MolonLabe

Nobody...we should secede from the Monarchy and become a Libertarian Republic Who the heck need monarchies anyway? Leftovers from the dark ages

There are plenty of communist and socialist types that voted Liberal during the last few elections that generally would have voted NDP or MLP instead. With Iggy in the leadership now, this is going to be the new trend...those who are much more to the left hate Iggy with a passion and the left will end up splitting their vote between Liberal, NDP, with maybe even a rise in MLP numbers. If the coalition stays together for the election after January then they will lose greatly due to popular dissatisfaction with it. Harper can table a bunch of things in the upcoming budget that won't be popular with Libs/NDP...and if Iggy is smart he will direct his people to vote for them to avoid an election. As much as I don't like Harper, I can't help but seeing this as a one big plan on his part from the get go.

You do realize that Chicago and DC have some of the highest homicide rates in all of North America right? D.C.: 31/100,000 pop Chicago: 21/100,000 pop DC has been rated first for all violent crime in the US, for at least 30 years in row now. They rank first for robbery, violent crime, homicide, property crime, aggravated assault, and vehicle theft for 2007. Oh yeah, forgot to mention...handguns and CCW are banned in Chicago and DC. Despite that, 80% of all of DC's homicides are done with handguns. The highest homicide rate DC saw was back in the early 90's...80/100,000 pop. Compare that to Vermont where one does not need a concealed carry license at all to carry a handgun concealed; they estimate that out of those eligible to carry a gun, 53% do. Their homicide rate has always been around 1-2/100,000 pop. Most cities in Texas that have similar populations to DC, have homicide rates around 1-14/100,000 pop. The majority of which have CCW rights. When CCW was first instituted in Florida, gun control advocates said there was going to be blood in the streets and road rage turned into shootings...that never happened. Instead Florida's violent crime rates all dropped while the rest of the country kept going up in homicides and violent crime. Gun bans don't work...CCW does Batman doesn't use guns Shows what you know I can hardly see a woman carrying one of those dogs in her purse. Dogs are a poor choice for self defense or house defense as they can be intimidated, or outright killed. Plus, dogs are hard to conceal, not to mention that the smaller they get the far less dangerous they become. Exponentially less dangerous. Firearms on the other hand are not relegated to such emotional directives and limitations. They don't have a brain of their own, and are far more effective for use at stopping home invaders, rapists, and robbers. A dog bite to the head or even throat will not kill immediately, and will take time to bleed out...whereas a CNS hit from most pistol rounds is instant. Concealed carry has the one advantage of forcing would be attackers to guess who is armed and who isn't. This means that those who are not carrying a firearm end up being protected by those who do not, through assumptive fear based guess work on the part of the thief, robber, rapist, murderer, due to simply not knowing who is armed and who isn't. This is why certain state police forces have been finding themselves arresting felons coming from states with higher rates of CCW permits. Criminals seek easier prey. They also choose to break into homes in the daytime when nobody is home so as to avoid getting shot at night by the owners.

And the problem is? The gun registry cost a minimum of 1 billion for only 7 million guns...$143 per gun. How much do you think it would cost for ammunition considering just how many rounds are out there? To register a single box of 20 rounds per gun owner, each round registered would then cost the taxpayers 20 billion dollars. I can only imagine just how much more money it would cost for a box of pistol rounds that come with 50 rounds in each box...not to mention the most common cartridge in the world being 22LR which all come in boxes of 50, 250, and 1000. Need I also mention that I can make bullets easily from lead, copper, brass etc at home with a small smelter, swaging press, and reload dies. Lead is less than a dollar for a POUND, and I have made copper jackets from plumbing supplies. Yeah like that will work...where exactly in the gun would you put these GPS tracking devices? In the removable stock? The removable bolt? The removable barrels? I can see the GPS device being destroyed on the first shot if it is in the barrel somewhere due to expansive pressure. And not to mention that if they run on batteries, and sooner or later those batteries will die and need to be changed. If the battery can be changed then it can also be removed. I can see you have given this enormous thought Also...how will any of these measure affect the other 17 million guns out there that aren't registered...or those that are in the US that are not in the same Canadian system that are being smuggled regularly across the border? I can make gunpowder at home with minimal chemicals...not to mention that I can make substitute powder composites with household chemicals as well. Black powder is still as simple to make as it was 600 years ago...smokeless gun cotton is still as simple to make as it was 130 years ago. One stop shopping locations for criminals and gang members Such armouries don't stop criminals from breaking into them in military installations...wth fences, gates, and armed guards on duty 24/7 All you will do is drive it underground by means of the paths of least resistance. Why should anyone bother with the safety exams, and get a license, and waiting periods, and registration transfers, and Authorizations To Transport to and from the range, and, and, and. When guns can be had easily on the street for cash and a smile, such restrictions will only serve to redirect people to less resistive sources. Any other bright ideas?

Believe what you want...I AM A LIBERTARIAN. I am 100% for the legalization of drugs the same as I am for the legalization and non-regulation of firearms, prostitution, etc. Considering though, that this specific thread is on gun control, I figured I would stick to the topic at hand rather than hijack it for a "drug" discussion. Tell you what...when there is any consistency in your posts(such as the presentation of the initial desire against overt government control, but then relegating yourself and others to excessive government control because you aren't getting a reach around) then you can engage in the debate from more constructive standpoint. Until then you are ranting, and ego stroking for brownie points Taken from the Libertarian Party of Canada website:

I am a Libertarian Not a Conservative But thanks anyway for the guilt-by-association routine without actually asking me what my position is on drug laws

Ok I will give... The Federal government under the Liberals told us that they had 95% compliance with the gun registry. Now...for one to have a percentile, you must have a base for comparison. Their sample is the actual number of registered firearms against a base that, get this, is a telephone survey of 2341 households, done back in 1995 where they asked complete strangers over the phone as to whether or not they had a gun in the house. That phone survey gave them a figure of approximately 6-7 million guns owned by between 1.2-1.3 million people. However...the plot thickens Back in 1975 a report was done for the Governor General on the exact same topic. Excepting one main difference...they used imports minus exports, minus lost/destroyed/stolen firearms data from the RCMP. Their figures back in 1975 based on hard data showed 18 million firearms owned by approximately 6-7 million people. We also know that the import/export data for 1975 to 1995 show a net importation(imports minus exports) of 110,000 guns per year. So add 2.2 million to the prior figure of 18 million to arrive at a hard-data total of 20.2 million guns And again we know that this annual figure doubled from 1995 to 2005 giving an additional 2 million net imported firearms to the mix, which brings the total to 22.2 million guns as of 2005...with the total imported guns for 2006, and 2007 being 440,000 and the estimated figure for 2008 being 250,000. This puts the total net figure for 2008 at approximately 23.1 million guns. Now we know for certain that the gun registry has 7 million registered firearms, which means that the compliance rate is actually 30.3% This means that 7 out of 10 gun owners do not trust their government. This also means that there are close to 17 million unregistered firearms out there. We also know through the National Weapons Enforcement Support Team(NWEST) that out of all recovered crime guns, 95% are know to be originating from the USA, and that out of the estimated 5% originating from Canada less than 1/3 of those are actually on record as registered in the system, 90% of which are on record as stolen. So...if the percentiles clearly show that the guns already in Canada are not in the source line for violent criminal activity, then where is all the alarmism coming from? The above figures are also why we cannot trust the registry for any verifiable information for police when they knocking on doors for domestic incidents. The gun registry, through CPIC, would tell the officers that there are no guns in the house, to which they still run a 1 in 4 risk of coming across guns anyway(unreg'd figures against total population) Still trust gun control? UK Violent Crime Rate = 2300 / 100,000 pop (2006/2008 UK Home Office) And still rising US Violent Crime Rate = 740 / 100,000 pop (2007 FBI UCR) And still dropping

I am a Libertarian through and through, but living up in the Yukon doesn't give us that option on the ballot. Until such time though I vote Conservative.

Those that continually advocate gun confiscations or gun control are always devoid of two prime factors in their reasoning...disobedience, and ingenuity. To be clear the argument that gun control will work, must first make two opposing assumptive platitudes. 1) People are untrustworthy and therefore must be disarmed 2) People will follow rules of disarmament because they can be trusted This is the prime reason that gun control never works...it doesn't take into account the nature of disobedience or cleverness of those who disobey. It also does not take into account their motivations for disobedience; in that they group the politically directed lumped in with the criminally violent. This in itself is a fatal mistake in that it makes enemies of generally law abiding citizens where there was no enmity prior to such directives. Any litmus test of gun control should be in the compliance ratio...that is to say the nature of trust of government by the citizens. A good example of this would be in the total number of estimated firearms in Canada. So how many guns are in Canada? Anyone have a clue? I will let you fine people stew over it a bit and then reveal the answer