Mea culpa sir. Never met a guy named Courtney, and did not look closely enough at your facebook shot, is all. I would never have made the sexist assumption you mentioned, though. Kristy would have my nuts on a pike for it, if I did.
Mea culpa sir. Never met a guy named Courtney, and did not look closely enough at your facebook shot, is all. I would never have made the sexist assumption you mentioned, though. Kristy would have my nuts on a pike for it, if I did.
I know sir, and to be honest with you, it happens all the time. Less now as I get older, but still pretty frequently.
How else do you explain Switzerland, which has as high a per capita rate of gun ownership as the USA (if not higher), yet has far less gun related crime. I believe there is a cultural basis as well, but as I said, I have not seriously researched any of this. Just spitballing, is all.
(I have also not researched any of this, so take whatever I say as ignorant opinion)
I believe this is an important point, and also references back to morty's comments. In my opinion, North American culture is not mature enough (for lack of a better word) to handle guns. Here, guns are somewhat glorified. More and more, they are becoming an accepted method of dealing with problems. I'm not saying that guns are a big problem, and can be found on every street corner and playground. But they are creeping into normal lives. That is why I would support additional hand gun control. By reducing possible exposure to guns, society at large will have less tolerance for them. Maybe an impressionable youth will see a friend join a gang, get a gun, and will think "this guy is crazy, I'm outta here", instead of thinking "this guy is cool, maybe I do need protection as well". Or maybe that is just my wishful thinking.
In Switzerland, and Europe in general, I believe there is a greater respect for war and suffering, and the effect that guns can have on people. The tolerance for gun crime is much less. You can even see this in television show ratings. In France, almost any show with gun exposure and violence (CSI, Law and Order, etc) has a higher rating (usually 14+) than shows with sexual content (Sex and the city, anything on after 9pm, usually rated 12+). Further, I would wager that the guns in Switzerland are rifles stored in attics to be used in case of invasion (isn't everyone in Switzerland technically part of a militia??). There is a distinction between guns to be used to fight in an army, and guns to be used to prevent a mugging or rob a store.
Finally, I would argue there is a big difference between a hand gun and a rifle. A hand gun can only be used to kill a person. Well, possibly for sport shooting at ranges, but that is a side issue. Rifles and shot guns have a valid use for hunting, and possible military use. I would support a complete ban on handguns, and restrictions on rifle/shot gun ownership.
It will be interesting to see what happens in Washington DC with the current debate over guns, and if it will lead to any meaningful statistics it the current ban is repealed.
You are correct viz. military service in Switzerland. Every male citizen between 18 and (I think) 40 is required to perform national service with the military. They are also required to keep there personal weapon (assault rifle for soldiers, a pistol in addition for officers) at home, where they are issued 50 rounds for the rifle, and 36 for the pistol. The ammo is sealed to prevent use for non-military reason, and inspections are random. The soldier IS allowed to purchase personal rounds for their weapon as they may desire. Upon discharge, they are allowed to keep their weapon, once it is rendered to a semi-auto function only.
You can argue all you want about the benefits of banning handguns in this country, but that will not make it work. As stated previously, they are, for all intents and purposes, banned already. At least in Canada
As for the SCOTUS decision, I believe they will rule in a strict consructionist fashion. This means the handgun ban will be ruled unconstitutional.
I too am intrigued by Morty's comments. I think the break-down in "community" over the last few decades is a big factor in this aspect of the criminal "gun culture".
You can argue all you want about the benefits of banning handguns in this country, but that will not make it work. As stated previously, they are, for all intents and purposes, banned already. At least in Canada
Then perhaps I should argue for increased enforcement and/or sentencing for gun related crimes. Guns just seem surprisingly common for something that is for all intents and purposes banned. But again, I have more opinion than fact in this debate. I'd also be curious to know what the average Canadian citizen thinks/knows about gun laws. If most people have incorrect views/facts, then perhaps the facts do not matter. It goes back again to the perception of guns in society. Maybe if people thought they were banned, then the actual number would decrease over time....yes, a tenuous, hopeful thought at best.
I spent 3 years at RMC. Summers in Gagetown, etc. and winters in a classroom. You don't get assigned a regiment until your last summer of training and I didn't make it that far, but it would've probably been 12 R.B.C. (I was in the armour track).
I'll agree with the things Mark wants to point out about the dangerous of guns etc.
But do we understand that making more laws creates and increases violent crimes? The older generations are about to go through a consciousness shift and an identity crisis when they realize this.
If we are worried about guns and violent crimes we should be raising the intelligence level of our society not deciding what new laws to create. I had zero classes in highschool about compassion and non violence. School was purely about stepping on my peers heads to get above them.
I would argue that a gun also serves a purpose, and is much safer than gasoline
You'd argue, but not convince.
Scroll through the past posts. I've said my thoughts on this, though I will admit - some have changed. I now AM in the camp of melt them all down (aside from enforcement and very few select other reasons).
Also, darb, I'm formulating a series of thoughts on your post... give me a bit.
extremely strict limitations on producing, manufacturing, selling, and owning firearms is the best option. simply banning them all (or melting them) is pointless. after destroying all the guns i guess we'll have to get rid of all the knives, then the brass knuckles, then bats, then wooden boards with nails in them.
extremely strict limitations on producing, manufacturing, selling, and owning firearms is the best option.
Again I just want to emphasize that adding rules and limitation will INCREASE violent crime. So instead of think in terms of how strict we should make these laws and what they should encompass, we need to start teaching our children how to live in a freer society.
I now AM in the camp of melt them all down (aside from enforcement and very few select other reasons).
Melt them all down? LOL...yes that will solve the problem. It's not like anyone with a high school equivalent education given a few tools and any sort of accelerant couldn't make a weapon/gun that would blow your head off.
Yes it does. Sadly you fail to address that this nut could have just as easily used this very purposeful item, walked up to the bar and threw a huge fire bomb in, burning everyone alive. Then what?
Again I just want to emphasize that adding rules and limitation will INCREASE violent crime. So instead of think in terms of how strict we should make these laws and what they should encompass, we need to start teaching our children how to live in a freer society.
education is probably the best way to better society in general and this can trickle down into lower violent crimes. however, i don't think the correlation is as direct as you are suggesting here.
education is probably the best way to better society in general and this can trickle down into lower violent crimes. however, i don't think the correlation is as direct as you are suggesting here.
You are mistaken and were lied to, uneducated on the subject and conditioned to see things in terms of what laws will help. We have studies from other countries that show these types of law increase violent crimes, they are facts and stats...I don't have them now but they were posted by the opposition and literally brought into our parliament to combat the new bills on mandatory minimums. I watched the opposition argue with the stats literally in their hands. Your 'not thinking' that there is a correlation is ruling and fueling this government movement to create these damaging laws and it making this country and world a very bad place to live in.
You are mistaken and were lied to, uneducated on the subject and conditioned to see things in terms of what laws will help. We have studies from other countries that show these types of law increase violent crimes, they are facts and stats...I don't have them now but they were posted by the opposition and literally brought into our parliament to combat the new bills on mandatory minimums. I watched the opposition argue with the stats literally in their hands. Your 'not thinking' that there is a correlation is ruling and fueling this government movement to create these damaging laws and it making this country and world a very bad place to live in.
well i guess i'll open my school for nazis and teach my students that white supremacy is awesome. that's learning. that's education. that does not directly lead to less violence and crimes. sorry but just general education has no direct correlation. it obviously depends on what is being taught to the students. this is pretty obvious so i don't quite understand your point.
i will state again, education does not directly correlate with less violence and crimes. the proper education probably does filter down in some capacity but not directly.
i will state again, education does not directly correlate with less violence and crimes. the proper education probably does filter down in some capacity but not directly.
ahh i was mostly suggesting more laws = more violence. But yes correct education will = less violence. But our eduction system the way it is today is largely responsible for the violence, teaching individual competitiveness, rather then holistic compassion.
Still not done with your bit darb, but am interested in seeing some of those stats when you get them.
Superned, do try and keep up. The previous posts in this thread clearly show my differentiation and opposition to guns vs. knives and other multi-purpose items. Though, I guess brass knucks would go in the fire too.
TLDR - knives, gas, rope, and most other things people say "Guess we'll have to get rid of too" are multi-purpose, they prepare food, fix things, act as fuel for our vehicles. Guns kill, that's it.
Still not done with your bit darb, but am interested in seeing some of those stats when you get them.
Superned, do try and keep up. The previous posts in this thread clearly show my differentiation and opposition to guns vs. knives and other multi-purpose items. Though, I guess brass knucks would go in the fire too.
TLDR - knives, gas, rope, and most other things people say "Guess we'll have to get rid of too" are multi-purpose, they prepare food, fix things, act as fuel for our vehicles. Guns kill, that's it.
Mark
i guess hunting with guns is off limits. bow and arrows burned as well?
i guess hunting with guns is off limits. bow and arrows burned as well?
Ya
I'm not a hunting advocate. Again, this is in this thread somewhere. If you want sport shooting (olympic style) - then the shooting range, with its superior security options keeps all the equipment.
I've already searched for the docs before and can't find them. Its completely obvious though, you make something illegal and it becomes a staple of organized crime, now its its worth money and people will kill for it. You send more people to jail, that come out worse than they entered. And when focus on fixing our society by changing our laws you miss the obviousness that if you fixed the people you wouldn't need laws. Its the wrong direction.
I've explained before though that the conservative government never ever denied that mm's don't create more violent crime. When stats were held up to them they ignored them and simply said we want dangerous criminals off the streets and cheered loudly.
And I say this with as much tact as I can muster. When it comes to most of the things you've mentioned here, hell, when almost anyone mentions anything, I usually want the documentation to back it up. You, in particular, will need to show me something because sometimes I have a tremendous difficulty following your lines of thought.
Comments
Not to get the thread off track again, but may I ask why you think that?
Is it because I get so wound up about the death penalty?
It's completely untrue is all.
I know sir, and to be honest with you, it happens all the time. Less now as I get older, but still pretty frequently.
I was taking the piss a little.
(I have also not researched any of this, so take whatever I say as ignorant opinion)
I believe this is an important point, and also references back to morty's comments. In my opinion, North American culture is not mature enough (for lack of a better word) to handle guns. Here, guns are somewhat glorified. More and more, they are becoming an accepted method of dealing with problems. I'm not saying that guns are a big problem, and can be found on every street corner and playground. But they are creeping into normal lives. That is why I would support additional hand gun control. By reducing possible exposure to guns, society at large will have less tolerance for them. Maybe an impressionable youth will see a friend join a gang, get a gun, and will think "this guy is crazy, I'm outta here", instead of thinking "this guy is cool, maybe I do need protection as well". Or maybe that is just my wishful thinking.
In Switzerland, and Europe in general, I believe there is a greater respect for war and suffering, and the effect that guns can have on people. The tolerance for gun crime is much less. You can even see this in television show ratings. In France, almost any show with gun exposure and violence (CSI, Law and Order, etc) has a higher rating (usually 14+) than shows with sexual content (Sex and the city, anything on after 9pm, usually rated 12+). Further, I would wager that the guns in Switzerland are rifles stored in attics to be used in case of invasion (isn't everyone in Switzerland technically part of a militia??). There is a distinction between guns to be used to fight in an army, and guns to be used to prevent a mugging or rob a store.
Finally, I would argue there is a big difference between a hand gun and a rifle. A hand gun can only be used to kill a person. Well, possibly for sport shooting at ranges, but that is a side issue. Rifles and shot guns have a valid use for hunting, and possible military use. I would support a complete ban on handguns, and restrictions on rifle/shot gun ownership.
It will be interesting to see what happens in Washington DC with the current debate over guns, and if it will lead to any meaningful statistics it the current ban is repealed.
my 2 cents (soon to be 1 nickel)
You can argue all you want about the benefits of banning handguns in this country, but that will not make it work. As stated previously, they are, for all intents and purposes, banned already. At least in Canada
As for the SCOTUS decision, I believe they will rule in a strict consructionist fashion. This means the handgun ban will be ruled unconstitutional.
I too am intrigued by Morty's comments. I think the break-down in "community" over the last few decades is a big factor in this aspect of the criminal "gun culture".
Then perhaps I should argue for increased enforcement and/or sentencing for gun related crimes. Guns just seem surprisingly common for something that is for all intents and purposes banned. But again, I have more opinion than fact in this debate. I'd also be curious to know what the average Canadian citizen thinks/knows about gun laws. If most people have incorrect views/facts, then perhaps the facts do not matter. It goes back again to the perception of guns in society. Maybe if people thought they were banned, then the actual number would decrease over time....yes, a tenuous, hopeful thought at best.
I spent 3 years at RMC. Summers in Gagetown, etc. and winters in a classroom. You don't get assigned a regiment until your last summer of training and I didn't make it that far, but it would've probably been 12 R.B.C. (I was in the armour track).
Also: 21 injured and 2 dead in Scarborough last night.
Mark
But do we understand that making more laws creates and increases violent crimes? The older generations are about to go through a consciousness shift and an identity crisis when they realize this.
If we are worried about guns and violent crimes we should be raising the intelligence level of our society not deciding what new laws to create. I had zero classes in highschool about compassion and non violence. School was purely about stepping on my peers heads to get above them.
There I did it, I opened it, but I'm ready...
I would argue that a gun also serves a purpose, and is much safer than gasoline
You'd argue, but not convince.
Scroll through the past posts. I've said my thoughts on this, though I will admit - some have changed. I now AM in the camp of melt them all down (aside from enforcement and very few select other reasons).
Also, darb, I'm formulating a series of thoughts on your post... give me a bit.
Mark
hahahahaha
Melt them all down? LOL...yes that will solve the problem. It's not like anyone with a high school equivalent education given a few tools and any sort of accelerant couldn't make a weapon/gun that would blow your head off.
That's good else:
"Look out! He's got a board with a nail in it!"
-Kang / Kodos
Yes it does. Sadly you fail to address that this nut could have just as easily used this very purposeful item, walked up to the bar and threw a huge fire bomb in, burning everyone alive. Then what?
education is probably the best way to better society in general and this can trickle down into lower violent crimes. however, i don't think the correlation is as direct as you are suggesting here.
well i guess i'll open my school for nazis and teach my students that white supremacy is awesome. that's learning. that's education. that does not directly lead to less violence and crimes. sorry but just general education has no direct correlation. it obviously depends on what is being taught to the students. this is pretty obvious so i don't quite understand your point.
i will state again, education does not directly correlate with less violence and crimes. the proper education probably does filter down in some capacity but not directly.
Superned, do try and keep up. The previous posts in this thread clearly show my differentiation and opposition to guns vs. knives and other multi-purpose items. Though, I guess brass knucks would go in the fire too.
TLDR - knives, gas, rope, and most other things people say "Guess we'll have to get rid of too" are multi-purpose, they prepare food, fix things, act as fuel for our vehicles. Guns kill, that's it.
Mark
i guess hunting with guns is off limits. bow and arrows burned as well?
Ya
I'm not a hunting advocate. Again, this is in this thread somewhere. If you want sport shooting (olympic style) - then the shooting range, with its superior security options keeps all the equipment.
Mark
This is the only thing close I could find but I don't even know what it is..... Mandatory Minimum Sentences - Position Paper - CCJA
I've explained before though that the conservative government never ever denied that mm's don't create more violent crime. When stats were held up to them they ignored them and simply said we want dangerous criminals off the streets and cheered loudly.
And I say this with as much tact as I can muster. When it comes to most of the things you've mentioned here, hell, when almost anyone mentions anything, I usually want the documentation to back it up. You, in particular, will need to show me something because sometimes I have a tremendous difficulty following your lines of thought.
Mark
Lengthening sentences = less incentive to give yourself up rather than kill someone who's about to arrest you for a gun crime.