Yes...and most are proud to say so. I was tempted to buy an unregistered gun just so I could have one and join them.
Bill to Abolish Gun Registry Passes 2nd Reading
- Thread starter FiveParadox
- Start date
Yes...and most are proud to say so. I was tempted to buy an unregistered gun just so I could have one and join them.
Oh....and I read in the Globe and Mail that Ignatieff wants to "decriminalize" the registration of long guns.......replacing jail sentences with fines.
Uh-huh
The government could NOT coerce shooters into registering with threats of major jail time.....so Ignatieff decides he can coerce them with threats of fines.
I thought this guy was supposed to have a brain......
Uh-huh
The government could NOT coerce shooters into registering with threats of major jail time.....so Ignatieff decides he can coerce them with threats of fines.
I thought this guy was supposed to have a brain......
Last edited by a moderator:
I admit that large numbers of shooters are engaged in acts of civil disobedience......
The credibility of you and your fellow shooters has just gone down the toilet.
Apparently not if he wants to fine people he doesn't consider to be criminals.:smile:
Last edited by a moderator:
How so?
You a non-believer in the legitimacy of civil disobedience???
Or is it only legitimate when it consists of masked left-wing anarchists bouncing rocks off cop's heads at a G8 meeting??
No. What we are saying is that we refuse to recognize a bureauctatic law which we do not agree with and did not ask for. Smoking pot is against the law but I have never known it to stop anyone.
In the strictest sense, yes, of course......but then we are ALL criminals.........
Or are you going to tell me you have NEVER broken a law??????
"All have sinned, and fallen short of the glory of....the GOVERNMENT????"
Nawww....I won't go there.
Oh....and even that ignores the fact that private ownership of arms was recognized well over 300 years ago in our constitutional framework as an "ancient right".......therefore laws set out in an obvious attempt to further the seizure of arms are unconstitutional......and it is your duty to defy them.....
But you REALLY don't want to go there.....
I agree with what you say BUT if we want to adopt that standard then we are going to have to coin another word when referring to the REAL "criminals".
There is no distinction.
Laws are legislated for the purpose of defending and serving public safety.
When someone breaks the law (including deliberate acts to avoid or defraud licensing or registration schemes that carry criminal offences for abuse), they are implicitly stating that public safety is not their concern. Breaking the law is never an appropriate recourse — the proper thing to do would be to follow licensing and registration procedures as they exist (albeit reluctantly, I suppose, if you’re in opposition to the program entirely), and to lobby members of the Parliament of Canada to amend the laws for criminal offences with which you disagree.
Laws are legislated for the purpose of defending and serving public safety.
When someone breaks the law (including deliberate acts to avoid or defraud licensing or registration schemes that carry criminal offences for abuse), they are implicitly stating that public safety is not their concern. Breaking the law is never an appropriate recourse — the proper thing to do would be to follow licensing and registration procedures as they exist (albeit reluctantly, I suppose, if you’re in opposition to the program entirely), and to lobby members of the Parliament of Canada to amend the laws for criminal offences with which you disagree.
In the strictest sense, yes, of course......but then we are ALL criminals.........
Or are you going to tell me you have NEVER broken a law??????
"All have sinned, and fallen short of the glory of....the GOVERNMENT????"
Nawww....I won't go there.
Oh....and even that ignores the fact that private ownership of arms was recognized well over 300 years ago in our constitutional framework as an "ancient right".......therefore laws set out in an obvious attempt to further the seizure of arms are unconstitutional......and it is your duty to defy them.....
But you REALLY don't want to go there.....
Well, even though I wasn't really in favour of the registry, I did register the weapons I had, even though I didn't use them...
I thought that only law abiding citizens would register their weapons. I see I was wrong...
Wouldn't work.
Gun owners are normal people with normal jobs and don't have the time or inclination to start up special interest groups and lobby the government. Besides, the course they have chosen has been rather successful so it obviously works.
Hardly. The law is not and was not about public safety. It was a tax grab and a silly plan to placate more special interest groups.
Now, that being said, your comment is complete and utter rubbish as everybody knows that "public safety" is a great concern of the Conservative party base and gun owners gravitate to that party. You don't like me insulting you, so perhaps you should elevate the debate above silly partisan rhetoric.
In the Liberal mind the long gun registry would save lives, they unfortunately failed to inform the criminals of the said registry.
Alan the Rocks knees are still jerking.
Alan the Rocks knees are still jerking.
Not quite.....
Some laws are ultra vires....beyond the power of the state to enact legitimately.......IMHO it is your duty to ignore, and violate those laws....
The idea that the State can legislate legitimately in all areas is incredibly dangerous.......by your logic, the German people were quite correct in tolerating racist laws directed at Jews by the freely elected gov't of Adolph Hitler........or the segregation laws in the deep south should have been followed.....despite the fact that they were only defeated by defiance.......as was the law we are currently discussing.
