0
   

Thoughts on gun control

 
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:27 am
That is a big part of the reason why you just rolled your government.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:27 am
cjhsa wrote:
Canadian gun laws and the repression of your police force is because of the ultra-liberal pansies you elected year after year. They really did a number on you - total brainwashing.


You scholars in Canadian history are a treat to read.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:33 am
cjhsa wrote:
That is a big part of the reason why you just rolled your government.


Like Blatham said... "You scholars in Canadian history are a treat to read."

You are really showing that you do not have a clue as to what happens in Canada. You should try getting some facts instead of making things up as you go. It appears that your gun isn't loaded.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:34 am
maporsche wrote:
I don't think that anyone who carries concealed weapons actually lives in constant fear of an armed attacker.

Again, I go back to the insurance argument. When I drive I don't live in constant fear of getting in an accident, but you never know if you will.

Also, not all gun-rights enthuisists are conservative. I am mostly liberal, but this is one position that I disagree with them on. I think Bill Clinton was the greatest president in the last 30 years. I've only been alive for 26, but from what I've read, Jimmy Carter wasn't all that great.


Good point Marporsche. And like many social issues, I don't think opinions on it come down necessarily in Left/Right, Liberal/Conservative zones.

The vast majority of us are vastly more in danger of injury or death via highway accidents than we are in danger of being shot. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of some medical pathology taking us out rather than somebody injuring or killing us either accidentally or on purpose. For the very large majority of the population, I think either in the United State or Canada, murder or attempted murder is way down there on the list of ways people are injured or die.

But again, for those in imminent danger of being murdered, the fact that it is a rare event is not at all important.

Walter is still dodging the question, and while I believe Intrepid is sincere in his conviction, I would bet a steak dinner that he would change his mind if confronted with the necessity of making that choice.

If the knife is at your throat (or that of a loved one or a child), the police aren't there, and the only hope for survival is the Smith & Wesson revolver I have in my purse, would you want me to use it? I guessing it would be a extremely rare person who would not.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:39 am
Foxfyre wrote:

The vast majority of us are vastly more in danger of injury or death via highway accidents than we are in danger of being shot. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of some medical pathology taking us out rather than somebody injuring or killing us either accidentally or on purpose. For the very large majority of the population, I think either in the United State or Canada, death by murder is way down there on the list of ways people are injured or die.


This is true! Yet I can't recall many threads here on these topics. Instead, it's guns, guns, guns, as if having 'em is (or should be) a key to our sense of well-being...
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:39 am
Foxfyre wrote:

Quote:
Walter is still dodging the question, and while I believe Intrepid is sincere in his conviction, I would bet a steak dinner that he would change his mind if confronted with the necessity of making that choice.


I'll have mine medium rare, thank you.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:40 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Walter is still dodging the question, and while I believe Intrepid is sincere in his conviction, I would bet a steak dinner that he would change his mind if confronted with the necessity of making that choice.


If you aren't content with my response, I don't change it just to do you a favour. It's my opinion, known since 1967, and I never changed it.
(For the record: I was in the alarm reserve and .. well, ehem ... I had a lot of military stuff at home.)
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:41 am
Dartagnan wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:

The vast majority of us are vastly more in danger of injury or death via highway accidents than we are in danger of being shot. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of some medical pathology taking us out rather than somebody injuring or killing us either accidentally or on purpose. For the very large majority of the population, I think either in the United State or Canada, death by murder is way down there on the list of ways people are injured or die.


This is true! Yet I can't recall many threads here on these topics. Instead, it's guns, guns, guns, as if having 'em is (or should be) a key to our sense of well-being...


True. Maybe people should be more interested in keeping their automobiles well tuned and in good repair. Unfortunately, many cars are on the road that should be pulled off.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:43 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Walter is still dodging the question, and while I believe Intrepid is sincere in his conviction, I would bet a steak dinner that he would change his mind if confronted with the necessity of making that choice.


If you aren't content with my response, I don't change it just to do you a favour. It's my opinion, known since 1967, and I never changed it.
(For the record: I was in the alarm reserve and .. well, ehem ... I had a lot of military stuff at home.)


I asked you what you wanted ME to do in such a case. You responded with what you wanted thE POLICe to do. That's a different thing. The police just about everywhere carry guns as a part of their standard uniform and equipment.

And maybe there are some, but I don't know of any places where the police are everywhere or where murders are generally attempted right under their noses.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:45 am
I can't imagine such a situation.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:49 am
Fifty years ago my father's hunting buddies had trouble bringing handguns into Canada when going after bear. Your "tough new laws" really didn't do much to change the irrational fear of guns you already had.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 11:52 am
Dartagnan wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:

The vast majority of us are vastly more in danger of injury or death via highway accidents than we are in danger of being shot. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of some medical pathology taking us out rather than somebody injuring or killing us either accidentally or on purpose. For the very large majority of the population, I think either in the United State or Canada, death by murder is way down there on the list of ways people are injured or die.


This is true! Yet I can't recall many threads here on these topics. Instead, it's guns, guns, guns, as if having 'em is (or should be) a key to our sense of well-being...


Well, Craven sort of made it a thread about guns, guns, guns. Don't you think it's appropriate to discuss guns, gun use, gun control, gun ownership etc. on a thread designated for that subject?

I would love to talk about other laws/policy etc. and have even started threads from time to time on this or that, but few have generated much interest. Seems like everybody wants to talk about gay issues, abortion, and guns, but not much else when it comes to social policies. I might try later on though so stay tuned.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:03 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Fifty years ago my father's hunting buddies had trouble bringing handguns into Canada when going after bear. Your "tough new laws" really didn't do much to change the irrational fear of guns you already had.


Ummm, your dad and his buddies hunted bear with handguns? Cheeky.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:18 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Fifty years ago my father's hunting buddies had trouble bringing handguns into Canada when going after bear. Your "tough new laws" really didn't do much to change the irrational fear of guns you already had.


Ummm, your dad and his buddies hunted bear with handguns? Cheeky.


No, with bow and arrow, and long guns. The handguns were in case the bears got the upper paw.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:21 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Fifty years ago my father's hunting buddies had trouble bringing handguns into Canada when going after bear. Your "tough new laws" really didn't do much to change the irrational fear of guns you already had.


What happened to your boasting about being able to bring large calibre handguns into Canada now since we changed governments? Now you go back 50 years and admit that even then it was a problem bringing handguns into Canada. You change like the wind.

It is not irrational fear. It is civilized intelligence.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:22 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Fifty years ago my father's hunting buddies had trouble bringing handguns into Canada when going after bear. Your "tough new laws" really didn't do much to change the irrational fear of guns you already had.


Ummm, your dad and his buddies hunted bear with handguns? Cheeky.


No, with bow and arrow, and long guns. The handguns were in case the bears got the upper paw.


Sure, don't give the bear a fighting chance.

BTW...Don't you have any bears in the U.S.? Why do you want to kill ours?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:45 pm
What a dolt. He doesn't even know about one of Canada's largest tourism industries.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:46 pm
Intrepid wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Fifty years ago my father's hunting buddies had trouble bringing handguns into Canada when going after bear. Your "tough new laws" really didn't do much to change the irrational fear of guns you already had.


Ummm, your dad and his buddies hunted bear with handguns? Cheeky.


No, with bow and arrow, and long guns. The handguns were in case the bears got the upper paw.


Sure, don't give the bear a fighting chance.

BTW...Don't you have any bears in the U.S.? Why do you want to kill ours?


Well personally I don't want to and wouldn't shoot any living thing for fun or sport, at least not with anything other than a camera. I gave up fishing because I felt bad hurting the fish and felt sorry for the worm. But I don't fault those who hunt and fish for fun, food, or sport.

So if you Canadians didn't want Americans hunting your bears, why do you issue them licenses?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:49 pm
Intrepid wrote:

Sure, don't give the bear a fighting chance.


I'm quite sure now you know nothing about hunting, especially about bow and arrow hunting, and are arguing for the sake of argument from an urban wasteland perspective.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2006 12:50 pm
cjhsa wrote:
What a dolt. He doesn't even know about one of Canada's largest tourism industries.


Well, well. This speaks volumes.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 01:28:01