Glorifying Guns?

I really don't know why Mr. Blatham is taking such a position. He, as a Canadian. should be very much aware that if law enforcement should ever vanish, the average citizen would have to defend himself or suffer the consequences.
Difficult times can arise. Mr. Blatham should know this.
My best friend lived in Montreal when there was a strike by the Montreal Police. Banks were robbed. Downtown stores were closed because of looting.
Millions of dollars of property damage had been inflicted. Of course, the army was called in, and, I am sure that Mr. Blatham knows--the Mounties rode to the rescue.

With events such as occured in Montreal( Mr. Blatham's country is Canada, is it not?) comment about Dildos, which cut off commentary about citizens' rights to bear arms, is childish.

Until know, I've alway thought, the 'Mounties' were the nickname of the "Royal Canadian Mounted Police - Gendarmerie royale du Canada"

Yes, you are correct, Mr. Hinteler. The Mounties are indeed the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and they did, in fact, help to restore order. A source for this story can be found in Time Magazine- October 17, 1999.

You may be interested to learn, Mr. Hinteler, that without a police force in Montreal, according to Time Magazine, taxi drivers burned down the garage of a limousine service that had competed with them for airport customers, a rooftop sniper killed a provincial police officer, rioters broke into several hotels and restaurants, and a doctor killed a burgular in his suburban home( the doctor was a card carrying member of the NRA no doubt). By the time the riot was quelled through a joint effort of the Army and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police( aka Mounties) six banks had been robbed, a hundred shops had been looted and twelve fires had been set.

For the record, the "Mounties" originated from an ad hoc force assembled to put down an uprising by the French-speaking Métis of Manitoba. The capitalists behind a transcontinental railway were angling for a government loan when the insurrection broke out (google the name Louis Riel), and they promised they could get a force into Manitoba within a week. With some help from them, and Tories anxious to make political capital, a mounted force was raised and transported to Manitoba. The railway company got it's loan, the Métis were "put in their place," and a new paramilitary police force was born, the Northwest Mounted Police. As with all colonial forces which were not a "Royal establishment," they wore blue uniforms.

During the Boer War, the Canadians contributed a good deal of cavalry, including the NWMP's, and they were the one force in the war whom the Boers consistently respected. The Canadians were experienced (although somewhat badly lead at first) when they arrived, and had recently purchased Colt machine guns mounted on gun carriages in the United States. As a mounted force with its own artillery and machine guns, they were sent to deal with the Boer Kommandos on their own home ground. After the war, just before the death of Queen Victoria, the NWMP were awarded special honor by being designated the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and allowed to wear the coveted scarlet coats.

Today they perform the functions of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the United States, as well as performing ordinary policing duties in all of the provinces. And they also now have their own reality television program--they have arrived.

dear mr mporter

Thank you for your kind attention to my posts.

Regarding those riots in Montreal to which you allude, yes, I understand that neither the army nor the constabularly would have assumed themselves properly equipped had they arrived, holsters loaded with silicone dongs, even the large calibre ones. Still, British police have gone about their helpful and orderly business bazookaless. Do they still? I'm uncertain.

But whether police and militaries ought to wear guns has no bearing, you'll agree perhaps, on whether grandma and uncle sam and the kids are all packing.

But my point was otherwise. US culture, particularly, displays this curious feature of happiness and comfort with guns and (take movies here) multilating and blasting heads off and ripping hearts out, but he chance of seeing a rather more life affirming and natural object, namely, an erect cock, is about zero.

I believe the Brits do not have police who generally go about armed, still. Of course, neither, generally, do British citizens.

Dear Mr. Blatham: I assure you that the Montreal affair in 1969 was quite a lot more horrible than your smarmy comment about silicone dongs would have us believe. What is it about downtown stores being closed because of looting that you don't understand? Is a rooftop sniper killing a provincial police officer your version of fun and games? Do you think that the looting of at least a hundred shops is a trifle?
Although there is no way to be certain, I would bet that a citizenry that was packing would have saved lives and property in Montreal in 1969.

As strange as it may seem to you, Mr. Blatham, some people value lives more than "erect cocks"!!!

If it is phallic worship you are into, I suggest that you avail yourself of the ubiquitous pornographic sites on the web. All of your caterwauling about the absence of "erect cocks" as compared to the alleged omnipresence of guns, reveals a curious ignorance of the thousands of displays of stiff phalluses on the hundreds of Web Sites available for the prurient.

In his book, "The Blank Slate", the evolutionary psychologist, Steven Pinker points out that casual sex is not casual. One of the hazards of sex is a baby and a baby is not just a seven pound object but from an evolutionary point of view, our reason for being. Every time a woman has sex with a man she is taking a chance at sentencing herself to years of motherhood, with the additional gamble that the whims of her partner coudl make it single motherhood.

I am sure that you will not understand, Mr. Blatham, but there are people, especially mothers of young girls, who consider an "erect cock" more dangerous to their daughters than an unloaded pistol.

What on earth does a mans penis and a gun have to do with each other?

Comparing the two is assinine. One is for killing and one is for fun. The two do not interchange.

I for one do not see a point in having a naked person running around on the TV Screen, it serves no purpose. I also don't watch too many shows where people walk around brandishing firearms for no reason. Then again, I usually am watching the History Channel or DIY net.

Naked people with guns...hmmmmm....how about naked cheerleaders with guns?

Where would they keep the extra magazines or speed loaders?

Bandoliers of course....thong style bandoliers...

My shortest post yet (I'm trying)

Way back when my President was named Nixon, I first visited Canada.
(After discharge from the military, I'd joined VVAW to keep serving my country.)
My mission was to bring draft dodgers and deserters home to "face the music".
Others worked to stop our soldiers dying in a war the US Gov't was not allowing our military to win.
Several hours drive north of the border, I'd read a brochure they gave me at the border crossing: "Americans may not bring guns into Canada." I asked for directions to the nearest RCMP station, and;
Going straight there, I literally 'turned myself in' for having a 9mm Browning in the console of my car.
"...I plead stupidity officer..." "shoulda read it at the border..."(me)
Two nice Mounties walked me out and took my gun from the car & then, one handed me his service pistol (after unloading it first)
It was also a 9mm-BHP, and they congratulated me on my taste in guns.
Then the Mounties thanked me for being law abiding, gave my gun back (loaded) exacting my promise to "Leave it home next time 'A'."

Cops appreciate law abiding citizens, in Canada also, it seems.
Besides meeting an honest citizen is a "once-in-a-lifetime" to cops who are used to everybody lying to them.
(the incident also gave them a good unbelievable-but-true story to tell)

It's a pain having to check your gun at the border though. The Canadians take good care of it, but it forces you to go back through the same portal rather than take a different route home as originally planned.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

mporter

Montreal, a lovely little town of my acquaintance, has produced a bountiful crop of rioters over the last three hundred years or so (hockey team loss being a common culprit).

But I think you are referring to the October Crisis of 1970, not 1969 (the earlier year saw a number of FLQ bombings though). It's a bit of our rich history with which I'm quite familiar, having both lived through it, and having done some study of it.

Though how it has any relevancy AT ALL to personal firearm ownership issues escapes we Canadians. Perhaps it is logically entailed that any time or place civil unrest is witnessed, the only prima facie resolution is mass gun ownership.

As to the 'smarmy' part of my post...your response is a living, breathing evidence of precisely what I said in it. Guns are like mother's milk, but sex toys are some species of evildoer. All as it should be. America is NOT upsidedown.

Please continue with your discussion. I'll send off a request to the management of the site, in your name, if that's not presumptuous of me, but I'm just trying to help, recommending that the site allow full and unrestricted personal gun ownership, and that it disallow all talk of sex toys and penises, and that it pass some rule such that irony is either clearly labelled as such, or just outlawed to keep things simple for those who prefer simple.

Remember:

If you outlaw irony
only outlaws will be ironic!



back to guns etc.:
Florida passed Concealed Carry legislation.
Lots of women got training and then got gun carry permits.
Sex crimes statistics showed a sharp drop.

Anyone else wonder if a would be rapist loses the urge when looking down a gun barrel.
Assuming women were aiming at the man's head...*

*You'll have to pry my irony from my cold dead lips!

wambli

That's very funny. Welcome to a2k!

Do you have a link to the referenced stats?

I've seen people who have their irony set on full auto, but these days mine is more like a single-shot.

Mr. Blatham: If you read my post, you will note that I referred to Time Magazine as my documentation. The lawlessness due to the Police strike occurred in 1969 not 1970. I find it strange that you don't know the history of one of your major cities, Montreal. You seem to know all about US History and events--or at least you write as if you do.

Regarding sex toys. I know that you may find it difficult to understand, Mr. Blatham, but my values are such that I honor a person who keeps a pistol in thier home for self protection much more than I honor a poor twisted soul who finds it necessary to utilize "sex toys" to find sexual fulfillment.

Hmmh: the Montreal policemen should have striked better in bitter winter times, like their New York City colleagues did in 1971.

In the USA - since strike by public employees is forbidden now - polciemen take the "blue flu" instead. Arkansas has been known to use State Troopers to take the place of those "sick" officers. Other states are even forced to call in the National Guard. (source: International Encyclopedia of Justice Studies ©2003 IEJS )

Hey Walter, is your avatar a picture of you? That's a big hat!