Jim McCulloch wrote:
> 
> I that case, Sam, although it saddens me, I have to say you were being
> deliberately dishonest, trying to pawn off a quote as supporting Kleck's,
> position, when in fact it you knew very well that the quote in question
> was an integral part of a presentation of evidence that Kleck's
> methodology is fatally flawed.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> --Jim McCulloch
======================================================================

 Jim, does it really make ANY difference to anyone if Kleck was right
or wrong? I know for a fact that it makes no difference to me. I'll
own and use as many guns as I feel are necessary, and I don't give a
fuzzy rats butt about any statistics or poll takers opinions. The only
opinion that counts in my house is MINE!

 The only reason you need numbers is to prove a point. However, if
you've already made up your mind on a subject, all the numbers in the
world are fairly useless for anything other than chit marks on a tally
sheet. They do, however, make good targets at 25 yards or less. (large
grin attached).

 The public is going to continue to buy guns no matter what the laws
say. The public will continue to USE guns no matter what the laws say.
If you don't believe that, change the word guns to drugs and read the
sentence again.

 You and Sam are sitting here arguing about "Jack Shit" and the last
time I talked to Jack, he was on his way to the mountains for a
vacation of fun with the snow bunnies.

 Mike Eglestone
---------------

 Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little
Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty or Safety. Nor, are they
likely to end up with either.

 They say that insanity is relative. When I consider MY relatives, I
have to admit that it's more than likely true.