Glorifying Guns?

Right. :wink:

Since it was the official photo for my ID-card, the hat had to look correct according to the Naval Manual No. xxx
(The first and only time, btw, - they asked me later, if I was a member of the local town guerrila, when looking at my uniform.)

Well, since you reference a Time issue which apparently doesn't exist...

Montreal suffered multiple riots in 69 and has suffered them before and has since. Lots of property damange in many, looting in others. There's nothing logically unique or telling about the police strike as regards any argument for citizen possession of firearms.

As regards your values, they are apparent, yes. "Twisted soul" in this context, and your racist outburst on "ragheads" in another are clarifying.

I wish I could, especially since I frequently work at night, carrying cash, but the process here truly redefines "red tape".

Misuse of the former can sometimes lead to misuse of the latter?

jarlaxle

I'll send you my mother in law to ride shotgun. They won't come near you.

That's quite all right.

jarlaxle- I am afraid that you don't understand. You see, people who use guns use them as a proxy for their penises. People who use guns are impotent and can't achieve sexual satisfaction so they actually get off by using guns.

I would love to hear Mr. Blatham espouse this position to a selected group of US Special Forces.

...or any ex-Marine.

Yes, of course, Tarantula, or any ex-marine.

If I posted a pic of my 8-year old son plinking with a semi-auto .22 rifle (i.e the AK-22 some people here would literally have a cow. Just a heads up, he's a pretty good shot for a little guy, so you might want to keep that cow out of range.

We also bought him and his sister a left handed compound bow, so they don't have to fight with my old right handed 25-lb recurve. A little over a year ago my son took an archery class here in the Bay Area, of all places, and he really likes it. In a few years I'll have to take him out for turkey and whitetail during bow season. That will be a new thing for me too as I've never hunted with a bow.

Mr. Blatham has, in my opinion, just rendered himself impotent in argument. He has made a statement, without qualification, about a factual matter which I am certain he has not investigated.

He said: "Since you referenced a Time Issue which apparently does not exist"

Now, everybody makes mistakes. But, Mr. Blatham appears to be certain of his ground.

The Time Magazine article does exist. It was published in Time on October 17th 1969 on Page 47.

It begins with the heading:
"Canada" City without cops.

I am very much afraid that Mr. Blatham has become quite miffed. He says he will not respond to any post of mine.

I did not mean to frighten him or hurt his feelings.

After all, none of us are perfect. Some of us, even Mr. Blatham make mistakes once in a while. I would respectfully suggest to Mr. Blatham that he not be so insistent in his errors since that only compounds the problem.