Gun Control is Completely Useless.

[Tonington]

I do not know one hunter or farmer that feels like registering their firearms is helping the crime situation in Toronto.

I don't either. I have a friend in Alberta who hunts, fishes, has a freezer filled with food that beats the hell out of the grocery store crap, he owns property west of Black Diamond, and plans on building a hunting lodge when he retires. But not once have I ever heard him complain about the law. To some people it just doesn't matter.

Considering that your family are 'not complaining', I suppose their registered firearms must be making a difference, right?

Logical fail.

 

[petros]

I spoke last night with a good friend who lives in a very rural area.......he told me that on election night he was listening to CBC Radio when they announced a Harper Majority........and he heard what he thought was a gunshot........he went to the door and opened it so he could hear better......and was greeted by the sound of people in every direction celebrating the end of the gun registry by firing their (undoubtedly unregistered) guns in the air....

Gotta love it.

Your dope grower buddies in the woods?

 

[cranky]

I don't either. I have a friend in Alberta who hunts, fishes, has a freezer filled with food that beats the hell out of the grocery store crap, he owns property west of Black Diamond, and plans on building a hunting lodge when he retires. But not once have I ever heard him complain about the law. To some people it just doesn't matter.

I don't believe you.

Logical fail.

indeed. it is a logical fail to suggest the absense of a complaint is equal to complete support.

 

[YukonJack]

I stayed off this thread, since I don't own a gun of of an description and neither do I have any desire to do so.

But can anyone give me a VALID reason why a law-abiding citizen should not be able own a gun, without the government butting its nose into that citizen's business?

 

[mentalfloss]

But can anyone give me a VALID reason why a law-abiding citizen should not be able own a gun, without the government butting its nose into that citizen's business?

Because people like you don't clarify what 'butting its nose into that citizen's business' actually entails?

 

[JLM]

Because people like you don't clarify what 'butting its nose into that citizen's business' actually entails?

It entails sticking their nose into the mundane details of law abiding citizens' lives rather than concerning themselves with identifying and rounding up criminals so that neither criminals or guns would be a concern! :smile:

 

[cranky]

Because people like you don't clarify what 'butting its nose into that citizen's business' actually entails?

He wanted a VALID reason.

 

[Unforgiven]

I stayed off this thread, since I don't own a gun of of an description and neither do I have any desire to do so.

But can anyone give me a VALID reason why a law-abiding citizen should not be able own a gun, without the government butting its nose into that citizen's business?

Sure, it's because of retards like you. Regulating something doesn't mean taking it away from everyone. It means taking it away from people who obviously shouldn't have access to it. If passing a competency test and providing some paper work to verify who you are and that you can take proper care of a gun is too much for you, then you shouldn't own one.

I've also noted that the division on this topic is quite aligned with the abortion topic. Odd how it's on one hand a tragedy for someone to choose to have an abortion yet thought of as a right by some to choose to shoot someone stealing carrots out of their garden.

 

[cranky]

Sure, it's because of retards like you. Regulating something doesn't mean taking it away from everyone. It means taking it away from people who obviously shouldn't have access to it. If passing a competency test and providing some paper work to verify who you are and that you can take proper care of a gun is too much for you, then you shouldn't own one.

I've also noted that the division on this topic is quite aligned with the abortion topic. Odd how it's on one hand a tragedy for someone to choose to have an abortion yet thought of as a right by some to choose to shoot someone stealing carrots out of their garden.

"Why I don't use the word retarded"
Why I don’t use the word “retarded” Shapely Prose

 

[JLM]

Sure, it's because of retards like you. QUOTE]

Next to you he looks like a Rhodes Scholar! :lol:

 

[mentalfloss]

It entails sticking their nose into the mundane details of law abiding citizens' lives rather than concerning themselves with identifying and rounding up criminals so that neither criminals or guns would be a concern! :smile:

Is it really that simple?

Or is the koolaid just that delicious?

 

[Colpy]

Sure, it's because of retards like you. Regulating something doesn't mean taking it away from everyone. It means taking it away from people who obviously shouldn't have access to it. If passing a competency test and providing some paper work to verify who you are and that you can take proper care of a gun is too much for you, then you shouldn't own one.

I've also noted that the division on this topic is quite aligned with the abortion topic. Odd how it's on one hand a tragedy for someone to choose to have an abortion yet thought of as a right by some to choose to shoot someone stealing carrots out of their garden.

Most of the people on these threads have no problem with passing a competency test and getting a license.......personally I don't.

I have never heard anyone say minor theft is a reason to kill anyone.

????????

What are you talking about???????

If abortion is seen as the killing of an unborn child (as it is by a very significant portion of the population), then abhorance of the current state of abortion law (or lack thereof) is only rational.

 

[cranky]

Funny, I could have sworn that the antigun crowd doesn't trust the competancy tests and licensing system that we have. why the sudden flip flop?

I don't believe in shooting anyone over a carrot. I have a poison ivy hedge that deals with those kind.

I see no conflict in my gun control and abortion stance. in both cases, I oppose the laws that are most likely to exploit life.

 

[Unforgiven]

"Why I don't use the word retarded"
Why I don’t use the word “retarded” Shapely Prose

I don't give a flying fu ck what words you use or don't use. You're a no mind motor mouth that can't tell **** from tits so go pound sand short bus hobo.

Next to you he looks like a Rhodes Scholar! :lol:

How would you know?

Most of the people on these threads have no problem with passing a competency test and getting a license.......personally I don't.

You are the head cheerleader when it comes to nuts and guns dude.

I have never heard anyone say minor theft is a reason to kill anyone.

Yet how many times have you said right here that it's your ancient right to use firearms to protect your life and property?

What are you talking about???????

It's been years Colpy, you're never going to understand my position no matter how clearly or reasonably I make it.

If abortion is seen as the killing of an unborn child (as it is by a very significant portion of the population), then abhorance of the current state of abortion law (or lack thereof) is only rational.

Doesn't matter if abortion is seen as killing an unborn child by a very significant portion of the population, the law says it isn't and that women in fact, have a right to choose to have an abortion or not. The point being that it's a hypocritical position to hold in the light of the burden carrying a fetus to birth would cause a woman and the lack of concern of killing someone because they are stealing your stereo.

 

[DaSleeper]

All you all can claim that the law is on your side, in the gun control and abortion law departement but when it comes to sleeping soundly at night and feel safe in my house?, I go by what my common sense and conscience tells me........

Full stop...

 

[cranky]

I don't give a flying fu ck what words you use or don't use. You're a no mind motor mouth that can't tell **** from tits so go pound sand short bus hobo.
.

Fallacy: Ad Hominem


That's a double fail, Unforgiven.

Not only are you attempting to reject a claim based on irrelevant information, your ad-hominem is incorrectly directed at me instead of the author of the article to which I posted a link.

 

[Machjo]

I spoke last night with a good friend who lives in a very rural area.......he told me that on election night he was listening to CBC Radio when they announced a Harper Majority........and he heard what he thought was a gunshot........he went to the door and opened it so he could hear better......and was greeted by the sound of people in every direction celebrating the end of the gun registry by firing their (undoubtedly unregistered) guns in the air....

Gotta love it.

Bloody dangerous!

YouTube - Celebratory Gunfire Preceded Officer Involved Shooting

 

[Unforgiven]

Fallacy: Ad Hominem


That's a double fail, Unforgiven.

Not only are you attempting to reject a claim based on irrelevant information, your ad-hominem is incorrectly directed at me instead of the author of the article to which I posted a link.

Your face is a double fail ass hat.

 

[cranky]

Your face is a double fail ass hat.

congratulations, that is only an ad hominem. you are making progress.

 

[Colpy]

Bloody dangerous!

YouTube - Celebratory Gunfire Preceded Officer Involved Shooting
YouTube - Celebratory Gunfire At Wedding Turns Fatal

As I said,

............."VERY RURAL".............

As well, my guess would be that most of the noise makers were shotguns.....absolutely harmless when fired into the air. (when loaded with shot)

Ever been in a duck blind?

You are the head cheerleader when it comes to nuts and guns dude.



Yet how many times have you said right here that it's your ancient right to use firearms to protect your life and property?



It's been years Colpy, you're never going to understand my position no matter how clearly or reasonably I make it.



Doesn't matter if abortion is seen as killing an unborn child by a very significant portion of the population, the law says it isn't and that women in fact, have a right to choose to have an abortion or not. The point being that it's a hypocritical position to hold in the light of the burden carrying a fetus to birth would cause a woman and the lack of concern of killing someone because they are stealing your stereo.

Damn right I am the head cheerleader for maintaining liberty in the form of ancient rights.....and you would be the head cheerleader for the jack-booted nanny-state control freaks.

BTW, where do you get that abortion is a right????

The SCOC certainly never ruled on that.

Or do you believe rights exist beyond the parameters of institutionalized law???