Anyway, this writer took the poll. At the time he took it, those who favored gun control were lagging roughly 30 percent to the 70 percent who do not want increased gun control. Prior to starting to write this, the writer went back to her site to find out the latest results of the poll but, alas, did not find the results posted. Perhaps the results are to be published later after a thorough, objective and statistically valid analysis is completed. Yeah, right.

This writer is certainly not saying O�Donnell is stupid but she is ignorant. Generally, any person who makes any opinion public without using any facts whatsoever in forming the opinion is an ignorant person in the writer�s estimation. And, for certain, this woman knows not of the facts concerning the arming, or disarming, of the citizenry of a nation.

Does she know, for example, that once upon a time, citizens of this nation were required to be armed? This was to insure the militia, the whole of the population, had arms to defend itself against both domestic and foreign invasions.

In case others aren�t aware of this, the second Congress in the Militia Act of 1792 defined �militia of the United States� to include almost every free adult male in the United States . These persons were obliged by law to possess a firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment. (Act of May 8, 1792; 2nd Congress, 1st Session, ch. 32) It is further stated that this statute remained in effect into the early years of the 20th century as a legal requirement of gun ownership for most of the population of the United States.

The reader may read of this and individual state requirements in �THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS�, the report prepared and presented to the United States Senate, 97th Congress, 2nd Session, by the Committee on the Judiciary chaired by Strom Thurmond, South Caroline. This document may be found at this link: History: Second Amendment Right to "Keep and Bear Arms", found on the Missouri 51st Militia Links site.

The writer highly recommends that all people interested in the right of the people to keep and bear arms study the history provided on this site in conjunction with KABA and others.

Those of you who regularly visit Keep And Bear Arms know of Kennesaw, Georgia. To review, however, this is the community that essentially follows the 1792 Act. In 1982, Kennesaw passed a city ordinance in which the heads of households (with certain exceptions) are required to keep at least one firearm in their home.

If a gun control radical extremist such as O�Donnell is correct, crime, accidental shootings, intentional shootings, violence in schools, child murders, and criminals in general should have ran amok, especially since the community nearly tripled in population (from 5,000 to 13,000) during the next 16 years.

However, nothing could be further from the truth. During the first year after the ordinance was passed, crime against persons decreased by 74 percent and then fell another 45 percent when comparing 1983 to 1982. The numbers of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.0 through 1998. (Information from The New American Magazine, editorial by Chuck Baldwin)

Of course, if O�Donnell did check any facts, she would find in every state in which there is concealed carry, that crimes in every category have decreased and, further, in the area with the most stringent controls, the capitol of this nation, that crime is a danger to all. And, why not since all of this is so logical.

First, if a criminal doesn�t know whether or not a person or a home is armed, the odds are that he would be less likely to confront the person or enter his home uninvited. Both England and Australia found this to be fact. Every form of crime increased in these nations following confiscation of arms, including in-home invasions (meaning while the occupants were home).

In fact, crime has increased in this nation as unconstitutional gun control laws were passed. As guns became more controlled, crime became less controlled and, therefore, increased. Related to many firearms crimes, it is clear that as the war on drugs intensified, so did the use of firearms as a tool for control within the drug trade, including by federal organizations.

Common sense dictates that if a criminal knows another person is weaker than him or is not armed, or that there cannot be a loaded weapon inside a home, then the odds are greater this person or home will be a target of those with criminal intent. It doesn�t take a rocket scientist to figure this out. If you were a criminal, wouldn�t you search out those least likely to be armed and least likely to be able to defend themselves. I know if I was a criminal, I sure wouldn�t want to have a high potential for being hurt or killed just to get a little money or other material item(s).

The woman would also find in every area of the world in which arms have been totally seized (Germany, Russia) that killings and incarcerations by governments of its citizens increases astronomically along with crime increasing tremendously. The result is citizens then live in constant fear. If the government doesn�t get them, the criminals will.

It also doesn�t take a rocket scientist to figure this out, either. But, then - who ever accused O�Donnell of being less than ignorant when it comes to firearms and the factual basis of the government�s intent to establish complete, plenary control over firearms and, hence, the people themselves?

To top it off, the woman is a complete hypocrite. Personally, the writer despises hypocrites when those hypocrites have the potential of influencing people who are not knowledgeable of such issues as gun control. O�Donnell gets on TV, the only medium many use for news and facts since they can�t or won�t read, and spouts her mental excrement as if she knows what she is talking about. Since it is on TV, less informed people believe her idiotic stattements, never considering that while she spouts her nonsense, she does so while protected by heavily armed guards.

This does point out a major problem for those of us who want our 2nd Amendment (and all) rights restored. Celebrities rely on their popularity to spout political and other unconstitutional garbage. The only reason they are listened to is because of their status as a �celebrity.� Thus, they can spread misinformation against our constitutionally secured rights as effectively as any government organization doing the same. As such, they are as treasonous in the mind of this writer as any official violating his oath of office.

Well, guess that makes O�Donnell not only an idiot in regards to gun control, but also a treasonous hypocrite with the intent of denying God-given rights to others while she remains under the protective cloak of her armed guards. Thus, she will be one of the �elite� permitted armed protection and other rights while those she has influenced in favor of gun control will end up without protection, neither against criminals nor the government.

Allowing ignorance and hypocrisy of such people, including most of all those in government, to determine the path this nation takes assures the people of this nation complete tyranny and loss of all unalienable rights.

And, as to that, Good Folks, I pray I either live long enough to see the trend halted and reversed or that I do not live long enough to see Liberty give its last dying gasp.