Whatever makes you think the sole purpose of a gun is to kill? I have many guns, and I use them on a regular basis to blow holes in pieces of paper. In other words, for recreation.
I have others that I use to kill. Mostly deer and boar.
Gun Control is Completely Useless.
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
I have others that I use to kill. Mostly deer and boar.
One of the rules:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Come on, that is a quote from the USA's constitution, second amendment, which was phrased that way because earlier years they could not assemble an army. Do you really think that condition still exists?? Worse it was taken from the English constitution, which they have since revoked... Surely you can see the difference. Canada can revise, change any part of the constitution, PROVIDED they have a majority of the provincial governments. We are talking Canada here, and even we have a decent army. At least decent enough for Harper to send overseas to support any blooming war the US gets involved in.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Come on, that is a quote from the USA's constitution, second amendment, which was phrased that way because earlier years they could not assemble an army. Do you really think that condition still exists?? Worse it was taken from the English constitution, which they have since revoked... Surely you can see the difference. Canada can revise, change any part of the constitution, PROVIDED they have a majority of the provincial governments. We are talking Canada here, and even we have a decent army. At least decent enough for Harper to send overseas to support any blooming war the US gets involved in.
Yes you probably do have a stock of guns.......So....does that change the purpose of them?? After all swimming pools are made for swimming and cars for driving. What purpose does target shooting do, except to make sure one can accurately hit whatever one shoots at. Kill a deer or kill a human, is still killing. Practice doesn't change a purpose.
DaSleeper ....deflection???your comment is more of one than mine is. Oh well, I got you pinned quite accurately.......no connection between thought or action for you, too defective.
DaSleeper ....deflection???your comment is more of one than mine is. Oh well, I got you pinned quite accurately.......no connection between thought or action for you, too defective.
Bull****.
Every historian worthy of the name disagrees with you.
Everyone that actually is competent in reading comprehension disagrees with you.
The United States Supreme Court found it to be an individual right, thus they disagree with you.
Recent polls have found the vast majority of US citizens disagree with you.
You haven't a clue.
Yes, it still exists.
Bull****.
You really do not understand the concept of individual rights, do you?
They can not be legitimately "revoked" or "invalidated". If they could be, they would not be rights, only privileges
Technically, the gun's sole purpose is to control an explosion that would otherwise harm or kill you, ie it saves your life.
Bbyrd, are you willing to acknowledge this inconvenient truth even though it doesn't help support your beliefs?
Bbyrd, are you willing to acknowledge this inconvenient truth even though it doesn't help support your beliefs?
The first use of nuclear "energy" was to make a bomb wasn't it?
Yet the same energy that can kill people can make electricity propel a submarine under water for years...
Let's do away with it at the same time we do away with guns just because of it's primary use!
Yet the same energy that can kill people can make electricity propel a submarine under water for years...
Let's do away with it at the same time we do away with guns just because of it's primary use!
Over half of the firearms in the USA are purchased not to kill but for self defense. They are contingency plan just like a fire extinguisher or a first aid kit.
Yes, I do. I just said so. So where does the "probably" come from?
No, it doesn't. That's my whole point. Your "guns are made solely to kill" is rubbish. They're made to shoot. If they were made SOLELY to kill, every discharge would lead to a dead body.
And guns are made for shooting.
The same purpose playing darts serves, i.e. as an exercise in skill.
So is buying it at the store, unless you're a complete hypocrite.
Who said target shooting is practice? Target shooting is a skill in itself, or at least the International Olympic Committee seems to think it is. I know lots of gun owners, including a couple of Olympic medalists, who've never shot at anybody, and never mean to.
Target shooting as an athletic event like the biathalon is a demonstration of physical fitness and discipline. It takes both health and discipline to control your breathing and body movements long enough to acurately shoot a target several hundred feet away.
Three questions about the above:
1. Since when do governments get to declare rights "invalid"??
2. Since when do the Courts consider a gov't declaration of rights as "invalid" to be valid?
3. Do you have to be slammed in the head with a brick to be appointed to the bench in this country?
The above simply reinforced my belief that Yes, Virginia, there is a limited right to keep arms in Canada.[/QUOTE]
In answer to the above
1) The government has that right when the citizens can not defend themselves against the government.
2) Ever since courts are appointed by government.
3)No but it helps. Also helps to be from big cities where criminals live.
1. Since when do governments get to declare rights "invalid"??
2. Since when do the Courts consider a gov't declaration of rights as "invalid" to be valid?
3. Do you have to be slammed in the head with a brick to be appointed to the bench in this country?
The above simply reinforced my belief that Yes, Virginia, there is a limited right to keep arms in Canada.[/QUOTE]
In answer to the above
1) The government has that right when the citizens can not defend themselves against the government.
2) Ever since courts are appointed by government.
3)No but it helps. Also helps to be from big cities where criminals live.
And this has what to do with Canada?? You keep on using the laws and constitution of the US to justify Canada's stance. Did you forget we actually live in Canada and fought a war with the US to keep our right to the laws and constitution we have?? I do not, as you would say give "A Shyte" if the US has adopted a gun policy that threatens the majority of Americans with death, merely by cutting a gun toting average American off in traffic. I like the majority of Canadians want nothing to do with such laws or that outlook. So, keep on with ridiculous reasons why our gun laws are illegal. 95% of Canadians DO NOT want to live under such laws.
You do realize that it is you that does not understand human rights. You know, like the right to live in freedom from fear of those who use force to get what the want. For every honest gun owner in the US there are 10 to 20 murderers, thieves, bank robbers, kidnappers (like this past week when two pregnant ladies were held hostage) those who use guns as threats to control their families. Guns are used in the US as a coercive means to achieve what most were unable to get through brainpower.
James, the idea of needing a gun to control it's explosive power is way off the wall. It sounds like something used in a Bizarro comic strip.
Bones...And guns are made for shooting.
Yup exactly right and 99 times out a hundred the target is human or animal in most societies and the object is not simply to wound.. " If they were made SOLELY to kill, every discharge would lead to a dead body." So, you acknowledge that the practice is for that purpose....to achieve a dead body in every discharge!! Seem to be digging yourself into a rather deep hole aren't you. LOL. Give it up....You cannot win.
As far as competition in target shooting, this is a reasonably recent phenomena. I knew Gladys Hope the ladies champion sharp shooter in the fifties and sixties. So target shooting is not a new sport. It evolved into a competitive sport but it is still mainly used to acquire the ability to hit what is aimed at. What exactly would one aim at in the normal course of one's daily life and for what purpose?
Oh James, Target shooting a physical fitness discipline??? Controlling breathing and body movements yes but are not most targets in the form of a human body?? That does not conform to the standard dart board.
As far as I am concerned, collecting guns, target shooting and hunting are all fine, and Canada laws allow that. Changing those rules so that concealed weapons are allowed, or changing the laws enough so that criminal or those with a mental problem slip through the cracks should not be allowed. Also, anyone who fail to keep their weapons secured and out of the hands of children, etc. need to be prosecuted for such negligence. With freedom to have and use a gun must come the responsibility to protect society from those who would misuse them.
I have often thought about that mother who was shot dead by her young child while shopping just before Xmas, in front of several other of her children. The act of keeping a hand gun in her purse within reach of her children, has changed those children lives and not for the better. I believe the child who shot her dead was about 18 months. It appears that it doesn't always need a sharp shooter to kill, simply a gun in the wrong hans.
LOL.....No But even here in the US it is illegal to shoot them.....actually the wild life people come out and set up traps and transfer them back into the wild when they an find such a thing. Just two days ago, they set up a trap to catch a big black bear who was using the family swimming pool quite regularly. Haven't caught him or her yet but they will. The reason for so many bears roaming around here (Florida) is because humans have driven them out of what was their home. Surely a nice dip in the family pool every so often is a bears right.
Last edited:
Yes, I think I know how you feel. I feel the same way when you talk about the idea of a gun that's sole purpose is to kill. I've shot firearms 10s of thousands of times(.22lr at targets), and that pesky desire for it to kill hasn't happened.
Absolutely not with a biathalon event, click here to see for yourself:http://www.morphing-creativity.be/websites/20/uploads/image/shooting_comp2_.jpg
I would agree that is extremely true with law enforcement. what are you trying to say about this?Are you saying it is a detriment to the psyche of our nation's law enforcement officers?
Ain't shot at a human-shaped target since I left the service. Some are human-shaped. Now, in your head, just process "some" into "most," then "most" into "all," and you'll have the perfect gun hysteric argument. You already demonstrated your definition of "fact" is "whatever supports my position, true or not."
We shoot typical bullseye targets, there is no shortage of styles to choose from.
I don't shoot human shaped targets, but this common law enforcement practise is not a bad thing just because bbyrd wants to make it so.
I don't shoot human shaped targets, but this common law enforcement practise is not a bad thing just because bbyrd wants to make it so.
BB you keep jumping from Canadian law to American law when it suits YOU. then you pompously chastise anyone else mentioning American law in answer to your rambling posts
Because that's what your posts are....long rambling conversations about your feelings on the subject with complete absence of common sense....
Because that's what your posts are....long rambling conversations about your feelings on the subject with complete absence of common sense....
Perhaps but then I simply follow the style that most posters here follow. i.e.. Because you follow the rules, you assume everyone who owns a gun does. They sure as hell don't.
DaSleeper.......Pompously??.....Look, I live for sometime, every year in both places and have done so since 1989.....I have the experience and the right to compare both countries and I claim the right to straighten out faulty conceptions. The purpose of more than one here is to convince those novices to the subject, that Canada should follow the US on this issue. I do not . I have good reasons because I see both sides, which many of you do not. I am telling you forcefully, (not ramblingly) that most Canadians do NOT want to have the American system of "gun control In my opinion, if those who feel gun laws should be loosened in Canada, there will be a backlash and gun owners will loose some of the privileges they currently hold.
Actually most of us do want closer to American style gun laws. It is only a few hysterical females that don't. Mostly we don't like having our rights stomped on by incompetent vote buying politicians.
