Gun Control is Completely Useless.

[bluebyrd35]

Using the term "gunslinger" don't make it the wild west. Multiple murders were quite rare in the late-19th/early-20th century west. They were fairly common in the east. Mafia shootouts and such. The mass murders in the west were usually carried out by the army, with the full authority of the state, so they weren't murders.

But don't let me interfere with your imagery of people you hate.


Well, that's true, I suppose. There were hundreds of shootings by infants in the wild west. That's why so many of the gunfighters were called Kid.

You have totally lost the plot. You think that an 18-month-old baby accidentally shooting his mother is like the wild west. Simply amazing.


Yeah, somebody who thinks 18 month old babies shooting their mothers by accident was common in the wild west is the very soul of sense and reason.

Now you are merely being spiteful. When one gets so vindictive (this goes for you as well DaSleeper) as to use personal hateful attacks rather than address the actual subject, It makes one wonder how a face to face factual discussion would go with either of you having a gun handy. This type of behaviour simply destroys any sensible rationality on your parts to the argument. It actually reinforces the need to keeping decent gun control.

Oh for god's sake or mine.....Don't keep on making stupid statements. Definition of gunslinger....: someone (such as a character in a story, movie, or television show) who is known for being able to handle and shoot a gun extremely well and not always with self control.

Sometimes the stupid comments here are unbelievable. When I present a particularly dreadful outcome to loosening up Canada's gun laws, I am accused of being gleeful about those same deaths?? You people are not just insensitive but incredibly poor losers.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Now you are merely being spiteful. When one gets so vindictive (this goes for you as well DaSleeper) as to use personal hateful attacks rather than address the actual subject, It makes one wonder how a face to face factual discussion would go with either of you having a gun handy. This type of behaviour simply destroys any sensible rationality on your parts to the argument. It actually reinforces the need to keeping decent gun control.

Oh for god's sake or mine.....Don't keep on making stupid statements. Definition of gunslinger....: someone (such as a character in a story, movie, or television show) who is known for being able to handle and shoot a gun extremely well and not always with self control.

Sometimes the stupid comments here are unbelievable. When I present a particularly dreadful outcome to loosening up Canada's gun laws, I am accused of being gleeful about those same deaths?? You people are not just insensitive but incredibly poor losers.

You brought up the wild west trope. I asked for examples. You replied with an 18 month old child. I point out how ridiculous that is, and I'm being spiteful?

 

[bluebyrd35]

James "These are examples that happened in the USA, you still need to show how Canadian laws caused an affect to Canadian stats."

My dear man I have. Canada's gun laws work, otherwise we would have stats like the US. I have met in my post all three of the criteria showing cause and effect. No one can find any other reason other than our gun control laws for the differences.

You brought up the wild west trope. I asked for examples. You replied with an 18 month old child. I point out how ridiculous that is, and I'm being spiteful?

Wrong again. Reread my answers again. I gave you two examples of gunslinger behavior and neither included that 18 months old child. That example was given to an entirely different question. Most definitely you are spiteful.

One more comment......I hate NO ONE........Hatred only depletes one's energy.

 

[Colpy]

James "These are examples that happened in the USA, you still need to show how Canadian laws caused an affect to Canadian stats."

My dear man I have. Canada's gun laws work, otherwise we would have stats like the US. I have met in my post all three of the criteria showing cause and effect. No one can find any other reason other than our gun control laws for the differences.


Wrong again. Reread my answers again. I gave you two examples of gunslinger behavior and neither included that 18 months old child. That example was given to an entirely different question. Most definitely you are spiteful.

One more comment......I hate NO ONE........Hatred only depletes one's energy.

So....why does Switzerland, with much looser gun laws than Canada, a nation that actively encourages gun ownership, and has 45 guns per 100 people (and I mean a LOT of assault rifles) have a murder rate one half that of Canada?

Indeed, at 0.8 per 100,000, the Swiss murder rate is among the lowest on earth.

And they are armed to the teeth.

Here's why...

Guns have nothing to do with it.

It is a question of culture.

 

[JamesBondo]

James "These are examples that happened in the USA, you still need to show how Canadian laws caused an affect to Canadian stats."

My dear man I have. Canada's gun laws work, otherwise we would have stats like the US. I have met in my post all three of the criteria showing cause and effect. No one can find any other reason other than our gun control laws for the differences.


Wrong again. Reread my answers again. I gave you two examples of gunslinger behavior and neither included that 18 months old child. That example was given to an entirely different question. Most definitely you are spiteful.

One more comment......I hate NO ONE........Hatred only depletes one's energy.

Instead of winning or losing this discussion on the merrit of your talking points,

do you realize that you are choosing to lose this discussion based solely on your inability to acknowledge that successful gunlaws must have actually caused a change in Canada. A simple comparison between the US and Canada doesn't cut it.

 

[pgs]

James "These are examples that happened in the USA, you still need to show how Canadian laws caused an affect to Canadian stats."

My dear man I have. Canada's gun laws work, otherwise we would have stats like the US. I have met in my post all three of the criteria showing cause and effect. No one can find any other reason other than our gun control laws for the differences.


Wrong again. Reread my answers again. I gave you two examples of gunslinger behavior and neither included that 18 months old child. That example was given to an entirely different question. Most definitely you are spiteful.

One more comment......I hate NO ONE........Hatred only depletes one's energy.

Yup tell that to the 2 men who walked into Surrey Memorial the other night with gun shot wounds .
And I believe there was another couple of killings in the last week .

 

[bluebyrd35]

Yup tell that to the 2 men who walked into Surrey Memorial the other night with gun shot wounds .
And I believe there was another couple of killings in the last week .

I am not against Canadians owning guns nor hunting, only that Canada's laws remain as they are.

 

[Colpy]

hahaha, tell me how I lost this discussion?? Name what other reason, Canada's numbers are SOOO much lower than the US'S based on anything other than our laws!!I

.

Once again:

So....why does Switzerland, with much looser gun laws than Canada, a nation that actively encourages gun ownership, and has 45 guns per 100 people (and I mean a LOT of assault rifles) have a murder rate one half that of Canada?

Indeed, at 0.8 per 100,000, the Swiss murder rate is among the lowest on earth.

And they are armed to the teeth.

Here's why...

Guns have nothing to do with it.

It is a question of culture.

 

[bluebyrd35]

So....why does Switzerland, with much looser gun laws than Canada, a nation that actively encourages gun ownership, and has 45 guns per 100 people (and I mean a LOT of assault rifles) have a murder rate one half that of Canada?

Indeed, at 0.8 per 100,000, the Swiss murder rate is among the lowest on earth.

And they are armed to the teeth.

Here's why...

Guns have nothing to do with it.

It is a question of culture.

I was in Switzerland this past summer and their history and situation is very different than Canada's. They are surrounded by those who covet their territory and they declare neutrality in all conflicts, which demands the necessity of defending that stance. Because of this every man and woman and young person is charged and trained in defending their territory. Even so, guns are locked up and are strictly controlled in their homes. They are required to spend a certain amount of time every single year practicing for battle. It may seem much more liberal than other countries but it is not.

Entering their country, everyone is given a pamphlet informing them of this. It is a sort of warning to all who enter.

Instead of winning or losing this discussion on the merrit of your talking points,

do you realize that you are choosing to lose this discussion based solely on your inability to acknowledge that successful gunlaws must have actually caused a change in Canada. A simple comparison between the US and Canada doesn't cut it.

I have won this discussion hands down!! YOU have not given any other reason than our gun control laws to account for the difference.

 

[DaSleeper]

Now you are merely being spiteful. When one gets so vindictive (this goes for you as well DaSleeper) as to use personal hateful attacks rather than address the actual subject, It makes one wonder how a face to face factual discussion would go with either of you having a gun handy. This type of behaviour simply destroys any sensible rationality on your parts to the argument. It actually reinforces the need to keeping decent gun control.

And the following is the reason that no one can have an intelligent discussion with you......your mind is made up and you don't even hear the argument from the other side or you completely dismiss it.....

I have won this discussion hands down!! YOU have not given any other reason than our gun control laws to account for the difference.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

I was in Switzerland this past summer and their history and situation is very different than Canada's.

Fer****ssake, that's what we've been saying and you've been denying. That history and culture and situation have a bigger effect on gun homicides, homicides generally, and gun violence than gun laws do. You've been the one claiming that gun laws are the sole variable.

Glad you changed your tune.

 

[Colpy]

I was in Switzerland this past summer and their history and situation is very different than Canada's. They are surrounded by those who covet their territory and they declare neutrality in all conflicts, which demands the necessity of defending that stance.

In other words, they are a different culture, exactly as I said. It is not the guns, it is the culture surrounding them.

LOL!! I just read Tecumsehsbones beneath....he said everything I was going to, and quite precisely too!

I won't waste my breath.

Except to ask: Do you think Canada and the USA share the same culture?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

In other words, they are a different culture, exactly as I said. It is not the guns, it is the culture surrounding them.

LOL!! I just read Tecumsehsbones beneath....he said everything I was going to, and quite precisely too!

I won't waste my breath.

Except to ask: Do you think Canada and the USA share the same culture?

Nope. I think Canadians generally are more cooperative, communitarian, and. . . this is the wrong word, please don't take it as an insult, but. . . docile? civil? orderly?

Why? I have three possible reasons.

1. After the American Revolution, people who felt badly about Britain and wanted to get the hell away from it would come to America. People who wanted new opportunities but didn't dislike Britain would come to Canada. I think that's why you've got a higher percentage of Scots and we have a higher percentage of Irish. So the immigrants to America would be a more discontented, dissentious bunch. Culture.

2. Similarly, for immigrants from other European countries, the rebellious and anti-authority would be drawn to America, the great rebel country, and those with a less belligerent attitude would favour Canada, with effective independence but a more civil relationship with its European parent. That attitude would end up pervading the culture.

3. I said this before, and I'm serious about it. For much of Canadian history, in much of Canada, the inability to get along with people in small spaces meant freezing to death. Not going so far as to call it evolution, or even adaptation, on a genetic level, but more a cultural thing. The relative harshness of your climate reinforces community effort and, most importantly, the ability to get along with others in small spaces.

That's certainly not all of it, nor does any one exclude the others. Just some notions.

Be interested what you think. Am I way up the wrong crick? Or do you think I might have a part of the story?

Also, I need to point out these are minor differences, more an attitudinal thing than a real culture. Part of our greater belligerence is just a matter of our size and power. But in terms of core values, you couldn't slip a playing card between the U.S. and Canada. You're the best neighbors a country could possibly hope for, and I hope we, for all our occasional parochiality and overbearingness (if that's a word), are pretty good neighbors to you too.

 

[DaSleeper]

Fer****ssake, that's what we've been saying and you've been denying. That history and culture and situation have a bigger effect on gun homicides, homicides generally, and gun violence than gun laws do. You've been the one claiming that gun laws are the sole variable.

Glad you changed your tune.

In other words, they are a different culture, exactly as I said. It is not the guns, it is the culture surrounding them.

LOL!! I just read Tecumsehsbones beneath....he said everything I was going to, and quite precisely too!

I won't waste my breath.

Except to ask: Do you think Canada and the USA share the same culture?

Nope. I think Canadians generally are more cooperative, communitarian, and. . . this is the wrong word, please don't take it as an insult, but. . . docile? civil? orderly?

Why? I have three possible reasons.

1. After the American Revolution, people who felt badly about Britain and wanted to get the hell away from it would come to America. People who wanted new opportunities but didn't dislike Britain would come to Canada. I think that's why you've got a higher percentage of Scots and we have a higher percentage of Irish. So the immigrants to America would be a more discontented, dissentious bunch. Culture.

2. Similarly, for immigrants from other European countries, the rebellious and anti-authority would be drawn to America, the great rebel country, and those with a less belligerent attitude would favour Canada, with effective independence but a more civil relationship with its European parent. That attitude would end up pervading the culture.

3. I said this before, and I'm serious about it. For much of Canadian history, in much of Canada, the inability to get along with people in small spaces meant freezing to death. Not going so far as to call it evolution, or even adaptation, on a genetic level, but more a cultural thing. The relative harshness of your climate reinforces community effort and, most importantly, the ability to get along with others in small spaces.

That's certainly not all of it, nor does any one exclude the others. Just some notions.

Be interested what you think. Am I way up the wrong crick? Or do you think I might have a part of the story?

Also, I need to point out these are minor differences, more an attitudinal thing than a real culture. Part of our greater belligerence is just a matter of our size and power. But in terms of core values, you couldn't slip a playing card between the U.S. and Canada. You're the best neighbors a country could possibly hope for, and I hope we, for all our occasional parochiality and overbearingness (if that's a word), are pretty good neighbors to you too.

I'm not as verbose as the two of you , but I must say you took the words right out of my head.......:lol:

 

[Colpy]

Nope. I think Canadians generally are more cooperative, communitarian, and. . . this is the wrong word, please don't take it as an insult, but. . . docile? civil? orderly?

Why? I have three possible reasons.

1. After the American Revolution, people who felt badly about Britain and wanted to get the hell away from it would come to America. People who wanted new opportunities but didn't dislike Britain would come to Canada. I think that's why you've got a higher percentage of Scots and we have a higher percentage of Irish. So the immigrants to America would be a more discontented, dissentious bunch. Culture.

2. Similarly, for immigrants from other European countries, the rebellious and anti-authority would be drawn to America, the great rebel country, and those with a less belligerent attitude would favour Canada, with effective independence but a more civil relationship with its European parent. That attitude would end up pervading the culture.

3. I said this before, and I'm serious about it. For much of Canadian history, in much of Canada, the inability to get along with people in small spaces meant freezing to death. Not going so far as to call it evolution, or even adaptation, on a genetic level, but more a cultural thing. The relative harshness of your climate reinforces community effort and, most importantly, the ability to get along with others in small spaces.

That's certainly not all of it, nor does any one exclude the others. Just some notions.

Be interested what you think. Am I way up the wrong crick? Or do you think I might have a part of the story?

Also, I need to point out these are minor differences, more an attitudinal thing than a real culture. Part of our greater belligerence is just a matter of our size and power. But in terms of core values, you couldn't slip a playing card between the U.S. and Canada. You're the best neighbors a country could possibly hope for, and I hope we, for all our occasional parochiality and overbearingness (if that's a word), are pretty good neighbors to you too.

Docile? Naw.......I've seen some pissed off Canucks (including myself) and docile is not how I would describe them. And a country that has lacrosse as its national sport, and a particularly pugilistic version of hockey as its national obsession does not fit my concept of "docile".

I think orderly kind of hits the nail..........here "peace, order, and good gov't" are seen as the highest societal virtues, with considerably less focus on the individual than is the norm in the USA....I think, anyway.

1. We're kind of a strange bunch. The Loyalists that came here after the AR (including many of my ancestors) brought very American ideas with them, but they were not the revolutionaries.......so those ideas are cut somewhat with Tory caution. As for immigrants later on, I think part of it is that we aimed for Scots entreprenuers or people willing to farm the prairies, and preferred (until the mid 20th century) Christians from the British Isles...... while the US wanted people to man the idustrial machine, and took in Europeans that wanted an urban life.....

2. More or less. I do think the vast difference in murder rates is very much a product of American inner cities. It is not that we don't have some very bad places, but they are few and far between......

3. As for climate, it is a strange thing. Murder rates in the world seem to rise at a tremendous rate as you go towards the equator, at least in the western hemisphere.........

Interesting notions.....and it does seem to me that great powers are gratuitously violent....God knows why.

 

[taxslave]

James "These are examples that happened in the USA, you still need to show how Canadian laws caused an affect to Canadian stats."

My dear man I have. Canada's gun laws work, otherwise we would have stats like the US. I have met in my post all three of the criteria showing cause and effect. No one can find any other reason other than our gun control laws for the differences.


Wrong again. Reread my answers again. I gave you two examples of gunslinger behavior and neither included that 18 months old child. That example was given to an entirely different question. Most definitely you are spiteful.

One more comment......I hate NO ONE........Hatred only depletes one's energy.

If Canada's gun laws work why are there so many criminals with guns? GO visit Surrey on any weekend.

 

[gore0bsessed]

Sarah Kemp Brady, who became an activist for gun control after her husband was shot in the head in the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, has died.

 

[bluebyrd35]

Fer****ssake, that's what we've been saying and you've been denying. That history and culture and situation have a bigger effect on gun homicides, homicides generally, and gun violence than gun laws do. You've been the one claiming that gun laws are the sole variable.

Glad you changed your tune.

Their gun control laws are very typical of all the countries with low gun violence .........How those laws come about is not the point. The point is that gun control laws work!!

The contention of this thread is that they don't work an no matter how I prove they do, seems to go over everyone's head. Smarten up for Pete's sake.

If Canada's gun laws work why are there so many criminals with guns? GO visit Surrey on any weekend.

It is not how many own guns, it is about the laws on whether or not gun laws work........ to whom and under what circumstances they are acquired. The waiting period , investigations on mental & criminal histories, etc. etc.

I am sorry but I have never in my life dealt with so many people who do not read what I say, twist what I write and believe what I don't say . Incredible......I am beginning to think I am dealing with a bunch of adolescents with only one idea and very little notion of what the idea is from one moment to another.

 

[Colpy]

Sarah Kemp Brady, who became an activist for gun control after her husband was shot in the head in the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, has died.

Yeah...I read that....and the hate coming from the comments section was particularly nasty.

I am not a fan of people that would restrict my rights as a free individual, but the woman is dead, her husband suffered a severe brain injury in a tragic shooting, and her stance was understandable, if indefensible.

RIP.

 

[JamesBondo]

I have won this discussion hands down!! YOU have not given any other reason than our gun control laws to account for the difference.

LOL You are being obtuse. nevertheless, I enjoy repeating myself so you need not worry about me growing tired of pointing out your flawed logic....

I don't have to provide a reason for the differences. Why? because only a fool would credit pre existing difference to canada's gun control laws.