Author Topic: The Great Gun Control Debate  (Read 678946 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Garry

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -25
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
  • Retired
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #25 on: January 15, 2004, 13:49:00 »

jrhume

  • Guest
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #26 on: January 15, 2004, 13:51:00 »
Well, the bad guys are gun owners, of course.

Did you miss the Get-Your-Mind-Right seminars that explained all this?  I think there was some electro-shock therapy involved . . . it‘s so hard to remember . . .

 :)

Jim

Offline bobthebui|der

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -60
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,065
  • I got a axe
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #27 on: January 15, 2004, 16:43:00 »
If someone has the balls to use a gun for anything other than sport or hunting (Illegal purposes), wtf makes people think a half-baked Gun Registry law is going to bother them?
The true measure of a man is how well he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good

Munit Haec et Altera Vincit

"2..4..6..8..tiptoe, sneak, and infiltrate, yaaaaaay, recce!" - Kat Stevens

Offline Padraig OCinnead

  • Member
  • ****
  • 280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 207
  • Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #28 on: January 15, 2004, 18:19:00 »
In my opinion these bills get passed because of the fact that 10% of Canada‘s population lives in T.O. They as a general rule have a horrible time with guns. A duck hunter‘s shotgun is all the same as some badguy‘s pistol to them. Toronto(GTA), Otawa, Montreal and Vancouver to a lesser extent have such a huge impact on the Feds that what they want we have to deal with.  Their special interest groups can show us all sorts of stats to validate this foolishness.
Is it a bad idea?
No, every little bit that helps to keep my little boy(5) and young daughter(7) safe is fine by me. If a few duck hunters get upset cause they get treated like a pariah, oh well.

What‘s the honest big deal of it? The way it was conducted is what gets me. How some guy can railroad this through, when other bills get held up forever is what gets me. Has it changed the fact that young men are blowing each other away in record numbers? Nope. It‘s still a good idea to try and make our country safe. But murder with guns have never been as rampant here as down south of the 49th. This has more to do with Canada‘s intolerance of violence as a whole than anything else. The myth of the wild west and all it‘s machismo is prevelant in American society. Media, entertainment, movie legends all force this down our throats,much of it on airwaves traveling north. Let‘s concentrate on that instead of this feelgood bill that only make duckhunters feel suspicious but the granola crunchers all smug in their hemp ponchoes.

End of rant.

Slainte,

Offline bobthebui|der

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -60
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,065
  • I got a axe
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #29 on: January 15, 2004, 18:23:00 »
I just feel like theres better things that my government can be spending taxpayers money on...some will disagree....but i‘ve never exactly found guns a problem (and i live at Yonge and Steeles in toronto)
The true measure of a man is how well he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good

Munit Haec et Altera Vincit

"2..4..6..8..tiptoe, sneak, and infiltrate, yaaaaaay, recce!" - Kat Stevens

Offline Padraig OCinnead

  • Member
  • ****
  • 280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 207
  • Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #30 on: January 15, 2004, 19:01:00 »
Cdn$1 000 000 000.00 (that‘s about US$315.45 in case you‘re wondering S.Baker) can buy an awful lot of hospital beds, or teachers, bring much needed help to far off communities in Northern Ontario, train new soldiers and still have enough for anti-crime programs.

I can‘t agree with you more ShOrtbUs.

Offline OLD SCHOOL

  • Member
  • ****
  • -165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 199
  • Veteran
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #31 on: January 15, 2004, 22:58:00 »
Padraig. You are on crack. Your kids are not safer with the gun registry. The duck hunter was never going to jack your car. Did the criminals register theirs?

Offline Enzo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -60
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 618
  • Meh...
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #32 on: January 16, 2004, 00:33:00 »
I concur with Padraig. I‘ve no problem with the concept of firearms registration. It‘s the implementation that needs a serious accounting. The cost is insane. The idea of centralizing and streamling seems fine on paper, but there is no excuse for this exhorbitant cost.

But we have to be clear, firearms registry is simply that, a registry. It has it‘s place, but at nowhere near this price.

The bigger problem is the lack of responsibility or accountability to the people over this mess.
"Most people would rather analyse risks than take them"

Wallace Kaufman

Offline OLD SCHOOL

  • Member
  • ****
  • -165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 199
  • Veteran
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #33 on: January 16, 2004, 00:53:00 »
Law abiding citizens have registered since the 1930‘s.
Criminals...never
There wasn‘t a problem before CFC came into being...that is the point.

Online Infanteer

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 114,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,313
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #34 on: January 16, 2004, 02:59:00 »
I am sure you guys would be pissed off if some government lackey was aloud to walk into your garage anytime he wanted to in order to see if you put your e-brake on.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline nULL

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -145
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 421
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #35 on: January 16, 2004, 03:46:00 »
The bashing of michael moore is kinda funny. I mean, he doesn‘t insult people without providing backed up data.

(Do you think the NRA wouldn‘t have jumped on "bowling for columbine" if they had found an inaccuracy somewhere in there?)

yeah, he hates bush. and he‘s given us plenty of legit reasons to understand why. the extent thbat some people can do is call him a joke and a fat ****. he‘s better known than any of you, has more credibility (yeah, that IS true!) and gets all of his "ammunition" against the right from legitimate news services...reuters, the BBC, etc.

"left wing" news services to be sure, but they‘ve got infinetely more credibility than most of us...

Online Infanteer

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 114,915
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,313
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #36 on: January 16, 2004, 03:53:00 »
Quote
the extent thbat some people can do is call him a joke and a fat ****. he‘s better known than any of you, has more credibility (yeah, that IS true!) and gets all of his "ammunition" against the right from legitimate news services...reuters, the BBC, etc.
Aww...nULL.  Your making me feel bad about myself.  I really regret losing your popularity contest.
If being a social nuiscence and harrassing 80 year-old men to make some bucks for my movie is what you respect, than cheers to you and your role models.
Maybe when lala-land finally becomes reality, and the means of production belong to a bunch of intellectuals and union bosses, you and Mr. Moore can enjoy a government subsidized bucket of chicken together.

The fact is, the crux of his argument in his movie is plain wrong.

How can guns be the root cause of violence in American society?  America has always had a "gun culture".  Why is it only recently that 15 year olds have been mowing each other down.

That is from a respected psychologist with a bestselling book on the subject...not some news service.  See Dave Grossman.

Michael Moore should pack it up and head to North Korea since he finds his country so morally reprehensible.  nULL, you are going to have a fun time in the military when you defend the actions of people who believe you are the biggest contributer to the world‘s problems and go out of their way to **** on you.

     
Quote
"left wing" news services to be sure, but they‘ve got infinetely more credibility than most of us...
Credibility with whom?  The Spartacus Youth League?  Its credibility with those who matter that counts.


Infanteer‘s Quote of the Week

"Nearly all of the opposition to our conduct in this war was expressed by professors and those in law, the media, government, and entertainment, who as a general rule lead lives rather different from those of most Americans [who were behind the war]...Those who were tenured, highly paid, or leisured, both Republican and Democrat, I think have forgotten how hard it is to survive and raise a family-how often daily life is muscular and dangerous, and how frequently evil people can and must be stopped only through physical strength from hurting those who are helpless....

Many enlightened and well-educated Americans-simply cannot believe that awful men abound in the world who cannot be cajoled, bought off, counsled, reasoned with, or reported to the authorities, but rather must be hit and knocked hard...Domestically, such hypocricy and naivete are problematic, but in a war with deadly adversaries like those we face today, utopianism is near suicidal."
Victor Davis Hanson
"An Autumn of War"



So as for the credibility we lack here, its a question of mind over matter for us.
I don‘t mind because they don‘t f***ing matter.

Infanteer Out
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Enzo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -60
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 618
  • Meh...
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #37 on: January 16, 2004, 04:49:00 »
The availabilty of the guns and the gun culture in the US is a sore point for many including Michael Moore. But in his movie he uses Canada as a basis of comparison effectively. Per capita, we have almost as many firearms in our population and the homicide rates are much, much lower. He asks why that is. As for Mr. Heston, he may have been an 80 year old man, but at the time he was the president of the NRA and that meeting showed that he was woefully out of touch, literally. The best thing the NRA could do is find a more energetic president who may lead the organization into a moderate age. I just perused the NRA‘s website, I notice many celebs posing and showing their solidarity beside target rifles and shotguns. None of them are shown with an assault rifle. Compromising a little in certain areas may increase the credibility of the NRA as it works with the government instead of fighting it. Only my opinion though. Their country to do so as they wish. I‘ll never be able to support the idea of a Tec-9 as a hunting weapon. I‘m a happy firearms owner in Canada and I left my C-7 at the base.

The movie uses the gun culture in many of its facets to support his arguments, but much of the film is also critical of the policies of the nation that allow such a disparity amongst its population. Why is it that a single mother can work 70hrs a week and not be able to meet her basic costs? Social questions such as that are rampant within. As for his credibility, I have to agree with that. Back to back books at number 1 for months on many a best seller list and an Academy Award winning movie allow him to claim credibility. If it‘s only people who lean to the left who support him, then that is still support nonetheless. In this age, I‘d hardly say that the right is lacking for representatives to carry their flag. It‘s about balance.

As for going to developing countries, that‘s a good thing for certain. But when your country is the major consumer of energy and goods in the world, that affects everyone. Then the idea of cleaning up from within is not so ignoble.

I‘ve no problem with Moore, Rush Limbaugh, Howard Stern or Triumph the comic dog. Every view should have a voice and allow the populace to decide for themselves, peacefully. That‘s the ideal, isn‘t it?
"Most people would rather analyse risks than take them"

Wallace Kaufman

Offline Padraig OCinnead

  • Member
  • ****
  • 280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 207
  • Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #38 on: January 16, 2004, 06:42:00 »
Old School,

How I want to throw a couple of zingers your way. But I won‘t. I never stated that the guns registery was the only answer. What I did say was any idea to make my neighbourhood safer was fine by me. If this bill is only one small part of it then so be it.

I‘ve hunted and fished when I lived up north. I dropped the hunting but not the fishing. So I‘m not some granola crunching long haired grease ball who thinks all gun owners are potential criminals. I know for a fact that not all gun owners are criminals. Many are my friends and some are family.The wrong people are being inconveniencedby this. But not all gun owners are responsible. If they have to think about safe storage and take actions to rectify this then what was the harm.

Anyone of those guys in Ottawa could have actually made the idea of a safer commnunity work with this bill had they planned it out better and left in out of the hands of those who don‘t understand what it is all about.

Offline Michael Dorosh

  • Banned
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • -1,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,778
  • Verloren ist nur, wer sich selbst aufgibt!
    • CANUCK
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #39 on: January 16, 2004, 09:20:00 »
I just watched Bowling for Columbine and loved it.  I worked in a gun shop part time, incidentally, for a couple of years as well as owning firearms myself.

I thought Moore‘s interview with Charlton Heston was quite interesting.  Heston came right out and said that gun violence is so prevalent in the States because of race issues - no idea how anyone could actually think that was true.  Yes, he may have been an 80 year old man, but he was also the spokesman for a VERY influential interest group who clearly made some controversial decisions (like holding those rallies in Denver and Flint right after the fatal school shootings).

As for Moore‘s weight - that‘s his business.  Einstein had long hair, so did Beethoven.  Most people know not to judge them by their personal appearance alone.

I think everyone is on the same page as far as the cost of the registry.

What needs to happen is for existing laws to be enforced - you get caught using a gun in the commission of a crime, that should not get plea-bargained out, that should ensure you get locked up for a long, long time, and not in the current system of day care we call prisons.

Morons who don‘t keep firearms and ammunition locked up seperately and securely should also have their weapons confiscated.  

If the justice system prosecuted existing criminal offences to the full extent of the law, there would be a lesser perceived need for a registry.

I‘m in favour of a registry, but given the Canadian Constitution, which does not guarantee any right to private property, the inevitable fear is that it might lead to confiscation.

I also resent that replica firearms (including airsoft BB guns) are considered as dangerous as machine guns (ie THEY ARE PROHIBITED) but dewats are perfectly acceptable.  Someone explain that to me in words that make sense.
"So, how's your sister?" -Brigadeführer Hermann Fegelein
 
http://www.canadiansoldiers.com
 http://www.calgaryhighlanders.com

Offline OLD SCHOOL

  • Member
  • ****
  • -165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 199
  • Veteran
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #40 on: January 16, 2004, 13:20:00 »
No zingers? How do you survive life in the Army without zingers? Don‘t worry you won‘t hurt my feelings...I don‘t have any.
O.K so you are part redneck so you seem to understand. I just did not agree with your statement that it was not a bad idea. The implementation of the registry borders on criminal.Where did the money go? How does the registry prevent the East Indian gangster from shooting buddy with a Sten over a debt or even you when you give him the finger in traffic? We are all for safe storage and licenses etc...but the gov. says this makes us safe. Criminals do not jump through hoops to own firearms and they never will. I smell dirty kickbacks in this program. Where is our money? People should be screaming. Forensic audit right ******* now please. $ 1,000,000,000 and 6 months to answer an e-mail? Any ma and pa two-bit business in Canada selling a widget will get back to you today or tomorrow! I would love to keep everyones children safe but this is no way to go about it. Beleive me I am no redneck freak...It would take me 45 minutes to get my shotgun out of Fort Knox if someone was breaking into my house...would probably shoot myself in the process...Just tired of the gov. trying to keep us safe and letting the real firearms criminals off with a handshake.
I worked for years at low pay in a tough enviornment and to watch some REMF geeks getting rich while we are fed **** in the dark would hurt my feelings...if I had any.

Surely nobody can argue against the fact that something dirty went on somewhere in the CFC? Someone has made plenty of money and it is not the Police Departments or the Crown Councils that could have used that money to keep your children safe.

The gov. is more dangerous than a epileptic on a grenade range and that will never change.  :salute:

fusilier955

  • Guest
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #41 on: January 16, 2004, 13:35:00 »
it is funny, in my political science class we studied this.  there is actually an increase in gun related crimes since its instatement, the number has surprisingly doubled.  as for the "tougher" zero tolerance to those who are caught with an unregistared firearm, there has been only one person jacked up by it so far, the rest have been passed over.

Offline nULL

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -145
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 421
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #42 on: January 16, 2004, 16:48:00 »
what exactly is involved with the registration process? is it merely informing the authorities of the number and type of guns you have and ensuring they are stored properly?

Offline Padraig OCinnead

  • Member
  • ****
  • 280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 207
  • Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #43 on: January 16, 2004, 18:19:00 »
The more I‘ve looked at this issue since I‘ve dragged it out of my mental closet, the less tidy it seems. It makes sense that this does nothing more than inconvience those who‘ve done nothing wrong. It seems that MR. Apu Nahasapeemapetilon doesn‘t register his Tac-four when he bought from Nigel Maroon-Town it in the back alley. The new law should have been handled by experts in the field rather than REMFs in the three ring circus that Ottawa can at times seem to be.

I‘ll stand by my statement however that the idea behind it is valid. It seems the politicians (goaded by the left wing knee jerking sissies) just mixed up who they should have been treating like dirty greasy little criminals and who was to be treated like the honest tax paying peasants.

Offline Padraig OCinnead

  • Member
  • ****
  • 280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 207
  • Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #44 on: January 16, 2004, 18:21:00 »
Oh yeah, by the way S_Baker it‘s spelled toques not touques! Tabarnac!

Offline Michael Dorosh

  • Banned
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • -1,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,778
  • Verloren ist nur, wer sich selbst aufgibt!
    • CANUCK
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #45 on: January 16, 2004, 19:31:00 »
Old School - I should have been more clear.  I would be in favour of a cost effective registry.  Of course it won‘t prevent criminals from having guns, nor will it make them register, etc.  The current registry is an undefensible joke.  On that, we agree.
"So, how's your sister?" -Brigadeführer Hermann Fegelein
 
http://www.canadiansoldiers.com
 http://www.calgaryhighlanders.com

Offline Garry

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -25
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
  • Retired
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #46 on: January 16, 2004, 20:43:00 »
I think any rational individual is willing to give up some personal freedom for the greater good of society, but how much is enough?

I think the whole basis of the firearms act is flawed, in that it assigns responsibility of the individual to the Government, vice the individual.

I contend that the individual is responsible to himself/herself, for themselves. I also contend that each must conduct themselves in a socially correct manner to remain a member of society.

No matter how many laws there are governing the tools of man, people still wallop each other with them. Drunk driving is a perfect example. We must (and do) codify the rules of personal behaviour.

As stated in previous posts, we have all the rules neccessary to guide personal behaviour. No more rules are required to punish those people who go against the wishes of Canadian Society.

In short- personal responsibility.

Unfortunately, personal responsibility is becoming less and less fashionable. As is common sense, and moral standards.

We as a society tend to trail our southern neighbours by about 10 years- watch out: the "nameless faceless society" than encourages personal outrages is coming sooner than you think.

Compounding the problem is a society that thinks criminals can and must be rehabilitated. Add in the concept that you cannot defend yourself (we‘re getting there) and you‘ve got Britain- check out the statistics for yourselves, it‘s getting scary.

We‘re basically a good bunch here in Canada- but our society is changing- deny it all you want, but it ain‘t gona stop.

Personal Responsibility- scary thought, eh?

Offline Gunnar

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 659
  • Civilian
    • http://www.ealdormere.sca.org
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #47 on: January 16, 2004, 20:44:00 »
Just keep in mind that Bowling is not a documentary, but in fact a propaganda tool on the part of Moore.  Take a look at this:

 http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2003_08_31_archive.html#10624779059990811

You get to see interesting things like the "free gun" at the bank demo was staged (cuz the waiting period still applies) and that Heston‘s comments were frequently taken out of context, and in fact from different speeches.

I don‘t disagree that the US has a problem with guns and gun crime, but to use Bowling as a pillar on which to lean arguments against guns is not a good plan....

In other news, at the start of the new year, some people were killed with properly registered guns.  Man, did the registry ever help them.
If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism --Thomas Sowell

Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for the West as it commits suicide.

Maxpower

  • Guest
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #48 on: January 16, 2004, 20:45:00 »
Quote
Originally posted by nULL:
[qb] what exactly is involved with the registration process? is it merely informing the authorities of the number and type of guns you have and ensuring they are stored properly? [/qb]
Well this is a bit more complicated as that.  As a new firearms owner i know i bit on this topic. First you need your licence in order to legally aquire or posses any firearms or ammunition.  To get my license I had to take the Canadian Firearms Saftey Course on both non-restricted (most rifles and shotguns) and restricted (handguns) firearms.  This was no big deal and was approximately 60 bucks.  Then I mailed my test results, references, a photo and another 80 bucks away to New Brunswick to get my PAL (Possession and Aquisition License). Another option could be to get a POL (possession only license) in order to legally buy ammo and retain the registered firearms you own, but not aquire new ones. So After approximately 2 months I recieved my PAL. For my first legal firearm, I bought a U22 Neos.  This falls into the Restricted class of firearms as it is a handgun. In order to purchase a restricted firearm, like a handgun for target shooting purposes, you must be a member of a recognized shooting club.  Then just go to the store and put the money down on the gun you want.  The store then calls the CFC (canadian firearms center) and initiates the transfer of the handgun to you.  You have to give some information and pay the gov‘t a 25 dollar transfer fee by credit card. They then give you a reference # and send you on your merry way.  They said it would take about a week to transfer the firearm and when the transfer was complete they would phone and notify the buyer.  After waiting 10 days  I  had to initate the inquery on my transfer and was told that it had been completed.  Before you can go to the store and pick up your firearm,  you have to contact the  Cheif firearms officer in your provence to be issued a Temporary ATT (authorization to transport). This ATT will have the Gun‘s Model, Serial# and the timeframe in which you are allowed to pick up the firearm and transfer it to you place of residence.
Once that is done and you now have your firearm at home you have to apply for a perminant ATT which is usually good for 3 years or until your license expires.  Mine took about a week to recieve and had the condition on it that I could transfer my firearm to any recognized gun range or gunsmith within my province of residence as long as I possessed the registration certificate for that firearm as well.  Now when the firearm is transfered to you from the store (or other seller) you are given the registration # but a new certificate is then queued to be printed in some government center.  This takes about 3 weeks to recieve.  So from Start to finish, it takes approximately 3 months to be able to purchase a handgun and legally transfer it to the range in order to go shooting.  Now this was for Restricted firearms, maybe someone who legally owns a rifle can let us know the proceedure for purchasing/registering a non-restricted firearm.

My opinion on this:  I think that this is a bit outragous.  The licensing proceedure to be able to purchase a firearm and ammunition is a good idea, better yet, essential.  But the registration proceedure is bullshit.  The billions of dollars used to set up this big farce of a system was definately  NOT worth it.  The law abiding citizens who own, or want to own, a gun for legitimate uses are being hurt by this act.  Not just the legal owners, but the newcomers who, like myself, want to get into the intresting world of firearms.  I think that this system is discouraging new people into this sport and is bad for Canada in general.

Anything I missed, just let me know.


  :fifty:

Offline Michael Dorosh

  • Banned
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • -1,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,778
  • Verloren ist nur, wer sich selbst aufgibt!
    • CANUCK
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate
« Reply #49 on: January 16, 2004, 22:05:00 »
But Bowling for Columbine was at least entertaining propaganda.  I‘m aware of the staged and edited parts, and it seems a bit heartless to have ostracized Mose...Charlton Heston now that his illness has come to light.  But should a man with Alzheimer‘s really be in charge of the largest pro-firearms interest group in the world, either?

I couldn‘t agree more with the concept of individual rights - and we are all seeing the changes Garry talks about daily.
"So, how's your sister?" -Brigadeführer Hermann Fegelein
 
http://www.canadiansoldiers.com
 http://www.calgaryhighlanders.com