Obama not reinstating AWB


PDA






warnerwh
April 11, 2009, 12:05 AM
http://www.politicususa.com/en/Obama-Assault-Weapons-Ban

Looks like the anti's big push right now is going no where, at least I hope.

If you enjoyed reading about "Obama not reinstating AWB" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Duke of Doubt
April 11, 2009, 12:24 AM
Yeah, abc just wasted a week of airtime.

Lone_Gunman
April 11, 2009, 12:30 AM
If you go to the Whitehouse.gov website, and click on agenda, and then click on urban policy, you will see that Obama still wants to reinstate the AWB.

ScottG1911
April 11, 2009, 12:33 AM
gunman is exactly correct, dont forget these are politicians we are talking about, just paid criminals

model of 1905
April 11, 2009, 12:33 AM
Diversionary tactics. If Obamination sees a chance without political suicide, he will make good on his campaign promises. Never let your guard down folks. This administration will take our Constitutional rights away given the slightest opportunity.

barbarian
April 11, 2009, 12:34 AM
Just waiting for the opportune time (e.g. best chance for getting what he wants) no doubt. Is this Obambi guy the President, oh really. Bad dream - hope it's only 3.75 more years


Barbarian

kingpin008
April 11, 2009, 12:34 AM
Politics is off-topic at The High Road.

warnerwh
April 11, 2009, 12:36 AM
You definitely can't trust the anti's. I like the fact I can watch 20/20
and not get as angry. Actually I wondered if I could even watch it tonight.

mljdeckard
April 11, 2009, 12:37 AM
I believe he can't. I don't believe for one second he doesn't want to.

Lone_Gunman
April 11, 2009, 12:40 AM
Politics is off-topic at The High Road.

This is not politics. Obama is not running for office. His underlings are stating what he says is his current position on the issue.

Just because a thread is about an elected official does not make it necessarily political.

Politics would be a thread about how Obama supports an AWB and McCain does not, so I am voting for McCain. That would be political.

kentucky bucky
April 11, 2009, 12:45 AM
He will just call it some other Gobbledygook name like the "Private Weapon owners Safety and Contingency Act", thus just repackaging yesterday's stale bread. They are trying to do the same thing with the so called "Fairness Doctrine". Do trust this wanna be tinhorn dictator for a second.

rbernie
April 11, 2009, 12:46 AM
This is an interesting link that is on-topic. It's not a political debate (Repub vs Dem, etc.) but about how the administration views the issue of a new AWB right now.

That SURELY is on topic for THR.

However, I will remind y'all that we have about eighteen gazillion other threads in motion right now about pretty much the same topic, so let's keep these from getting too repetitive.

Yeah, abc just wasted a week of airtime.I don't think so. The airtime is designed to scare the non-gunnies into fearing us'n gunnies, to bring into the fight those who might otherwise not have felt 'threatened' by us.

They're working hard at that, and I fear that we lack the means to directly counter that message.

Lone_Gunman
April 11, 2009, 12:49 AM
They're working hard at that, and I fear that we lack the means to directly counter that message.

The good news is that ratings are low for network news and shows like 20/20.

The number one news network is more or less pro-gun.

Ned Kelly
April 11, 2009, 12:50 AM
I have to give the white house spokesman credit. He did a very good job of steering clear of that ole coot. I didn't even know she was still scratching around.

Hopefully news like this may alleviate the panic everyone has been going through.

armoredman
April 11, 2009, 12:52 AM
Who was that, Baba Yaga?

eitrheim31
April 11, 2009, 01:09 AM
he never actually said obama is not looking to reinstate the awb just that he has been looking for other solutions like more police. his answer i thought kinda skirted the issue of the awb. and who was that lady asking the question? yikkes!

bdickens
April 11, 2009, 01:10 AM
No? Why do you think the white house staff (AKA the mainstream media) has been pushing all these "mass shooting" stories lately? You think all that stuff just started happening last week?

Zundfolge
April 11, 2009, 01:13 AM
I believe Obama is NOT lying when he says he will not reinstate the AWB.


For one thing the time to "reinstate" the AWB is gone, that had to be done in 2004.

Penning a NEW AWB (a likely worse one) wouldn't technically be "reinstating" the old one.



Anyway, take heart ... they're clearly convinced that supporting an AWB right now (even after the events of the last couple of weeks) would harm them politically.

Mt Shooter
April 11, 2009, 01:59 AM
If you go to the Whitehouse.gov website, and click on agenda, and then click on urban policy, you will see that Obama still wants to reinstate the AWB.


I just did and sorry but I dont see it, leafed through it.

Change in tatics....dunno

That said this thread is doomed.... IBTL

Funderb
April 11, 2009, 02:01 AM
IBTL?

where's the L at?

highorder
April 11, 2009, 02:09 AM
I hope the posters above that made reference to not recognizing Helen Thomas were kidding...

She has been a fixture of the White House Press Corps for a long time, and is well respected.

Who was that, Baba Yaga?


Ok, I lol'd

TRGRHPY
April 11, 2009, 03:21 AM
Robert Gibbs is a horrible liar, which is surprising since he gets so much practice at it. It's rare that the truth escapes his face. If you watch and pay attention, he never says that the president isn't going to pursue the AWB. He says that the pres is looking at pursuing other things, but doesn't rule out an awb. Certainly a hole big enough to drive a truck (loaded with newly confiscated AWs) through.

Gamera
April 11, 2009, 03:25 AM
I won't be holding my breath ;)

Wesson Smith
April 11, 2009, 03:29 AM
Politics is off-topic at The High Road. Says who? You?

Strings
April 11, 2009, 07:21 AM
*sigh*

Already told y'all what's going to happen. Blogged about it, but I'll put it out here again...

Sometime between now and 2010 elections, you'll see another AWB start moving in congress. It'll be FAR nastier than the previous one. Although they would love to pass it, they won't: it'll be meant to "die" a very public "death", so that the left can say "See? We protected your guns!".

The ones who author/sponser/vote for it will be from districts that are totally "safe" for the antis: they'll be from places like Chicago and Boston. But the whole show will give support to the "pro gun Dems", and will allow them to hold on to their majority through 2010. After that, all bets are off...

denfoote
April 11, 2009, 07:52 AM
Nevertheless, I'm saying:

LOCK, LOAD, AND PREPARE TO REPEL BORDERS!!

also,

IF IT'S TIME TA BURY 'EM, IT'S TIME TA USE 'EM!!!

Lone_Gunman
April 11, 2009, 10:01 AM
Quote:
If you go to the Whitehouse.gov website, and click on agenda, and then click on urban policy, you will see that Obama still wants to reinstate the AWB.

I just did and sorry but I dont see it, leafed through it.



Here is the link to the Whitehouse website page that discusses Obama's commitment to the AWB. Check out the last sentence. There has been no change in his policy:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/urban_policy/

Crime and Law Enforcement
Support Local Law Enforcement: President Obama and Vice President Biden are committed to fully funding the COPS program to put 50,000 police officers on the street and help address police brutality and accountability issues in local communities. Obama and Biden also support efforts to encourage young people to enter the law enforcement profession, so that our local police departments are not understaffed because of a dearth of qualified applicants.
Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Supports: America is facing an incarceration and post-incarceration crisis in urban communities. Obama and Biden will create a prison-to-work incentive program, modeled on the successful Welfare-to-Work Partnership, and work to reform correctional systems to break down barriers for ex-offenders to find employment.
End the Dangerous Cycle of Youth Violence: Obama and Biden support innovative local programs, like the CeaseFire program in Chicago, which implement a community-based strategy to prevent youth violence and have been proven effective.
Address Gun Violence in Cities: Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.

SCKimberFan
April 11, 2009, 10:09 AM
Politics is off-topic at The High Road.

Not this one.

Posted by rbernie (of THR Moderator fame)

That SURELY is on topic for THR.

Prince Yamato
April 11, 2009, 02:09 PM
This is a pretty bold piece when you consider it. The president's spokesperson had to publicly dodge an issue that 10 years ago would have resulted in a no-brainer response. I'd say that we're doing quite well. Let's keep the pressure up until we get an affirmative statement out of these people.

Hoplophile
April 11, 2009, 05:06 PM
Maybe spending time in London helped convince someone high up that taking away all these gun-things isn't such a great idea and that London kinda sucks.

Either way, I hope he's serious. More cops, enforcing existing laws, isn't that something EVERYONE can agree with? Remember, though they're exceedingly rare, a crooked FFL does so much harm to our image via supplying weapons illegally to whoever.

I just hope it's not B.S.

TRGRHPY
April 11, 2009, 05:21 PM
This is a pretty bold piece when you consider it. The president's spokesperson had to publicly dodge an issue that 10 years ago would have resulted in a no-brainer response. I'd say that we're doing quite well. Let's keep the pressure up until we get an affirmative statement out of these people.


Amen! One thing that we have now which is much more prevalent than back when the original awb, is that we all have email access. People are far more likely to send an email that to write a letter and mail it. And it's being used with fairly good succes.

WardenWolf
April 11, 2009, 05:26 PM
Here's what I expect Obama to do: he's not going to push it YET, but he's going to start pushing anti-gun propaganda and lies, until it gets to the point where the sheeple will DEMAND a ban. It worked in England and several other countries.

22-rimfire
April 11, 2009, 05:38 PM
BHO does not need to push the AWB. Pelosi will do it for him and he'll sign it. Count on it.

SoCalShooter
April 11, 2009, 05:47 PM
Watch what they do and who they associate with not what they say.

JimmyN
April 11, 2009, 09:56 PM
The climate is not right for any anti-gun legislation right now and they know it.

Look at Bobby Rush's AWB, Bill HR45. Over three months now, sitting in committee, and not a single co-sponsor. I find it amazing that even the hard core anti-gun politicians don't want to mention it, or put their name on it. That's the first anti-gun bill I can recall that didn't get at least 50 co-sponsors right out of the gate.

They barely passed the AWB in '94, and the anti-gun climate was more favorable back then. If they hadn't amended it with the sunset clause it probably wouldn't have passed. And other than magazine capacity it was just a ban on import and manufacture of certain cosmetics, you couldn't have more than two 'evil' cosmetic items on a rifle.

"....the gun and magazine ban had little practical value, and it was all symbolism and cosmetics. I didn't have the votes to do anything more. If it were up to me I would tell Mr. and Mrs. America to turn them in—turn them all in." --Senator Dianne Feinstein


Even after VaTech there wasn't a big movement to ban anything. McCarthy was extremely happy that the NRA had worked with Legislators to improve State reporting of mental health issues to the Federal database. She didn't seem confident that even that would have passed without the NRA's endorsement.

And with their current free membership offering the NRA is now getting a big boost in membership. They will have an even larger block of voters standing behind them, and significant influence on Congress.

To a politician getting re-elected is job one.... everything else is secondary.

Blackbeard
April 12, 2009, 12:18 AM
Bear in mind that his alternate solution may not be better than a gun ban. He may try to require annual mental health testing in order to own guns.

Doggy Daddy
April 12, 2009, 12:28 AM
Politics is off-topic at The High Road.

And Johnny's smoking in the boys' room!! :eek:

Lone_Gunman
April 12, 2009, 12:29 AM
Bear in mind that his alternate solution may not be better than a gun ban.

Nancy Pelosi is recently on record stating that a ban is not the objective. The new objective will be registration and keeping guns from crossing state lines.

Imagine the NFA expanded to include military style semi-autos. That is what I expect they are shooting for. You can still have your AR, but it will need to be registered and you must pay a $200 tax. That would have a chilling effect on AR sales, yet they would be completely legal.

Pack
April 12, 2009, 01:17 AM
No "ban" is needed.

You can far more effectively tax, rather than legislate, a right out of existence.

What do you want to bet that the business about no longer selling used military brass to commercial reloaders wasn't, in part, a test baloon to see how closely people watch what actions the government takes regarding any aspect of RKBA, and how prompt and vocal the opposition is.

Even if it wasn't, I can promise you that sometime soon anti-gun elements in power will try to slip some "baby step" measures into place, just to see if anyone on this side of the issue's been lulled into complacency by the Hellish :barf: decision.

Kind of Blued
April 12, 2009, 01:23 AM
Hopefully news like this may alleviate the panic everyone has been going through.

Maybe that's the point. The easiest way to get Americans to stop buying so many guns right now is to announce that there is no threat to their ability to do so.

Remember a month ago when Helmke said "you shouldn't be buying as many guns as possible right now", and we all agreed to disagree with him?

10-Ring
April 12, 2009, 02:09 AM
Don't be fooled. An AWB is on the agenda and will be addressed as soon the economy appears (not the wording) to have stablized. IF they start pushing this now, when they can't put their full attention & resources to it, it would fail and would be even tougher to resurrect.
This is just a diversion! Don't be fooled!

JohnBT
April 12, 2009, 09:21 AM
Here's one for you and he wasn't trying to sell me a rifle either. I'll be happy if it doesn't come true.

A gun store owner I know was told by a large government/police supplier that he has recently seen a dramatic increase in AR (etc.) purchases for personal use by alphabet agency employees.

It's like they know something is coming. This increase is in addition to the run on guns we've all been seeing.

Rumor has it that the President will issue an executive order concerning the sale of AR-style rifles in order to give himself and Congress 60 to 90(?) days to work on legislation.

Take it for what it's worth. This didn't come from some old grouchy guy sitting behind the counter in his dusty old shop dreaming up conspiracy theories. It was told to me in a I-can't-quite-believe-it-but-the-guy-is-connected-so-let's-see-what-happens tone of voice.

And no, I've never seen a UFO or bigfoot. ;)

John

jfh
April 12, 2009, 01:11 PM
IMO, there's a couple of real nuggets in these posts.

First, an observation: Many of these politicians are lawyers--and as such, they have been trained (better-trained than many of us non-lawyers) in the use of logic in our language. So, with careful parsing of their words, the President and his henchmen (Rahm et.al.) can state that there is no (new or reinstated) AWB in the wings. So far, I have seen little lying from our national leaders about this topic--but plenty of disingenous statements.

Secondly, as the impact of Heller comes into play (the new DC registration rules / laws, and the larger incorporation discussion) the new thrust of antigun legislation clearly must be for more onerous requirements for legal guns.

So--and back to the point at hand:

1. New antigun legislation will be for onerous registration and access to AWs--remember, that an 'Assault Weapon" is a political term, not one of the firearms standard lexicon.

2. That registration will include invasive personal qualifications for mental health, (domestic) violence, and the like.

3. It will not come until the water-carriers--safe antigun politicians, ABC, The Brady Bumch, the mass media/mass murders--generate the foment needed for political demonstration of "populist" will.
The ABC programs are designed to generate new talking points: for the uniformed general voter, they concretely demonstrate "the gunshow loophole." For the selective / hunter shooter, they reinforce ASHA tenants. All of these points are designed to peel away support for conservative 2nd Amendment positions.

Another AWB isn't going to happen--but far more sophisticated legislation will be proposed. HR45 sits there as a diversion, IMO. It's a stalking horse that helps placate the gun-hater wing of the Party.

Getting in front of this kind of agenda is difficult, as rbernie suggests. With the NRA being the only big "mouthpiece" our side has--although the SSA might be helpful--it's hard to generate a set of talking points for the general public to respond to. For the moment, the only one I see as possibly fruitful is the Examiner Blogs that are cropping up--largely progun.

Ideas for putting together a national attempt at building a positive perspective by pro-gun forces probably belong in activism. For the moment, we--the progun forces--are riding only on twenty-plus years of 'conservative' thought about smaller government, and that was largely dissipated by the previous Republican administration.


Jim H.

searcher451
April 12, 2009, 02:29 PM
As the Vietnam war raged through the 1960s, the first premier of China, Chou En-lai, was asked about the historical effects of the 1789 French Revolution on that country. His considered reply: "Too soon to tell."

feedthehogs
April 12, 2009, 06:11 PM
I believe Obama is NOT lying

How can you tell a politician is lying?

Their mouth is open.

Sorry but in over a half century of living I can count the number of politicians who didn't lie on one hand, maybe.

They've just gotten a little smarter and the weak minded are buying the emperors new clothes.

Madison avenue and marketing is alive and well in the politican business. You know the same group that sells overpriced items by tagging them with tactical, spec ops and urban camo to the gullable.

Ned Kelly
April 12, 2009, 07:05 PM
I think the fearmongering started by a few people to make a buck needs to settle down. It's pretty rediculous. People didn't start panicing in the 90s until just before the AWB was signed into law. Even then you could find all the ammo and guns you wanted.

On reinforcing existing laws it always concerns me when people see that as a good idea.

You would be surprised what's on the books in this country if you had to obey every law.

In some states you would no longer be allowed to use anything but ball or softpoint ammunition for home defense. frangible ammuntion would be illegal to use for home defense.

Just one rarely enforced law among many.

There are a lot of laws that aren't actively enforced.

grimjaw
April 12, 2009, 07:08 PM
I agree with Lone_Gunman in post #38. Their most effective tactic they could try right now without raising the ire of people who own no semi-automatic weapons (such as bolt action rifles or shotguns, typically for hunting use), especially given the large amount of gun purchases since the end of 2008, is to tax the hell out of the system. Increased revenue in a market? Tax, tax, tax! Regulate, regulate, regulate!

Don't want to buy a gun anyway? No harm to you! (Same apathy used in the heavy taxation of cigarettes)

Want to buy a gun? OK great! Register your 20" bbl semi-automatic Bushmaster, etc, under the current rules for machine guns, and pay the extra taxes. Want to sell your gun? Rinse and repeat.

I don't know how they'll try to infringe upon ownership of semi-automatic handguns. They don't meet the nebulous definition of "military style assault weapon," and have been used in more than one of the mass murders in the last few years. Might be they'll just try register anything semi-automatic, regardless of magazine capacity and to include rimfire. Semi-automatic handgun registration as an NFA item might also be a way to decrease the percentage of concealed carry licenses applied for and/or issued. States might prohibit carrying such "restricted" weapons concealed. It'd be like carrying a silencer.

They have no way to ban (and destroy) magazines of a certain capacity without causing extreme fuss. Easier for them to restrict manufacture and future sales, artificially inflating the market for magazines over X rounds. There are enough state laws against such that they don't need to double up to be effective, really.

It's easy to figure these things out. Just pretend you're a politician responsible for two things: 1) getting re-elected and 2) perpetuating the government. Government requires tax revenue to function. What way can I generate new revenue and still get votes? What way can I regulate (and in doing so grow the function of government) without prohibiting the activity altogether?

jm

Prince Yamato
April 12, 2009, 10:08 PM
There won't be any registration. It's too expensive and a logistical nightmare.

grimjaw
April 12, 2009, 10:13 PM
There won't be any registration. It's too expensive and a logistical nightmare.

It'll be paid for by increased taxes on registration, or it'll serve the behind-the-scenes purpose of drying up demand for the activity through punitive taxation. They can make the law and then underfund the approval process.

jm

LSCurrier
April 12, 2009, 10:19 PM
If anyone thinks politicians are not seeking to take away our guns in some way or another they are very much mistaken.

I believe this 100% and hope that I can look back 8 years from now and say I was wrong - but I don't expect to be able to do so. :mad:

Luke

Ned Kelly
April 12, 2009, 10:22 PM
After reading Obama's leaked Homeland security document on right-wing extremist groups it almost brings back the urge to go out and buy more ammo.

AllAmerican
April 12, 2009, 10:44 PM
Registration isnt going to happen. Why? Because the government knows that there are many many folks who just wont do it.

What happens when gun owners say NO.

Thats all this whole AWB gun thing is. We just tell them NO.

You wanna tax it? NO We'll just vote you out

You want us to register? NO

You want us to turn em in? NO

You want to restrict us further? NO

Its really not that hard to figure out.

Too many people run around touting their "when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns" mantra.

Fact is, there are less people who mean it and expect to be an outlaw. There are many sheep out there who own guns.

Just say NO to any more Government control.

NO, NO, NO

That is what will work.

dbarile
April 12, 2009, 10:57 PM
Just say NO to any more Government control.

It worked so well the last time!

Seriously. No offense intended, but I believe a lot of our fellow Americans have and will say Yes Yes Yes to more government control, especially if it controls someone else.

Prince Yamato
April 12, 2009, 11:42 PM
It'll be paid for by increased taxes on registration, or it'll serve the behind-the-scenes purpose of drying up demand for the activity through punitive taxation. They can make the law and then underfund the approval process.

Yeah, because they're going to pull $100 billion out of thin air for something as arbitrary and partisan as gun registration? No. They're not. Obama had to practically beg for $87 billion for the Iraq War. He's not going to get a dime for something like registration.

It worked so well the last time!

I'm pretty sure there wasn't the huge brouhaha against an AWB in 1994 as there was this year.

Blackbeard
April 12, 2009, 11:52 PM
I just love the fact that gun control has become the "third rail" of Washington politics -- even moreso than medicare reform.

cleetus03
April 12, 2009, 11:54 PM
What the hell is wrong with some of yall, MOLON LABE plain & simple! The fact of the matter is, the slippery slope to gun prohibition is just not physically possible in this Country!!!!!


Sure the govt passed a AWB in 94, but did that do anything to effect your ability to own or buy anything they actually banned?, Hell no!

The U.S. has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world! Its impossible, say it with me impossible to register the firearms in this country.

It also scares the living sh*t out of our govt, that we are arming ourselves in unprecedented amounts than ever before in this country's history these past few months! We are buying & stockpiling 1000's & 1000's of rounds of ammunition for an array of firearms to have for just in case the TSHTF.

Some of us have been arming ourselves for years, and been provoked as gun nut jobs as a result. But now the entire country has gotten with the program, and as a result the govt is becoming nervous and listening to what the people want which is "NO FU**KING GUN CONTROL"!

We control our destiny in this nation, sometimes through peace & sometimes by the way of the gun, as our forefathers did to fight for & proclaim our independence in 1776.

Ned Kelly
April 13, 2009, 12:04 AM
I can see the logic somewhat. Polls may say one thing (anti-gun) for media hype. But empty ammo shelves (pro-gun) at the local walmart speak greater volumes.

grimjaw
April 13, 2009, 12:38 AM
Prince Yamato et al,

I didn't say the current government would be able to pass it. I just think they'll float that that idea as opposed to any kind of ban.

jm

GRIZ22
April 13, 2009, 01:53 AM
Obama's press secretary may say he's against an AWB but I think he'll fold if an AWB bill hits his desk.

outerlimit
April 13, 2009, 02:16 AM
He wants to get re-elected and the Democrats want to maintain their majority.

So that means no AWB, for the time being that is.

badbadtz560
April 13, 2009, 02:35 AM
I totally agree w/ you there Grizz and outerlimit.. I'd think Obama will sign that thing the second it hits his desk; hell, he'd have it signed before it hits his desk if he could. the problem is that he can't get his congressmen to pass it. Why? b/c they're afraid that if they vote for an AWB, they're gonna lose the next election... possibly ending their chances of advancing political power.

Might as well take the credit for it not happenin if it ain't gonna happen... and thus appeal to the gun lovers.. right? that's a politician for'ya

So all you suckers needa stop buyin up the ammo and mags b/c I can't find ANY! I know it's shameful as a THR member to only look for ammo on those bi-monthly grocery trips, but shooting isn't my #1 hobby either.

On the flip side, I'm sure that if some organization starts huge gunfights against police using AW's ... we'll get an AWB within a few months.
Or... if somebody important gets assassinated (prob won't have to be an AW even) we'd get an AW... but let's not count on any of the above.

My backing? just look at all the other gun control laws we have.. they were either sparked by assassinations or attempted assassinations of presidents, presidential candidates, or special ppl (MLK)

BTR
April 13, 2009, 03:59 PM
The president can't institute a new AWB by executive order. He may be able to ban the import some firearms, but can't do a THING to domestic manufacture unless congress passes a brand new law.

cbrgator
April 13, 2009, 04:10 PM
I recall Dianne Feinstein saying very recently that now is not the time to push a new AWB, but she is planning one and will introduce it when she thinks it has a better chance of passing, because right now there is no shot. Stupid for her to say though, because now we'll be on alert. Right when things look safe is exactly we should be the most vigilant because that's when it's coming.

rbernie
April 13, 2009, 05:16 PM
Time to move on.

If you enjoyed reading about "Obama not reinstating AWB" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!