WarBicycle Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Miller aims to ban handguns, shut ranges Don't hold your breath waiting for the gun violence to stop; criminals will continue to have access to illegal guns regardless if this jerk gets his way. Individuals caught with unlawful firearms should be severely punished. Rather than punish honest people, individuals caught with unlawful firearms should receive a mandatory ten-year prison sentence, and individuals using a firearms to commit a crime should get a mandatory fifteen-year sentence in addition to the sentence for committing the crime and, most important, sentences should not run concurrently. Those individuals convicted of not storing their weapons properly should have their weapons confiscated, and banned from owning a weapon for life. That, combined with a five thousand dollar fine for each weapon stored improperly would be an excellent deterrent for those too cheap to purchase a proper gun safe. I haven’t owned a gun for nearly twenty-five years, but support the right of responsible adults to own firearms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Is this Miller guy really that stupid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 The vast majority of the violence that has everyone's ginch in a knot will continue as long as the prohibition of drugs remains in place. Criminals will always need guns to defend themselves from other criminals, I fail to see why this should be such a mystery. Harsher mandatory sentencing will only cause criminals to use their guns to defend themselves from the authorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Is this Miller guy really that stupid? That and more Wilber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 No matter whether you favour or disfavour the ban, your prescriptions for the problem are just silly, WarBicycle. Looking at the article, it does seem a little excessive in that I am not against well secured (and guarded) ranges, some of which they are effectively going to shut down, but the idea of banning the general public from owning handguns is not particularly offensive to me. I mean, really, if you want something to protect your home with that badly, you can still own a rifle, right? The only other place I suppose is the question of antiques and unusable collectors items, but there is no good reason that I can see that it should be legal to have a run of the mill Beretta at home. As eyeball points out (rightly in this case), the real problem is that criminalized drugs, among other things, create a demand for handguns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarBicycle Posted May 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 (edited) I've owned several handguns in the past, and was an active member of a handgun club. I've never met a single individual who purchased handgun to defend their family; they purchase them because they are either members of a handgun club or an avid collector. Edited May 27, 2008 by WarBicycle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Is this Miller guy really that stupid? Like the long gun registry, the plan here is not to actually do anything about crime, but to be seen to be doing something. It is not so much that Miller is an idiot, as the voters of Toronto are idiots, and he is playing to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarBicycle Posted May 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Washington, DC and Chicago have had handgun bans for decades and are still amongst the most violent cities in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Washington, DC and Chicago have had handgun bans for decades and are still amongst the most violent cities in the US. What do facts have to do with this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 No matter whether you favour or disfavour the ban, your prescriptions for the problem are just silly, WarBicycle. Looking at the article, it does seem a little excessive in that I am not against well secured (and guarded) ranges, some of which they are effectively going to shut down, but the idea of banning the general public from owning handguns is not particularly offensive to me. I mean, really, if you want something to protect your home with that badly, you can still own a rifle, right? The only other place I suppose is the question of antiques and unusable collectors items, but there is no good reason that I can see that it should be legal to have a run of the mill Beretta at home. As eyeball points out (rightly in this case), the real problem is that criminalized drugs, among other things, create a demand for handguns. You may have missed the point! Those against Miller's proposal are offended because it does nothing to reduce the number of ILLEGAL handguns used in CRIME! It's a mere photo-op, nothing more. So why waste our time and attention instead of actually DOING something??!! That's why some call for harsher sentences on the actual criminal use of firearms. You have to wonder, is Miller actually so stupid he thinks his proposal would do something positive about getting guns off the street or is he on the take to some gangstas who want to be sure their victims don't have guns to protect themselves? It just seems so obvious that criminals will ignore a handgun ban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 You have to wonder, is Miller actually so stupid he thinks his proposal would do something positive about getting guns off the street or is he on the take to some gangstas who want to be sure their victims don't have guns to protect themselves? It just seems so obvious that criminals will ignore a handgun ban. Miller is that stupid and more. This is about optics too, even if he knows it won't do anything, he can appear to be seen doing something about the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Miller is that stupid and more. This is about optics too, even if he knows it won't do anything, he can appear to be seen doing something about the problem. And hey, if he can infringe on law abiding people's rights along the way, all the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Washington, DC and Chicago have had handgun bans for decades and are still amongst the most violent cities in the US. What do facts have to do with this? Chicago, far from being one of the most violent cities in the world, is in the middle of the pack as far as US cities go...with a murder rate of 16.4 per 100,000. In comparison, Detroit the murder capital has a murder rate of 47.3 while Washington DC is higher....29.1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 What do facts have to do with this? Nothing. It is simply playing to peoples fears. Create more laws. Criminals will obey them. As much as they obey the laws that are presently in hand. Ho Hum - another day in canuckleland - I used to think the fruits and nuts folks only lived on the west coast - looks like the political F&N group is expanding and the sheeple of canuckleland will blindly follow - lead by the cbc and the toronto star. Just another bucket of oil to add to the slippery slopes. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Create more laws. Ho Hum - another day in canuckleland - I used to think the fruits and nuts folks only lived on the west coast - looks like the political F&N group is expanding and the sheeple of canuckleland will blindly follow - lead by the Conservatives. Borg The only reason a stupid law that you hate is being created Borg is that you won't give up a stupid law (prohibition) that you or at least your beloved Conservatives, love. Think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Nothing. It is simply playing to peoples fears. Create more laws. Criminals will obey them. As much as they obey the laws that are presently in hand. Ho Hum - another day in canuckleland - I used to think the fruits and nuts folks only lived on the west coast - looks like the political F&N group is expanding and the sheeple of canuckleland will blindly follow - lead by the cbc and the toronto star. Just another bucket of oil to add to the slippery slopes. Borg The fruits and nuts out west have it on good authority (including some on this forum from the other side of the rocks) that THIS,THIS and THIS is just a product of our hysterical imagination's because the system is working the way it should. At least we aren't stupid enough to think a handgun ban will fix it. Not yet anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 THIS,THIS and THIS is just a product of our hysterical imagination... These are actually by-products of a hysterical ideology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 These are actually by-products of a hysterical ideology. Explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 Too sad to see Miller's position being denigrated. A sign that cities and mayors in this country have no power. Just too sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 (edited) IMO, the idea of stiff penalties if you commit a crime while in possession of a handgun makes more sense. A ban doesn't reflect reality. Edited May 28, 2008 by noahbody Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 IMO, the idea of stiff penalties if you commit a crime while in possession of a handgun makes more sense. A ban doesn't reflect reality. Maybe it reflects an attempt to change reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 The vast majority of the violence that has everyone's ginch in a knot will continue as long as the prohibition of drugs remains in place. Criminals will always need guns to defend themselves from other criminals, I fail to see why this should be such a mystery.In effect, you are asking to us to choose Society A where addictive drugs are legal and Society B where guns are poorly controlled.I want Society C where drug dealers are controlled and guns aren't used. The State must control addictive drugs, and AK-47s or nuclear tactical weapons. The State must forbid access of some (OCD) people to these items. In some cases, the items must be simply forbidden. Toxic substances - for example, lead in gasoline. --- I posted this in another thread and it seems to me an intelligent compromise about gun control: In rural areas, subject to control for storage and purchase of weapons and ammunition, we should allow small-calibre semi-automatic weapons with a maximum of five rounds and single bore long guns in homes. In urban areas, all legal firearms (shooting pistols and so on) should be stored in gun clubs.We should forbid all other types of firearms and increase penalties for their possession, use or sale. We should abolish the long gun registry. I think this is a reasonable compromise between legitimate gun users and people who want gun control. It would also achieve the benefits of gun control at reasonable cost so that more funds could be applied to enforcement. It also mirrors legislation in Australia. Unfortunately, "gun control" is a wedge issue. Nobody reads the fine print or even cares. "Gun control", to an urban voter, is like "human rights" to everyone. What politician can win an election opposing "human rights" or a "human rights commission"? IOW, if I were an urban charlatan seeking votes, I would present myself as a great defender of "gun control". ---- The person who robs you blind will not have a one-week growth of beard and an accent and a stutter in his speech. The person who takes your retirement savings will smile, shake your hand, wear a clean suit and seem so honest. And when you lose your retirement savings to him, you'll have no recourse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 I posted this in another thread and it seems to me an intelligent compromise about gun control: I remember the quote August. It was not viable then nor is it now. Legal for rural but not for urban? Not a chance in hell. Gun control does not work. Stiffer penalties will help. Nothing will help Miller. Not booze not drugs. A lobotomy might help. Maybe Igor can find Abbie Normal and get another brain. If not ask Frau Blucher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Explain. The right-wing is hysterical at the thought of people recreationally altering their minds, unless its with alcohol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 The right-wing is hysterical at the thought of people recreationally altering their minds, unless its with alcohol. The left wing thinks it is OK for people to fry their brains on methamphetamines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.