Too Big to Jail

[Jackal]

The government only represents what we vote for, so we only have ourselves to blame.

 

Not always so. There are many hidden agenda's that you and I would disagree with here in Canada.

[BusaNostra]

"I hear the self defenses discussion point often.

It seems so foreign to most Canadians I suppose. It seems like the General Public is always afraid for their lives down south."

 

Evil people are all around, I was in Eaton Center (Toronto) at the time when Jamaican gang spread bullets and killing a bunch. Canada are now populated with different ethnic groups from Europe-Middle east- Asia & notorious carribeans it's no longer foreign as you think. Maybe still foreign in Alberta & New Foundland...it will come.

[Jackal]

"I hear the self defenses discussion point often.

It seems so foreign to most Canadians I suppose. It seems like the General Public is always afraid for their lives down south."

 

Evil people are all around, I was in Eaton Center (Toronto) at the time when Jamaican gang spread bullets and killing a bunch. Canada are now populated with different ethnic groups from Europe-Middle east- Asia & notorious carribeans it's no longer foreign as you think. Maybe still foreign in Alberta & New Foundland...it will come.

 

True, but there isn't the same drive for citizens to go arming themselves in Canada. I don't even hear it as a topic of discussion.

[BusaNostra]

"True, but there isn't the same drive for citizens to go arming themselves in Canada. I don't even hear it as a topic of discussion. "

 

But it's hard to compare your country to a country involved in civil wars and many foreign wars. America has 26 Wars from Colonial Times to the Present.

People here react differently - offence & defence part of life. Someday, maybe it will change. They laughed at Ron Paul but i like his idea. Get out Europe - Asia - Middle east and close United nations and stay home....maybe just maybe "we" in North America can live & stay together. After all, Canada is the biggest business partner of America.

Edited January 25, 2013 by BusaNostra

[Jackal]

"True, but there isn't the same drive for citizens to go arming themselves in Canada. I don't even hear it as a topic of discussion. "

 

But it's hard to compare your country to a country involved in civil wars and many foreign wars. People here react differently - offence & defence part of life. Someday, maybe it will change. They laugh at Ron Paul but i like his idea. Get out Europe - Asia - Middle east and United nations and stay home....maybe just "we" in North America can live & stay together. After all, Canada is the biggest business partner of America.

 

 

Just as a small aside,

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Canada

 

Canada has a rich military history. She has been involved in almost every war the USA was involved in and a few the USA wasn't. In WWII for instance, we assisted Britan and France a week after they declared war, and only ten days after the invasion of Poland.

 

Last year was the 200 year memorial of the war of 1812 for instance. That was the only time the USA and what became Canada were at war with eachother. It became a defining moment for our nation, in much the same way the Civil war was for the USA.

 

I think you'll find that Canadians are very proud of their war time efforts.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Jackal

[WestTexasS2K]

I don't walk around in constant fear for my life. I live in a small town 88k where we all know our neighbors. We watch out for one another. People are for the most part are extremely friendly. Most people in our neighbor hood attend a bi annual block party where we get together BBQ and get to know each other better. We know all the kids, spouses where they work and so on.

 

I'm sure the people that live in any of the areas where mass violence has happened felt safe in their surroundings too.

[MoPho]

I have family visiting and don't have much time, so will get this over with in one big post.... :leaving:

 

 

 

 

Originally Posted by crewst

The age of the Constitution and technological changes to arms does does not matter at all. You clearly do not grasp the concepts involved in the founding and framing. Read some material from the Federalist Papers and similar material, specifically the framers discussing rights and tyranny. Throw in some reading on Paul Revere's warning about the British coming as well.

 

 

 

 

So even if we go with tyranny as the founding fathers reasoning, you can't tell me that had they known what technology would bring and how the guns would be used more for crime than fighting off the impending tyrannical govt that they would have been so vague in the constitution. The 2A is open to interpretation, and it could be read that by "well regulated militia" that they intended for guns to be locked away in bunkers with regulated public access in case of "tyranny"

 

And why can't we have tanks, rocket launchers, bazookas, etc? We would need such weapons to defend ourselves from our own military since clearly guns aren't enough to stop the govt or no one would be worried that the govt will take them away

 

 

 

I think it is pretty safe to say that our men and woman in service aren't brainwashed enough to let some dictator turn our military on the people. Not to mention I don't think it is even possible for someone to get that much power the way our govt is set up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-----

 

Firstly, thanks for the clarification.

 

I hear the self defenses discussion point often. It seems so foreign to most Canadians I suppose. It seems like the General Public is always afraid for their lives down south, in that at any moment a crazed lunatic will need gunning down. I feel sorry for folks that feel that way, because the general feeling where I live is that it is a safe place where gun violence is generally not feared. I notice the change in feeling when I go to the States.

 

Does the cycle not perpetuate itself though. Everyone who snaps looks normal enough at sometime. By allowing less restriction on folks having guns, aren't we really just arming the ones that have the potencial to snap?

 

 

It's pretty foreign to many Americans too. It's a bit ironic that we now need guns in order to protect ourselves from those that have guns :banghead:

 

 

Obviously it's too late for real gun control and I am mostly indifferent to the idea, but I do find it absurd that gun people are so bent out of shape about having to go through background checks or putting limitations on some guns that aren't really self defense type weapons if it makes some people happy. It's pretty selfish of them not to be willing to compromise.

 

What I also don't get is that I had to jump through hoops and wait 6 months to register my Caterham (not to mention had I bought it new I would have had to wait even longer for the delivery), what's so hard about having to wait and/or jump through some hoops to get a gun? If you want it bad enough, you should be willing to do whatever it takes.

Heck, it was harder for me to adopt my dog than it would be to get a gun in some states.

 

 

 

------

 

 

If there were armed guards or teachers/staff with concealed carry permits, lives could have been saved.

 

Not necessarily true, in many of the mass shootings the perpetrator was wearing body armor and in the Columbine school shooting there was armed guard and that didn't stop the shooter. In fact the only thing that stopped the shooters was the shooter taking their own life

And why just schools? Should we have armed guards in every mall, supermarket, movie theater, Home Depot, Walmart, gas station (remember the DC sniper?) etc.? What about in public parks? Police state? Where do you draw the line?

And who is going to pay for these arm guards? And what about paying for the insurance to cover the lawsuits that result when the armed guard/teacher/staff accidentally shoots a student?

 

If having gun free zones makes people so safe, then why do anti-gun people ever have armed security? Celebs, rich people, politicians complain about guns, want more gun-free zones or to ban guns completely, but still have armed guards. I guess Obama has asked the Secret Service to not carry guns around him so that he'll be safer... ha!

 

These people have protection because they often have stalkers and get threatened regularly. The average citizen doesn't have to worry about this

And the President and his family is required to have secret service, so it is a bit silly of you (and the NRA) to make issue of this as he has little to do with the decision

 

If I remember correctly, Feinstein is submitting a bill to ban "assault" guns, but yet has a rare California permit to carry. Laws for thee, not for me applies I suppose, just like lefties and taxes.

 

So is her permit to carry for an "assault" weapon or are you just trying to spin even more bullshit?

 

 

-------

 

 

But it's hard to compare your country to a country involved in civil wars and many foreign wars. America has 26 Wars from Colonial Times to the Present.

 

 

 

What nonsense!

 

 

.

Edited January 25, 2013 by MoPho

[Mondo]

Well I guess I finally throw my two cents in with everyone else

[JohnK]

This is beginning to sound like Congress; two sides becoming more and more polarized. There is not AN answer, there isacompromize that everyone thinks is pretty awful, but somehow steers into the middle of the road, and that works well enough until circumstances change. It would help a lot if people would bite the bullet ( sorry about that) and realize that starting with what they want to be true and cherry picking the facts that support that point doesnt give good results, and learn that you have to put ALL of the most accurate information you can find on the table and and assess ALL of it dispassionately if you want a good answer about what should be done. Not fun, but gives good outcomes - and you get to think of yourself as a grownup.

[rikker]

Even those that cannot abide guns, (like myself), understand that a total gun ban in the USA is probably never going to happen; but we have to do something.To have a standard nationwide background check for all guns purchased might be a good starting point , as would high capacity clips and rifles that were clearly designed to kill humans as fast as possible even in their "castrated semi " mode.

Mopho does come up with some valid points...

Imagine what it would be like to buy a seven at a car show or privately and never have to worry about registering to own or using it, as opposed to what many here have experienced at the DMV.

Do you really think the NRA and gun rights supporters are really bothered about the protection of ancient laws over that of the gun manufacturers and the almighty dollar nad the mach right to own the ultimate death toy ?

More guns out there to "protect" against millions of guns out there is ridiculous.

Why is this made out to be a political "lib v rep" debate anyway?

Why are more people up in arms over the many real freedoms and loss of rights that have been taken away in the last 20 years under the name of "security , terrorism or the Homeland" ,( particularly since 9/11 ) with regard to privacy, personal rights, arrest and loss of rights?

I really do wish more Americans traveled,

(and not just in the military).

Yeah, it is soap boxing a bit, but I just had to laugh to myself; if they ever did impose restrictions on the high performance AR 15 types

it might be very similar to the owner of a new 7("please put it down as a 1967 Lotus") trying to convince a bored state DMV employee that the 2103 Bushwhacker rifle with high cap clip really has to be registered as a 1976 Brown Bess.

Edited January 28, 2013 by rikker

[Mondo]

More to my original point in starting this thread

[JohnK]

To explore the fact a bit further, read Sinclair Lewis' Caucasian Chalk Circle - a group of bank robbers who realized that they could make a LOT more money if they bought and ran a bank than if they stole the money from the banks - minus the downside if they got caught. I dont think the book was meant to be funny, but wry laughter seem appropriate.