Long gun registry Cont.

If anyone wants to come up to Northern Ontario and explain why we shouldn't have semi-automatic hunting rifles we've owned and made use of for a long time, I'm sure the rod and gun club people here would provide you the opportunity to address the locals.

And for what it's worth,  the Liberals' whacko gun laws were never popular in much of Northern and western Canada. Sorry, that's just the way it is. The Liberals were thrown out of government for many reasons, and I suppose this is but one of them. They should have thought to consider what most Canadians want and not what they believed we want in a paternalistic manner as usual. Phony majorities don't mean much from one election to the next with FPTP. It's not a good measure of the government's popularity in general.'

Homelessness and vast inequalities across Canada exploded under the Liberals. They didn't care about that though, and now they're on the outside looking in where they belong.  

Joey, I grew up in a rural area, back when guns were simply kept in the basement and being responsible meant that you didn't leave your guns loaded and stored the ammunition separately.  It was perfectly normal to have 5 or 6 guns in the house. It wasn't uncommon to see stop signs on country backroads shot full of holes.  I remember being in grade 7 or 8, listening to other kids brag about how they blew small animals apart with shotguns.  And yes, I remember when FAC's came into being and the outrage and angst that it prompted.  So, spare me the lecture.

Saying the gun registry targets rural hunters is no different than saying that handgun registries target urban target shooters or car registries target car owners.  A registry is going to affect the people who own that which is registered.  That's the whole point.

Here are a few facts that you might not know:

1. On a per capita basis, residents of large cities are less likely than those of smaller cities and rural areas to be the victim of homicides. 
2. In 2008, while homicide rates were decreasing in large cities, they increased by 25% in smaller cities and rural areas.

Source: Statistics Canada

So, maybe people who argue that crime is just a big city problem should think again.

Fidel:  If you've sunk to the depths of quoting a wingnut like Gary Mauser, you're on your own, pal.

Ranger:  Please don't mangle my posts.  If you can't figure out how to use quotes and won't be bothered to ask your kids for help, don't quote me!

The gun registry is a ruse for the two old line parties to avoid discussing the real issues. Ontario and Quebec have had the strictest gun laws of any province before the Libranos were exposed for kick-back and graft way of governing, which they were rightful to be suprised by the Gomery inquiry since crooked and unaccountable governments in Ottawa are rarely punished.

No more bullshit! No more bullshit! No more bullshit!

And I think some of us would like nothing better than if the only political issues ever discussed in our newz rags were gun registry, separate school funding, and how theocratic feudalists in Afghanistan are winning the phony war using unregistered rifles. Total Bliss.

That's Fidel and revolutionaries have guns. The worms haven't tried anymore Bay of Pigs invasions lately. And it's a good thing, because Cubans are ready to defend the revolution at all times!

And it was a shame that Allende refused to pass out rifles to the government workers and supporters in general. Things might have turned out differently in the 1970's.

Viva La Revolucion! 

Well there you have it, the rest of us and our traditions, heritage and hobbies need to just pack it in, tolerance it seems, is a one way street when you drive on the left.

It's too bad free dominion wasn't an equal opportunist extremist site, you would fit right in.  You don't see that though, because your beliefs are the right beliefs, right?

The arrogance is incredible, im tempted to laugh, but then the pathetic reality brings me down to earth, I would weep for the Canada that will be when people like you get to make policy, but then we already have the registry. For now.

The above emotion-laden post, on a progressive board, is about keeping rifles at home without having to fill out messy forms.

Someone should put this in a time capsule. No future generation will believe it otherwise.

Thats all you have left? But then, you haven't really had much to begin with, and yes this is a progressive board, isn't the truth a part of being progressive? Your snarky comments are really all you have.  Your beliefs are the right beliefs, right? No exceptions right? How wonderful it must be to have attained such a level of perfection.

You are right, this isn't your Canada.

Is that all you have left?  A statistic that I've already demonstrated means SFA and some half-assed illogical arguments?

The workers begged Allende to hand out rifles when they knew the fascistas were plotting against them. Small business owners and the well to do joined in fascist solidarity with banging of pots and pans in the streets while Allende's people marched by.

And thousands of government workers were arrested, tortured, and many joined the ranks of the desaparecidos.

As long as we have Alberta premiers writing college essays praising the likes of god damned Pinochet, they can come pluck the hunting rifle from my cold dead hands. The Shawinigan strangler, Paul Martin and the rest of those sob's can go straight to hell with their liberal-fascist gun registry.

No first came Weimar Republic's new gun laws in 1928. Nazis finished the job.

Without the gun registry people owning long guns still have to apply for licences, tags and outdoors cards. I don't see why people think Canada will be the equivalent of the wild west.

Handgun registry is still on in our Northern Puerto Rico while they continue to be smuggled into the country past hypnogogic border bobbies, and especially whenever they wobble for benefits, decent working conditions and living wages.

And there will be no bank representatives in Canada offering people brand new rifles after they open savings accounts. Bowling for Columbine was a Michael Moore movie mostly about the USSA not Bananada.

But if Canadians really do desire to be more like Amerikkka, they should continue voting Liberal and Tory and vice versa. Our two old line parties will continue pauperizing Canada right on schedule.

Scary and unnverving to me - comparing filling out a postcard form for your rifle to the Third Reich is absolutely beyond the pale and a complete insult to Holocaust survivors, just for starters.  I guess the requirement to license your vehicle was from Mussolini...

You think it's more beyond the pale to compare vehicle registration to the gun registry than it is to compare the gun registry to the Nazis???

"First they came for the gun owners, but I did not speak out because I was not a gun owner..."

I grew up in the country. My brother shot rabbits in the eye. (we ate them so no damage to the body)

And I know all about how nuts people in small towns and rural areas are.

I was one of them.

This was another example of Harper's tactical superiority - creating some non-existent chasm between rural and urban - and defeating the politically brain-dead Ignatieff and Layton, both of whom were too cowardly and confused to tell their MPs: "Vote no, or fuck off out of this caucus."

Harper's pathetic "EI reform" was equally successful in causing his opponents to run around like beheaded fowl.

You should be ashamed of falling prey to this obvious tactic.

Of course, it was the Libranos whose over-cooked federal accounting books Denis Dessautels threatened not to rubberstamp not so long ago.  I think the Libranos couldnt be blamed for thinking ahead to kgb'ing all the gun owners in Canada after thieving from the worker's fund to the tune of $48 billion. They were prolly thinking that only a street rebellion could restore law and order in our Northern Panama at the time. Gotta hand it to them for wanting to CIA everyone's gun stashes while they robbed us blind.

Where I grew up, in a rural farming community 350 miles north of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, pretty much every home had (and still has) guns...usually multiple guns.

I wonder why the streets and countryside weren't (and aren't) awash with blood?

You don't get it, do you? This is about the registry. There is no rational reason why people should go looney about registering their firearms. This is a well-financed campaign to create a phoney divide on a non-issue between urban and rural Canadians. For progressive people to play into that division is little short of criminal.

Just look at the nonsense here - "filling out forms- sheesh!!!!!!", and "next come the Nazis to kill us all!!!!!", and "it's those Liberals!!!!!!", and "just because women's groups want it doesn't mean it's right!!!!" and "it once cost $2B and I can't sleep nights thinking about that!!!!!!!!!" - so much so that Ignatieff and Layton lie down and say "ok, I yield, put me out of my misery!!!" If this doesn't scare you, I'm not sure what will.

Our hunting rifles were licenced and legal before the Libranos came along. What's the fuss? Why should anyone think the Libranos gave two shits about law and order when they were the biggest crooks since Lyin Brian?

Why not register all Catholics and Jews, socialists and union leaders in a federal database while they're at it? Everyone says their cars and cats are registered, so why not do things right?

The long gun registry was a way for the Liberals to appear to be improving public safety without actually getting tough on criminals while they crooked and robbed the taxpayers, the unemployed, and were basically arrogant bastards in government to the very end.

They created a database of law abiding citizens who will likely be the first to be intruded on by soldiers & police if there's ever another October Crisis. And the Shawinigan strangler knew all about false flag terror when he was PET's muscle at the time.

You can count me out of Fidel's "socialist" utopia of Catholic schools and guns for all.

Afraid not. I'm just a worker trying to get along in life.

Love to hear it. It hasn't made an appearance on this board. Ever.

Didn't he don a Nazi uniform and declare his support for Hitler so that he could continue his academic career? My apologies if I have him mixed up with someone else.

I have nothing whatsoever against guns. I do, however, believe they must be strictly controlled and regimented, so that any deliberate or accidental harm flowing from them is reduced to as close to zero as possible. And in the balance between potential harm and liberty, I would happily weigh in on the side of restriction. I also don't favour private ownership of firearms - I would prefer that they be rented to licenced users engaged in legitimate pursuits (hunting, sports shooting, etc.). Not "self-defence", for example.

I'd rather that guns be abolished than capitulate to the kind of ugly sentiments that oppose gun control. The day that women say, "it's not an issue any more", I'll maybe reconsider. Until then, to "drop the whole gun control thing" would be treachery and betrayal.

Check out the statements in the Activism thread, including the YWCA Canada condemnation of Bill C-391.

I think you did all the mangling pretty much on your own... you are a hoot!

You're referring to the Executive Director of the Yellowknife YWCA as a "Liberal"?? Because she supports the long gun registry (just as the NDP officially does, by the way)? Well, I guess that's a step up from calling babblers "Liberals", but it's a tad bizarre, no?

What about the handgun registry, RANGER? Should that be abolished too?

:

Gee RANGER, I thought I was asking a simple question.

You are quite correct: handguns are either restricted or prohibited. But under current legislation, if a handgun is in your possession, you must register it.

So my question is: Do you agree with that registry?

Here's my concern, RANGER: I've tried to absorb all the arguments against the long gun registry (mainly that it's expensive; it doesn't prevent gun crime; it's unreliable and can actually confuse the situation for police; it's difficult and time-consuming for users; it can lead to confiscation in the future; it's unnecessary) - and I honestly don't see where all these same criticisms, without exception, couldn't be applied just as well to the obligation to register handguns.

If that's correct, then logically, if Canadians agree with abolishing the long run registry, why wouldn't they also support the elimination of the requirement to register handguns when someone proposes that next?

RANGER, I agree. Handguns are more of a concern, for all the reasons you've said. The part I'm missing is why they need to be "registered". How does that prevent gun crime; how does that prevent criminals getting a hold of them by illicit means; how does that help the police in their work?

Those individuals who would conceal handguns, or use them in crimes, will most certainly not register them (agreed?), will likely obtain them unlawfully (agreed?) - so the registry will overwhelmingly show lawfully-obtained handguns owned by law-abiding citizens.

I don't want to harp on this, but I'm trying to understand the logic. Why would anyone who opposes long-gun registry defend handgun registry?

To address this point, the people that go through all the lawfull channels will in very high percentages have there guns properly stored and dismantled without ammunition around it and in a gun safe or locker, criminals access out of much easier places like glove compartments, these are the situations police need help with.

Many officers would question this point of view, this officer who chooses to be anonymous gives his perspective:

I am a peace officer with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and am currently posted to the xxxxxxxxxx Detachment. One of my current responsibilities is to train new cadets that have recently graduated from Depot Division by furthering their "hands on" training in the field. I am very concerned about this new Bill regarding firearms registration. I am concerned that if it is not passed in the House that more Mounties may face the same fate as the two young men did within this last month. This firearms registration must be abolished once and for all! I find that I have to deprogram every cadet that I train when it comes to CFRO checks and their reliability in regards to officer safety.

One dark evening, myself and a newly graduated cadet had to visit a residence of someone suspected of a violent crime. The cadet told me, rather proudly, that they had conducted a CFRO check on the house and that it showed that there were no firearms present, so we would not have to worry. I scolded his ignorance and naivety. I told him to stop and think about that for a moment. I said, "Do you honestly think that someone who is already living a criminal lifestyle and is in possession of firearms has any intention of registering them?" I told him to never place any faith in the registry and most of all, never trust that notion that just because nothing is registered to an individual then an officer's safety is insured. Conversely also, do not ever believe that just because someone has a firearm registered that they will never use it in the commission of an offence! It does not matter if a gun is registered, if someone is bent on crime they will use a registered or non-registered gun. If no gun is available, they will use something else.

In my evaluation, the registry only causes more criminal code infractions (before the amnesty) as police query law abiding citizens' guns to see if they are registered only to find out that they may not be - in spite of the claims that the owner did in fact attempt to register them; or the information on the registration certificate is incorrect, etc. making the gun owner appear negligent.

The gun registry places police officers' lives at risk. The gun registry offers a false sense of security. The gun registry is making criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens. The gun registry is eating up resources that the RCMP and every other municipal or first nation force desperately need. The gun registry consumes valuable time for the average police officer on the street who has real crime to fight. Saying that the guns are the problem in this society is like saying pens are the cause of spelling errors, or that cars are the cause of drunk driving, or like saying fast food restaurants are the cause of obesity.

When will common sense prevail? People need to be held accountable for their actions - whether with firearms, alcohol, vehicles, etc. That is what the Conservatives did with the Liberals when in opposition and then on a larger scale once elected.

The gun registry brings justice into disrepute. It is an absolute waste of taxpayers money. The registry does nothing to fight the crime issues in this country. Please do everything possible to make sure that this Bill passes.

Many of the stats the pro registry folks put out are very twisted and misleading hence unconvincing, when you can provide stats on what's flowing through the border we can sit down and to proper corelation about anything concerning the registry, I hate to break it to you but alot of gals are cops and I've spoken to many personally that are not as well and they are not shedding any tears over the death of this Liberal government mistake.

Brian if you wish to self-identify as nuts, go ahead, (though I don't care for the term). Will you please not include the entire rural and small town demographic, whom I have no doubt are as diverse both in their views and in their mental health as any other group.

Loretta, thanks for the logic, but it's wasted here unfortunately. The only ones that need persuasion are those MPs (and their parties) who gave Harper what he wants. The organizations lobbying for effective and stringent firearms control need our encouragement to carry on.

You can't figure it out, can you???  You screwed up the postings, including the OP and message #2 and you don't know how to fix them.  You can't properly match up the quotes and yet they let you use guns?

I'm so glad I don't live anywhere near you.  Somebody should warn your neighbors.

Regarding the MacLean's article, given that they are right-wing sympathizers on just about every other topic, why would anyone think that this would be an exception? There are other sources of information and, obviously, stats change from year to year, which is the point of saying that the registry and licensing program work to reduce gun violence.

Regarding a crazed-with-anger male spouse, I would rather take my chances with a knife 'cause perhaps I could outrun that or strangling but it's pretty hard to outrun a rifle. And, let's face it, it's not just spouses that are dealing with gun violence, it's also children or co-workers.

The point about the numbers of women killed through gun violence is irrelevant -- it merely shows that men are killing each other, and all indications are that these killings are primarily done with smuggled handguns. I have, as you can see above, no problem with increasing border vigilance regarding the smuggling of handguns. I gather you don't have a problem with continued requirements for licensing of those who have handguns and registration of them, despite the fact that the killings haven't stopped even though it's a requirement?

My concern with any MP supporting this bill is that, because eliminating the registry is a lynch-pin issue in a platform that also includes turning back the clock regarding same-sex marriage, choice concerning abortion and a number of other policies, both social and fiscal, I see it as supporting the Conservatives, writ large. While I understand the pressure rural MPs are facing from the gun lobby and their minions, it's important not to let the Conservatives continue to make progress on their agenda, (where it can be avoided, confidence bills notwithstanding) and to avoid letting them split the opposition with this issue.

What does being internet savvy have to do with handling a gun? Would you hire a computer geek to fix your plumbing?

Hunters, farmers, and target shooters enroll in safe gun handling courses and must pass written and practical exams. But anyone can post their two cents worth on the web.

If they can pass the written exam, how come it is so hard to register?  Someone mentioned earlier that some of the people in fear of the registry could not write.

Do people have a james bond complex when they get a licence?

After all a gun licence is a (restricted) licence to kill.  Do they feel all secretive and spy like?  Would registering the killing machine blow their cover?  

I cannot understand the mentality.  I mean, look at the military.  Do they have to keep account of where their guns are?

Of course they do.

 And the stupidity of the opposition to the registry is mind boggling.  They ARE going to improve the info sharing between licencing depts and the police.  Thats the nature of info technology.  So in a couple of years,  (if the politicians allow the police to do their jobs) they will have that information that you guys try to hide anyway.    So in as little as 3 years time, you guys have TOTALLY LOST this stupid fight.

I think it is a great shame that these alfalfa males are so easily played by Harper and his cronies.   You can strut around with your semi automatic, burn your registration forms and feel big.   But why do you have to do the theatrics to feel like a man?  

Maybe it is the reminants of some apeine mating dance where the homonoids ran around with big sticks to scare other males? And impress the females?

Do you not get it?  The women here are not impressed by it.  Most of them are disgusted. 

Read back over some of the paranoid shit that you ( the gun owners) wrote.

Isn't it strange that grown men (with guns) are so scared?  What the hell is the matter with you?           You got the effing guns!

I hate paperwork too but I have to do it. 

And if I cannot do it, I hire someone to help me. 

You  hove to buy the gun to have it, right?  If you do not want your "privacy" violated or invaded, how about do not buy a gun?   And believe it or not, the Canadian government has to weigh up your "privacy" against the safety of its agents.  And it has to worry about protecting other citizens against machines designed to kill  too.   It is not all about you.

Fidel, you keep on bringing up the Liberals.  They are irrelevant to the current debate.  Brian has raised excellent questions and you're dancing around them.  Everyone here seems to agree that licensing is OK, although it is a much more intrusive procedure than registration.  We all seem to agree that the hand gun registry is OK, although it is intrinsically no different from the long gun registry.

But when it comes to the long gun registry, suddenly there are excuses galore.  Why?  This makes no sense.

And I'm still waiting for an answer to my question.  Do you want to be out hunting with someone who lacks the intelligence to line up quotes?

Well someone keeps bringing up the gun registry boondoggle, which was a Liberal government creation. If a phony majority of Canadians don't think as highly of the Liberals enough to elect them, then how can the Liberals think enough of their own gun registry to actually vote against the Tories now scrapping the gun registry? Obviously the gun registry was inconsequential for the Liberals real agenda for propping up the Tories and maintaining conservative elitism in Canada.

Well if licencing is more intrusive than registration, then why not just go with licencing? Why pile on another layer of expensive bureaucracy for law abiding gun owners?

If you insist on receiving an answer, why don't you register this last question with babble moderators? Maybe they can help you. I think you're just clever enough not to though.

Apparently new gun regulations in the states stopped military personnel from carrying firearms on bases. Maj. Hasan was shooting ducks in a barrel on November 5th until a civilian police officer was able to take him down with his own weapon. Handguns are so easy to conceal, and far too many are brought into Canada illegally regardless of the handgun registry in place.

Some of the regestry haters mentioned that only 2% of  gun murders were committed with registered long guns. They neglected to mention these statistics.  in 1991 there were 271 murders with firearms of which 103 were committed with long guns.

                      1995  there were 176 of which                                    61 were with  long guns

                      2008     there were 200  of which                                34 were with long guns

So regardless of the 2% number  it could be argued from the figures that the registry is saving in the region of 50 people per year from the wrath of long gun owners and users.   Are 50 lives per year worth 3 to 7 million dollars?

Seems that it is a pretty cheap way of saving lives.  $100,000  per life saved from long gun users?

And if you put it that way, maybe the licence fee should be a whole lot more.

Why should I pay extra  tax because buddy cannot keep his gun out orf the way of criminals?

Or because buddy has sore knuckles from the last time he beat up his wife so this time he uses the shotgun?

Forget the 2% number,  how many LICENCED long guns are used to commit murder per year?

Seems the licencing people are allowing way too many shady and downright careless people have guns.

And  from this thread, many would conclude, way way way too many  mentally unstable people too.

This is disgusting.  Two babblers are persistent in calling other babblers too unintelligent or mentally unstable to own guns.  No wonder it's such an acrimonious issue.  I was actually reading good argument for the registry and then it all got blocked out by these sanctimonious attacks. 

Probably one of the most irrational posts I've ever read on babble.  Why should anything be controlled??? "Accidents happen and tragedies happen"??? Try telling that to the relatives of the Polytechnique victims and any other person impacted by gun violence, especially women.  What an utterly callous and disrespectful thing to say.  So many of those tragedies could have been prevented by strong licensing and registration provisions.  And please don't call me "emotional" for invoking the Polytechnique massacre - I'm not the one comparing filling in a form for your gun to Nazi Germany or claiming that registering long guns will destroy the rural way of life.

We can't legislate all wrong behaviour or harmful attitudes out of existence - tragically, there will always be hateful and misogynist individuals that wish to inflict harm on women and others.  I want to make sure we do everything possible to keep those kinds of folks from getting guns - I guess I'm a corporate lackey for the Liberal fascist agenda, or something.  Government has a legitimate role to control the circulation of guns and to make sure every single gun owner is licensed, every gun is registered and that does not take one iota of rights away from anybody. 

I predict the idiotic Private Member's Bill that made 12 NDP MPs and Layton lose their moral compass will never see the light of day - the case for keeping the registry is compelling and Canadians will not stand for an NRA-style pro-gun agenda dominating their Parliament. 

Behaviour and attitudes don't maim and kill people, guns do.  Legislation can't abolish patriarchy but it can limit the harm caused by freely circulating guns in our society. 

Good because you also have no proof that putting a piece of paper beside a long gun would have prevented Marc Lepine from perpetrating the massacre at Ecole Polytechnique. That's not a rational argument.

What the Libranos' gun registry did do was make criminals of law abiding citizens whose long guns were already licenced and legal. And at the time Liberals were expressing false concern for vulnerable women with creating an expensive knee-jerk billion dollar gun registry bureaucracy, they were peeling tens of billions of dollars from the social transfer to Canadian provinces. The Liberals made Canada a less hospitable country for women and their children beginning with the terrible federal budget they handed down in 1995. Meanwhile, few people were concerned about the real crooks in Ottawa and the way they rolled back social spending in Canada to 1940's levels and thieving $48 billion from the worker's fund. Libranos must have concluded that the only way law and order could be restored was by street rebellion. Better make a list of all the potential armed resisters to the liberal-fascist setup they were creating at the time.

Canadians split over long-gun registry: poll

It's settled. A phony majority of Canadian are for scrapping the gun registry. All those who support FPTP should accept the results and hope the Liberals aren't elected again if they really care about women and their children's rights.

I give up. 

Peon, I shall be.

Frick, I now wish I had taken more writing courses.

I wish I had more experience and knew the references and history like you do Fidel.  I'm a young one, keep feeding me my friend.  Just no catholic stuff. 

It is not sanctimonious.  There is lots of evidence that mentally unstable people own long guns. And mentally unstable people (who were in possession of guns) have been known to post on the internet before going on a rampage.  

What makes babble inpervious to this happening?

And check patronising post no 5. Is that kosher? Or post no 6. Insulting to pro regestry people and probably first nations too.

then post no 26 from Yarg (who totally insulted womens groups in the previous thread by the way)

"The arrogance is incredible, im tempted to laugh, but then the pathetic reality brings me down to earth, I would weep for the Canada that will be when people like you get to make policy, but then we already have the registry. For now."    All that about doing a little bit of paperwork!

Then yarg in post 29 claims that their refusal to register is proof that the registry does not work!  He claims that 2% of murders with guns are done with registered long guns.  (He did not say which year or which week)  that statistic applies to. 

The records clearly show that murders with guns are less than they were in 1991 and murders with long guns are a LOT LESS than in 1991 going down from over 100 that year to 34 last year.  

That COULD be taken as proof that the long gun registry is a big success. Eh??  Anyone want to spin it?

And concider that long guns are getting more and more automatic, with laser sights and so forth,  it is incredibly strong proof that it is working!

Mysteriously, murders with long guns have been reduced from 2 a week (before the regestry) to less than one a week (after 10 years of the registery).

then, post 36 and  then post 58 sinks pretty low too.

105 is just silly. licencing is ok, registration makes me pissy.

109 why should anyting be controlled?   OK, well, civilization be damned.

and then, 110 which basically is  that I and others on the pro registry side have to be nice and sweet. dig out the statistics, refute the nonsense, and get the hard facts  and realitys brushed aside by the boys with guns time and time and time again.

(Like the amazing and totally useless  2% of murders with guns was done by registered long guns).  Nobody said what month or week or day that applied to or whether it was made up on the spot.   And the statistic, (if real ) cannot be used to prove anything. 

Except by the boys with the guns.   You cannot get the message across to them either.  The statistic (whether real or imaginary) means whatever you want it to mean.  So perfectly useless in a rational  arguement.

And speaking from the irrational corner in which they stand, that is the only way they can win.  They skirt the rules of rational debate because in a fair debate they lose  after 3 moves.  

We play dirty, because the other side only plays dirty. 

I aint a saint, so if someone is an ahole to me, I  just return the favour.

I bet if there was moderated debate on this thread, the pro gun guys would be gone real quick. And why?

Because logic is their enemy.  Some of them are no better than terrorist wannabees.

And if you think that "disgusting" go back and read some of their posts.  I play by the rules most of the time.

The 2% guys never play by the rules. They have been just as flattering as I have been. 

I would argue that they have not been coherent in their arguements.

I'll look at the rest of your post but right here is where you don't get it.  You insinuated that some babblers may be mentally unstable just by their posts here.  Are you some internet psychiatrist?

Should I turn it around on you?