Warhippy Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 2 minutes ago, Satchmo said: Let's not over exaggerate its' membership numbers either. From what I've seen, there are more people choosing the liberals over the conservatives because in their view it is the lesser of two evils. The issue with partisanship Any criticism of one side is automatically labeled defense or support of the other. Because it is unfathomable for a mind so simple as to only think of things as left v right to comprehend a scenario in which another person can loathe both but decie one is slightly more palatable than the other not based on political lines 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 39 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: So in light of that statement. Would it not make more sense to tighten up the borders and crack down where these illegal hand guns are making it in to Canada to begin with? What good is punishing law abiding gun owners when it doesn't even address the route problem of illegal hand guns? When I served every night unless on deployment we had to return our weapons to the armoury for secure safe holding. The punishment for unsecure or unsafe handling was swift and severe If the gun lobby hadn't cried and cried about a registry maybe we wouldn't be at this point in the issue If a gun owner is that paranoid that they won't register a gun then they aren't fit to have one Seriously ... If a gun owner is going to follow all the rules and safely secure weapons and ammo then there's no reason not to register them. The rights of the many Trump the rights of a minority .... Gun owners. The comprise was the gun registry and since it's been rejected the only recourse left is removal of assault weapons and handguns. You can't hunt with either so unless your on the range why does a private citizen need either ? This taps into the real issue of the cons muddying the waters on rights vs not rights A right - freedom of movement Not a right - trespass onto other property A right - freedom of speech Not a right - hate speech. A privilege in Canada ... It's not a constitutional right - guns Not a right - to demand to own guns on you own terms when others may have to live with the consequences of those guns 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, the destroyer of worlds said: Criminals gonna criminal is not an argument against gun control. Criminals gonna criminal is starting a discussion on the CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. Or on our border agency or on immigration services. Again, this isn't an argument against gun control. Don't we have gun control as a result of the potential of crime? I fail to see how these two things don't correlate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Bob Long said: its just fear mongering from the PP brigade that you'd be thrown in jail for normal speech or protesting. It's their "thought police" trope re-hashed. They are trying to figure out how to handle the really extreme stuff online. As this gets debated over the various readings and committees they will sharpen up what it means by the time it hits the senate for yet another review, and then potential challenges in the Supreme Court. We are so far away from the scenario's being made up in here it's just silly. It's not that it is the vagueness of some of it. I can ignore PP. I figure yeah it's probably a ways away from being fully hashed out enough to see it more clearly. Until then it's just an unclear bill besides some parts that are clearly defined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Junkyard Dog said: It's not that it is the vagueness of some of it. I can ignore PP. I figure yeah it's probably a ways away from being fully hashed out enough to see it more clearly. Until then it's just an unclear bill besides some parts that are clearly defined. thats how these things usually go, things get added and removed during the three bill readings all the time. Its a really tough problem, its going to take a lot of work and honest debate to figure out how to make it work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Bob Long said: thats how these things usually go, things get added and removed during the three bill readings all the time. Its a really tough problem, its going to take a lot of work and honest debate to figure out how to make it work. Hopefully, if it does pass it is something we can all agree with. Probably won't be for a while till we figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the destroyer of worlds Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 11 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said: Don't we have gun control as a result of the potential of crime? I fail to see how these two things don't correlate. Criminals going to ignore a law is never an argument against said law. People speed but a major reason for speed limits is to prevent accidents and deaths. Saying we shouldn't have speed limits because people speed is asinine. Similar energy to the whole criminals gonna ignore gun laws so we shouldn't have gun laws. Asinine. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 4 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said: Hopefully, if it does pass it is something we can all agree with. Probably won't be for a while till we figure it out. one thing I really like about this current version of the libs is they are willing to take on some hard files - assisted dying, new internet laws, the emergencies act, e.g. They certainly haven't been boring. The fear mongering stuff has to stop though, its BS, and all they could end up doing is making life easier for some really bad folks. We have a constitution for a reason, nothing like the fear mongers are talking about is in the cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 31 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: No, but you do get a complimentary container of black face paint. Not sure what you would use it for though... law abiding gun polish, maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4petesake Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 56 minutes ago, D.B Cooper said: Let’s not act like it’s not here. Nah, comments about misplaced blame for issues constantly gets misrepresented as support for Trudeau. Really, have you seen anyone here gushing over Trudeau? I was a misplaced conservative. I never left the party, they left me when they did away the “progressive” part of their name and united with the bullshit of the reform party. I have no time or trust for a party that panders to bible-thumpers and extremists. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 17 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said: Criminals going to ignore a law is never an argument against said law. People speed but a major reason for speed limits is to prevent accidents and deaths. Saying we shouldn't have speed limits because people speed is asinine. Similar energy to the whole criminals gonna ignore gun laws so we shouldn't have gun laws. Asinine. All I am saying is that it has to correlate, otherwise there wouldn't be point in legislating gun control. It is obvious it correlates. The same legislation that brought more gun control also brought harsher penalties for certain gun crimes. We don't just pass legislation for the sake of passing legislation. There's a reason for everything. And we want to limit the amount of guns out there to prevent unnecessary deaths which is not a bad reason. The problem is that there's an argument to be made that, with the majority of crimes are committed with illegal guns, perhaps they went overboard with certain aspects of the bill as it pertains to what is considered prohibited. They've already backtracked parts of it. Also aren't you comparing apples with oranges a bit here comparing it to cars and speeding? The majority of car accidents are not caused by illegally obtained cars... I mean... I guess at the rate they're getting stolen nowadays they could be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 Its getting rough out there, food banks receiving all time high traffic. If any out there are able to give it is a great causes, and they are able to make your money go quite far. https://www.mapleridgenews.com/news/maple-ridge-food-bank-makes-urgent-appeal-7369369 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Salmon Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 3 hours ago, RupertKBD said: Sooo....just so we're clear: You admit that the images you posted and claimed were evidence of the RCMP backing your statement, did not actually do so? As far as your article from "justiceforgunowners.ca goes, I'm sure it make lots of good points. Moose can be quite dangerous, no doubt. But it's beside the point in regards to my post. I responded to Satchmo, because he too was skeptical about the screenshot you posted.....and with good reason. Sooo.....just so we're clear I'm not saying it was fake. You spent a whole day trying to prove that and you got nothing. Did you email the guy at the bottom of the page fore more information like he offered? I doubt it As for the article it uses facts from statscan and other reputable sources. If you read it you would see that PAL holders commit less crime than ordinary citizens. It doesn't go on about moose or assault moose. It goes to prove my point correct. I can understand though why you wouldn't read it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Salmon Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 3 hours ago, King Heffy said: But it's fine for you to speak for me assuming I'd agree with your position on the Bill? What I said is 'what we should agree on'. But obviously that's never gonna happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 2 minutes ago, Spring Salmon said: What I said is 'what we should agree on'. But obviously that's never gonna happen Why not? Stronger laws against online stalking eg should be an easy thing to agree on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 11 minutes ago, Spring Salmon said: Sooo.....just so we're clear I'm not saying it was fake. You spent a whole day trying to prove that and you got nothing. Did you email the guy at the bottom of the page fore more information like he offered? I doubt it As for the article it uses facts from statscan and other reputable sources. If you read it you would see that PAL holders commit less crime than ordinary citizens. It doesn't go on about moose or assault moose. It goes to prove my point correct. I can understand though why you wouldn't read it Not even commenting on the Moose story. As I already said, I'm not even saying it's wrong. All I'm saying is that the original screenshot that you posted doesn't say what you claimed it said. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.B Cooper Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 hour ago, Satchmo said: Let's not over exaggerate its' membership numbers either. I didn’t. I just said half would be I jail too. 1 hour ago, Satchmo said: From what I've seen, there are more people choosing the liberals over the conservatives because in their view it is the lesser of two evils. Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Salmon Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 4 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Why not? Stronger laws against online stalking eg should be an easy thing to agree on. Sure. Same with child porn. What we don't need is this batshit crazy bill that can put people on house arrest for not doing anything wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Spring Salmon said: What we don't need is this batshit crazy bill that can put people on house arrest for not doing anything wrong But that's not a real thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Spring Salmon said: Sure. Same with child porn. What we don't need is this batshit crazy bill that can put people on house arrest for not doing anything wrong I agree we should not put people on house arrest for not doing anything wrong. Why do you think that is going to happen? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the destroyer of worlds Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 So I'm just watching YouTube videos and posting on CDC and the RCMP gonna come arrest me? I'm gonna go before a judge, get convicted of something and then face house arrest? That's what getting house arrest for nothing sounds like to any reasonable person. That ain't happening. There would have to be SOMETHING. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Salmon Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Satchmo said: I agree we should not put people on house arrest for not doing anything wrong. Why do you think that is going to happen? It's literally in the bill. Why put it in there at all then? For once I agree with Coyne. Did you read the globe article? It needs to be scrapped altogether and parts of it possibly redone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 12 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Why not? Stronger laws against online stalking eg should be an easy thing to agree on. Unfortunately I dont think it passes. There definitely needs to be some accountability online especially when in comes to protecting minors. But the current version seems a little over the top, how does one incite a genocide online for example? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 7 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: Not even commenting on the Moose story. As I already said, I'm not even saying it's wrong. All I'm saying is that the original screenshot that you posted doesn't say what you claimed it said. I think the point of contention was that we were told it was the RCMP who said this: Statistically, licensed gun owners are between three and five times less likely to commit murder than the average citizen who does not have a firearms license. The statement may be true. It may be false. But your assertion that it was Chief Supt. Marty Cheliak who said it is false. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.B Cooper Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 34 minutes ago, 4petesake said: Nah, comments about misplaced blame for issues constantly gets misrepresented as support for Trudeau. Really, have you seen anyone here gushing over Trudeau? Yes I have. Absolutely and 100%. It’s not often lately, but Trudy fans are here. 34 minutes ago, 4petesake said: I was a misplaced conservative. I never left the party, they left me when they did away the “progressive” part of their name and united with the bullshit of the reform party. I am 37. The PC broke up a few years before I was allowed to vote. My dad always supported them, but I always leaned and voted liberal, until 2019, when I just couldn’t bring myself to do it anymore. I’ll never vote conservative, but I doubt I’ll be voting liberal again too. 34 minutes ago, 4petesake said: I have no time or trust for a party that panders to bible-thumpers and extremists. I feel the left extremists are just as plentiful and just as arrogant, ignorant and insufferable as the right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.