S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
293
guests, and
5
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,583
Posts546,726
Members14,425
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438 |
I've been away for the past two week and have only occasionally tuned in here. After 18 pages of posts generally going around in circles I have just one point to make:
Firearms registration invaribly leads eventually to firearms confiscation as has been referenced in multiple examples here in other Countries. If you are in favor of firearms registration you are treading with the enemy period.
The 2nd Amendment IS an unalienable right.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,466 Likes: 213
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,466 Likes: 213 |
Craig, help me out here.... I hear you canvasback and I understand King's point. As I see it King is here to help, but I can't help but wonder why he'll mix in curve ball or off hand comment for no productive reason. My interpretation, 'Bush bad but he gave you what you deserve in the patriot act so you can accept public safety gun control measures for the children'. King says he wants American gun control to resemble Canadian gun control, so his help is undermining progun efforts by calling for compromise at every twist and turn for no other reason than it works for me so it should for you. My take on the patriot act, it's a response to an act of war against the US. Where gun control is the assault against a constitutional right for ideological reasons. I'm no fan of the patriot act, but I can't equivocate here. Identifying and stopping an enemy vs. criminalizing citizens for ideology.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 391 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 391 Likes: 11 |
Hummmm...there goes that song again, dammit Delta Dawn, wh..... I recall that song- Helen Reddy= the fem-lib-lezzie with her "I am woman, hear me roar" anthem to Gloria Steinem and Helen Gurlie Brown- what a load of crap-- But what does opening Pandora's fabled box have to do with Delta Dawn, what's the flower you have on?? Pray Tell. I don't recall any lines in that song about opening boxes-- It refers to a comment I made in a previous thread. Comment was made in reference to postings by a certain "source", who (IMHO) is a very accomplished troll, using reporting techniques (learned, and "liberally" used even today by our Canadian liberally subsidized network) to goad people into losing their patience and then being painted as "racists" and "radicals". The postings from that source remind me of the line "What's that flower you have on, Could it be a faded rose of days gone by?"
Dumb, but learning...Prof Em, BSc(ME), CAE (FYI)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,498 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,498 Likes: 396 |
Craig, The problem with the Patriot Act is the same problem that gun control has....it turns law abiding citizens into criminals and it give big government entry into areas of our lives it has no business being in until we've committed a crime. And the anti gun people would describe the gun "problem" in the US today as a war they need to fight.
A couple thoughts having finally read most of this thread.
First, as noted by a few way back, the devil is in the details. The anti gun people will construct laws and publicize what they are proposing as the most reasonable of actions. Until you read the fine print of what actually gets enacted.
Second, the oft repeated statement here about back ground checks being the Trojan horse for registry is, IMHO, correct. Much better, again, IMHO, if you have to have something, to have a licensing system like ours in Canada. It is divorced from the specific gun. As long as the transaction is between licenced citizens, then no one is telling anyone about any specific gun. And yet, the person you are selling your gun to is unlikely to be a gang banger. Please don't take this as support for licensing. It's just not as bad as registries.
Finally, you are going to lose the fight. Maybe not this time. But you will eventually. Because in protecting the specific 2cd amendment right, the pro gun lobby never wins a convert. Too much logic and not enough emotion. The other side has been whipping our asses on this for 40 years straight now. And we keep responding the same way.
My 8 year old boy was selected to represent his grade three class at a public speaking contest. While waiting to hear him, I listened to a cute and appealing little girl from grade four give her speech on why guns are bad. They kill people. Until we figure out how to counter that, our cause is lost.
Last edited by canvasback; 02/27/13 11:05 PM.
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,498 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,498 Likes: 396 |
Duplicate post. iPad issues. Lol
Last edited by canvasback; 02/27/13 10:59 PM.
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,202
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,202 |
Craig, The problem with the Patriot Act is the same problem that gun control has....it turns law abiding citizens into criminals and it give big government entry into areas of our lives it has no business being in until we've committed a crime. And the anti gun people would describe the gun "problem" in the US today as a war they need to fight.
A couple thoughts having finally read most of this thread.
First, as noted by a few way back, the devil is in the details. The anti gun people will construct laws and publicize what they are proposing as the most reasonable of actions. Until you read the fine print of what actually gets enacted.
Second, the oft repeated statement here about back ground checks being the Trojan horse for registry is, IMHO, correct. Much better, again, IMHO, if you have to have something, to have a licensing system like ours in Canada. It is divorced from the specific gun. As long as the transaction is between licenced citizens, then no one is telling anyone about any specific gun. And yet, the person you are selling your gun to is unlikely to be a gang banger. Please don't take this as support for licensing. It's just not as bad as registries.
Finally, you are going to lose the fight. Maybe not this time. But you will eventually. Because in protecting the specific 2cd amendment right, the pro gun lobby never wins a convert. Too much logic and not enough emotion. The other side has been whipping our asses on this for 40 years straight now. And we keep responding the same way.
My 8 year old boy was selected to represent his grade three class at a public speaking contest. While waiting to hear him, I listened to a cute and appealing little girl from grade four give her speech on why guns are bad. They kill people. Until we figure out how to counter that, our cause is lost. Simple..if THEY don't drop it...we pursue a progran to deny them freedom of speech...under the same argument that its not unlimited...and idiots flapping their gums like them are more dangerous than bootleg liqueur or homemade drugs are. And certainly far more dangerous than any gun is.
The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree, and think 25 to life would be Appropriate.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
Dear god, Craig, where does Bush come into it or curveballs or undermining pro-gun efforts? I've written to a senator, the NRA and posted here, as Jim noted above, recognize what is going on for what it is: registration.
Chatter about slippery slopes and nibbling away at constitutional rights is mewling to the converted. Nowhere have I said I want "American gun control to resemble Canadian gun control." I fought gun control, period.
I've said, plain as pudding, that none of the proposals for gun control will have a gnat's eyelash of effect on gun violence. I've quoted the Harvard study here and reminded McCain of Canadian experience so cut out the nonsense, please.
Integrity of a conversation demands respect, candour and trustworthiness. Imputing motives without evidence and saying what is not true is disrespectful, only making the world safer for fools.
Any time you're taking on the stately edifice and authority of a national government trying to saddle its citizens with unwarranted arbitrary measures, look to help wherever you can get it, not obfuscate and declaim as you're doing.
Last edited by King Brown; 02/27/13 11:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,437 Likes: 34
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,437 Likes: 34 |
Unfortunately, some of these guys have pudding for brains. Logic doesn't often intrude upon their world. P.S.: King, I'm not referring to you.
Last edited by Replacement; 02/28/13 12:23 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,466 Likes: 213
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,466 Likes: 213 |
Dear god, Craig, where does Bush come into it or curveballs or undermining pro-gun efforts? I've written to a senator, the NRA and posted here, as Jim noted above, recognize what is going on for what it is: registration.
Chatter about slippery slopes and nibbling away at constitutional rights is mewling to the converted. Nowhere have I said I want "American gun control to resemble Canadian gun control." I fought gun control, period.
I've said, plain as pudding, that none of the proposals for gun control will have a gnat's eyelash of effect on gun violence. I've quoted the Harvard study here and reminded McCain of Canadian experience so cut out the nonsense, please.
Integrity of a conversation demands respect, candour and trustworthiness. Imputing motives without evidence and saying what is not true is disrespectful, only making the world safer for fools.
Any time you're taking on the stately edifice and authority of a national government trying to saddle its citizens with unwarranted arbitrary measures, look to help wherever you can get it, not obfuscate and declaim as you're doing.
Ok King, here's my version of pudding. Bush comment...if you have any integrity please note that's my and my alone 'interpretation'. Didn't your note to the senator state that compromise was inevitable. Didn't you just earlier today answer 'yes and yes' about your advice to the NRA. No disrespect intended, but I recognize the butting of heads. I believe in the past, I've acknowledged when I've misread you. My opinion is you're not remembering or selectively disregarding some of your comments. Trustworthy....imputing motive without evidence.....I've admitted I tend to point out the 'flowery adjectives' that you lay down as factual assumptions. If I don't buy them, why can't I point them out. You have some very pointed opinions about my character, some of your assumptions rub me wrong.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,498 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,498 Likes: 396 |
Simple..if THEY don't drop it...we pursue a progran to deny them freedom of speech...under the same argument that its not unlimited...and idiots flapping their gums like them are more dangerous than bootleg liqueur or homemade drugs are. And certainly far more dangerous than any gun is.
BHD, I hope you are kidding, although I share your frustration. But seriously, to win the war, it won't be because you have stopped Obama or Congress from enacting some stupid law in the next year or two. You will win when you figure out how to get Hollywood and school teachers on our side. All this "cold dead hands" stuff, while satisfying to express, just digs us further into the hole. It won't be won because of the 2cd amendment right, it won't be won with logic. It will only be won, long term, by changing the terms of reference. And the left have made the terms "guns are bad. guns kill people".
Last edited by canvasback; 02/28/13 09:51 AM. Reason: grammar
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
|