Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear
I know they don't, my point, again, is that I find it an odd corelation, that the same group seems to be supporters of legalized drugs, condemning the slippery slope of infringed liberties. That is all.
Listen Dapper Dan, I know you've been spoiling for some action for a long time now. Just because I am the only one who might even consider having a good old brawl with you doesn't mean this is the time or place for it. So you can say that those who want to distribute Crystal Meth in school yards are also the one's who want to take all the guns away from everyone, but it's still isn't true and I'm not going to take away from this thread to sooth your tingling assology tooth.
Yes, I am, I can pick either side of an issue to support, regardless of my personal feelings. In this case, I am following my own personal feelings on the matter.
Emotional day, huh?
I think it does. I think it hypocritical, especially from your position. You have touted that the legalization of drugs, will deter and decrease crime. Now it's someone elses fault.
Not at all. Those so called "law abiding gun owners" who choose to support the gun show loophole that puts guns into criminal's hands no questions asked are the hypocrits.
Agreed.Already have shown a meaningful correlation.
You don't agree at all. You contradict this in choosing to support so vehemently the gun show loophole that allows guns to be put into the hands of criminals no questions asked. Gun trafficking needs to be addressed and closing the gun show loophole is perhaps the best start to that process.
I was highlighting differing perceptions, stop being silly.
And the Pope wears pointy hats. You're the one introducing ridiculous nonsense into the thread in an obvious attempt to derail something that you can't debate with any effective rebuttal.
Loopholes don't impress me much in general. What's hard to grasp about that?
How you can't answer a simple yes or no question. I know you are capable, so it's just being stubborn and not wanting to accompany your argument into that dark night.
What's the difference? Semantics?
You don't understand the difference. So how can I explain it to you at this point in a thread about gun control and the specific point, the gun show loophole? I have tried a few times using different methods to help you understand it but at this point I don't think you're going to get it. So why waste time on it?
I find it strange that you think I typed that somewhere...
Semantics. Turn about is fair play, oui?
Those who do are always the last to know.
Umm, I'ld like for you to show me where I sated anything that remotely resembles that accusation.
Well I didn't want to do this but you force my hand. This was found last night on Bear's desk near the computer and under some cookies, old .22 shells and a greasy ball gag.
Hurts me to do it buddy!
I say the same thing about those that wish to "decrim" drugs.
Really? I have never heard you say anything like that. I must have missed it.
Whereas I see stiffer penalties as the way to go.
You gotta let this stiffy fetish go bud.
Yet when we see a woman that gets the whip for wearing pants we think it's a stupid thing to do. No mater how harsh the penalty it doesn't undo a single bit of the crime that was committed. And clearly seeing that death penalty States still get people committing capital murder, it's not a deterrent either.
I do, did, have, then people like yourself and Ton call me a facsist and and draconian.
Then consider the words you speak.
It's not a 'nice try', it's a fact. If you fail to report a stolen firearm, you don't risk being charged, you will be charged. The US is a completely different story.
Yes and I have been talking about the US all along here while you seem to jump from Canada to the US law when it suits you. There is no gun show loophole in Canada. Come on short bus keep up with the tour. In many States in the US you can privately sell a gun without any questions asked. Hence the problem I have been talking about.
That's great, and if gun crimes came with an instant and minimum snetance, those criminals would be kept behind bars for greater periods of times. Your point?
I think if you commit a crime in Canada and use a gun then you should be facing Life with 15. But that doesn't stop the next kid who is handed a gun and told not to take sh!t from no one cause he's a gangbanger now, or the group who opens fire on a member of a rival gang in a turf war does it?
, Not it isn't. Vaccums tend to get filled.
So you have a vaccume fetish too eh? That sort of explains the 6 vaccumes out in the yard up on blocks with no wheels at your place.
Oh no he d'int!
No nude pics this time, my eyes are just starting to heal up...lol.
I thought you like chicks??? Ok whatever... I'll send back your copy of Bath House Bear Action. I don't know what you wanted me to do with this freaky deaky stuff anyway.
Sure, but that isn't the fault of the manufacturer.
Not unless the manufacturer has conspired with the dealer. But if they have done everything above board, then the manufacturer should have nothing to worry about.