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:Q4Byg.90796$hp.62347@read2.cgocable.net...   
   > What fails is your feeble attempt to discredit those that speak the truth.   
   > There are many police documented that say the registry is no use in   
   > fighting crime.   
   > The point, I can produce pages of these testimonies from police all across   
   > the country, but I have not seen any evidents to the contrary from you, or   
   > any other extremist.   
      
   of course you CAN... although you will not   
      
   > And yes, ultimately the bottom line comes down to $$$$. The exhorberant   
   > amount of our money that has went into this fiascal is sickening,   
   > considering it has made no impact on getting criminals and illegal guns   
   > off the street, and never will.   
      
   yes... keep harping on about $$$$... let's all harp on about $$$$... it's   
   the only way to keep costs under control while making government more   
   efficient and effective... what is sickening however, are the myopic   
   perspectives of the loony-toon-gun-loons and their making baseless claims   
   while expecting to be taken at face value and angered when challenged for   
   substantiation...   
      
      
   > What will produce the results we are all in favour of, is putting more   
   > police on the streets with more resources to accomplish the goal.   
      
   yes... a MUCH cheaper solution... toss out an expensive-to-build   
   infrastructure in order to replace it with the ongoing expense of labour...   
   to accomplish.... what, exactly?.... solve more crimes?.... catch more   
   criminals?.... hmmmm... and you've proven such a move is justifiable, how?   
      
      
   > You want to spend millions, and even billions, more on something that has   
   > been tried and ultimately failed, and allow the criminals to out-man and   
   > out-gun our police, rather than getting the upper hand on the real   
   > criminals.   
      
   actually... it appears that you want to spend FAR MORE $$$ to replace a   
   system that's barely even been implemented, certainly not long enough to be   
   efficient nor to be as comprehensive as it needs to be and certainly much   
   less than long enough to evaluate its contribution toward managing this   
   issue.   
      
      
   > This just boggles my mind!   
      
   and apparently, easily achieved.   
      
      
   >At some point, you have to forget about your emotions,   
      
   exactly   
      
   > put your biased opinions aside, and approach things with common sense and   
   > logic.   
      
   now you're talking   
      
      
   > If not, your scheme ultimately ends in an expensive failure, such as we   
   > have now.   
      
   such an astute observation by an expert on such matters   
      
      
   > If I'm wrong, and the registry is providing results, you should be able to   
   > produce it.   
      
   actually... whether you're right or wrong, the registry is providing   
   results... and providing proof is YOUR bag, not mine... i'm happy with its   
   justification for existence and i'm looking forward to seeing the problems   
   with it, fixed.   
      
      
   > I know you're befuddled because I can produce evidents to support my   
   > claim,   
      
   actually.... i think you've just proven yourself to be the befuddled one...   
      
      
   > because all you can do is say "I don't like what they say, so it can't be   
   > true". But show us what you have to prove your claims that registration is   
   > an invaluable tool.   
      
   actually, i provided coherent and rational explanations of where your   
   arguments fell apart... if you were able to address my arguments, you   
   would... instead, you've decided to take the   
   repetively-circling-down-the-drain-whirlpool-express to meaninglessness...   
   and so, as what seems to be a customary part of this journey with   
   loony-toon-gun-loons is an accusation of me doing something you've done...   
      
      
   >    
   >>> hmmm.... after sifting through all that crap... i found 8 different   
   >>> officers identified... hmmmm... if some sort of dissent existed on any   
   >>> scale amongst the force over the justifications for the registry; first   
   >>> of all, you'd be able to offer up MANY MORE names and tons of links to   
   >>> support their claims in context... and you'd likely even be able to find   
   >>> some form of survey of police opinions... what you've offered is nothing   
   >>> more than hearsay from a few dissenting voices where there should be by   
   >>> default, far more voices simply due to the per-capita ratio gun-lobbying   
   >>> police versus the population at large... iow... if the number of police   
   >>> who support the abolishment of the registry were proportionate to the   
   >>> population at large, you should be able to easily drum up 100 names....   
   >>> what you've offered falls far short of anything remotely resembling a   
   >>> convincing or compelling argument...   
   >>   
   >> come to think of it... what you've offered is overwhelming proof that the   
   >> vast majority of police support the registry and there is no culture of   
   >> dissent amongst the ranks... only a couple of voices whom appear to also   
   >> be loony-toon-gun-loons against a backdrop of how many police in   
   >> canada?... some dissent is entirely expected and should not surprise   
   >> anyone... nor should it surprise anyone that you guys are so desperate   
   >> that you'll hang onto any thread you can find... no matter how weak...   
   >> after all... it's just a matter of spin, ain't it... it's all about how   
   >> you dress up them numbers, eh?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)