Hand Gun Ban

marktheone · Post by **marktheone** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 9:59 pm

Justpedallingcrap, I am not saying anything about a conspiracy theory at all. What I am saying is that when a people have no ultimate recourse for the government of a country things usually start to head south. Firearms are largely outlawed in Spain, Ireland, Britain. The common thread to all these countries is their growing lack of civil liberties.

Let's pretend for a moment that Paul Martin is sane, though we all know otherwise. What if he were imbalanced? It's a long way from here, I know, but how do you suppose the people of Iraq came to be under the thumb of the gov? Religion and lack of ultimate force would be my answer. What's to stop a goverment from taking anything they want if we have no recourse?

CID junior. (overtures of CID if I've ever heard it)

just clearing the trees · Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:18 pm

Dust Devil wrote:Ok toronto boy how about defence against all these supposed scary people who are killing each other in toronto

Lol, it's been a long time since I've lived anywhere close to TO. You couldn't be much further off base, but nice guess. And besides, when I do go to Toronto or any other major city, I'm not concerned for my safety. I don't know what everyone is so afraid of. I'll fill you in on a little secret, these gang members and criminals are not concerned with killing you. The only way you'd be in trouble is by being a bystander in the wrong place at the wrong time catching a stray bullet meant for someone else. But besides, IF one did want to kill you, do you really think you're a match for some street-hardened gang member spraying bullets from a fully automatic machine pistol? You're giving yourself way, way too much credit.

marktheone wrote:how do you suppose the people of Iraq came to be under the thumb of the gov? Religion and lack of ultimate force would be my answer.

Oh please, are you trying to tell me that Iraqis don't have guns? They all have AK's for petesake! That doesn't wash at all.

marktheone wrote:What's to stop a goverment from taking anything they want if we have no recourse?

You say I'm pedelling crap? There you go trying to pass off another far-flung, "what if" scenario, that is so far beyond the bounds of reason it borders on lunacy. Tell me, what are you concerned that the government is going to do, or take from us and how are they going to accomplish that? Our military? Yeah.....right. Cookoo.......cookoo. Just keep hiding in mom and dad's basement and you'll be safe.

marktheone · Post by **marktheone** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:29 pm

OK Kiddo. It is not far flung at all. The general population of Iraq, the you and me's of there, do not have firearms. That is how oppression starts. At the end of the day the people must have some sort of ultimate power to keep the gov in check.

So am I right in saying that you believe that hand guns should be banned? So that being correct you would then have to say that the guns being used in Tonto are registered and acquired by the same means that I would use to get them? Does that make any sense? Also take it a step further. Do you think that they will stop at handguns? Not a chance. The Fiberal's are quickly making a western seperatist out of me.

scm · Post by **scm** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:39 pm

grimey wrote:
justplanecrazy wrote:Even more stats:

63% OF MURDER VICTIMS WERE STABBED, BEATEN OR STRANGLED – 26% WERE SHOT
So am I a bad guy because I carry this?

http://www.knifesite.com/index.asp?Page ... odID=77997

i carry one of these

http://www.knivesplus.com/media/SP-C79PSBK2.jpg

dont think anyone will give me a hard time for having a knife with whistle on it...

just clearing the trees · Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:49 pm

marktheone wrote:So am I right in saying that you believe that hand guns should be banned? So that being correct ......

Actually, that would be an incorrect assumption. I just think people get a little carried away when the gun topic comes up. Who cares? I don't think a handgun ban will work, but I don't care. Handguns serve no useful purpose. If they want to take away your hunting rifles, then sure, go ahead, get pissed and hot under the collar, I'll be right there with you. But the government wants to take away your useless implement of death. Boo hoo. It's not the end of the world and as much as you would like us all to believe, the government is not secretly plotting to beat us all into socialist submission.

ScudRunner · Post by **ScudRunner** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:16 pm

Chantel Wrote:

To the "sportsman/target shooters", what exactly is this sport because I never heard of it? Is it shooting targets? in the best location?

Heres a Website with some Videos you can watch.

http://jvdynamics.com/nrg_old/multimedia.php

North Shore · Post by **North Shore** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 12:14 am

Hmmm, neat videos. Not sure that they really help 'the cause,' though. A bunch of young guys blazing away at torso-shaped targets isn't going to win over any non-believers, especially when the current spate of violence involves young guys blazing away at real, live torsos...
In the fall, I spent an afternoon at the range with a couple of the Conservation Officers in the province where I work. Yes, it was fun, but not really the sport that I'd choose to do as a hobby, but, each to his own...

ScudRunner · Post by **ScudRunner** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 12:31 am

They now use or promote the use of non human shaped targets more of the octagon shape with out the head. Most compeditors will shoot for the centre anyway.

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 12:42 am

just clearing the trees wrote: do you really think you're a match for some street-hardened gang member spraying bullets from a fully automatic machine pistol?

Yeah, these pro's are "good" at their job..

http://www.canadafreepress.com/toronto-news.htm

At around 3 p.m., several shots were fired outside of a restaurant on Dundas Street just east of University Avenue. A man in his 20s was shot in the leg

It was 30 shots.. lol...

See the problem is, you might not be able to "stop" them from "hitting" you, but you sure as hell can fire back at them.

It's amazing how some of these "gang" members get scared when someone is SHOOTING BACK.

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 12:44 am

This is what a civilian can use for protection against thugs with uzi's

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:10 am

The bottom line is that banning handguns will do nothing. Here's a little bit of stat breakdown from JPC's post.

63% OF MURDER VICTIMS WERE STABBED, BEATEN OR STRANGLED – 26% WERE SHOT
(total number of homicides caused by a gun 26%)

66% OF FIREARM HOMICIDES COMMITTED WITH A HANDGUN
(17% of all homocides caused by a handgun)

72% OF HANDGUNS USED AS MURDER WEAPONS WERE NOT REGISTERED
(3% of all homocides caused by a registerd handgun)

Of the 3% of homocides that would not have occured probably 99% of those would have still occured by some other means if a registered handgun was not available. We did studies over and over again in Criminology that verified that the means of commiting murder has nothing to do with the amount of murders commited.

On the other hand:

13% of Canadians own a firearm of which, 12% of those own a handgun. That means that across Canada over 4,195,166 people own a gun and 503,420 people own a handgun. So the Liberals feel that they are doing the right thing by taking away 500,000 peoples rights to have their handgun and restricting over 4 million peoples rights of owning a gun in order to try and deal with 3% of the murders that were caused by a registered handgun. That's 3% of 582 in other words 17 homicides.

So say that gun control is 100% effective. In other words every murder caused by a gun would have not taken place. So of the 582 homocides 151 were caused by a firearm. That means that the government paid 13,245,033 dollars to prevent each of those murders with their 2 billion dollar gun control plan. Now I'd agree with almost everyone that my life is worth 13 million dollars. On the other hand we can clearly see that the gun registry did nothing to stop those 151 murders and that the murder rate has significantly increased since the implimantation of gun control.

Bottom line we're taking 500,000 people who are involved in handgun sports as passionatly as some of us are involved in baseball and telling them they can't play anymore. If one guy took a baseball bat and murdered 17 people in the dressing room, would it make sense to make baseball illegal? The fact is that baseball bats cause more murders in Canada already then registered handguns. Banning handguns does nothing but cost billions and take away over 500,000 Canadians sport of choice.

Dust Devil · Post by **Dust Devil** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:21 am

scrambled_legs wrote:The bottom line is that banning handguns will do nothing. Here's a little bit of stat breakdown from JPC's post.

63% OF MURDER VICTIMS WERE STABBED, BEATEN OR STRANGLED – 26% WERE SHOT
(total number of homicides caused by a gun 26%)

66% OF FIREARM HOMICIDES COMMITTED WITH A HANDGUN
(17% of all homocides caused by a handgun)

72% OF HANDGUNS USED AS MURDER WEAPONS WERE NOT REGISTERED
(3% of all homocides caused by a registerd handgun)

Of the 3% of homocides that would not have occured probably 99% of those would have still occured by some other means if a registered handgun was not available. We did studies over and over again in Criminology that verified that the means of commiting murder has nothing to do with the amount of murders commited.

On the other hand:

13% of Canadians own a firearm of which, 12% of those own a handgun. That means that across Canada over 4,195,166 people own a gun and 503,420 people own a handgun. So the Liberals feel that they are doing the right thing by taking away 500,000 peoples rights to have their handgun and restricting over 4 million peoples rights of owning a gun in order to try and deal with 3% of the murders that were caused by a registered handgun. That's 3% of 582 in other words 17 homicides.

So say that gun control is 100% effective. In other words every murder caused by a gun would have not taken place. So of the 582 homocides 151 were caused by a firearm. That means that the government paid 13,245,033 dollars to prevent each of those murders with their 2 billion dollar gun control plan. Now I'd agree with almost everyone that my life is worth 13 million dollars. On the other hand we can clearly see that the gun registry did nothing to stop those 151 murders and that the murder rate has significantly increased since the implimantation of gun control.

Bottom line we're taking 500,000 people who are involved in handgun sports as passionatly as some of us are involved in baseball and telling them they can't play anymore. If one guy took a baseball bat and murdered 17 people in the dressing room, would it make sense to make baseball illegal? The fact is that baseball bats cause more murders in Canada already then registered handguns. Banning handguns does nothing but cost billions and take away over 500,000 Canadians sport of choice.

While I do agree with your post we need to remember that we don't have the right to having guns. The only rights we have are those spelled out in the charter. People seem to forget this and it bugs me when people claim to have things like the right to collectivly bargin. Just because something is legislated does not make it a right.

But I do agree that banning hand guns is B.S

Wilbur · Post by **Wilbur** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:33 am

Anti-gun ban people should avoid letting themselves get dragged into nonsense arguements about self-defence, dictators, etc. Neither of those are justification for having handguns. There should be no need to justify having guns as long as you use and own them in a responsible manner that does not put others at risk.

Rather, the principal arguement against the ban is that it will be a 100% ineffective waste of money. It is already illegal for these criminals to have guns. The escence of the case made by these pro-gun ban people is, "we need to make it illegal to do what is already illegal." What sort of stupid logic is that?

Enforcement of our current laws is where the solutions to all types of violence will be found. We can make all the laws we like, if they aren't enforced in a consistant and meaningful way they amount to a waste of paper. The necessary back-up to enforcement is addressing the underlying issues driving people to violence, crime, gangs, etc. The Liberals have not done either in all their time in power, and they have no intention of starting now.

marktheone · Post by **marktheone** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:48 am

Good post wilbur. Has Mr. Martin (AKA Mr. Dithers) been asked how a ban on hand guns will keep them out of the hands of criminals? It's ludicrous. I think we all agree on that. What then would his motivation be? I am sure that he is not naive enough to think that he will be helping the gun problem in Toronto. What is his motivation?

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:59 am

Mark...of course he doesn't think banning handguns will keep them out of the wrong hands.....he's sucking up to southern Ontario for votes!
That said....in the wee small hours of a dark night, if I ever must, I will be greeting the scum-bag with a Winchester 1300 Defender, rather than a dinky little handgun.....keep that in mind, all you scum-bags out there! Handguns will be replaced with REALLY BIG NASTY SHOTGUNS!!!

Wilbur · Post by **Wilbur** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:29 am

Dithers is doing what the Liberals always do. Callously following the poles and special interest groups. Most urban Canadians don't own, care or know anything about guns, and a ban won't influence their vote. But a large minority of urbanites are stupid and ill informed enough lefties to actually believe banning handguns will solve the problem. There are a lot more of them than there are anti-ban people. Consider as well that most gun owners are in western and rural Canada and won't be voting Liberal under any circumstances. Hence, for the Liberals a ban makes political sense. It will buy a good number of votes and help them win some urban ridings, and will really only cost them votes in ridings they have no chance of winning in any case.

Whether or not a law or piece of legislation is effective, logical or fair is never a concern of the Liberal party; only political optics.

justplanecrazy · Post by **justplanecrazy** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:36 am

The thing I don't get is that the Auditor Generals report not only brought the sponsorship scandal to light but also the huge waste of money known as the Gun Registry. She publicly critsized the program as a waste of tax payers money. Also Toronto's own police chief stood up and said that the registry has not helped them in any way shape or form. Why aren't the Urbanites looking at that report and their police chief more than some dumbass Politician.

marktheone · Post by **marktheone** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:48 am

I really don't see it buying all that many votes for him even in Toronto. There was some lady on the news last night who's gang banger son was shot in Tonto and even she said that banning hand guns wouldn't help.

In the 60's and early 70's guns were banned in Florida for a bit. Crime actually increased in the form of B&E's. The legislation was removed and some old lady blew a crooks head off while he was climbing over her window sill. Crime went down again. True story.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:17 am

Nothing like a load of .00 buck shot in the face to put a damper on crime!

Wilbur · Post by **Wilbur** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:49 pm

Why aren't urbanites picking up on the auditor general's view of a wasteful gun registry? Easy, most don't care about guns and the registry and won't read a news article with a headline about the gun registry.

As for the fact the registry is a waste of time and money, does nothing to reduce crime, shootings, or to keep guns out of the wrong hands, and is declared ineffective by the police chief of Canada's largest city; since when do facts and logic matter to the politically correct left wingers?

hazatude · Post by **hazatude** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 4:56 pm

This is the evil type of scumbag that votes for Martin:

http://comcult.yorku.ca/frames/staff/pr ... ukier.html

hazatude · Post by **hazatude** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 4:58 pm

marktheone · Post by **marktheone** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:57 pm

Wendy is pure unfiltered evil from a spring source deep in the backwoods of East Vancouver.

Hornblower · Post by **Hornblower** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:02 pm

Guido wrote:My question is this: In a country where carrying a concealed weapon is illegal, WHO THE HELL NEEDS A HANDGUN??

Right on Guido; And who needs golf clubs, who needs beer, who needs a sports car, or an SUV, who needs an airplane. The Lie brals should ban everything. They can have my axe if they'll send someone over to split my firewood. Come to think of it, someone should ban this forum because of all the subversive chatter against the government. Of course they could just ban Cat Drivers and then all the members would be content with the status quo.

In my opinion everyone should be satisfied with a TV. We can all watch actors do stuff for us.

costermonger · Post by **costermonger** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:27 pm

Check Pilot wrote:Michael Savage is right

Bwahahahahahahaha....

Hand Gun Ban

Hand Gun Ban Good or Bad??