Engineering Professor Shares Thoughts on Constitutional Law, Calls for Handgun Ban


Plain Compact 1911 Handgun Pistol Generic
Engineering Professor Shares Thoughts on Constitutional Law, Calls for Handgun Ban

Fairfax, VA – -( In a recent piece for the Bangor Daily News ironically titled, “Why banning handguns makes sense,” Associate University of Maine Electrical Engineering Professor George Elliott struggled to argue why the tools of self-defense have no place in civilized society and are unworthy of constitutional protection. Unsurprisingly, some of the academic’s own statements refute his thesis.

At the outset of his case, the professor lamented, “The U.S. is awash in handguns. Their numbers have been steadily increasing from an estimated 65 million in 1994 to about 111 million in 2015, an increase of around 71 percent.” Elliot is right, there has been a significant increase in the number of handguns owned by civilians since 1994. However, his implication that this has fueled violent crime is wrong.

According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting data, from 1994 to 2017, the murder rate declined by more than 40 percent. Over the same time period, the violent crime rate has decreased more than 45 percent. So America is more awash in guns than 1994 and experiences just about half as much violent crime.

Elliott went on to ponder, “Why so many handguns? My best guess is that many people believe that handguns provide some self-protection and they are readily accessible.” The professor later dismisses any utility handguns might provide, stating, “people need to ignore the NRA’s “stand-your-ground” and ‘only-a-good-guy-with-a-gun-can-stop-a-bad-guy-with-a gun’ nonsense and realize that during a hostile confrontation with another person, remaining non-aggressive and removing oneself from the situation is a much better way to remain safe than using a gun.” The latter remark runs directly counter to the best evidence on the subject.

Many people believe that handguns provide some self-protection because they in fact do provide the means of self-protection. Earlier this year, Florida State University Professor of Criminology Gary Kleck analyzed the Centers for Disease Control’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data and found that Americans frequently use firearms for self-defense.

The data shows that the number of defensive gun uses per year is about 1 million. The figure dwarves that of firearm homicides and suicides.

Moreover, Kleck’s earlier research on violent encounters shows that the most effective means of resisting criminal assault is armed self-defense. In his book Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, Kleck analyzed survey data to find that “Victims who used guns were less likely to be injured than crime victims who did not resist…”

After a few clumsy applications of the typical anti-gun talking points, our cocksure electrical engineering professor was confident enough to fancy himself a constitutional scholar. According to the would-be jurist, the Supreme Court “erred” in ruling against Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban in the landmark Second Amendment case District of Columbia v. Heller.

Rather than grapple with the finer points of Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion, Elliott exclaimed, “If it can be shown that handguns do not, in general, provide protection, then banning their private ownership is not a violation of the Second Amendment.”

As previously explained, it has not been shown that handguns do not provide protection “in general.” However, Elliott’s core misunderstanding seems to be with the nature of individual rights.

Of course, in Heller the Court found that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes and that the purpose of self-defense was at the core of the Second Amendment protection. The test for respecting an individual right has never been a mere public policy argument over whether on balance an exercise of a particular right accrues more societal benefits than costs (however such benefits and costs might be defined and measured).

Interpretation of our founding document isn’t a battlefield of social scientists with competing theories. It is a careful deliberation of the text and history of the document under which Americans provide their continuing consent to be governed. Elliott’s statement attacks a fundamental legal concept whereby the rights of the individual are placed paramount, even if respect for that right may impose some cost to society.

We kindly ask that the electrical engineering professor spare the world his further musings on gun control. Otherwise we might be forced to unleash our unconsidered thoughts on electron-spin-resonance transistors for quantum computing in silicon-germanium heterostructures.

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit:

  • 164 thoughts on “Engineering Professor Shares Thoughts on Constitutional Law, Calls for Handgun Ban

    1. Author: The Revelator
      “On behalf of servicemen”..???? I’m not a vet? “Didn’t serve” ?…… You’re nothing more than a little loud mouth little Pee Hole. I hope you served. (and not butt hole service,ouch!) And again…………………………………………… 3 amigo’s should enlist..if your still capable.(or Reup!)
      Nope I take the enlist part back. Still, any Vet has to admire your…………????? something.
      Please!!!!!! Save your wit’s for another topic. Y’all just keep Blowing this one. Eh…..
      Keep yer eyes open, I’m sure to give ya’s more to banter about. And!!!!!!!!!! TheHolyCrow will give ya’s more too. Ya know? ya’ really can’t seem to refute what he say’s. Oh well, late night and just settling down after a lousy power outage. Love ya’s. Oww. my two fingers. Still,not as much as y’all Ron

    2. Ok Everybody, we are two days in and will begin keeping track. For any newcomers here is an outline.


      Ladies and Gentlemen, prior to December 7th 2018, a commentor known as “Ron” got in an argument on this article because he felt his opinion should replace facts. He lost the argument in glorious fashion.

      On December the 7th, he launched into a tirade about how no one was talking about Pearl Harbor even as we remembered with our families. He then attempted to use the deaths of the men and women at pearl harbor to attack those that had previously embarrassed him during his argument. Let this be a record of that until he issues a public apology to the Families of the men and women who died on that day for his shameful act of using them for his own personal gain.

    3. @Ron
      Yes, YOU OWE AN APOLOGY. You tried to use the deaths of servicemen to elevate your own stature and to silence others. As far as I am concerned, that puts you in the same boat as John Kerry during the Winter Soldier hearings of 71.

      trying to compare others to hitler because you don’t have the balls to man up and take responsibility for your shameful actions is not going to make this go away. This is not going to move on. Every time you make a comment it provides more proof against you.

      So on behalf of real servicemen, you are not a Veteran. You didn’t serve this country, you served yourself and therefore don’t qualify. You may have spent time in the military but that’s all it was, counting time until you could use it to one up yourself to others. That is why when we point out your lack of honor and integrity you cant argue against it. You didn’t learn a thing about why our military became the greatest in the world, and it shows in your actions.

    4. Author: The Revelator

      The only thing pitiful here is that you believe your attempts to shift attention away from your wrong doing will someone make people ignore it.

      You owe a sincere public apology for the Families who lost members at Pearl Harbor back in 1941. You need to own up to it.

      Awww….come on now. I owe an apology??? I did my time. It’s you….who owes the apology. Your excuses continue to be lame. You 3 amigos just try to be some sorta ‘orators’. ( + a click) Adolf Hitler…One of the GREATEST orators of all time,,,You’s gotta at ‘least’ remember him? Well,the 3 of ya’s combined wouldn’t equal to a pimple on his posterior.
      Now….again…can we move on??? I really feel I give yer pathetic ‘computer’ lives some meaning. And again…You idiots type a hell of a lot more than me.(TWO FINGERS) And now that’s just plain STUPID of ya’s.. (what’s next?) Ha-HA! Still make my day!!

    5. @Ron

      The only thing pitiful here is that you believe your attempts to shift attention away from your wrong doing will someone make people ignore it.

      You owe a sincere public apology for the Families who lost members at Pearl Harbor back in 1941. You need to own up to it.

    6. Author: The Revelator

      Your actions do not match your words. You’re a hypocrite and a liar, and the only hogwash here is your attempt to make yourself feel better about your own self esteem/ego issues.

      If you truly believe in honoring fallen servicemen, stop using them as a tool to bludgeon those you disagree with. Its downright shameful.

      You truly are pitiful

    7. Author: The Revelator

      If Heed the Call-up is on one as you say, then I guess that makes you his beast of burden.

      None of us forgot about the anniversary of Pearl Harbor, we just don’t feel the need to try and use the deaths of servicemen as a tool to try and make ourselves look better by vocalizing how great we are for talking about it.

      The above statement is truly pathetic. Your excuses are lame,as you well know. You “Don’t feel the need, you felt it was off topic”. Hog wash. But, still glad to have reminded ya’s.Great Army vs Navy game yesterday!!!! Now, enough of all this attention on me. Again, I am flattered. Now please….let’s move on to other subjects??

      1. @Ron

        Your actions do not match your words. You’re a hypocrite and a liar, and the only hogwash here is your attempt to make yourself feel better about your own self esteem/ego issues.

        If you truly believe in honoring fallen servicemen, stop using them as a tool to bludgeon those you disagree with. Its downright shameful.

      2. Ron, you’ve made this thread all about you and how wonderful you are by posting that you “thought” about remembering the Day that shall live in infamy, while attacking those you believe to be unworthy. Personally, your posts just make you appear to be an ass, so enraptured by your belief that you are the most wonderful person here. Please read “The Picture of Dorian Gray”. If you were older, I’d assume it was written about you.

        1. @ Heed the Call-up

          Ron does not have that level of integrity or honor sadly. He loves to accuse others of making excuses, but it is really just a distraction tactic to move negative attention away from himself. That’s his MO.

          Quite frankly, I guess he is what passes for a 2018 version of Cindy Sheehan.

    8. Author: Heed the Call-up
      Ron, remembering the sacrifices of others that died for our country, like prayer, don’t need to be vocal to have them. Get off you high horse before you fall, you toddering fool.

      What a bunch of crap from you. Extremely pathetic! You have no idea! Now you remember? (Mr. Patriot?) Your post is PURE GARBAGE! And I don’t give a Dam what you and your cohorts have to say. Your not even on a horse…..your on a JACK ASS!
      Ride it with the rest of your feel gooder’s.

      1. Ron, now I remember? Did I ever state I “forget”. As I stated, one does need to verbalize to think… well, maybe you do…. You keep opening your mouth and inserting your foot. It’s amazing that you even are capable of using a computer.

        Now, I know you are probably not capable of this, based on your posts, but try to have a reasonable debate, rather than typing BS and attempting to associate that with the person to whom you are directing your ignorant missives. Copy-paste and claiming someone stated something they didn’t, when the posts are visible to all here, makes you, at minimum, a complete, ignorant fool. Sadly, you must think highly of yourself (a common trait of people like you) or you wouldn’t continue with this line of attack that just makes you appear even more of a fool than you might actually be.

      2. @Ron

        If Heed the Call-up is on one as you say, then I guess that makes you his beast of burden.

        None of us forgot about the anniversary of Pearl Harbor, we just don’t feel the need to try and use the deaths of servicemen as a tool to try and make ourselves look better by vocalizing how great we are for talking about it. You talk about how full others are of themselves, but you have used it to full advantage to show what an ignoramus you are.

    9. Author: Heed the Call-up
      Thank you again for your kind words.
      Got the Army Navy game on and they just did the National Anthem.
      Great! Trumps out there. Look forward to great game.
      I bet none of them blew off Pearl Harbor Day.

      1. Ron, remembering the sacrifices of others that died for our country, like prayer, don’t need to be vocal to have them. Get off you high horse before you fall, you toddering fool.

    10. Author: The Revelator
      @ Heed the Call-up

      What over bloated egos. I’ll bet ya kiss every inch of yer body. And I haven’t been on here for about a yr. Even so…Glad ya take the time. Ya do make my day. Till next time. Ron

      1. @ Ron

        Thank you for continuing to prove what I pointed out about you. You cant even engage with anything that was said, so it devolves into weird insults which just shows you realize you lost the argument you started. On top of that, you aren’t even good at giving insults.

        Right now your hope is that if you just keep giving insults then the people that embarrassed you will go silent and disappear. If you want to talk about over bloated egos, look in the mirror at the guy who bit off more than he could chew because he wanted to show everyone how smart he was before failing in epic fashion.

    11. Author: Heed the Call-up

      Yep…copy paste. You, regulator, etc. make my day. Glad to spice things up here.Otherwise this all feel good we’re right your wrong stuff would be perty boring. And you know it. About the only other one here with a head on his shoulders is
      ‘TheHolyCow’. I enjoy his truthful comments. And…thank you all for your kind words. Like I stated, makes my day.

      1. @Ron

        Still unable to actually engage with any type of factual evidence, and resorting to hoping mocking will shut up the people you don’t like.

        Ron, in case you had not figured it out my first comment to you that set you off, the one that started you on this tirade, was being made in agreement with part of what you said, while pointing out an area where you needed more information. You wanted people here to view you as a smarter more enlightened man, so you kept putting in bits about whether or not your comments would be well received or not. You wanted someone to attack them without evidence so you could shout them down. You weren’t expecting anyone who would be more studied and informed than yourself.

        All you have done is show yourself as a hypocrite, willing to lie, hoping to cheat to get out of tight spots… You talked at one point on here of being a Vet, but your attitude shows no integrity that service normally instills. Instead of integrity, you act like You are the sole arbitrator what is acceptable and when caught and exposed you double down. You don’t even have the courage to debate openly so you quote drop and think others are idiots so a quote will suddenly make you victorious, which is what Heed the Call Up was trying to point out to you.

        More than anything else, I feel sorry for you. I’ve had run ins with you in the past, and each time you end up making a fool of yourself when you really don’t have to. You have every opportunity to be better, to strengthen your mind, but you continuously get in your own way. You could be so much more, and it should not take someone much younger than you having to point that out.

      2. Ron, glad we could “make your day”. We are accustomed to idiots posting drivel, so your idiocy is not only expected, but not surprising, nor any better than the dross of people like you. The rest of us are here to learn, while people like you are incapable of such. Sadly, it’s the most ignorant that believe they know everything, and copy paste isn’t a sign of intelligence, just in case you didn’t realize that, too.

        The Revelatory and the others you have replied to a intelligent and their posts are informative. You and your posts are just the opposite.

        Enjoy your holiday season.

      3. Ron, Geez, it you are just here to entertain yourself by annoying people, then you won’t get much conversation in the future. Why not just play it straight? Oh, I see if this is all just a farce, then no one posting here can be held responsible. Well … that might be a defense.

        1. @Wild Bill

          He was never looking for conversation. What he wanted was ego stroking so he could tell others here how much smarter he was. Now that he has essentially had his pants dropped in front of everybody here and his back porch painted red, he is just turning nasty because his opinions were countered by evidence.

    12. Author: The Revelator

      Well…it seems you wasted some wear and tear on your two little fingers with all that jibber jabber. (that’s how I type anyway) I’m sure the rest are ‘impressed’ with your……long winded church going diatribe. Without telling ya to ‘blow’ it outta yer posterior (not fitting for a man (you) of the cloth) because I wouldn’t say that.. but the world is full of know it all’s. I guess myself included. You can state from yer bully pulpit…………….

      “The number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the state” …Founding Father…James Madison

      1. @Ron

        Cant say Im surprised. You don’t actually want to engage with me since it forces you to move away from vague answers and put substance and context behind your statements. For example, the quote you so generously provided. You quote it, but you don’t understand the meaning so you twist it to suit your own desires. That is why you are still trying to put forward an idea that I am trying to force a religious sermon on you and “Convert” you. That in and of itself is a lie on your part.

        What Madison was saying in that quote is that Religion, or rather religious denomination when taken to its apex adopts the human trait of moral superiority and attempts to exert its will over others for the purpose of “The greater good.” It doesn’t matter what term you fill in for religion, for example Catholicism, Islam, Atheism, Environmentalism, Socialism, or even Secularism(Worshiping the idea of the separation of church and state). When Madison talks about how people invest themselves more diligently and apply to themselves to making their actions match their words. This was a condemnation statement against the idea of forced compliance of thought. Perhaps, another founding father’s words are in order. How about John Dickinson about eight years before the Revolutionary War.

        “Religion and Government are certainly very different Things, instituted for different Ends; the design of one being to promote our temporal Happiness; the design of the other to procure the Favour of God, and thereby the Salvation of our Souls. While these are kept distinct and apart, the Peace and welfare of Society is preserved, and the Ends of both are answered. By mixing them together, feuds, animosities and persecutions have been raised, which have deluged the World in Blood, and disgraced human Nature”

        Try this rough translation. All men are created Equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, and to safeguard these rights governments are instituted by men. When you lose sight of individual dignity and rights, and cloud judgement with opinion or conformity, then that spawns tyranny. Human nature seeks self recognition and justification. It wants to feel its opinions are validated, it wants to win. This is what the founding fathers were trying to prevent, and believe it or not the reason can be traced back to the fact that many of them were Deists.

        Considering what the entire origin of the apparent melt down you seem to be going through was, my statement that people will cherry pick quotes without context so they can point at it and scream at others “See! See!? This is why I am right!” Not only did you quote me directly in your original response trying to explain why your opinion showed I am wrong, you turned around and agreed with the statement in your second response by stating people are people and prone to deceit. You even questioned if they had a lying media back then. And finally on top of that, you now do exactly the very practice in the exact process that I described to you in the first place… But don’t worry. As long as you can convince people that you really stuck it to me because you made a crack about how easy it is for me to write very long detailed responses that don’t leave you any room to argue, maybe you’ll be ok. And, when you don’t actually have substance to back up your opinions, you can always throw a jab my way by telling me to get my head out of my backside, then magically pretending like you wouldn’t actually say something like that immediately after having done that. Bravo! That’s about as effective as using a chihuahua as a guard dog against me. So do you want to prove more of what I have said in my previous statements? Do you want to show everyone you really are not well studied by just trying to dismiss what I have said or resorting to snide comments in the vain hope that it will someone demoralize me?

        Perhaps, you are being serious and the length of my comments are just too daunting for you to read and comprehend. You see, I’m not doing this to impress anyone, and I generally do not respond to any “Atta-boy” comments I get because that’s not what I am here for. So if it is easier for you, I can condense every single thing I have just written in this response down into a single sentence if it helps you out, cut right through the “Jibber jabber” with a smile. Are you ready for it?

        “Are you really that stupid?”

        Concise, to the point, and looking forward to seeing if you want to demonstrate for us all your impersonation of a marionette.

        1. The Revelator, well-stated. Yes, Ron is in full a–hat mode today. He’s been trying that with a number of us here.

          1. @ Heed the Call-up

            My first run in with Ron happened about a year ago. I’ve watched a lot of what he has done here and honestly can say he has not changed in all that time.

            He takes things personally and gets upset when anyone appears to be more knowledgeable with him while disagreeing with something he says. The Pout mode he is currently in has had a lot of practice.

            Its almost one of the saddest things you can see, because all you can do is just shake your head and hope people like that don’t procreate.

            Hope you and your loved ones are having a safe and Joyous Christmas and Holiday season.


            1. The Revelator, yes, I understand. I have seen him post his ifdiocy before, too. Sadly, as you stated, he is incapable or unwilling to learn, to better himself.

              Hope you have a good holiday season, too.

    13. @Ron

      “You seem to be one of those who wear their religion on their sleeve.”

      I love this, especially since I was in no way trying to demand that you take part in or consider any one religion correct for you. What I did do however was call into question your claim of “Subjective truth” and your opinion that a text is evil much like someone on the left would claim that certain inanimate objects are evil. Considering my original premise, that people try to justify their own opinions and insert them as fact into religion by cherry picking select pieces of text while simultaneously avoiding any context contained therein, I find it hilarious that you have just demonstrated this as perfectly as you have.

      Now you seem to be taking offense to the FACT that I simply stated what the bible says, and more to the point since it was Christianity which has been the focus here (by you pointing to both the old and New testaments) Christian beliefs in particular, you are now beginning to get combative with me verbally. Trying to combine “No disrespect” with dismissing someone as using a “Bully pulpit, soapbox, or whatever..” You appear to be making a habit out of contradicting yourself.

      Since you also chose to state it so boldly, and since it is not in the US Constitution, perhaps you would like to explain what you view as the separation of church and state. However, if you don’t like the response I will give in return. Had you been paying attention you would have noticed I specifically stated you are free to follow or not follow any religion you like, and you would not have ended up self diagnosing yourself with your opening comment. Perhaps you should look at your own comments and practice what you preach yourself. Citing a rose is still a rose no matter what you call it, if you truly took that route when it comes to facts instead of trying to push your opinion, which does not constitute fact, then we would have no problem. Instead, you are getting indignant because you are talking to someone who has studied and is quite good at explaining history without having to delve into opinions, and it is frustrating you. Your problem is not Favorable responses, your problem is that you expect others to accept your Opinions as truth and when they don’t you want others who see their responses as illegitimate. It don’t work like that.

      If you honestly want to have a legitimate debate, I am open to that. But that does not mean that I will let you say things unopposed when there is factual evidence and context that disprove or changes the meaning of what you are trying to cite. So your choice. You up for it, or is discretion the better part of valor?

    14. FACT: Criminal’s/Crooked Politicians/ Child Molesters hate guns when they are in the hands of law abiding Patriotic Citizens….. ..PERIOD

    15. The Bible says self-defense is a God-given right and we have a responsibility to protect our family. Nehemiah commanded the workers building the temple to be armed and have swords ready. Christians are commanded to resist the devil. (James 4:7 & 1 Peter 5:8-9) The Bible says the goal of the devil is to steal, kill and destroy. The best way to resist the devil is to be armed with a firearm and the word of God, the Bible. In Luke 22:35-38 Jesus commanded His disciples just before he left them to die on the cross to buy weapons.

    16. Author: The Revelator
      @ Ron

      The Bible is meant to be read as a whole. Unfortunately you have people who will cherry pick anything to try and justify their own desires. You need look no further than those who try to point to the word “Militia and “Well Regulated” in the second amendment, and they get angry when you don’t ignore the rest of what the amendment says. It’s the same situation.

      Sadly, that is part of human nature.

      I’m sure I may get some negative comments, but………I am a GOD,Supreme being believer.
      The Bible (in my opinion) is a History book of sorts. Everyone has to look to their ‘own conscience’ and do what they feel is right. Remember..there are two Testaments. One more ‘evil than the other.

      1. One Testament is “more ‘evil’ than the other???? Where did you get that idea?

        Old Testament is God’s covenant with the Hebrews (Israelites and Jews), while New Testament is God’s covenant with gentiles – including the Jews (at least, those who do not reject Jesus) – effectively, all mankind.

      2. @Ron

        What you are stating is that you believe Religious Truth(Faith) to be subjective. Now the way you worded it you may or may not believe in Christianity, as it seems you are dancing around the edges. Christianity however is not Subjective, it is objective. If you consider yourself to follow Christianity, you should know that Jesus said there is only one way, one path, and one acceptable program. HIS…. There is no subjective truth where each person gets to decide what is acceptable to them, where they can follow a multi-step program and advance to different levels as they see fit. To paraphrase Bobby Jones, “If you aren’t following the bible and doing as Jesus taught, but instead try to do your own thing, you may be following a very interesting Religion but it aint Christianity.”

        Choose to be whatever you wish, but you cannot change the definitions. Belief in subjective truth is a Post Modern thought process designed to reject reality for the purpose of destroying a society. It is similar in thought to Nihilism but has a goal or belief behind it where Nihilism does not. You may not like hearing this as a reply, but if you believe the Bible is a history book, then there is no possibility for Subjectivity because subjectivity ignores history as well as facts. What you stated was self contradicting.

        Neither testament is evil. The old Testament as a historical reference is the story of Man’s rejection of God and inability to save itself. The new testament is the second chapter, its purpose prepared by the first to show the reason why, proclaiming the gift of grace. Both parts are meant to be read as a whole as stated before.

        1. You seem to be one of those who wear their religion on their sleeve. But YES..the Bible is a History book. Common sense. Who wrote it? Any book,then, now, anytime is written by people. (I wonder if they had a lying media back then) No disrespect intended. But people are people.
          Evil?…yep,there is. Read what ya preach. The Bible is full of whatever you may not call ‘evil’. A rose by ‘any’ other name is still a rose. Go find your ‘bully pulpit’, soap box or whatever.
          I’m sure this might not get too many favorable responses….. But, I am a firm believer in ‘separation of church and state’.

          1. Ron, yes, The Revelator, is correct in his post about you. You contradict yourself within your posts in your attempts to refute him. “The Bible is full of whatever you may not call ‘evil’.” Yes, it does show “history” and it shows how man, when believing himself to be better than others (you, for example), fails and God punishes them. Who, other than man, would have written the Bible? Does the fact that it was written by man make it wrong? If you believe that, then you must also believe that the Constitution is wrong and that we do not have inalienable rights. Based on your posts, you probably do believe that, but it takes more than posting stupid comments and criticizing others to be a man – The Revelator clearly identified you and took you to task. Your silly copy and paste responses and quips fall far short in rebuttal.

    17. According to this “expert”, if criminals are threatening others, like children, the best course of action is for you to flee rather than protect. I bet he wouldn’t even follow his own advice, instead peeing his pants and cowering on the ground.

    18. Author: james
      what does “the British wanted to win” even mean in context?

      Just what it says. They (the British) wanted to win. Do you honestly believe The U.S. wanted to win in Korea or Nam?

    19. well.
      those FOOLS WHO HATE GUNS, and don’t want the rest of us to have ours, is TO BAD.;
      i choose to KEEP MIME.

    20. I will be more then happy to remove myself from a dangerous situation without defending myself with a firearm if I and others are not at risk,even a justified self defense with a firearm is a ordeal no one wants to find themselves in.

      That said,some times this is not a viable(and survivable )option.

    21. Associate University of Maine Electrical Engineering Professor George Elliott
      What makes this …. socialist a Violence or Gun Expert?
      I am a Gunsmith, perhaps NASA and DoD should listen to my opinions on there doings.
      This is just another Commie running his mouth hoping to Trash the Constitution and this Country

    22. At my work we have mechanical and structural engineers who design thing that do work. Things that create. We also have electrical engineers who design controls. Control being the key word. Guess which ones own firearms.

    23. It takes law enforcement 40 minutes to respond to a burglar alarm at my house. How does Elliot suggest I wait to help to arrive? On my knees??? hoping the intruders don’t harm my children. Literally just H O P E ?

    Leave a Comment 164 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *