The never-ending debate on guns is often polarized by simple-minded perceptions that reduce arguments to two camps: Gun-control types who “want to take your guns away,” and gun zealots who want a gun in every pot, pocket and pew. The reality is not so stark, and local gun shop owners in Flagler County are first to show why.
With the discussion of gun control and gun rights provoking more discussions than foreign affairs this election season, FlaglerLive spoke to three store owners who hold different views on many aspects of the debate, though one thing they all agree on is that the gun sales business in Florida is doing very well.
“I think everybody is doing well because gun violence has been in the news lately and a lot of people are worried,” said Larry Beighle, a dealer and co-owner of Larry’s Guns and Ammo on South State Street in Bunnell. “You’ve got a lot of folks moving down here who are looking for protection for themselves and for their families and homes.”
Palm Coast City Councilman Steven Nobile owned HSDS Guns in Palm Coast until the end of 2015 before closing it in order to become a wholesale manufacturer of gun holsters. He said business was always brisk for him last year.
“The only problems for us, sales-wise, would come when the federal rhetoric kicks in, the gun issue becomes politicized, people talk about banning weapons, and then the biggest dealers buy up all the supply,” Nobile said. “The big guys in our business create a shortage and drive up the prices.”
Robert Weidig, who owns a gunsmith shop bearing his name on Utility Drive in Palm Coast, said he sees “furious buys” by customers periodically.
“They move down from New York or New Jersey and learn how much easier it is to buy a gun here,” Weidig said.
Even though crime in the state is at a four-decade low, the owners say that the biggest reason new customers come in looking to purchase a gun is safety, with Weidig saying he’s been seeing more and more women come into his store. There are some who come into the store as hunters, Beighle said, but most react to situations such as the racially motivated mass shooting of nine black people in Charleston by Dylann Roof last June or the mass-shooting by a Muslim couple in San Bernardino in December, which left 14 dead and 22 injured, and get frightened.
Nobile added that he saw a surge last year in customers seeking concealed weapons permits. Such surges have typically happened immediately after broadly publicized mass shootings, and after the two elections of Barack Obama.
“The fear doesn’t seem as pronounced as it once was, but as soon as something like (San Bernardino) happens you see more coming in talking about safety,” Beighle said.
Fears can backfire. Last week a Palm Coast man was jailed after started shooting his gun in his backyard canal. That day there’d been a murder at his wife’s workplace–the Putnam County Health Department–and he’d been unable to reach her by phone because of a lock-down and what appears to be authorities’ inappropriate ban on calls in and out from employees. He got worried. He wanted to ensure that next time his wife was armed so she could protect herself. But he ended up facing an aggravated assault charge for inappropriately wielding the gun. Arrests for gun infractions are almost routine in Flagler County.
If in legal circles, in newspaper columns, social media and blogs the debate carries on regarding the meaning of the Second Amendment, Gallup polls have show a relatively steady consensus in two fundamental regards: while 55 percent of Americans favor stricter gun control, the Second Amendment’s more recent interpretation as protecting an individual right to bear arms is supported by 73 percent of Americans. So while the push for more gun regulations, however unsuccessful, is likely to continue, the Second Amendment itself is quite safe.
When it comes to gun safety and regulations, the local gun-business owners begin to disagree. Weidig believes that federally-mandated background checks “are a total waste of time.”
“The 4473 form from the Brady bill is just a paper chase, and it gives the ATF something to do,” he said, referring to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. “If anyone thinks background checks are stopping crime, they’re very foolish. People can get guns any way they want and the background check doesn’t stop them.”
Nobile felt that while background checks were a good idea, allowing person-to-person sales of guns at gun shows, long a hot topic in the gun control debate, was wrong.
“It’s not at all difficult in Florida to get a weapon, because if somebody comes into my store and the background check comes back negative, they can go to CraigsList or the Pennysaver and buy from an individual,” Nobile said. “If you want to do something that will have an effect, I think that would have an effect, not letting those transactions happen.”
Beighle agreed that in addition to doing a background check on every gun sold in Florida, enforcing existing laws is as important.
And all three owners interviewed believe maybe the biggest problem they see with gun owners now is lack of safety training.
“We’ve got way too many people running around the streets of Florida not knowing how to use their weapons, and it leads to problems,” Nobile said. “Most of them get their permit and don’t use it, but in my opinion every person should have to take a firearms safety course before buying a gun. You take a test, show that you can use the weapon carefully and safely, and then you can buy the gun.
“We put in regulations for being able to drive a car,” Nobile added, “why wouldn’t you do that for firearms?”
But that’s not required under Florida law, as it is required in about half the states.
Weidig, who taught gun safety courses for more than 20 years, agrees that safety training is adequate, but isn’t concerned about the number of guns in Florida.
“Too many guns? You can never have enough guns,” Weidig said. “There aren’t enough guns in Florida right now.”
One part of the gun debate that comes up all the time in the Florida legislature is open carry laws. As of 2016, 45 states have some version or semblance of an open carry law, allowing those with permits to display their weapons openly.
Florida is one of five states where most forms of open carry regulations are banned. The issue came up most recently in February, when a bill allowing open-carry (HB 163) passed the House but was tabled in the Senate by Senate Judiciary Chairman Miguel Diaz de la Portilla (R-Miami). (An earlier version of the story had incorrectly reported that all open carry is banned: in fact, certain allowances are made for hunters and others in restricted circumstances.)
All of the Flagler gun shop owners agreed open carry was a bad idea.
“I don’t understand the purpose of it, honestly,” Nobile said. “If someone has an open weapons permit, and if a gun accidentally shows while someone’s walking down the street and a police officer sees the gun, they have to do something about it. But if you’re legally carrying that gun, you shouldn’t have to worry about being harassed by sheriff’s and deputies.”
Weidig was even more vehement in his rejection of open carry.
“We have a lot of retirees down here and they put a gun on their hip and feel strong but have no idea what they’re doing with that gun,” Weidig said. “If I were a bad guy and saw someone flashing a gun, I wouldn’t even need one of my own. I’d take theirs and do what I wanted to do.”
Aside from opposing open carry, the local owners felt that Florida’s laws are sensible. They don’t see a reason to change them, or add more.
“Florida is doing it right, and I think it’s just a matter of enforcing some of the current laws,” Beighle said. “But I’ve got no problem with what the laws are now.”
anonymous says
I’m buying another gun as soon as possible.
Nancy N. says
Almost every one of the “moderate” stances on gun laws and gun control that these store owners took in these interviews actually benefits their business. Limit person to person sales? Well then everyone has to buy from a gun dealer like them. Require everyone to have to have training? Oh, they just happen to sell that…it rings hollow.
Their opposition to open carry sounds like common sense but I’m wondering if it comes more from a place of concern that if open carry was allowed and people realized how surrounded by idiots carrying guns they were in the community, that it might create a movement for gun control.
I think the truth is more in the quote from Mr Weidig, “You can never have enough guns.”
r&r says
If the guns are taken away the law biding people will turn them in leaving all the bad guys with their’s. Chicago has this law and leads the nation in murders due to gun shots.
PeachesMcGee says
“Florida is one of five states where all forms of open carry regulations are banned.”
That statement from the article is incorrect. In Florida, you can legally open carry a loaded firearm while engaged in, or going to and from, fishing, hunting, and camping. Florida Statute Chapter 790 Section 25.
FlaglerLive says
Thank you for the correction.
Flatsflyer says
I think we need to extend the background checks to include checking for government handouts. How can someone on food stamps afford to purchase or own a closet full of guns? Unemployment, disability, Medicade should be a consideration when buying a gun. If you can’t afford to take care of yourself, I sure don’t want to take care of your needs so you can buy another gun!
Downtown says
From the story…”some 1.5 million Floridians have a permit.” “Even though crime in the state is at a four-decade low,”
Don’t you think that maybe more CCP’s would continue the decline of crime? Sure looks like as CCP’s increase crime decreases.
FlaglerLive says
While there appears to be some cause and effect, it’s not really the case: Florida’s falling crime rate has mirrored the nation’s, and New York’s crime rate, which has fallen even more than Florida‘s, suggests that guns have little to do with it: New York is among the top five states with the most restrictive gun laws in the nation.
Geezer says
Flatsflyer
Quite the throat-clearing. So you would deny a gun purchase, and a day at the shooting range
to a disabled person–a person who paid into the system for many years? Last time I shot at
Strickland, I saw handicapped access for target shooters. I’ll bet they’re on disability, and without jobs.
What do you propose: we confiscate their guns? Should we send these people to the glue factory?
Or do you want to raid their closets?
Where did you come up with this asinine diatribe?
Knightwatch says
I simply cannot understand the willful ignorance and paranoia of gun nuts. No matter what happens… robberies, shootings, terrorist threats, whatever, no matter how remote the threat or the crime, their answer is more guns. Every study by responsible researchers shows that more guns do not deter crime. Every study shows that free access to guns causes, not deters, more violence. Every study has shown that a gun owner is far more likely to harm him/herself, or friends and relatives, than to heroically confront a criminal. Every study shows that suicide attempts are 80% more lethal with guns.
Guns now kill more people 25 and under than any other cause. Guns deaths are now about equal with annual automobile deaths. Nationally, guns kill twice as many children and young people than cancer, five times as many than heart disease and 15 times more than infection. Yet the NRA and their martinet gun nut members call for more guns.
This is a national medical epidemic and an embarrassment. We must all stand up to the NRA and stop the carnage.
Markingthedays says
I haven’t agreed with much that Nobile has ever said, but I’m a liberal who is in favor of RESPONSIBLE gun ownership. Training and background checks should be a precursor, just as he says.
PeachesMcGee says
KnightWatch…
A gun, by itself, does not kill anyone. Human interaction is required.
More laws don’t work…just look @ Chicago.
Christopher Anderson says
I am Chris Anderson owner of Chris Anderson’s Firearms Training, and soon to also be sales. I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and was part of the open carry movement in Austin Texas.
Training; Proper firearms safety and use training is essential for anyone who owns or carries a firearm. May of my students have watched online videos, or received the minimum training required for the CWP, and think they have a good handle on what they are doing, until they come into class and realize how much they did not know, that they did not know.
Many gun stores offer Florida Concealed Weapons Permit Classes, but their class offerings end at that point. I, and a few other trainers in the area, teach follow on and more advanced gun handling and safety classes. Knowing how to shoot vs being able to effectively defend yourself in a stressful situation with a firearm, are two very different things. In my opinion the training requirements should be expanded to cover more information and require a written test and skill (shooting) qualification. I have had students with Florida CWPs come to me for more training, that needed to be retrained in the basics of safety, handling, and pistol operation before we could move forward. That should not be the case.
There is a section in your article where Mr. Nobel is talking about training regulations for being able to purchase a gun, while the link posted in the sentence “But that’s not required under Florida law, as it is required in about half the states” links to a site talking about requirements to conceal carry, not to purchase.
I am a proponent of open carry, and person to person gun sales.
Sherry says
Great post Knightwatch!
Why are those on the “No Fly/Terrorist Watch List” still allowed to legally buy guns? Why does any self respecting hunter need an automatic weapon? It’s simply because of “legal” bribery by the NRA!!!
Here’s an article worth reading about Australia and the UK and their efforts on lowering gun crime and death:
Sherry says
OOPS. . . Here’s the link. . . hopefully, some will learn from it:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/how-australia-and-britain-tackled-gun-violence.html
Common Sense says
I see people at various venues around town, with their guns. Mostly older, white, men, who can no longer drive at night because of poor eyesight. Some can barely drive at all and when you ask them why they are armed, they tell you they need them for “protection”. However, they can’t quite explain what they need to be protected from. In every single case when asked if they have been the victims of any crimes in the past the asnwer is no.
Delta says
Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
Stinger Missiles don’t shoot airplanes, people shoot airplanes,
Nerve gas doesn’t kill people, people with nerve gas kill people.
Using the above logic why stop with guns ? Every american has a right to keep nerve gas for home defense.
In this country when we have a mass killing, the answer to how to stop it is we need more guns. This answer is very cleverly coming from the the folks who sell guns. See a conflict of interest here?
I am gun enthusiast, however I have witnessed the move from 38. revolvers and shotguns to Military grade weapons (assault rifles) in the hands of civilians that is just plain disturbing .
For the Politically inclined I don’t think the NRA has the clout that is purported to have. Yes they have large money lobbyists paid for by gun manufacturers and member fees that frighten our political leaders. But the rank and file of the NRA are sick of the murders as anyone else.
Guns laws are about keeping weapons out of the hands of humans who wish harm on others, not about making sure that every human has one. ( gun manufacturers want every american to have a gun)
anonymous says
I don’t feel safe here and I’m getting a gun as soon as I save up. I need protection. These police are a joke.
I can’t take the chance of an illegal or unlicensed person hurtING me.
Geezer says
Delta makes a good point. People have gone from the old workhorse .38’s, shotguns, and .22’s to
guns that really have no sporting purpose. People have been in a panic, sensing stiff gun regulation
in the near future. I can picture a life-size oil painting of Barack Obama in the CEO’s office of Colt’s
Manufacturing–a venerable arms company who nearly went bankrupt just a few years ago.
The president spurred a stampede of gun and ammo purchases, and never was able to meaningfully
restrict gun sales. What a shot in the arm for gun and accessory manufacturers! I think that Obama
will be sorely missed at the gun shops. If Trump is elected–the “gold rush” will come to a rude stop.
Ironically, the gun craze will fade if Orange Trump becomes the chief executive.
If Hillary gets her hoary hands on the White House, expect the gun factories to triple output.
Pick your poison, boys and girls.
I can’t wait to break out my vintage Colts and Smiths and spend sunny days shooting (affordably)
at inherently violent, and sneaky tomato cans, and perforating smarmy paper plates, dammit.
It’s a little brisk up here in New England, but the days are warming, and the range will soon beckon me.
“May you live in interesting times”
–Traditional Chinese curse
Bc. says
Flatsflyer that is the most ridiculous thing I have read in a long time.
jack burton says
I can show a thousand and more quotes from those on the gun control side who ““want to take your guns away,” This includes politicians, media types, movie stars, and academia types.
Please find me ONE quote, just ONE quote, from a comparable status person on the pro-firearm side “who want a gun in every pot, pocket and pew”
When an article starts out with such an obvious, willful and deliberate falsehood you know the rest of it has little to no value in the discussion.
Outsider says
Not only that, Geezer, but I would bet he was opposed to drug testing welfare recipients; it would be just fine for them to buy drugs with our money, but not a gun.
Anonymous says
Just “love” how the left call those who are FOR the constitution ” zealots”
Rich says
Marxist and Islamists who infect our federal government plus the MSM media prostitutes who protect them will gleefully lie, falsify, fabricate, slander, libel, deceive, delude, bribe, and treasonably betray the free citizens of the United States..
Second Amendment foes lying about gun control – The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with personal self-defense.Firearms are our constitutionally mandated safeguard against tyranny by a powerful federal government.
Only dictators, tyrants, despots, totalitarians, and those who want to control and ultimately to enslave you support gun control.
No matter what any president, senator, congressman, or hard-left mainstream media prostitutes tell you concerning the statist utopian fantasy of safety and security through further gun control: They are lying. If their lips are moving, they are lying about gun control. These despots truly hate America..
These tyrants hate freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, and private property. But the reality is that our citizens’ ownership of firearms serves as a concrete deterrent against despotism. They are demanding to hold the absolute power of life and death over you and your family. Ask the six million Jewws, and the other five million murdered martyrs who perished in the Nazzi death camps, how being disarmed by a powerful tyranny ended any chances of fighting back. Ask the murdered martyrs of the Warsaw Ghetto about gun control.
Their single agenda is to control you after you are disarmed. When the people who want to control you hold the absolute power of life and death over your family, you have been enslaved. The hard-left Marxist and Islamists who infect our federal government plus the MSM media prostitutes who protect them will gleefully lie, falsify, fabricate, slander, libel, deceive, delude, bribe, and treasonably betray the free citizens of the United States into becoming an unarmed population. Unarmed populations have been treated as slaves and chattel since the dawn of history.
Will we stand our ground, maintaining our constitutionally guaranteed Second Amendment rights, fighting those who would enslave us?
American Thinker
Geezer says
Outsider,
Comments like that person’s are much like a foul odor that mercifully dissipates and is soon forgotten.
Nancy N. says
So, Rich, you think that “Firearms are our constitutionally mandated safeguard against tyranny by a powerful federal government”?
How much good is your handgun – or even your AK-47 – against a Apache attack helicopter, a Stealth fighter, or a tank? You really think that Remington in your belt is the only thing that is keeping the world’s strongest military from taking over its own country?
I got news for you: it isn’t. If the U.S. government wanted to turn on its people, the average citizens would be more overwhelmed and outmanned than the Iraqi military was. And we all saw how THAT ended.
To be blunt, claiming that people in this country need to have weapons to be able to prevent government tyranny doesn’t even pass the laugh test.
In any event, the 2nd amendment was about ensuring the rights of property owners to recover slaves. The “well organized militias” written into the 2nd amendment were posses to pursue escaped slaves.
Joe Veteran says
“I think we need to extend the background checks to include checking for government handouts. How can someone on food stamps afford to purchase or own a closet full of guns? Unemployment, disability, Medicade should be a consideration when buying a gun. If you can’t afford to take care of yourself, I sure don’t want to take care of your needs so you can buy another gun!”
Are you for real? You are saying that if someone is down on their luck, that they get government help, should automatically lose their rights to defend themselves, or not allow the constitution to apply to them.
The Constitution applies to all “Americans”, not just the rich, or the well off, but the sick, the elderly, and even those on food stamps. If they qualified for help, then they get help, it should not reflect on their right to protect themselves or their family members. So as a combat veteran if I get disability, you believe I should lose my rights to defend myself? even if my disability has to do with my service provided to my country during war. Who should make the rules as to who should have a right to defend oneself, or just die at the hands of a criminal? you? FlaglerLive’s? Corrupt Politicians? What makes America great is that the Constitution does not discriminate, even if you feel it should. There is currently a law on the books as to how to determine if someone is not capable of owning a firearm, let’s not abuse that law, and allow Justice top prevail, and not opinions.
Joe Veteran says
“WASHINGTON, June 27 2005- The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.”
According to the US Supreme Court decision in Warren v. District of Columbia in 1981, the police do not have the duty to provide protection and services to individuals except under specific assignments.
“Police have no legal duty to respond and prevent crime or protect the victim. There have BEEN OVER 10 various supreme and state court cases the individual has never won. Notably, the Supreme Court STATED about the responsibility of police for the security of your family and loved ones is “You, and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your family and loved ones. That was the essence of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the early 1980’s when they ruled that the police do not have a duty to protect you as an individual, but to protect society as a whole.”
The cemetery are full of many who decided to call 911, and wait on the cavalry, instead of protecting themselves.
Joe Veteran says
By the way, as a former police officer, I can tell you very clearly, that we arrived to many calls, just for the chalk line, and investigation.
HiCarry says
Sherry, re: the “No Fly List”
It’s full of errors, that’s why. The GAO found at least 30% of the names on the list were there in error. Not to mention that there is no way to know if you get placed on the list, no objective criteria to get on the list, and no practical way to get off the list.
Even the ACLU says using the list to bar purchases of firearms is wrong and has already successfully filed a lawsuit against the DOJ and will most likely file another.
Due process is important.
Using your logic, those on the no-fly list should also loose the right to free speech, the practice of their chosen religion, be subject to random searches, and immune from any bars on cruel and unusual punishment, right?
Geezer says
Nancy N.:
Nancy, keep in mind that US soldiers are Americans too, and I doubt that they would
kill their fellow citizens, friends and family wholesale at the behest of their government.
I think that they’d realize quickly that they’re on the wrong side, and it would signal the
time to rein in a new government! Those helicopters and fighters would come in real handy.
The miltary might which you cite would eventually be directed towards the stuffed shirts
who dare to order such as an attack.
Apache helicopters firing missiles at mom as she bakes apple pie–I think not, ma’am.
Sherry says
@ HiCarry Please, NEVER twist or extrapolate the meaning of my posts and inject your own ignorant thinking into my comments, thank you! Please speak only for yourself!
I absolutely am aware that some names on the no fly list should not be there and the list should most certainly be cleaned up. I use that example to make a point that we need Federal legislation for gun safety regulations which require far more extensive background checks, a ban on automatic and semi-automatic weapons, training, and a closure to ALL the loopholes that allow transfer of guns to circumvent those gun safety regulations.
Currently, because of NRA bribes, we are prohibited from even collecting valuable data on gun violence and murder rates in the USA! This madness needs to STOP!
Hammock says
A bribe would be a felony for the one who bribes and the congressmen who accept the bribe, so stop it.
Home invasions can happen in seconds and police (who respond to crime and not prevent crime) take minutes to get there. And when they do the bad guy would be gone, and you could be very dead.
If you stop all gun sells there would be no more guns? Please. When alcohol was prohibited there was not alcohol? I guess there is no drug problem by your reasoning.
If you disagree with any of these statement, you should not be allowed to vote.
HiCarry says
@ Sherry
“Why are those on the “No Fly/Terrorist Watch List” still allowed to legally buy guns? Why does any self respecting hunter need an automatic weapon? It’s simply because of “legal” bribery by the NRA!!!”
Ignorant thinking? Me thinks the only ignorant one here is you, my dear. You asked a question which I answered and then simply applied your logic to the exercise of other Constitutional Rights for which I suspect you hold in a slightly higher esteem. But, maybe calling you ignorant is too kind? After all, you reply that you know the “No-Fly” list is inherently flawed and wildly inaccurate yet still suggest that it still be used to restrict otherwise law-abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights. That’s not ignorance, that is willful deceit and wanton disregard for other’s civil rights and that is shameful.
Now, let’s address more of what appears to be your limitless ignorance for such a short post: Where are any posts or suggestions that hunters want “automatic weapons?” I suspect, again, that you just don’t know what you’re talking about. Can you even define what an automatic weapon is? What about a semi-automatic weapon? I think it incumbent on you to be able to define these terms if you advocate for banning them.
I would also suggest that you are quite capable of stopping “[T]his maddness”….just stop posting your wildly inaccurate, emotionally driven, fact bereft reasons for banning guns and stop acting like you know what you’re talking about. It is obvious that you do not. SO, do us all a favor: Please, stop the madness!
Outsider says
Exactly what I was thinking, Geezer! What red-blooded American soldier is going to turn his Apache on fellow citizens? Look at what the generals did when Trump declared he would order the military to do such and such; they said they would defy the orders. Apparently some posters are unfamiliar with the term “guerilla warfare” as well, which may include the use of certain tactics by an inferior force against a superior enemy.
Outsider says
Common Sense, did you also ask them if they ever had small pox before they got vaccinated, and deride them accordingly? By your logic, it’s silly to prepare for something that is possible but has not yet occurred to a particular individual.
Sherry says
@HiCarry I have much better things to do than to waste my time justifying myself, my knowledge, my very credible opinions to those like you. I’ll just “consider the source” and continue getting ready for fabulous Paris tomorrow. :)
Sherry says
@ Hammock. . . most certainly “considering the source” for you as well. . . wouldn’t want you to feel slighted.
Geezer says
Outsider:
There are more guns than people in the United States. It’s a logistical impossibility to ever
think that our arms will ever be confiscated such as in Australia and England. Gun ownership
is more than a right–it’s a deeply steeped tradition in the United States.
Those same people who would be assigned the task to disarm the rest of us, know this.
Most come from families who own firearms.
Just try that shit they pulled in Australia, see what happens. That would make the Civil War
look like a garden party, serving banquet beer, and chicken wings.
Our culture isn’t one of obedience–it’s a culture of individual freedoms, and laws, which many
want to subvert. As far as guerilla warfare goes; that my friend, is an understatement.
We should all unite and look to dismantle the plutocracy that our nation has evolved into.
That’s a great area in which to concentrate our collective frustrations.
See you around, Outsider.
HiCarry says
@ Sherry
“@HiCarry I have much better things to do than to waste my time justifying myself, my knowledge, my very credible opinions to those like you. I’ll just “consider the source” and continue getting ready for fabulous Paris tomorrow. :)”
It’s not that you have better things to do, it’s that you cannot justify yourself or your knowledge. It is obvious that you are quite ignorant on the subject at hand. You cannot even demonstrate a very basic knowledge of firearms (automatic versus semi-automatic) yet for some reason expect everyone to believe you are somehow competent to weigh in on the conversation. That’s a tad bit narcissistic isn’t it?
As for your “credible opinion,” the only thing credible about it is that it is indeed your opinion. An opinion based on emotion not fact or logic. When you can argue a point using credible evidence and facts, let me know. Until then, do us all a favor and stop the madness that is your illogical ranting and ad hominem attacks.