Gun Control is Completely Useless.

[Colpy]

Please be sure to apologize to Canada as well.

No Chretien owes the apology for costing us 2 billion dollars for NOTHING.

AND Ignatieff owes us an apology for whipping a Private Members' Bill to thwart the will of the people in the last Parliament.

 

[mentalfloss]

I don't think the freedom is worth it to humanity, but if that's what 'democracy' has decided..

It's kind of ironic that Harper's building so many prisons though. I'm sure there's no correlation between gun-related deaths.. and uh.. guns.. or.. crime.. so there will be a lot of space to play footie in those things.

 

[cranky]

I don't think the freedom is worth it to humanity, but if that's what 'democracy' has decided..

.

its interesting that you would say that because the history of humanity on this matter is quite clear.

It sucks.

ie the history of how a government treats its own unarmed civilians is brutal and inhumane.

 

[cranky]

Explain to me as well, why the murder rate in the USA has fallen 40% in the last 20 years, while gun restrictions have lessened to the point that 80% of American states allow legal concealed handgun carry by citizens??????

Sorry if I am offering facts to the anti-rights crowd, but if you like at the wikipedia charts for the USA, there is a huge spike in the late 1980s early 1990s that was attributed to inner city blacks in the crack coccaine wars. So yes, I agree that the rates fell when CCW laws were passed, but for the most part the reduction in murder had very little to do with gun laws.

In fact, that is my general opinion on this whole issue, ie " In Canada, there is no sigificant correlation between firearms deaths and the lawfully owned firearms inventory. Hunters and Farmers buy rifles by the tens of thousands per year, yet the overall murder rates are dropping. So if anyone wants to insist that there is a correlation, than I insist that we should force all law abiding firearms owners to buy more rifles this year to further drop the murder rates."

 

[Jack_Of_Spade]

And if he turns around and just makes it a voluntary registry? which would be a solution to placate everybody that only long guns you hunt with would have to be registered.
Which of the two wins in that instance????

The Concervative claim to already have put foward a bill to scrap the registry when they knew it wouldn't pass . So I am sticking to my prediction which is " they will not scrap the gun registry !

My original prediction was "He will come back with a revised gun control registration and the owners will pay the cost of the registration." So I guess ianything less then a full scraping make me the winner.

AND Ignatieff owes us an apology for whipping a Private Members' Bill to thwart the will of the people in the last Parliament.

I can't apoligise to Canada I didn't elect the poeple who came up with the registry or the way it was implemented!
Personaly I just want to keep the right to own a riffle! Wheather I have to register it or not I don't care ! I do care how ever about a billion dollars Liberal BOO BOO!

 

[Colpy]

The Concervative claim to already have put foward a bill to scrap the registry when they knew it wouldn't pass . So I am sticking to my prediction which is " they will not scrap the gun registry !

My original prediction was "He will come back with a revised gun control registration and the owners will pay the cost of the registration." So I guess ianything less then a full scraping make me the winner.


I can't apoligise to Canada I didn't elect the poeple who came up with the registry or the way it was implemented!
Personaly I just want to keep the right to own a riffle! Wheather I have to register it or not I don't care ! I do care how ever about a billion dollars Liberal BOO BOO!

Wrong.

The Conservatives supported a Private Members' bill, Bill C-391. Traditionally, this type of bill is a free vote in Parliament, and 20 MPs from the opposition parties voted for the bill on first and second reading. That was enough to pass it.

However Ignatieff broke Parliamentary tradition by deciding to whip the vote in a motion to kill the bill, thus forcing his MPs to vote against it.........and it died over the Conservative's protests.

The gun registry is on the second level of Conservative priorities after the economy. We will pass the budget, and an omnibus crime bill before the summer break.....and in the fall the killing of the gun registry will be among the first bills introduced.

 

[Jack_Of_Spade]

Wrong.

The Conservatives supported a Private Members' bill, Bill C-391. Traditionally, this type of bill is a free vote in Parliament, and 20 MPs from the opposition parties voted for the bill on first and second reading. That was enough to pass it.

However Ignatieff broke Parliamentary tradition by deciding to whip the vote in a motion to kill the bill, thus forcing his MPs to vote against it.........and it died over the Conservative's protests.

The gun registry is on the second level of Conservative priorities after the economy. We will pass the budget, and an omnibus crime bill before the summer break.....and in the fall the killing of the gun registry will be among the first bills introduced.

So I have to wait until fall for my appoligy? Gosh Darn it! OK for making me wait there will be no mercy after my prediction comes true! LOL

 

[cranky]

Wrong.

The Conservatives supported a Private Members' bill, Bill C-391. Traditionally, this type of bill is a free vote in Parliament, and 20 MPs from the opposition parties voted for the bill on first and second reading. That was enough to pass it.

However Ignatieff broke Parliamentary tradition by deciding to whip the vote in a motion to kill the bill, thus forcing his MPs to vote against it.........and it died over the Conservative's protests.

The gun registry is on the second level of Conservative priorities after the economy. We will pass the budget, and an omnibus crime bill before the summer break.....and in the fall the killing of the gun registry will be among the first bills introduced.

I hope you are correct. because I won't tolerate a conservative government that doesn't move on this before the next election. ie if the registry still exists, I take my vote away from the conservatives and move it to Jack Layton. I don't want to do this, but I will.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

I am pi$$ed at Peter Stoffer; he had the gonads to run on a platform of eliminating the LGR, I have even talked to him personally about it, he is my MP and his office is just a couple miles down highway 2 from me. He was at the Sobeys after the vote on the private member's bill and all I could do was glare at him after he decided to neuter himself. We took him at his word, never thought he would go back on it, but go back on it he did. I never did vote for him, but even my left leaning daughter voted for Adam Mimnagh. But to pi$$ me off even more, Mr. Stoffer got on News 95.7 and proclaimed that it mustn't have been that much of a big deal because he got voted back in, along with all the other turncoats of his party, mind you he didn't use that exact term. What got Mr. Stoffer voted in was that he is liked, hell, I like him, he is also a media darling, but as my Grampa often said to Lester B., (according to my mum), "Mike, I like you as a friend, but I don't like your politics, and I will never vote for you".

darn, its a little outdated, and Peter Stoffer has already won, but check this out:

YouTube - Scrap the Long-gun Registry, vote Adam Mimnagh in Sackville-Eastern Shore

..............................................................

here's a quote from a macleans article that I like:

"You can build all the databases you like, but no properly trained officer of the law will ever enter a premises or stop a suspect without accounting for the possibility of a weapon coming into play. If one were to take the CACP at its word, and accept that the registry with all its inaccuracies is routinely used to “check for the presence of firearms” in homes being visited by police, one would be forced to consider the possibility that the damn thing is nothing but a digital Petri dish of overconfidence and carelessness—well worth consigning to oblivion in the name of safety and common sense alone."

Christie Blatchford - Topics - Macleans.ca

Yeah, Blatch for PM, I've always liked her. But one thing we sould remember, there is no such thing as the Long Gun Registry, it the Gun Registry, period. It is just an updated version of an unreliable system introduced in 1934. Except that the purpose now is to disarm everyone who is not either a law maker or law enforcer, that inference alone should be scary enough to people who value their freedom.

 

[In Between Man]

Saw this and just had to post it here. For those who will enjoy it:

YouTube - Uncle Ted has a message for Hillary Clinton

 

[Jack_Of_Spade]

Colpy

I see you are getting it in the shorts again for your knowledge and ability to share that knowledge with people who would rather put down your
common sense regarding firearms of all kinds than to understand what you are saying.

Experts and teachers know their topic from direct hands on use and learning and study over time.

That is where you are ahead - and your opinion has much more weight than those who deride you for that knowledge.

You are not advocating violence of any kind - but common sense and to learn the dangers, proper use and care and intellligent dialogue of firearms...

Because someone "doesn't like the concept of guns" does not an expert make.

Only fools disengage from the learning process by allowing their limited opinion on a subject to prevent them from examining the other side.

I personally hate guns for what they represent - not because of why they are in our world but for the few who have misused them for personal advantage or anger.

My opinion cannot rest on the minority of violent people in our world, and I must respect the opinion of those who train in the use of weaponry for protection and cessation of aggression against the majority.

Until someone can guarantee peace and no violence in our future, I have to state only an expert such as yourself can offer the best path to society's wish to "control" firearms.

"I have to state only an expert such as yourself can offer the best path to society's wish to "control" firearms."
Just one question Curiosity? Are you and Colby related ? Dont get me wrong Colby has some good coments but "an expert"??

 

[Omicron]

You're nuts.

The only reason to fear gun control is if you think you couldn't do it and if you think your government is as evil as you would be if you were in control.

Otherwise it's a normal scientific application.

http://tunes.digitalock.com/Augusts_Rhapsody.mp3

Hold Harber to the principles of Common Sense.

Can you guys imagine a government motivated by common sense?

Since I know that all you hate me, I shall subvert unto you grand mother hated: http://tunes.digitalock.com/Augusts_Rhapsody.mp3

 

[cranky]

I love gun control. I am very happy when I can get 3 bullets into the smallest circle of my paper target. I am very happy when I can carefully place my shot on a deer so the deer does not suffer.

Furthermore, I love handguns. I think the handgun is the most humane self defense weapon available. I don't have to bludgeon the criminal, and in many cases I don't have to shoot him.

The big advantage with a handgun is while one hand points the gun at the criminal, the other is able to dial the police. Don't make me put that cell phone down to hold a rifle, it narrows my options.

You're nuts.

The only reason to fear gun control is if you think you couldn't do it and if you think your government is as evil as you would be if you were in control.

Otherwise it's a normal scientific application.

http://tunes.digitalock.com/Augusts_Rhapsody.mp3

Hold Harber to the principles of Common Sense.

Can you guys imagine a government motivated by common sense?

Since I know that all you hate me, I shall subvert unto you grand mother hated: http://tunes.digitalock.com/Augusts_Rhapsody.mp3

I can't say that I hate. I doubt that I will ever say that.

But all your talk about Lucifer is a bit over the top.

 

[Jack_Of_Spade]

You're nuts.

The only reason to fear gun control is if you think you couldn't do it and if you think your government is as evil as you would be if you were in control.

Otherwise it's a normal scientific application.

http://tunes.digitalock.com/Augusts_Rhapsody.mp3

Hold Harber to the principles of Common Sense.

Can you guys imagine a government motivated by common sense?

Since I know that all you hate me, I shall subvert unto you grand mother hated: http://tunes.digitalock.com/Augusts_Rhapsody.mp3

My father often said" you cant hate anyone unless you have hated yourself twice as much" So if somone on here hates you imagine how they feel about themself.

I love gun control. I am very happy when I can get 3 bullets into the smallest circle of my paper target. I am very happy when I can carefully place my shot on a deer so the deer does not suffer.

Furthermore, I love handguns. I think the handgun is the most humane self defense weapon available. I don't have to bludgeon the criminal, and in many cases I don't have to shoot him.

The big advantage with a handgun is while one hand points the gun at the criminal, the other is able to dial the police. Don't make me put that cell phone down to hold a rifle, it narrows my options.



I can't say that I hate. I doubt that I will ever say that.

But all your talk about Lucifer is a bit over the top.

Cranky "
Don't make me put that cell phone down to hold a rifle, it narrows my options.
Personaly I prefer the "shoot , shovel and shut" up methode of self defence LOL

 

[Colpy]

The problem with the Firearms Act:

When he opened his apartment door to go check, he claims a big police officer lunged towards him, grabbed him by the neck and pushed him to the floor where a civilian member of the force fell on him, breaking some of his ribs. He then lay on the floor at gunpoint for five hours while officers “tore apart” his apartment looking for guns. Mr. Barnes is currently on trial for unsafe storage. Despite all of his guns being locked away, police and Crown prosecutors claim some of the safes in which his guns were stored, as well as some of the locks used to secure them, were inadequate. That has now become a crime in Canada for which guilty-until-proven-innocent police tactics are the norm.

Lorne Gunter: Police are stigmatizing lawful firearm owners | Full Comment | National Post

This is ludicrous.

It has to go.

Add this to the ALBERTA CPFO going to a gun show, and informing the people therein he was going to behave as if the regulations for gun shows were in full effect...........when they have been delayed by the Conservative gov't.

Outrageous.

KILL the Firearms Act COMPLETELY. Fire the bureaucracy, introduce a simple graduated license system...............start treating gun owners like what they are....normal citizens.

Pitting police against law-abiding gun owners has strained the relationship between the two and put at risk the idea that policing derives its legitimacy from the consent of the policed. For this reason more than any other, the Tories should repeal Bill C-68 — not just the gun registry — now that they have their majority.

Hear! Hear!

 

[Tonington]

Turns out the guys carrying the handguns, and with full access to "assault" rifles are LESS apt to kill each other.

Is there any reason in your research that you decided to report the gross murder rate, instead of say the rate of crime involving guns, you know for a post comparing gun laws and gun availability?

The right to ber free from unreasonable search.

Quote from the firearms act where it details the conditions for searching a home.

The right to remain silent.

Where in the Charter do you find the right "to remain silent"?

 

[CDNBear]

The only reason to fear gun control is if you think you couldn't do it and if you think your government is as evil as you would be if you were in control.

So how does that play into you thinking the Harper gov't is evil?

Where in the Charter do you find the right "to remain silent"?

Section 7, via R v. Hebert and 11c, as well as section 13 specifically.

 

[Colpy]

Tonington;1425438 Is there any reason in your research that you decided to report the gross murder rate, instead of say the rate of crime involving guns, you know for a post comparing gun laws and gun availability?

Absolutely!

Murder is the ultimate defense offered for firearms laws........how many times have I heard "if it saves just one life" or equivalent BS.....

But if one intends to kill somebody, but does not have a .45 ACP handy because of gun laws. and so beats the intended victim to death with a baseball bat.....they are just as dead. The gun law saved no one.

If we are to sacrifice some of our liberty, the onus is on those that would take our liberty to prove that they are making society significantly safer.........and they simply can not do that.

That is my point.

Tonington;1425438
Quote from the firearms act where it details the conditions for searching a home.

102. (1) Subject to section 104, for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Act and the regulations, an inspector may at any reasonable time enter and inspect any place where the inspector believes on reasonable grounds a business is being carried on or there is a record of a business, any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a gun collection or a record in relation to a gun collection or any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a prohibited firearm or there are more than 10 firearms and may

(a) open any container that the inspector believes on reasonable grounds contains a firearm or other thing in respect of which this Act or the regulations apply;

(b) examine any firearm and examine any other thing that the inspector finds and take samples of it;

(c) conduct any tests or analyses or take any measurements; and

(d) require any person to produce for examination or copying any records, books of account or other documents that the inspector believes on reasonable grounds contain information that is relevant to the enforcement of this Act or the regulations.

]Tonington;1425438
Where in the Charter do you find the right "to remain silent"?

11. Any person charged with an offence has the right

(a) to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence;

(b) to be tried within a reasonable time;

(c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;

and

26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.

 

[Tonington]

Absolutely!

Murder is the ultimate defense offered for firearms laws........how many times have I heard "if it saves just one life" or equivalent BS.....

But if one intends to kill somebody, but does not have a .45 ACP handy because of gun laws. and so beats the intended victim to death with a baseball bat.....they are just as dead. The gun law saved no one.

Which has sweet fu ck all to do with what I asked you. If you're comparing gun laws, and similar populations, and any resulting difference in crime rate, then the relevant statistic you ought to be interested in is gun crime, unless you can show that for all populations the ratio of gun murders to all murders is the same, which you have not done. The gun crime rate could be higher in the US population, with other murders being lower, which would invalidate the central claim you made in that post.

102. (1) Subject to section 104, for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Act and the regulations, an inspector may at any reasonable time enter and inspect any place where the inspector believes on reasonable grounds a business is being carried on or there is a record of a business, any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a gun collection or a record in relation to a gun collection or any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a prohibited firearm or there are more than 10 firearms and may

So, having reasonable grounds is evidence-in your mind- of a charter violation of the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizures? Crazy conservatives...

11. Any person charged with an offence has the right

(a) to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence;

(b) to be tried within a reasonable time;

(c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;

and

26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.

So onto the next question, how does the Firearms Act specifically violate this clause?

Section 7, via R v. Hebert and 11c, as well as section 13 specifically.

Yes we're getting there...section 7 only applies after you've been detained, and section 13 refers to testimony in legal proceedings...

 

[JLM]

Absolutely!


But if one intends to kill somebody, but does not have a .45 ACP handy because of gun laws. and so beats the intended victim to death with a baseball bat.....they are just as dead.

Absolutely right on the mark, Colpy............or bash their head in with a rock. :smile: