Strict Gun Laws

User avatar
AlanH
Lord of the Board
Posts: 4649
Joined: Oct 23rd, 2006, 8:08 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by AlanH »

rookie314 wrote:Because if he had a gun and it was not registered he would have been the criminal. That was the intent of my original post. If they have broken into his home he can use resonable force to deter them. If they were not armed and he shot them he would be charged. Second point of my original post is there in no documented case of the gun registry stopping anyone from being killed in this country. Not one criminal has said to himself, "I am not going to shoot that guy because my weapon isn't registered". As I stated in my original post as well, the farmer in North Battleford, because he is a decent law abiding citizen has gone through the hoops to register his weapon and because of that we are all safe. In case you didn't figure it out, thats sarcasm.


Sarcasm, speculation and theoretical scenarios... wow, you make a great case for something, but it's certainly a poor case for showing how screwed up Canada and it's laws are when it comes to the defense of ones home.
User avatar
westsidebud
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3808
Joined: Jul 18th, 2009, 11:36 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by westsidebud »

well i think that long guns should not be registered , and that hand guns and automatics should be only used on target ranges.
GO CANUCKS GO
User avatar
Phoenix Within
Guru
Posts: 9504
Joined: Jul 24th, 2008, 7:41 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by Phoenix Within »

westsidebud wrote:well i think that long guns should not be registered , and that hand guns and automatics should be only used on target ranges.

With the exception of the automatics (which are prohibited), you've stated what the laws already were before the registry came into effect.
So I love the Okanagan but it's a place best enjoyed from atop a very large pile of $100 bills. - Spocky
User avatar
Wallybanger
Fledgling
Posts: 109
Joined: Sep 8th, 2005, 6:38 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by Wallybanger »

You're only wasting your time trying to convert the idiots. There are too many myopic sensationalists slinking around to make any sort of an intelligent discussion worth while. The people who think that GUNS ARE BAD are the same jackasses who think that airport security is keeping us all safe :hailjo:

I don't worry about guns... you know what I worry about? Some crackhead stabbing me with a butter knife down town because I don't have a lighter to lend him.

Gun control is a red herring used to occupy simple minds.
westsidebud wrote:
We could have employed hundreds of full time RCMP officers for the entire length of their careers for the amount of money spent on this useless registry, and the results on crime would have been far more tangible
. yea you right.we could have hired more vigalanteas

I bet vigilantes would get more done than the RCMP.
westsidebud wrote:i agee with alan here.we a million times better off than the states in terms of safety

And Switzerland is a million times better of than we are. Guess what their -privately owned machine gun- to population ratio is.
AlanH wrote:
rookie314 wrote:
Please don't blame Canada for your lack of understanding it's laws, nor your cherry picking of news stories to make it sound worse than it is


You honestly think that was cherry picking? Give your head a shake. He wasn't able to defend himself. If he had a weapon he could have and the bad guys would be DEAD. Instead you bleeding hearts will say, "lets catch the bad guys, send them to court, give them probation or suspended sentences, tell them not to do it again and put them back on the streets to KILL again." I bet you dollars to doughnuts the perpetrators of this crime will be known to police, or out on parole.


Yes, I honestly do think it was cherry picking a story to demonstrate a lack of understanding of Canada's laws.

Where in the story was it mentioned that he had no means of defense? If he had a weapon he could have? What statistics do you base this brilliant observation on? The U.S.A.? I can't help you if you didn't read anything else posted other than what you quoted... you have not understood what was said based on your above "opinion" Is it Canada's fault that the homeowner is now dead because he failed to defend himself? He could have bought a gun and had it at the ready and there is no law that says that he cannot, so now he is dead.... Why is that Canada's fault?

Take your own advise and shoot yourself in the head... err.. I mean shake your head.

Um... except the "safe storage" laws..... It is illegal to keep a firearm loaded when in storage. It's also illegal to load a firearm in an area where it is illegal to discharge. The only time you can have a firearm unlocked is in a rural setting where the firearm is being used for LIVESTOCK protection (yeah, you can't keep it unlocked to protect your self) and even then, the ammunition has to be stored in a separate location.

It's illegal to protect your self in Canada. You pretty much have the choice between death and jail (yeah, I know the laws on personal defense, they are idiotic, save yourself the time and embarrassment of arguing with me).

Why, in the name of god, would you assert your self like that when you have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT THE *bleep* YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? I'm impressed that you are actually so dense as to go off on a tangent of malcontrived cognitive diarrhea.
None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free.
-Johann von Goethe
User avatar
eMeM
Übergod
Posts: 1421
Joined: May 11th, 2007, 2:37 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by eMeM »

I read these on one of those "crazy CT" websites and have yet to verify but if correct it's something we should keep in mind.

"1911 Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1929 The Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1935 China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1938 Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 6 to 7 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and 12 million Christians who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1956 Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, one million “educated” people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
1964Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
1970 Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
1994 One has only to learn what really happened to the Christians in Rwanda between April and July of 1994 to imagine what may lie in store for Christians here in America at some time in the not-too-distant future. After the Christian Tutsis had been disarmed by governmental decree in the early 1990s, Hutu-led military forces began to systematically massacre the defenseless Christians. The massacre began in April 1994 and continued until July 1994. Using machetes rather than bullets, the Hutu forces were able to create a state of abject fear and terror within the helpless Christian population as they systematically butchered hundreds of thousands of them.

The United Nations immediately convened hearings on the genocide taking place in Rwanda, but Madeline Albright, the American Ambassador to the United Nations, argued strenuously that neighboring African nations should not be allowed to intervene until the “civil war had come to an end.” In reality, of course, there was no civil war since those being slaughtered had no weapons with which to defend themselves; it was simply a matter of mass murder. In addition to blocking intervention by neighboring nations, Madeline Albright also insisted that the word “genocide” must not be used, and that the United Nations forces stationed in Rwanda were not to be allowed to intervene. In the three months that followed, between one-half and three-quarters of a million Christians were systematically dismembered, hacked to death, and slaughtered in the bloody carnage that ensued.

Tens of thousands of Christians were murdered in their churches; tens of thousands more were murdered in their hospitals and in their schools. On several occasions, United Nations soldiers stationed in Rwanda actually handed over helpless Christians under their protection to members of the Hutu militia. They then stood by as their screaming charges were unceremoniously hacked to pieces. At the end of the carnage, in late July 1994, the American government rewarded the Hutu murderers with millions of dollars in foreign aid.

Strangely, the American press has remained silent Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA about the fact that almost all of those who were slaughtered were Christians, and it was the policies of our government that were primarily responsible for blocking efforts by neighboring African countries to intervene."

Taken from here:
http://dprogram.net/population-control/
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I Think
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10477
Joined: May 29th, 2008, 6:12 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by I Think »

Why would you want to live in a country where you feel you must have a gun to feel safe?
We're lost but we're making good time.
fred 2
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Apr 9th, 2009, 8:51 am

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by fred 2 »

Why do you? YOU SPEND THE WINTERS IN TH USA,with your beliefs you should not go there.
I Think
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10477
Joined: May 29th, 2008, 6:12 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by I Think »

fred 2 wrote:Why do you? YOU SPEND THE WINTERS IN TH USA,with your beliefs you should not go there.

Spent last winter in Mexico freddie,
not only that, but i dont need a gun to feel safe in the US or Canada.
not withstanding the above, you have no idea what my beliefs are.
We're lost but we're making good time.
fred 2
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Apr 9th, 2009, 8:51 am

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by fred 2 »

*try reposting without the personal attack/Jo*
User avatar
Amarow121
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 768
Joined: Mar 27th, 2009, 8:30 pm

Re: Strict Gun Laws

Post by Amarow121 »

Nibs wrote:Why would you want to live in a country where you feel you must have a gun to feel safe?


Couldn't one make the same arguement with locked doors?

"Why would you want to live in a country where you have to lock your doors?"

(and yes locks can hurt people. Ever been locked out of your house/car/work on a cold day?)

Return to “Canada”