1. Of course, please do.
2. That is an excellent question, what does everyone think?
What is a good non-aggressive approach to a civil political discussion with someone with opposing views? We as the firearms community generally speak on behalf of ourselves when it comes to the political debate, but the opposing party's can turn towards an emotional conclusion, instead of looking beyond the surface of the debate. These types of people could be met on a different playing field, staying from the emotional subjects but looking at other areas to sway their opinions. Away from firearms, perhaps look at discussing economy and community. Something where both parties in the discussion can have a back and forth without the need for the emotional drive of violence and past tragedies, as this is the greatest hurdle on these types of people.
Not everyone's world includes firearms either so we have to remember that there is more to this fight than just us, our economy, our people, our jobs and livelihoods are also things that are at stake. How long until this country is tapped dry and we are on our 4th bailout like some of the European economies.... We need to take care of ourselves before we can take care of others.