Isn’t it strange how ideas and opinions change with time? Both sometimes change dramatically within a single conversation. At the government level support for one thing or another can change more quickly than a speeding bullet. The frequency of incidences in national and international events, as reported in an unstable media—an unreliable venue more interested in providing entertainment than reporting news, tends to make situations worse than they might be. Based on often inaccurate, or incomplete, information, the audience become polarized. The majority of people take either one side or another and defend their position fiercely, rejecting facts or ameliorating circumstances.

I invite you to consider how polarized people are over gun control. The acrimonious words and actions of anti-gun forces are perceived by gun owners as a threat—as well they should be. This is especially true when anti-gun advocates permeate the government. When office holders and other persons in positions of influence, people such as Chicago Mayor Daley, judges in California, Colorado’s Congress, the Massachusetts’ Supreme Court, various school boards and school administrators (one of which recently suspended a 6 year old for pointing his finger like a gun toward another kid), and even pollsters, throw themselves into a frenzied attack against firearms, they get met with equal amounts of resistance. I think this could be termed as polarized positions.

I have yet to meet an NAF member who isn’t a gun owner. In conversations they have, without exception, expressed anger over organizations and people such as the Brady Campaign’s leader, Paul Helmke, politicians like Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, and mega-bucks George Soros, just to name a few whose names and positions came up.

Polarization can be a self-defeating thing. When there is no give on either side there often no way to reach a workable compromise. Sometimes this situation is reported fairly by some part of the news media. That is, if it has entertainment value. Considering the dearth of accurate reporting about gun control efforts, where is the news coverage of facts surrounding it to be found? Perhaps among the best is the Heritage Foundation, Hillsdale College’s Imprimus, and the National Rifle Association magazine America’s 1^st Freedom. Once in a while the Christian Science Monitor has some coverage and the Wall Street Journal certainly does.

If you want to keep your firearms, be free to obtain concealed carry permits, even defend yourself and your family within the confines of your own home, it would be wise to promote and defend those leaders and media concerns that defend gun rights. If you don’t have time to ferret out which of your legislators supports your position, if your "news" outlets fail to report gun ownership related issues, then heres a suggestion for you: get rid of the papers and magazines that support gun control, be a member of the NRA/ILA, and support gun friendly media like those listed above and let your government representatives know how you feel and that you vote. Don’t do it by email. Hand written or typed, letters pack more influence. Phone calls work too. However busy your schedule may be, find the time to be involved. Your freedom to make a personal choice concerning your firearms is at stake.

In the meanwhile, don’t forget to have fun!