Long-gun registry a must - my letter to the editor

115 posts / 0 new
Last post
rural - Francesca rural - Francesca's picture
Long-gun registry a must - my letter to the editor

http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2178914

 

Editor:

 

 

I got a speeding ticket the other day. It's a big one. Real stupid move on my part, and I should know better. I offer no excuses or justification. I've also been reflecting on it; my state of mind at the time, and what I've learned about myself and how I can make changes.

As I reflected on the incident, I noted something.

As the officer left his cruiser and walked toward me, I was already assembling the documentation he would need to see. My drivers licence, my insurance and my proof of ownership. It occurs to me, these documents serve a significant purpose.

My driver's licence verifies who I am, it demonstrates that, at some point, I was tested on my ability to drive, my understanding of the rules of the road and that the provincial government knows I drive.

My insurance is required by law. It's there to ensure others don't suffer for my mistakes that loss of property can be compensated for, etc.

The proof of ownership verifies the car is mine, I have the right to drive it, I didn't steal it (although I was driving it like I stole it, but I digress) and that it too is licensed, registered even, with the province.

Driving a car is a huge responsibility, it's not a right, it's a privilege in our community. A car, truck or any other type of vehicle is dangerous in the hands of an irresponsible person, present company included, someone who is suffering from specific illnesses and those over a certain age, they need to keep demonstrating they can operate the car safely.

So why is it when it comes to guns, it is such a hard concept to want to know who owns them, verify that the people who own them know how to operate them, and to protect the general public from misuse?

Opponents of the long gun registry harp on about the cost of setting up, as the most significant reason to dismantle it. Well the money is gone and spent, and there are many more wasteful and useless programs the government is attached to that could be and should be scrapped, so "waste" is not exactly a justifiable reason to scrap it. Now that it's up and running and being used the ongoing costs are not significant. To throw it away, wastes the entire effort.

And yes it is getting used. According to the most recent report on the registry, tabled, but not discussed in Parliament: in 2003, police officers accessed the online firearms registry an average of 1,811 times a day: by the end of September 2009, it was accessed by police an average of 10,818 times a day.

This debate is being framed as urban vs rural, but never have I seen rural needs triumph over urban: ever! So there's more to it than that. If rural had that much power, we'd have a regional transportation system, doctors and adequate education funding.

This registry is a step in the right direction of helping our police cope with domestic violence. One out of three women killed by their partners is killed with a long-gun. (Stats Canada) For a woman experiencing any form of domestic abuse, a gun in the home is an unspoken threat, a potential risk to her safety.

We need to keep this registry, we need to keep tools in the hands of our police so that more women are not killed. As we come upon the 20th anniversary of the Montreal Massacre, we reflect upon what that taught us, what preventative lessons we could learn. This registry was one of those lessons, one of the steps taken to protect women. Between 1991 and 2006, the use of shotguns and rifles in homicides declined by 65% because of stricter controls (Statistics Canada 2008).

This registry isn't about farmers and red tape, it's about women's safety and the safety of the officers who put their lives on the line, every time they respond to a domestic violence call.

Francesca Dobbyn Owen Sound

Sineed

Thanks for this RF!  

I remember going down to the University of Toronto in December 1989 and standing silently, in shock, with a large group of women, many current U of T students, thinking of these women who laid down their lives just because they wanted an education.

And now, on the 20th anniversary, the government wants to celebrate by revoking the very law that was brought in on account of these women, a law that helps keep women safe.

Bears repeating, the funds wasted were largely due to the deliberate sabotage by pro-gun groups, aided by the American NRA, clogging government fax machines with repeated spam faxes, for instance.  Your mention of urban vs rural also helps remind everybody how this government likes to rule by "divide and conquer," pitting different regions of the country against each other in order to advance an agenda I don't understand, and don't want to look at too closely.

Great letter!!

rural - Francesca rural - Francesca's picture

Thanks

 

Fidel

Sure the gun registry is a good idea if it was done right and not just a make work project for embedded old line party bureaucrats and connected friends of the party.

Who thinks Canadians need:

  1.  a national housing strategy
  2.  federally funded & regulated child care 
  3. prescription drug coverage
  4.  expanded public pensions
  5. affordable education
  6. a national dental officer
like other rich countries have? The forest for the trees.

rural - Francesca rural - Francesca's picture

we also need safety for women, we have it in part with this registry, leave it alone and move on

remind remind's picture

Thank you R-F and Sineed I cross posted a  comment of each of yours to another thread as it appears that there is a growing body of evidence indicating women are under attack as an identifiable group more and more every day....

 

yarg

rural - Francesca wrote:

we also need safety for women, we have it in part with this registry, leave it alone and move on

 

Completely and utterly wrong, as were most of the other points you tried to make.  Not all liberal ideas are good ones, or sensible ones, this is one of them.  Here is an example, our involvement in the afghanistan war, bad idea, ignoring the environment, bad idea, gun registry bad idea, it doesn't matter which side it came or is still coming from, those are bad ideas.

How many womens services could have been improved with 2 billion dollars? Or how many MRI machines would that have been? 

"There are nearly 7 million registered long-guns in Canada. Yet of 2,441 homicides recorded in Canada since mandatory long-gun registration was introduced in 2003, fewer than 2 percent (47) were committed with rifles and shotguns known to have been registered. (Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics)."

http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/media/nr/2007/nr20071116-2-eng.aspx

We could talk about gang violence but im sure those guys are just misunderstood and didn't really mean it! lets focus on the 2 percent.

As I said in another thread a piece of paper won't prevent someone from using a long gun in a crime, and people still do, albeit as an incredibly small percentage of total firearms offences (but why would that be important, the truth it seems isn't relevant), the gun used at Dawson college was registered! don't you get it yet?

 

 

 

Sineed

Why are gun people so against the notion of registering lethal weapons?????

We license our cars.  We license our dogs.  We license our cats (I'm a scofflaw - 2 unlicensed cats).  Why are guns so frigging sacred?

More guns in the community = more people getting shot.

Quote:
Access to Guns in the Home

Many research projects examining the accessibility thesis have compared homes where firearms are present with those where they are not.13 Kellerman and his colleagues, for example, concluded that the homicide of a family member was 2.7 times more likely to occur in a home with a firearm than in homes without guns. After accounting for several independent risk factors, another study concluded that keeping one or more firearms was associated with a 4.8-fold increased risk of suicide in the home.14 The risks increased, particularly for adolescents, where the guns were kept loaded and unlocked.15

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cdic-mcc/19-1/d_e.html

If you read down that same page, you'll see another article which states that the per-capita murder rate in the US with guns is fifteen times that of Canada's.

 

And there was all the deliberate malicious sabotage that caused that much-vaunted cost overrun: thousands of forms filled out wrong on purpose or from non-existent people, who subsequently had to be changed or deleted, the clogged fax machines, tying up the phones all day and crashing the switchboard.  

Quote:
"The system was built on the assumption that it would have something like a 10 per cent error rate and instead the error rate was 90 per cent. Some of that was because of the compexity of forms and some of that was deliberate" said Cukier, who's also a professor of information technology management at Ryerson University. "You'd be hard-pressed to find another program that faced such extensive efforts to undermine it."

http://www.itvendorsdirectory.ca/Online-Resources/detail.php?id=62008

Quote:
THE CFP AT WORK

NWEST provided support to an RCMP detachment after a suspect was stopped with four non-restricted “long guns” in his vehicle. The suspect was evasive when questioned, leading investigators to believe the firearms had been stolen. NWEST conducted CFRO checks on the recovered firearms and determined all four were registered to a local resident and not the person who was in possession of them. The registered owner, who was working out of town, was contacted by police and said that, as far as he was aware, all of his firearms were safely stored at his residence. Police attended the owner’s residence and discovered evidence confirming that his residence had been broken into and that all 16 of his long guns had been stolen. Subsequent investigation resulted in the recovery of the remaining 12 long guns from the suspect.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/rep-rap/2008-comm-rpt/sec5-eng.htm#d

Unionist

Thank you so much, Francesca and Sineed. The murders of these young women 20 years ago (and of Anastasia de Sousa so much more recently) happened in my extended neighbourhood. Our whole family will be attending commemorative events next month. Together, we must never allow the wheel of history to be turned backwards.

 

Loretta

Returning Fire on Gun Registry Critics - The Tyee, November 17, 2009.


"The recent vote is appalling. We will witness the tragic consequences of this bill." -- Dr. Carolyn Snider, Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians
A lot of people had strong opinions on last week's column opposing the vote in Parliament to kill the long gun registry, passed with all Conservative and some Liberal and New Democrat MPs voting in favour.
Today, I return fire on registry critics.

Long guns aren't a problem? In 2008 a full 17 per cent of all homicides committed using firearms were committed using rifles and shotguns -- that's 34 deaths, Statistics Canada reports.
Read more of Bill Tieleman's column in The Tyee here.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

I never know which side to take in this issue.   I kind of think it helps but not really.....if you really think about it.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

If someone's going to kill somebody they're going to do it. 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
Together, we must never allow the wheel of history to be turned backwards.

Too late! Because in the 1990's our federal Liberals turned back the clock on social spending in Canada by several decades. The UN has chided Canada on a regular basis for pulling the social safety net out from under women and children. Violence against women is said to start with poverty, and poverty is one of the root causes of domestic violence. Canada's abysmally low social assistance levels have been declared a violation of women's rights as well as children's rights. We needed rolling back the rollbacks well before the Liberals decided to spend billions on an expensive gun registry bureaucracy with illegal handguns pouring in over the border past flimsy border patrols.

RANGER

We didn't have to waste 10 years of our tax dollars on this as this 1999 paper tells us:

 

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/breitkreuzgpress/990628.html

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

I love you Fidel.  :)

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Gotta register the guns before you have to feed the masses.

rural - Francesca rural - Francesca's picture

you know if I thought for one minute they'd feed the masses with the money saved, you could convince me, but they won't, so I'll take the gun registry over a sign about a sign

Unionist

Stunning argument, counterposing the avoidance of violence and death of women to the provision of food and social services:

"Which one do you want? Control firearms, or end poverty? Can't do both, y'know! We have limited resources!"

I don't think so.

 

NewCanada NewCanada's picture

You know I have a bunch of tools in my shed that could easily kill someone, better register them with the government.

I play a lot of sports, so I guess my baseball bat, hockey sticks, pool cues, etc. should be registered with the government too, because there have been thousands of assaults on women and children with objects like these as well.

My kitchen contains 2 dozen very sharp knives, should I have them registered? What about my ice pick? The rope I have in my barn? You know I could suffocate someone with my pillow, better tell the government I have it.

The abuse of women and children cannot be tied to a long-gun registry, it can be tied to the effects of alcohol, drugs and mental illness.

If someone is going to harm another, they will use whatever object they can get their hands on. I can guarantee it won't be my shotguns with trigger-locks in a heavy duty locked cabinet! Stop wasting tax dollars on a useless piece of legislation.

PraetorianFour

I've been shooting for quite a while now. I don't hunt but I think hunting is a very important part of our economy and the ecology.

I never really understood the gun registry but was recently made more aware of it. There are actually two gun registries.

My father and I registered all our firearms when the volunteer registry came out. I remember being put off by it because the information that came back on the registry cards was constantly wrong. My address. My name. The make of the firearm, the size of the barrel. It seemed EVERYTHING had something wrong with it. Out of over a dozen firearms not a single card was perfect. I've also heard all the comments about how the registry cost over 2 BILLION dollars before even a single gun was registered. The whole system seemed poorly designed and implimented.

More about me. I'm a big believer in gun control. BIG. I think it should be much more difficult to qualify for your licence and I think the test should be more regulated (with deep background checks) Arrested for hitting your girlfriend? No gun for you. NO record of violence.

Pretty much if you show up to get your license and say ya fuck the liberals, they will pat you on the head and pass you.
I don't think we should be allowed automatic weapons and I'm very iffy on if people should be allowed to carry them on the street. CCW I think it's called. MUCH stricter punishments for criminals who use weapons.

What I was told is that the gun registry is different from when you buy a pistol lets say and you register that firearm with the Canadian Firearms people. I don't know the exact difference but apparently there is one. I'll do some research and post it if anyone is interested because I'm curious about it too.

I guess one thing [BIG thing]with the Gun registry that so many shooters hate is that it records certain weapons which if the government bans, the police come into your house and take the firearm and not reimburse the person.

I don't see how that is different from the normal registry that everyone who buys a firearm goes through but apparently there is.

I'm happy to register my firearms and they are all registered, they all have locks on them and only my wife knows the combo to the vault.

Francesca, I think the example you gave above about carrying the proper documentation is exactly what happens when someone buys a firearm however it's not the "gun registry" that is in question. Even with this registry sent to the garbage, when I or anyone else buys a firearm we will still register it with the government. Every weapon in canada should be registered. Enough with the comments about Germany being the last country to enforce weapons registration 1938 bla bla. This is freakin Canada.

I believe what they're talking about being canceled using your example Francesca is that you registered your car separately because it's a sports car.
Tomorrow you might wake up and the government decided that YOUR model of car is too fast. Too many people have been caught speeding with it and it's too dangerous so they come to your house and take your car away from you without reimbursing you the cost.

This has already happened. Often firearms get judged on how evil they look. That's like banning a car that LOOKS fast but could be in actuality one of the slowest cars on the road.

Unionist

The evil government.

Buddy Kat

The letter to the editor writer would be singing a different tune if the cop radioed in the license plate and it came back , armed and dangerous maniac...the cops would have probably killed the poor person. That's the problem with the long gun registry ..it's error prone and it could say you have way more guns than you actually have and the authority's would act accordingly. Maybe even intentionally place the error on your file.

Violence against woman is directly related to poverty...like fidel mentioned ..not guns. Guns are about the only thing a government will listen too when the people are fed up with a corrupt and dictorial government, via revoloution, that or a financial penalty so huge they have no choice. That's the libs main worry at the time , not sexism.

Yes it's sad that people or gangs who should not be allowed to have guns can easily get them and commit crimes with them. That too can be linked to poverty and unemployment and a rotten self serving government. Even the whole gang thing can be directly related to failed drug wars and police brutality and force over the years. The police or government always throw the first stone and the gangs follow suit. For every action there is a reaction.

 

 

 

Unionist

The Liberals were merely reacting to a powerful movement, spearheaded by feminists, to get people out of harm's way through firearms. The notion that Libs or Cons want to confiscate people's weapons so they can avert the Revolution is worthy of some ultra-right U.S. militias. I'm distressed to see the extent to which such delusional theses appear on this board.

RANGER

Buddy Kat wrote:

The letter to the editor writer would be singing a different tune if the cop radioed in the license plate and it came back , armed and dangerous maniac...the cops would have probably killed the poor person. That's the problem with the long gun registry ..it's error prone and it could say you have way more guns than you actually have and the authority's would act accordingly. Maybe even intentionally place the error on your file.

 

This was a worry for some folks in a conversation I was having, what if Dad or Grandpa is having a heart attack and the computer says he's got a couple of hunting rifles? do paramedics delay until cops say "coast is clear" (because some might assume there may be a "nut job" in the house?) those seconds could mean life or death to a law abiding citizen.the potential is there for gang members on the street  getting medical attention much faster than people that abide our laws. 

PraetorianFour

Their are two ways to buy firearms.
Illegally and Legally.

Illegally is pretty much a no brainer. You get caught after a crime or by accident.

Does registering weapons prevent violent crime? Say crime against women? Yes and no.

It is more of a matter of someones actual firearm licence than which guns are registered. A shot gun can kill just as easily as a handgun or rifle.
Me registering a gun won't prevent squat from happening. The gun is still in my hands, I still have intent to commit a crime. I'm going to commit that crime and a piece of paper saying I own an assault rifle won't change anything.

The feeling I get is that many believe this will prevent crime, I think deter is a better word. I'll explain.

What WILL prevent violcence against woman [As seems to be a popular theme] is the actual issuing of my licence in the first place. DO a background check on me. Do I have a violent past? Have I been arrested for gang activity? Domestic abuse? If yes then refuse me a licence for ALL guns unless it's reviewed and pardoned. Maybe I got in a fight at a bar when I was 18, I'm 35 now and have a clean record, kept out of trouble since.

If I already have my licence and I commit a violence related crime, have firearms agency revoke my licence.

Registering certian types of guns so the government can turn around and ban JUST those guns down the road isn't going to save lives. If I want to go on a shooting rampage and I can't legally buy an AK47 fine I'll just buy one illegally at a 3rd of the price.
The government incorrectly tries to lable some firearms as more dangerous than others.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
The Liberals were merely reacting to a powerful movement, spearheaded by feminists, to get people out of harm's way through firearms.

 

Interesting. Marc Lepine commits mass murder in Quebec, people say "something must be done", the Long Gun Registry is the result, and history paints the Liberals as responsive and caring and having done something of value.

 

A few thugs fighting over a cell phone murder a girl on Yonge St. on Boxing day, people say "something must be done" and when Jack Layton suggests that in addition to social programs, maybe the thugs with the guns should go to jail, so as to keep the people out of harm's way, he's painted as the greatest sell-out since Bob Rae.

Unionist

Snert wrote:

Quote:
The Liberals were merely reacting to a powerful movement, spearheaded by feminists, to get people out of harm's way through firearms.

 

Interesting. Marc Lepine commits mass murder in Quebec, people say "something must be done", the Long Gun Registry is the result, and history paints the Liberals as responsive and caring and having done something of value.

Perhaps you misunderstood. I said the Liberals were "merely reacting". They had no plan to reduce violence against women. They responded, and created this registry which was inadequate and a boondoggle (why not make your friends some money off it!?). They were not responsive nor caring nor is the registry of any tremendous value. The call to eliminate the registry, however, comes from the most cynical and base motives on the part of the Conservative party, and from self-serving political opportunism on the part of some other MPs. It is indefensible on any moral ground.

As for Layton's overnight crime kick following the Kreba shooting, it shows clearly what principle and its absence are about. The feminists who demanded stricter gun control (among many other measures to stem violence) were targeting guns. Layton's tough-on-crime stand, like Harper's and Ignatieff's,  targets (primarily) individuals. If we rid society of the bad apples, life will be good. With friends like that, we need to still keep looking for friends.

faustus

It seems to me the opponents of the registry are really scared and will stoop to almost any argument to reach their goal. I think they have a base paranoid fear that the government will just outlaw every gun eventually, and forcing registration is just the first step. 

As far as the 2 Billion dollar argument goes. I really don't buy it. How much did it cost us to create a system where automobiles are registered throughout the country? I think if I added it up it would probably amount to more than 2 billion, but I don't see anyone suggesting we abolish it to get more MRI's or eliminate poverty.

Maybe there are legitimate reforms that need be considered for the registry, like fair compensation for seizure of banned weapons, or grandfathering the new system on a gradual basis. But abolishing the whole registry? I'm just staggered at the stupidity of that, and the apparent popular support for abolishing the registry has left me rather stunned.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
Perhaps you misunderstood.

Some, I guess. You'd seemed supportive, but I don't mean to suggest you support the Libs.

But it also looks, from your response, like your concern with scrapping the registry has more to do with who wants it (the Cons!) than with the registry itself. Is the registry of sufficient value to warrant its cost?

Quote:
The feminists who demanded stricter gun control (among many other measures to stem violence) were targeting guns. Layton's tough-on-crime stand, like Harper's and Ignatieff's,  targets (primarily) individuals.

I'm not sure what's so wrong with targetting the humans.  Do our libel laws target humans, or newspaper printing presses?  If I drive drunk does my car go to jail, or do I??

RANGER

faustus wrote:

It seems to me the opponents of the registry are really scared and will stoop to almost any argument to reach their goal. I think they have a base paranoid fear that the government will just outlaw every gun eventually, and forcing registration is just the first step. 

As far as the 2 Billion dollar argument goes. I really don't buy it. How much did it cost us to create a system where automobiles are registered throughout the country? I think if I added it up it would probably amount to more than 2 billion, but I don't see anyone suggesting we abolish it to get more MRI's or eliminate poverty.

Maybe there are legitimate reforms that need be considered for the registry, like fair compensation for seizure of banned weapons, or grandfathering the new system on a gradual basis. But abolishing the whole registry? I'm just staggered at the stupidity of that, and the apparent popular support for abolishing the registry has left me rather stunned.

 

 

The stupidity came about when they got rid of the FAC program which is just another way of registering fire arms,they already had all the information and most gun owners knew this, as well as many that didn't own guns, it caused duplication and confusion, and ended up paralysed and very costly, the biggest crime of all is that law enforcement was screaming for funding to actually get the bad guys, we are paying for it now not only in our pocket books but on our streets as well. Common sense took along time to arrive to this issue.   

NewCanada NewCanada's picture

faustus wrote:

Maybe there are legitimate reforms that need be considered for the registry, like fair compensation for seizure of banned weapons, or grandfathering the new system on a gradual basis. But abolishing the whole registry? I'm just staggered at the stupidity of that, and the apparent popular support for abolishing the registry has left me rather stunned.

This isn't about banned weapons, its about already legally purchased guns, which are already registered with the government when i complete all the certification and training in the first place. Why do you people keep putting stupid comments on here about something you obviously don't know anything about in the first place.

PraetorianFour wrote:

What WILL prevent violcence against woman [As seems to be a popular theme] is the actual issuing of my licence in the first place. DO a background check on me. Do I have a violent past? Have I been arrested for gang activity? Domestic abuse? If yes then refuse me a licence for ALL guns unless it's reviewed and pardoned. Maybe I got in a fight at a bar when I was 18, I'm 35 now and have a clean record, kept out of trouble since.

If I already have my licence and I commit a violence related crime, have firearms agency revoke my licence.

These steps are already taken when it comes to becoming licenced. Why do people think that this Registry suddenly made the laws stricter or changed the way crimes are committed? the only thing the registry did was appease a bunch of sissy lobbyists and waste billions of dollars. Did it stop cops from being killed?

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/03/03/rcmpalert050303.html

No it didn"t.

On top of all of this, did no one see the illegal activity undertaken by the RCMP when personal information from the registry was given to polling company EKOS. This is just one example of the registry being abused.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Safety+minister+takes+shot+RCMP+disclo...

yarg

rural - Francesca wrote:

you know if I thought for one minute they'd feed the masses with the money saved, you could convince me, but they won't, so I'll take the gun registry over a sign about a sign

 

Thats not at all what I mean't. of course you and unionist know that, but it seems you would rather posture than deal with the facts, fact is only 2 percent of firearms homicides are committed with registered firearms, focus on the real problem. the people who have or are likely to commit an offence. Registering an inanimate object solves nothing, the registry has no impact on gun crime, the statistics used by the coalition for gun control etc. are all twisted and filled with lies. The liberals are using you, using your desire to help women, using the blood of female victims in the mortar that has built this wall of lies, fight for the truth, not for some liberal ploy to keep them elected in the cities for all eternity. 

 

Unionist

Snert wrote:

But it also looks, from your response, like your concern with scrapping the registry has more to do with who wants it (the Cons!) than with the registry itself.

Not at all. I do, however, think that when Stephen Harper is pushing in one direction, and the women's movement in another, that one should stop and reflect for a moment.

Quote:
Is the registry of sufficient value to warrant its cost?

That's a loaded [sic] question, because its cost was artificially inflated and it's now being exaggerated.

Quote:
I'm not sure what's so wrong with targetting the humans. Do our libel laws target humans, or newspaper printing presses? If I drive drunk does my car go to jail, or do I??

What's wrong with targeting humans is that it doesn't solve the problem. Not even a little bit.

 

RANGER

Harper doesn't have to do a thing,how to achieve a Conservative majority by Iggy and Rae :

 

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/liberals-get-realistic-on-gun-registry/article1368417/

 

 

 

idiots

Fidel

I think the women's movement should think long and hard about getting more of themselves into the halls of power where these kinds of decisions are made. And the largest hurdle to that happening is our obsolete electoral system and low voter turnouts.

We get one day every four years to cast a protest that counts for anything. Don't waste it and choose wisely. 

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
What's wrong with targeting humans is that it doesn't solve the problem. Not even a little bit.

 

Then why, in the two examples I gave, and in pretty much every other example I can think of, do we target the humans?

Unionist

Snert wrote:

Then why, in the two examples I gave, and in pretty much every other example I can think of, do we target the humans?

We punish, correct, rehabilitate the individuals in all three cases (cars, printing presses, and guns). But in one of the three cases, the instrument used has no main purpose except to kill and maim living things. And they are commonly used as instruments of deliberate crime and violence. Are we really communicating here, or are you just playing word games with me? It's the NRA that says that people, not guns, kill people. One gets tired of hearing that sort of braindead ultra-right bullshit on a progressive board on the eve of the murder of the Polytechnique women.

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
 One gets tired of hearing that sort of braindead ultra-right bullshit on a progressive board on the eve of the murder of the Polytechnique women.

Apparently the rifle used in the Ecole Polytechnique massacre was obtained legally. Would Lepine have registered the rifle had there been one? It's hard to say. But would the registry have stopped him from murdering anyone?

NewCanada NewCanada's picture

Unionist wrote:

One gets tired of hearing that sort of braindead ultra-right bullshit on a progressive board

How exactly is the over-regulation of our rights considered progressive? I thought being a leftist meant having more rights and freedoms?

Unionist

NewCanada wrote:

I thought being a leftist meant having more rights and freedoms?

Oh, really. Like the freedom to look after your own rugged individual self. The freedom not to be regimented into state-run schools and health care. The freedom to work, or stay at home, or run a business and employ people. The freedom to keep your guns locked away after the day when the Government comes to take your property away.

If that's the idea, then count me out of "leftism".

 

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

Unionist wrote:
 One gets tired of hearing that sort of braindead ultra-right bullshit on a progressive board on the eve of the murder of the Polytechnique women.

Apparently the rifle used in the Ecole Polytechnique massacre was obtained legally. Would Lepine have registered the rifle had there been one? It's hard to say. But would the registry have stopped him from murdering anyone?

You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

NewCanada NewCanada's picture

Unionist wrote:

Oh, really. Like the freedom to look after your own rugged individual self. The freedom not to be regimented into state-run schools and health care. The freedom to work, or stay at home, or run a business and employ people. The freedom to keep your guns locked away after the day when the Government comes to take your property away.

If that's the idea, then count me out of "leftism".

What does that mean?

Unionist

NewCanada wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Oh, really. Like the freedom to look after your own rugged individual self. The freedom not to be regimented into state-run schools and health care. The freedom to work, or stay at home, or run a business and employ people. The freedom to keep your guns locked away after the day when the Government comes to take your property away.

If that's the idea, then count me out of "leftism".

What does that mean?

If you have to ask, you can't afford it.

Give me that good OldCanada.

 

Unionist

Good parallels, Fidel. Now go engage in discussion with some women about how they view the issue of firearms. And please don't go over to the Tim McVeigh ZOG-fearing crowd. Socialism does not mean fearing Government and stashing away arms. It's the wrong direction for Canada.

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Unionist wrote:
 One gets tired of hearing that sort of braindead ultra-right bullshit on a progressive board on the eve of the murder of the Polytechnique women.

Apparently the rifle used in the Ecole Polytechnique massacre was obtained legally. Would Lepine have registered the rifle had there been one? It's hard to say. But would the registry have stopped him from murdering anyone?

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Okay, but why? Am I asking too many questions for your liking?

Would you agree to the feds maintaining computerized lists of registered Jews, union leaders, socialists, or Catholics? Or just those capable of armed struggle? And, should the feds share these lists with the US Homeland Stupidity feds in some kind of SPP-Vulcan mind meld with our imperial master nation? SPP? Wasn't that Liberal gov initiative/delegated task instructed to our Liberal stoogeocrats  by Warshington, too?

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Good parallels, Fidel. Now go engage in discussion with some women about how they view the issue of firearms. And please don't go over to the Tim McVeigh ZOG-fearing crowd. Socialism does not mean fearing Government and stashing away arms. It's the wrong direction for Canada.

Do you like sex and travel?

The right to pursue armed struggle is still there in the US constitition, which is revered by left and right around the world for it's basic democratic functions. It's been shredded and trampled a few times and increasingly so in the last decade, but it's still not a bad idea regardless.

And the right to armed struggle is there in Cuba's constitution as well. Governments have gone bad and will probably go bad in future. There are no guarantees in life.

Viva la Revolucion!

 

Unionist

Holy crap. The socialists supporting Harper's abolition of gun control so that they can wage the armed struggle lawfully.

Wake me up when the credits start rolling please.

 

Fidel

Hey you still have to fill out some forms before owning a gun.

And if you know of anyone who does have a gun and is being a menace to the safety of others, you have some kind of obligation to report it the cops. People looking out for one another. That's a socialist ideal and something no government list can substitute for. Stephen Harper is not a socialist and will never be on a list of socialists unless by accidental data entry.

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
Holy crap. The socialists supporting Harper's abolition of gun control so that they can wage the armed struggle lawfully.

[url=http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/registration_article/registration.html]Ri... Halbrook[/url] wrote:

Quote:
Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.
 

They knew where to look for the guns well ahead of time.

And IBM was infamous for aiding the fascists to create and maintain lists of slave labourers, each according to ethnicity, political pursuasion, religion etc. They were meticulous in accounting for slave labour as it related to profit margins for them and their industrialist and banking friends.

Unionist

Jean Chrétien emulated Hitler. And the feminists cheered him on. And if the Jews had kept their hunting rifles, there would have been no genocide. And lists are inherently evil.

I changed my mind. Don't wake me up at all. To sleep - perchance to dream - ay, there's the rub.

 

remind remind's picture

wow, I made excellent turkey pepperoni sticks today...

Pages

Topic locked