marcinmoka

That's not what I asked. So once again, is it in your best interest for Iran to have access to the nuclear weapons?

Keystone, as (and I presume) a Canadian, do you want Iran to have easier access to Nuclear weapons? Would it be in your best interest? Would it make the world a safer place?

So if someone tried to shoot you, but accidentally missed...all is forgiven? Mens rea?

And not the nagging Jewish mother?

Never heard of it. Though you do get some interesting Image results when you google it. I'm guessing that's in the environs of L.A? Clearly there are exceptions due to other factors, equally in the case of Guangzhou, Mumbai, etc. And granted, Torino, Milano, Bilbao, Barcelona are better situated for trade, but why are northern Europeans usually better off than those in the south? Slovenia exempted, why where nations such as Poland or the Czech Republic better suited for entry into the E.U than Bulgaria or Romania? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.

With the exception of either a geographic advantage (i.e. access to ports, proximity to other trading partners, industrial clustering - Hollywood,Silicon Valley, etc) or political creations (Singapore, Israel, etc), why does economic wealth tend to cluster in less pleasant climates? In general, it seems the closer you get to the equator, the lower the economic prospects. Northern Europe vs. Southern Europe? Even more visibly, northern Italy or Spain compared to their southern counterparts? Why have cities such as Chicago, New York, Boston managed to create a more diverse economies than that of Oklahoma City or Mobile, Alabama? Do milder climates somehow promote productivity, ingenuity and creativity? Clearly, year-round agricultural activity was never an option, thus leaving people to devise alternate means of economic subsistence.

Not a bad idea. Q-Ships a la WWII could be another option. Furthermore, I do find it mildly amusing the (relative) level of cooperation between normally antagonistic nations in the Gulf of Aden, especially with the emergence these past few days of Iranians joining the effort. The plus side about having such nations (i.e. Russia, China, Iran, etc) in the fold is that their rules of engagement may prove to be a little more "liberal" than our own.

Amazing. You devote time for two separate posts to explain that "you don't have the time" to reply. Just label everything false without explaining why. Anyhow, party-on, Garth...

Wow. You must of thought long & hard on that one. You too Angus. By and large, those guns were bought legally. Whether they end up as illegal firearms in either the American, or Canadian black markets is irrelevant. The point is they were legally acquired. Is there anything in those hypothetical, yet relevant scenarios that you took personally? ----------------------- Intellectually riveting, Angus, from the Anne Coulther school of debating. P.S. Do you know what inclination means? ------------------------- Should people be allowed to own RPGs, SAMs all in the name of "self defence" (or pleasure for some)

No. Here, most DO NOT. They are too hard and too pricey to come by (luckily). And remember, almost all illegal guns start off legal. Not at relatively low prices. Supply- Demand & Price elasticity. Geez. Like Detroit, St. Louis, Memphis, etc? So big cities with high handgun ownership rates have lower levels of rape? So why than does Canada have lower incidence of rape than the U.S? Convenient. Now thugs can simply wait outside hospitals, schools and bars to rob people. Nurses watch out. You don't get it, do you? I don't know you, and for all I know, you could be a rapist or a goof and have yet to act on your urges. Maybe you walk in on your significant other cheating and do something out of anger. Or you could be mentally stable now, pass the appropriate tests, and one month later, loose your marbles, or have never been diagnosed or confined. Wasn't the Virginia Tech Massacre with a legal weapon? In other words, how do I know that you want to use said gun for defensive rather than offensive purposes. I don't. And thus, I see your carrying of a handgun in the open to be more a THREAT to me and my family. And yes, eliminating threats to my loved ones DOES concern me.

Fair enough. But if that is your sole reason, than what would having the right to carry a concealed handgun accomplish? Would your standard hunting rifle not suffice? But than again, what if the Russians attack. Why shouldn't I be able to acquire a nice RPG or SAM launcher? Criminals shouldn't be able to. But if guns become more widespread on the open market, rest assured that criminal elements will have a much easier time doing so on the black market. Feel free to "pleasure" yourself, but in either a designated environment, or with a rifle. How a CCW'd handgun will "pleasure" you at work or on the subway is beyond me (and I would strongly recommend discussing that with your doctor). Back to M.Dancers question, where did these guns come from? a. How? You've yet to explain. How is my faith in the law and law-enforcement agencies an appeal to emotion. b. Read. I don't care for the banning of guns in general. I care about CCW and ease of access to handguns.

i.e. Efficiency in killing. And no, they were not CREATED for said purpose. Apart from those living in the wild, most of humanity had already domesticated animals for consumption. They were created to help one kill in war. Again, no. The sporting use, in both cases was a secondary appropriation, but not their purpose. We all know. But it sure made the act of far easier. I agree. I don't oppose guns in general. I only oppose the idea of civilians carrying concealed hand guns, which clearly have no use in either hunting nor sport shooting. Again, the idea of concealed, widely available handguns. To be honest, I was thinking of a recreational shooting course and membership and may eventually do so.

I know someone would say this. But seriously, think about that for a second. Cars have one purpose, transport. They ultimately serve a far great purpose in society. Guns were also conceived for only one purpose; an efficient means of killing. Beyond that....??? I don't know. Do you? My statement was response to Oleg's "statement". Really? Why so? Explain please. And while your at it, explain how your fear of threats lurking everywhere and your desire to play armed avenger are not "based on emotions"?

One may be responsible at the time of issue, but what guarantee of future stability? What if one succumbs to mental illness, or a traumatic event down the line? Humans are emotional beings.

Yes. Exactly the same thing. And locking my doors when I leave the house is also identical to ones belief in religious mythology. Did you come up with that analogy yourself? Don't strain yourself now.