We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I guess I have to disagree that Florida has 'very advanced' gun legislation. As far as I can tell there is no, repeat-no, evidence that broadly distributed, easily available guns, particularly hand guns, have any effect on crime rates. The issue appears to provide a kind of solipcistic argument for those who want guns and have little or no respect for the lives of others, but it has no basis in fact. Further, a necessary consequence of this policy if the wider and easier availability of weapons for nefarious purposes and an escalation of interaction--more people with more guns means more shooting. I live in Vermont which has fairly easy gun laws and I have an interest in target work myself. But, I am sadly aware that guns foster violence particularly in urban areas, a fact that gun liberals seem to conveniently forget. They choose instead to believe that what is good for the goose is even better for the gander: if it works in rural hunting oriented areas it must be better for heavily populated areas with no hunting tradition. Frankly ther reasoning and ethics of this piece and most all gun argumentation is pretty poor and leads only to greater alienation, less social cohesion, less stable communities, and higher levels of violence. The simple selfishness of it all is astounding.