Steve Koski, you have posed a good question and the answer is unequivocally YES.
If I am willing to kill for my rights (I am) and willing to die for my rights (I am if necessary), then yes I am also willing to lie to the sheeple if necessary to win back/keep these precious freedoms and make our nation great again. As it happens, fortunately, I do not have to lie, as all the legal and prudential arguments happen to weigh strongly in favor of us freedom advocates (it's just a matter of getting the message across). However, as the masses are in fact quite short-sighted and well, let's say "uninformed" as a group, then yes, absolutely, for the good of the country and our future generations, "bald-faced" lies will do far more good than harm. This is one case of the end justifying the means - not ANY means, mind you, but lying if necessary, yes. It's for the sheeple's own good. Lying is actually something I quite averse to, and anyone who knows me can tell you my honesty and integrity is well above the norm. But with some things (civil liberties), the stakes are so high that I'm willing to go against my normal beliefs for the greater good (as I said, if I am willing to KILL for my rights - something I am loathe to do ordinarily, then lying is but a small price). Again I must emphasize that lying is rarely if ever needed when you're on the side of truth and good sense, as we are. I should add the the ONLY reason I see not to lie -if necessary- would of course be to maintain impeccable credibility (obviously, exposed lies weaken credibility). This is an extremely strong reason and ought to be weighed at every juncture. But with "urban myths", how can one be exposed as propogating a lie until such time that the legend is proven a lie? If you can put the ball in the antis' court, I say do it!
You are of course right that the antis perpetuate bald-faced lies, chief among them this crap about the RKBA being limited to state militias, not an individual right - that idea, which did crop up in a few lesser court opinions and law review articles, has been shattered by several supreme court opinions and the vast weight of scholarly articles.
[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited July 01, 1999).]