- Reaction score
- 6,080
- Points
- 1,160
Infanteer said:
And why Britian, which has outlawed firearms, had an unprecidented increase in violent crime, with criminals being the ones using the outlawed guns?
Liberals want Handgun Ban
- Thread starter Michael Dorosh
- Start date
- Status
And why Britian, which has outlawed firearms, had an unprecidented increase in violent crime, with criminals being the ones using the outlawed guns?
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,739
- Points
- 1,040
I think the important points have been made. It is an election ploy to push voters:
1) It helps anchor the portion of the Liberal base for which "no guns" is a strong enough belief to make a single-issue voting decision.
2) It steals the same base from the NDP.
3) It goads the CPC and anyone who might be mistaken as a spokesperson for the CPC to respond "angrily" and drive a few more middle-of-the-road "undecideds" into the Liberal camp. The CPC (and supporters) must respond calmly and rationally.
This backfires quite nicely on the Liberals and casts a moral stain on the statists who support the ban. There can be now no doubt that the Liberal intention is to confiscate firearms regardless of any real social policy benefit. It undercuts the philosophical standing of every statist who believes that freedoms may be infringed if there is a sufficient social good to be gained, because in this case the irrefutable data of crime in Canada do not point to legitimate firearm owners as being a significant source of crime or of firearms sold to criminals. There is no social good gained proportionate to the loss of freedom. It reveals the ignorance of everyone who doesn't understand the laws in Canada which already restrain lawful firearm owners and ownership - if they had any respect for the rest of us and a shred of humility, they'd abstain from voting and consider themselves disqualified by lack of basic social and intellectual competence.
>What's the point in owning a handgun? It is useless for hunting and it's only purpose is to kill other human beings. Or shoot on a range to practice killing other human beings. I'm sorry, maybe it's fun to shoot a handgun on a range, but your personal enjoyment is superceded by the need to protect our society. Your handgun could easily be stolen and fall into a criminal's hands.
The complete and final answer to the "what's the point of <X>" question is: there doesn't have to be a point. It isn't given to you to decide how others are permitted to pursue happiness. Which person or group of persons is appointed the guardian of all other rational adults of free will, with a mandate to decide what is acceptable to own or do, and what is not? I never cease to be amazed at the arrogance and smallness of mind of people who see government as their personal hammer and all other people as nails.
What's the point of tobacco, marijuana, autos which can exceed 110k/h, skateboards, fast motorcycles, alcohol, unprotected sex with anonymous partners, backyard swimming pools in neighbourhoods with small children, television and movies which portray violence gratuitously, fireworks, bearing children who can't be supported, foods and beverages with no nutritional value, large living spaces, foods and cosmetics which can cause fatal allergic reactions in other people.
These are all things which are unnecessary, are chiefly for or a result of personal enjoyment, and create very real costs to society in terms of bills paid by taxpayers. Shall we agree then to create a model society, in which no one is permitted to do anything which could result in a social cost? You give up your unnecessary, harmful, and potentially costly pastimes, and I'll give up mine. We will establish what the list of permitted recreations is, and then each choose freely from it. If nothing on the list appeals to you and your life consequently seems destined to be joyless, feel free to execute yourself provided you do so at no cost to anyone else. Perhaps you can pay someone to do it and create a net social good, since social goods seem to be the be-all and end-all of existence for your ilk.
1) It helps anchor the portion of the Liberal base for which "no guns" is a strong enough belief to make a single-issue voting decision.
2) It steals the same base from the NDP.
3) It goads the CPC and anyone who might be mistaken as a spokesperson for the CPC to respond "angrily" and drive a few more middle-of-the-road "undecideds" into the Liberal camp. The CPC (and supporters) must respond calmly and rationally.
This backfires quite nicely on the Liberals and casts a moral stain on the statists who support the ban. There can be now no doubt that the Liberal intention is to confiscate firearms regardless of any real social policy benefit. It undercuts the philosophical standing of every statist who believes that freedoms may be infringed if there is a sufficient social good to be gained, because in this case the irrefutable data of crime in Canada do not point to legitimate firearm owners as being a significant source of crime or of firearms sold to criminals. There is no social good gained proportionate to the loss of freedom. It reveals the ignorance of everyone who doesn't understand the laws in Canada which already restrain lawful firearm owners and ownership - if they had any respect for the rest of us and a shred of humility, they'd abstain from voting and consider themselves disqualified by lack of basic social and intellectual competence.
>What's the point in owning a handgun? It is useless for hunting and it's only purpose is to kill other human beings. Or shoot on a range to practice killing other human beings. I'm sorry, maybe it's fun to shoot a handgun on a range, but your personal enjoyment is superceded by the need to protect our society. Your handgun could easily be stolen and fall into a criminal's hands.
The complete and final answer to the "what's the point of <X>" question is: there doesn't have to be a point. It isn't given to you to decide how others are permitted to pursue happiness. Which person or group of persons is appointed the guardian of all other rational adults of free will, with a mandate to decide what is acceptable to own or do, and what is not? I never cease to be amazed at the arrogance and smallness of mind of people who see government as their personal hammer and all other people as nails.
What's the point of tobacco, marijuana, autos which can exceed 110k/h, skateboards, fast motorcycles, alcohol, unprotected sex with anonymous partners, backyard swimming pools in neighbourhoods with small children, television and movies which portray violence gratuitously, fireworks, bearing children who can't be supported, foods and beverages with no nutritional value, large living spaces, foods and cosmetics which can cause fatal allergic reactions in other people.
These are all things which are unnecessary, are chiefly for or a result of personal enjoyment, and create very real costs to society in terms of bills paid by taxpayers. Shall we agree then to create a model society, in which no one is permitted to do anything which could result in a social cost? You give up your unnecessary, harmful, and potentially costly pastimes, and I'll give up mine. We will establish what the list of permitted recreations is, and then each choose freely from it. If nothing on the list appeals to you and your life consequently seems destined to be joyless, feel free to execute yourself provided you do so at no cost to anyone else. Perhaps you can pay someone to do it and create a net social good, since social goods seem to be the be-all and end-all of existence for your ilk.
- Reaction score
- 8,298
- Points
- 1,160
I just saw something kind of bizarre on CBC - a CBC newscaster (Suhanna Marchand sp?) expressing incredulity that this will do anything given that "don't we already have some of the strongest handgun controls in the world already?"
Other gems:
"Is it really law-abiding handgun collectors we need to be protected from?"
"the money was previously announced"
"there's an election on"
"nobody's listening"
Paraphrased and perhaps misquoted but the tenor of her (and Carolyn Dunn's) statements was certainly interesting given the source.
What is the world coming to when CBC questions a gun control law?
Other gems:
"Is it really law-abiding handgun collectors we need to be protected from?"
"the money was previously announced"
"there's an election on"
"nobody's listening"
Paraphrased and perhaps misquoted but the tenor of her (and Carolyn Dunn's) statements was certainly interesting given the source.
What is the world coming to when CBC questions a gun control law?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
I think that's just them being (in their minds at least) good journalists.
IF they didn't question this statement it would seem that they are not as impartial (they aren't impartial but love to look as thogh they are) as they claim to be.
Nothing more.
IF they didn't question this statement it would seem that they are not as impartial (they aren't impartial but love to look as thogh they are) as they claim to be.
Nothing more.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Kirkhill said:
They're probably just pissed that Martin hasn't made funding the CBC his first campaign promise.
But seriously, this just shows how intellectually bankrupt the Liberals are. No plan in place for combating violence or looking at other issues; instead they pull this out of thin air on the coattails of the murder in the church. You cannot tell me it isn't a sleazy vote grab as so many others here have pointed out. Hell, if even the media sees it....
Oh well, if it goes through at least cruise ships will be safe again...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
hamiltongs said:
Shot dead by a registered firearm, I highly doubt it! I lost a cousin at 49 yrs old two weeks ago by a heart attack so I guess we should ban all McDonalds and similar grease pits.
So then I guess you support the greater and mandatory use of public transport and the use of bicycles (in summer anyways) and the banning of all cars and especially high pereformace ones, as these kill more people that guns in Canada (irresponsible and intentional misuse), especially in the hands of drivers 15-25.
Sure, lets ban all the guns, and what you have is only the police, defence forces, and the criminals left :
I am sure it will make the criminals life much easier.On a more serious note, Australia has some of the harshest handgun restrictions, and yet handgun crime (and murder) continues to rise, and mainly due to ethnic gangs and related crime. We are an island continent, and yet illegal handguns pour in through our ports. Only 1/10,000 sea containers is inspected by Customs.
Some handguns, yes have been stolen off brinks guards, and other licensed security firms, but RARELY does a legal registered handgun ever go missing. Yet .40 calibre Glocks and Norinco M1911A1 .45s are abundant, and easily appear in the hands of crims without serial numbers ever being on the recievers! Also cannot forget the loss of over 900 Glocks the police had stolen off the warfs in Sydney, the majority ending up in the middle eastern gangs of Sydney.
After the murder of 35 people in Tasmania in 1996, the laws were tightened, yet the use of firearms by criminals carrys on. Its only the law abiding owners out there who have the pressures and restrictions, and to me that does not make much sense.
Cheers,
Wes
- Reaction score
- 6,482
- Points
- 1,360
Folks let make this REAL simple,
Crystal meth- banned
Heroin- banned
Drunk driving- banned
Now, just what does anyone with even a SHREAD of a brain think banning handguns will do?
And, once again, I speak as a gun hater.......so don't try and drop that one on me.
Crystal meth- banned
Heroin- banned
Drunk driving- banned
Now, just what does anyone with even a SHREAD of a brain think banning handguns will do?
And, once again, I speak as a gun hater.......so don't try and drop that one on me.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Would that be the same cop hating racist Dudley Laws who was charged with and IIRC convicted of spousal abuse and running a refugee smuggling scam a few years back. Slap on the wrist for both as well IIRC. The same BADC who orchestrated the spontaneous (as in they just happened to find pile of briks to toss threw shop windows spontaneous) Yonge Street riot a few years back.
Yup great role model, there I definitely want to hear his input to this problem. Especially when it advocates against tough sentances and "intense warm fuzzy hugs oops I meant intervention"
Where's that frickin sarcasm smiley I was promised?
BTW Ceasar I hope you plan on cleaning that pistol after using it to stir soup.
So it begins,for now it's handguns next it will be shotguns and rifles.In my opinion the govt. should get rid of the young offenders act because these kids that get involved with gangs know theres nothing that can be done to them.When they turn 18 there not worried about jail because to them its there way of life.The act just gets them ready for harder crimes because they know the system better than any lawyer.Anyway back to the fiberals,if they start seizing guns there going to loose alot of votes in the east because a lot of us own guns for shooting on ranges and hunting .I voted liberal all my life,thats about to change.I would rather vote conservitive even thow i dislike there anti-east attitude,than vote liberal and loose my guns....THE LIBERALS WERE ELECTED TO LEAD THIS COUNTRY,NOT GIVIN THE GOD GIVIN RIGHT TO RULE IT.In my opinion most polititions are maggots and do not give a f**k about there constituants,just there vote .WARNING(If ya don't like my grammer or punctuation.....kiss my ass)rant off. 
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I am pissed. The more I think about this the angrier I get.
They want to turn me into a criminal (I will not give them my firearms) because they are afraid to enforce laws against criminals. I guess I am an easy target. I have never been accused or convicted of a crime in my entire life. The extent of my criminal tendancies is a few speeding tickets from my younger days. I am an outstanding citizen in every regard and contribute to the well-being of my community and Canada at large. However I own a couple of handguns because I have always taken soldiering seriously, so I will eventually become a criminal in Liberal eyes.
Meanwhile the gangbangers will feel no effect, will continue to do their thing, and scoff at the law. That my friends is fu*&ing bulls*&t.
Not only did the Liberals lose any semblance of support I had for them and some in their party, they have just motivated me to work against their empowerment in any way that I can.
They want to turn me into a criminal (I will not give them my firearms) because they are afraid to enforce laws against criminals. I guess I am an easy target. I have never been accused or convicted of a crime in my entire life. The extent of my criminal tendancies is a few speeding tickets from my younger days. I am an outstanding citizen in every regard and contribute to the well-being of my community and Canada at large. However I own a couple of handguns because I have always taken soldiering seriously, so I will eventually become a criminal in Liberal eyes.
Meanwhile the gangbangers will feel no effect, will continue to do their thing, and scoff at the law. That my friends is fu*&ing bulls*&t.
Not only did the Liberals lose any semblance of support I had for them and some in their party, they have just motivated me to work against their empowerment in any way that I can.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
bubba said:
Yes Bubba, the first step to confiscation is REGISTRATION. We seen this in the early 1990s. I lost a semi auto FAMAS which was worth with acc's about $1,700 (it happily disappeared before the due date). For those blind and stupid enough to register their long arms ( this includes me), its too late. The clock ticks.
Despressingly yours,
Wes
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 7,046
- Points
- 1,160
UberCree i don't think it's a matter of the liberals being afraid of going aftyer the gangs or whatever.
I think it's simply the liberals trying to get votes from the flock. People who either don't give a shit or don't know any better smile and nod. The same way they smile and nod when the liberals get caught taking money out of their pockets and yet still chck off the liberal box on the ballots.
I know it's easy for lots of us to get painted as warmongers or gun nuts or rednecks - whatever.
It's not the case. I'm for gun control. I don't think citizens should own assault rifles, submachineguns or .50 cal sniper rifles. This is simply a stupid decision which will hurt the good guys and do nothing at all to curb illegal activity among the bad guys. It's a waste of money and resources and it's a bandaid solution aimed at getting votes NOT cleaning up the street. Unfortinuately by the time people realise the stupidity of it they will already have casted their vote.
I think it's simply the liberals trying to get votes from the flock. People who either don't give a shit or don't know any better smile and nod. The same way they smile and nod when the liberals get caught taking money out of their pockets and yet still chck off the liberal box on the ballots.
I know it's easy for lots of us to get painted as warmongers or gun nuts or rednecks - whatever.
It's not the case. I'm for gun control. I don't think citizens should own assault rifles, submachineguns or .50 cal sniper rifles. This is simply a stupid decision which will hurt the good guys and do nothing at all to curb illegal activity among the bad guys. It's a waste of money and resources and it's a bandaid solution aimed at getting votes NOT cleaning up the street. Unfortinuately by the time people realise the stupidity of it they will already have casted their vote.
- Reaction score
- 17,068
- Points
- 1,010
Hey UberCree,
I was wondering how long it was going to take you decide to not vote Liberal (I was watching you begin to waiver on the Conservative $1200 child care credit)
Seriously, I have never donated money to a political party or written a letter to a Prime Minister. This issue will make me do both. I will be donating money to the Conservative Party of Canada to help fight this and I will write a letter to the PM explaining why his party is NOT getting my support because of such a stupid annoucement on his part.
For the record, while I do not own a handgun, I support any law-abidding citizen the right to own for the the same reason I support anyone's right to drive a motorcycle, watch porn, read any book of their choice, go sky-diving, etc- it doesn't hurt me.
Cheers
I was wondering how long it was going to take you decide to not vote Liberal (I was watching you begin to waiver on the Conservative $1200 child care credit)
Seriously, I have never donated money to a political party or written a letter to a Prime Minister. This issue will make me do both. I will be donating money to the Conservative Party of Canada to help fight this and I will write a letter to the PM explaining why his party is NOT getting my support because of such a stupid annoucement on his part.
For the record, while I do not own a handgun, I support any law-abidding citizen the right to own for the the same reason I support anyone's right to drive a motorcycle, watch porn, read any book of their choice, go sky-diving, etc- it doesn't hurt me.
Cheers
" know it's easy for lots of us to get painted as warmongers or gun nuts or rednecks - whatever.
It's not the case. I'm for gun control. I don't think citizens should own assault rifles, submachineguns or .50 cal sniper rifles."
Disagree.
I'm for PEOPLE control. People are harder to hide and easier to find. Just compose a list of people who CAN'T own guns - register them - and let everyone else own whatever they like until they step on their dicks and get a record, then put THEM on the list.
Right now it's back-asswards: we have the law abiding guns and people on the list. That's the hard way and besides - it don't work.
Register arseholes - not guns!
Tom
It's not the case. I'm for gun control. I don't think citizens should own assault rifles, submachineguns or .50 cal sniper rifles."
Disagree.
I'm for PEOPLE control. People are harder to hide and easier to find. Just compose a list of people who CAN'T own guns - register them - and let everyone else own whatever they like until they step on their dicks and get a record, then put THEM on the list.
Right now it's back-asswards: we have the law abiding guns and people on the list. That's the hard way and besides - it don't work.
Register arseholes - not guns!
Tom
- Reaction score
- 2,082
- Points
- 1,160
"This is not the Canada we imagine,'' Martin said from the Jane and Finch area of Toronto. "It isn't the Canada we want for our families."
- How appropriate- I have thought the same about Jane and Finch for years, and I've never even been there.
"Guns turn punks into killers," said Toronto Mayor David Miller. "We must choke off the supply of guns here in Canada."
- law of supply and demand buddy - see above comments from your boss. Why don't we just choke the punks?
"The right to bear handguns is not a Canadian value,'' said Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant.
- this from the man who is going to protect our daughters from Karla Homolka.
"I wasn't going to vote in this election. Now, I am. "
- whiskey601
- How appropriate- I have thought the same about Jane and Finch for years, and I've never even been there.
"Guns turn punks into killers," said Toronto Mayor David Miller. "We must choke off the supply of guns here in Canada."
- law of supply and demand buddy - see above comments from your boss. Why don't we just choke the punks?
"The right to bear handguns is not a Canadian value,'' said Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant.
- this from the man who is going to protect our daughters from Karla Homolka.
"I wasn't going to vote in this election. Now, I am. "
- whiskey601
D
dutchie
Guest
Danjanou said:
Yup, before and after. A dirty weapon is a mortal sin in my books.
By the way, I have had a complete change of heart on ownership/possesion of firearms. I used to favor some controls on possesion, and a total ban on carrying outside of ranges, crown land, etc. Now, I am for what TCBF called 'people control'.
Been convicted of a violent crime? Total ban on ownership/possesion of firearms for life. Get caught committing a crime while in possesion of a firearm? 25 year min in prison (and I don't mean commit a crime WITH a firearm. Simply possesing is enough for me). That means if you shoplift with a pistol in your pocket, you're gonzo.
Make it so unattractive to use firearms while committing crimes, that only law abiding citizens will for the most part own/possess them.
- Status
Similar threads
