XPost: can.politics, can.rec.hunting, can.talk.guns
XPost: kingston.general, talk.politics.guns, van.general
From: klunk@theothershoe.org
"Larry" wrote in message
news:Pshxg.85390$hp.40853@read2.cgocable.net...
>
>>actually your guns, along with all other guns are either actually used in
>>commiting crimes or they can potentially become crime-enabling weapons...
>>so, by tracking all guns, we (as a society - try not to forget we're all
>>in this together) are more capable of managing a problem that is insanely
>>out of control....
>
>>ho-hum.... try saying something different than the rest of the loons,
>>ok?... at least provide a spin that demonstrates you've read at least a
>>bit of this several-month-long thread... ya know, just to sound less like
>>you're talking out of your ass....
>
> I have owned a lot of guns, and not one of mine have ever been used in a
> crime, same goes for all my friends.
how nice for you
> And it is you who continues to just repeat the same old crap, with no
> proof.
yes.... the same old crap... with no prooooooof, you say?
hmmmmmmm..... i must be watching a different channel,
'cause the plotline on my soap has been the loony-toon-gun-loons crooning
the same ol' tune... btw... when are you going to start calling me a liar?
> You people have not posted one piece of evidence that shows the registry
> works. I at least get off my ass, unlike you armchair do-gooders, and
> search for proof either way, objectively. You obviously don't, you just
> keep cutting and pasting the same old stuff, and you can't produce proof
> of support in favour of your claims.
yes... you got off your ass to search for proof you say.... hmmmm.... and
what proof was that....?..... a couple of grumps grumbling.... hmmmm....
members of the gun-loon-lobby, perhaps.... even retired policemen who didn't
know the registry applied to them and that they probably wouldn't even know
how to turn on their computer, much less understand complex mathematics
utilized to determine criminal behaviour patterns...
> I do support and believe gun owners should be responsible, and I sir am,
> so our guns don't get into the hands of criminals. I also support having
> to pass gun safety courses and renewing an FAC every five years, but this
> far too costly registry does nothing to aide in the final intensions, to
> reduce crime and make us safer.
i see... you support various costly initiatives to ensure safe and
responsible firearms use yet you think only the registry is expensive and
does nothing to deal with the growing problem of violent crime.....
hmmmm.... AND you claim "objectivity".....?!?!?!?
> Why not use the wasted money on fighting crime and getting the criminals
> and illegal guns off the street? As it is now, because of too few police
> and other resources, and too little jail time and/or deterrent, the only
> way an illegal gun is recovered is if a crime is committed. If police and
> the legal system had the resources, they could get out there and find
> these criminals and illegal guns and get them off the street before
> someone gets hurt.
and you, as a member of the loony-toon-gun-loon-lobby have been ejikated in
the ways of managing a Police force?.... so much so, that you can do a
better job of determining budgetary expenses than those whom are actually
involved in the process.... AND you call me an "armchair dogooder".....
bwahahahaha.... btw... if i was a "dogooder"... then, shouldn't you and the
rest of your ilk recognize that such is in your own best interest and for
YOUR "good" as well?.... why do you fight so much against something you know
is good for you?
> Here are more facts that also seem to say registration doesn't work.
> I'll just wait for that proof you have that shows the registry is making
> us safer from gun crime, ok?!?
> Larry. MorningMoon Bear
> (NOT 'BOCK BOCK FOCK FOCK' Larry, TopPoster)
>
> Article published Tuesday, June 15, 2004, at The National Post.
>
> More gun control isn't the answer
>
>
> By John R. Lott Jr. and Eli Lehrer
>
> Gun control has not worked in Canada. Since the new gun registration
> program started in 1998, the U.S. homicide rate has fallen, but the
> Canadian rate has increased. The net cost of Canada's gun registry has
> surged beyond $1-billion -- more than 500 times the amount originally
> estimated. Despite this, the Canadian government recently admitted it
> could not identify a single violent crime that had been solved through
> registration. Public confidence in the government's ability to fight crime
> has also eroded, with one recent survey showing only 17% of voters support
> the registration program.
and this is the great illusion that the loony-toon-gun-loons love to
croon... (paraphrased) "if crime ain't eliminated, then it ain't
workin'".... too bad your overgrown brows prevent you from seeing further
than the tips of your toes... crime is a problem AND it's growing AND we
need to do MANY things to get it "under control"... the registry is a SMALL
part of an overall and necessary strategy that will require all of us to
work together to resolve...
quite frankly, your posts, along with practically every other post made by
every other loony-toon-gun-loon that's posted here has demonstrated a
remarkable incapacity for working through issues.... you only seem capable
of bludgeoning your way through the issues and then you cry foul when the
gaping holes in your arguments reveal your very inept attempts at providing
justification for something when deep inside, YOU ALL KNOW registration is a
necessary, and small component of a complex solution to this pandemic.
> So, if this hasn't worked, what's the solution? The NDP, which polls
> indicate may hold the balance of power in Parliament after June 28, has
> proposed a radical solution: "going across the border to the U.S. and
> actively engaging in lobbying to have gun -control laws in the U.S.
> strengthened."
So.... what hasn't worked....?.... registration?.... you're right, because
we've never had a comprehensive registration system.... it has NEVER
existed... so pointing out it's failure is easy... try explaining why it is
an invalid strategy and you idiots fall apart....
> This is part of an ironic pattern: When gun control laws fail -- as they
> consistently do, whether in Canada, the United States or other
> countries -- politicians seek to pass new laws rather than eliminate the
> old ones. In the United States, gun -control groups now claim that the
> 1994 Brady Act implementing background checks and assault-weapon bans
> failed to reduce crime only because they didn't go far enough; and that
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
