It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Canada: Stigmatizing lawful firearm owners

page: 6
28
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


Ahh, I see that you live in England where gun control has really had a great effect hasn't it? How's that working out for you folks over there? I heard it really had a great effect on the ilegal importation and use of ilegal firearms on your streets (sarcasm off)


At no time in any of your silly comparisons between owning a firearm and owning chemical weapons did you come remotely close to giving LOGICAL reasons why firearms should be ilegal in Canada or the US, or contribute to the reasoning behind the stigmatizing of law abiding gun owners. Instead, you offer up insane comparisons, I think you can do better than that... I also heard that over in the UK in some places they have even banned knives, whats next, pointy sticks and stones? lmao. Many Canadians and Americans don't expect people living in a nanny state like England to understand the reasons for owning firearms, afterall, you're entire populous is under close watch by big brother and it's mass array of camera's keeping track of your every move, how does that feel?

In essence, if the poop ever hits the fan and your populous is forced to defend itself from a tyrannical out of order government in the future, you are all up poop creek with no paddle. But I guess you all must trust your governments over there fairly well, because after all, look at all the rights you have handed over to them over the years.



edit on 13-5-2011 by Jocko Flocko because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
wow now theres a strawman argument if i have ever seen one

talk about dishonesty and twisting of things.


There's no strawman and there was no dishonesty in my post.

You had a problem with someone else telling you it's illegal to own something.

I offered two examples of things that, by your own argument, should not be illegal to own; namely, potential chemical/nuclear components, and live samples of deadly viruses.

Please do not accuse me of dishonest debating practices, when it's your argument that is faulty, incoherent and inconsistent !


Originally posted by neo96
wow are you british still upset that a bunch of farmers and frontiersman won our independence from you people?


No, we - like everyone else around the world - are just upset that the descendants of these hicks are calling the shots on the world stage, massacring and killing in the name of all that your country holds dear: $$$.


Originally posted by neo96
heres some honesty you do your username a disservice and i am no fan of the tripe you expouse.


Defend your point then. There's no need for name-calling and evasiveness if your argument stands up to scrutiny.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Let me quote DTOM:


Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe

Listen Up!!!!



Please discuss the topic, and not each other, in a respectful manner.
First and last reminder:


MOD NOTE: ALL MEMBERS: We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.



Be advised.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Guns don't kill people...people kill people!

If someone wants to kill someone they will use anything!Guns aren't the problem..people are!If you have a history of violence then no gun for you.Simple as that.But you can't take everybody's guns away,it's not fair!



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
Ahh, I see that you live in England where gun control has really had a great effect hasn't it? How's that working out for you folks over there? I heard it really had a great effect on the ilegal importation and use of ilegal firearms on your streets (sarcasm off)


It's working fantastically over here.

My city was renowned nationwide for supposedly being the ''gun crime capital'' of Britain. We had about 5 people shot dead in one year. 5 people murdered in one year by guns in an urban conglomeration of between 600,000-800,000 caused my city to be labelled as ''dangerous'' by the red-topped gutter-press.

In my city alone, there have been two cases in recent years where someone who was caught with a handgun was tried, convicted and sentenced to 5+ years in prison. In one other case, a man was sentenced to 27-years in prison because he had a loaded weapon !

Yes, gun control has had a great effect in Britain, to an extent where, statistically, I would be twice as likely to die from an accidental gunshot wound in the USA as I would from an intentional gunshot wound in the UK.

There's absolutely no realistic, statistical risk that I'll ever be a victim of gun crime in Britain, so I feel sorry for Americans and, to a lesser extent, Canadians, who have to quiver away in fear every time they go out in public !

This whole ''packing heat'' concept is totally bizarre to us... ''Oh, hang on a minute, just checking: I've got my front-door key, car keys, wallet, phone, and...er... yeah, my gun, just in case someone shoots me''... Say wut ??!!


Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
At no time in any of your silly comparisons between owning a firearm and owning chemical weapons did you come remotely close to giving LOGICAL reasons why firearms should be ilegal in Canada or the US, or contribute to the reasoning behind the stigmatizing of law abiding gun owners. Instead, you offer up insane comparisons, I think you can do better than that...


Why were my comparisons between gun-ownership and chemical weapon ownership ''silly'' ?

I don't know whether you are American, but, if you are, can you please point me to the part of your Constitution which would make the personal manufacturing of chemical or biological weapons illegal ?

The logical reasons for citizens to not carry firearms has already been firmly established. If you want me to expand on that, then I have no problem doing so. It's just that I don't want to waste my time going into too much detail when my comments will be buried midway between a forest of words !

Besides, my original comment was questioning another poster's philosophical take on this issue; namely, that he did not appreciate someone else telling him what he could or couldn't own.


Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
I also heard that over in the UK in some places they have even banned knives, whats next, pointy sticks and stones? lmao.


Damn right we ban knives over a certain length.

Again, something else that is working admirably... Any intelligent person will choose not to carry a 4-inch+ blade with them, otherwise they will get a custodial sentence.

Let's have a look here: if some character wants to mug me, then I know almost certainly that he hasn't got a gun, and it's highly likely that he hasn't got any blade larger than a pen-knife on him.


Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
Many Canadians and Americans don't expect people living in a nanny state like England to understand the reasons for owning firearms, afterall, you're entire populous is under close watch by big brother and it's mass array of camera's keeping track of your every move, how does that feel?


I admit that Britain does have an element of ''nanny state'' PC nonsense going on here, but I can assure you that - after reading a number of news threads on ATS - we've got absolutely nothing on the USA !

Seriously, they have Political Correctness as a national religion !


I would strongly urge you to look up the facts regarding CCTV in Britain. I can walk miles and miles without ever being caught on camera. The vast majority of cameras are owned by private businesses.

Sadly, uncultured and ignorant remarks about this issue from outsiders with an axe to grind are two a penny.

This is getting old... Please try something more original and factually accurate.


Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
In essence, if the poop ever hits the fan and your populous is forced to defend itself from a tyrannical out of order government in the future, you are all up poop creek with no paddle.


Yes, just as if your government unleashes chemical or biological weapons on you, you'll be able to defend yourself against them, won't you ?

A despotic government murdering their own civilians by dirty-bombs and chemical warfare. Yeah, those ''pea-shooters'' are really going to come in handy.



Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
But I guess you all must trust your governments over there fairly well, because after all, look at all the rights you have handed over to them over the years.


''Rights'' ? What are you talking about ?

We haven't handed over any rights, because there's no such thing as innate rights. The concept of ''rights'' is something that is neutral and subjective. It's really only backward-ass types who think that ''rights'' were bestowed upon them by some uncorroborated external source.

No ''Creator'' endowed anybody with ''rights'', so I'd recommend getting your thinking cap back on !


edit on 13-5-2011 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
In reality, I don't even think that the large majority of people living in the inner cities in this country understand the FAC process to begin with, nevermind forming an EDUCATED opinion that Canada ever needed such a thing as the liberal parties gun registry. I'd be willing to bet 90% of Canadians living in those same major urban centres don't have the slightest idea about the paper work, proof of good citizenship standing, mental background checks, firearms safety courses and other obstacles prospective gun owners have to go through to aquire an FAC in Canada. Thats just for rifles and shotguns, nevermind the handgun ownership process. I'd be willing to bet, when it comes to firearms, most ignorant uneducated Canadians think that anyone off the street can just walk into Bass Pro Shops and purchase a rifle; I'd put money on it.


You're absolutely right; it's a system of priviledge here. Priviledge; the exact words used to describe obtaining a PAL license from the mouth of both Chief Firearms Officers of BC. Despite near perfect scores in my training for both non-restricted and restricted, they screwed me around for years because 1) I trained for it when I was 16 and applied for it at 19, and 2) some highups at my highschool didn't like me very much and destroyed my entire reputation with the government by claiming I have mental problems (I have documentation proving otherwise, but the government obviously doesn't care because the alarms were raised once).

The firearms registration system is a farce, and the people in charge are a joke. RCMP run it; if you don't get along with them, or if you think more radically than other Canadians, then you don't get to legally own firearms. Period.


WatchRider-
Tell me about it!
I have some cop coming around my house to 'check the storage' of my shotgun (legally held) even though the storage for it's already ok and approved!


There's a very simple solution for that. Cite the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms where it states you have the right against arbitrary search and seizure. If they still press the issue, hire a lawyer and sue those bastards.


TheComte-
So, I guess the answer is no, you have no statistics to prove what you are saying. I thought as much. I just gave several examples of gun crimes committed by formerly "law-abiding citizens" with rifles. What do you do? Completely ignore them, just like most Conservatives do when they are confronted with the truth


I take it that you've never taken the CFSC (and/or CRFSC), because you get all of that information covered. You are provided with statistics on gun deaths in Canada, and the instructor usually describes stories of gun deaths (whether suicide or accident) to educate trainees.

In fact, I would recommend you take the training even if you don't ever want the license. It will enlighten you.


The only joke here is your assertion of 99% of murders are inner city and gang related.


Dunno where you're from, but I would say that at least 95% of gun murders in BC are gang related, and the rest are isolated cases. You would have to be extremely naive to believe that by restricting or banning legal gun ownership, that it will somehow cut down on deaths by guns. If you really want to shoot someone, then you can easily find an unregistered gun to do it- the gun registry system cannot cover all guns; IN FACT, it bolsters competition between the legal gun market and illegal gun acquisition.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Gun laws only effect good people.

Anybody who will kill someone won't care about the gun law so who does it effect?The law's not made for criminals because criminals don't give a crap!



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:47 AM
link   
First of all lets be clear on one thing, when I refer to guns I am refering to the 'long type' of guns that are mainly used here in Canada for hunting, skeet shooting and as a tool for farmers and people in the wilderness when camping or at the cottage. I am not refering to handguns as this entire topic is to do with how our Canadian liberal party created gun registry has wasted BILLIONS of tax payer dollars making honest law abiding citizens register long guns. It has a been a complete and utter useless waste of money. Simply put, it was meant to appease the voter base in the inner cities, you know, liberal feel good legislation that does nothing to tackle the true problem at hand, inner city gun crimes comitted by gangs.



My city was renowned nationwide for supposedly being the ''gun crime capital'' of Britain. We had about 5 people shot dead in one year. 5 people murdered in one year by guns in an urban conglomeration of between 600,000-800,000 caused my city to be labelled as ''dangerous'' by the red-topped gutter-press.




Yes, gun control has had a great effect in Britain, to an extent where, statistically, I would be twice as likely to die from an accidental gunshot wound in the USA as I would from an intentional gunshot wound in the UK.


I would love to see some statistics backing up this statement that you present, because everything that I have read, seen and heard on the BBC over the years points towards a very large importation of Russian made handguns from the North African coast into Great Britain. All that I have seen so far points towards your system as being fundementally flawed and biased towards law abiding citizens who wish to own guns. I have traveled to Britain many times as I have family that live in Manchester, my uncle works for the Police in Manchester (Go United!) and I have heard first hand from him last summer the problems of the importation of ilegal firearms into his area of operations, especially amongst the more organized gangs in the area. Granted, your average thug is not as likely to be carrying an expensive handgun, I was told that a Russian made makarov pistol retails for roughly 300 to 500 GB Pounds on the street.

Your own Olympic shooting team can't even practice in thier own country and must practice abroad, I think that says a mouthfull, don't you?




This whole ''packing heat'' concept is totally bizarre to us... ''Oh, hang on a minute, just checking: I've got my front-door key, car keys, wallet, phone, and...er... yeah, my gun, just in case someone shoots me''... Say wut ??!!


It's purely a cultural difference, that's all. Americans hold dear to them thier bill of rights and they should as all they need to do is look to the north to Canada where gun owners rights have been eroded by lefty do-gooders for the past 50 years. I admire Americans when it comes to standing up for certain freedoms such as gun rights as us Canadians could learn a thing or two about cultural and historical preservations.



Why were my comparisons between gun-ownership and chemical weapon ownership ''silly'' ?


You are drawing comparisons between something completely absurd and completely ilegal here in Canada and I would imagine the US with something that is fun to do on weekends, like shooting skeet or going hunting with friends.



Damn right we ban knives over a certain length. Again, something else that is working admirably... Any intelligent person will choose not to carry a 4-inch+ blade with them, otherwise they will get a custodial sentence.


Wow, you sound so compliant and so naive when it comes to your government, very 'sheep' like, almost like you are being led to the slaughter with your eyes closed, it's actually quite scary my friend. Do most people in your country find it *OK* that the government dictates to them what size knife they can take camping with them on the weekends? Do you have any idea how absurd that sounds to people living in North America? It's almost as if you need a governemnt to *TELL* you what is right and what is wrong. I don't know about anyone else, but if I want to take a machete with me camping to clear out the brush for my campsite, it sure as hell aint any buisness of the governments what size the blade is!



I would strongly urge you to look up the facts regarding CCTV in Britain. I can walk miles and miles without ever being caught on camera. The vast majority of cameras are owned by private businesses.


Really, that's interesting, however I don't buy it and you are going to have a heck of a tough time selling that argument to someone who has been to London, who has been to Manchester, who has been to Liverpool... I have seen them with my own eyes while walking the streets. Your government currently has deployed more CCTV camera's than communist China! This is all documented fact freely available to anyone who goes looking for it, it's even admitted by your own government as one the greatest tools it has in the "war against terror" as they can track anyones movements thoughout a city like London.

First hit in google.

www.dailymail.co.uk...




Yes, just as if your government unleashes chemical or biological weapons on you, you'll be able to defend yourself against them, won't you ?


I would hope that during an internal civil war that the military that owns such weapons would do it's duty and side with the voice of the people rather than an out of control government, but Canada doesn't own such weapons, so no need to worry there mate. But at least those of us who are armed would have a fighting chance by retreating to the wilderness and employing the use of guerilla fighting tactics. That area opens up an entire whole different subject about strong militias that are well educated in the use of such guerilla tactics; a very good subject I might add and something us Canadians could learn a thing or two about as well.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join