Gun Control Doesn't work...Never did, Never will!

DrGreenthumb · October 8, 2008

Well how many people do you think die each day from drug overdose...i am willing to bet more than die from gunfire.......at least in North America

Exactly zero people have died from a cannabis overdose....ever. Legal pharmaceuticals on the other hand...probably kill almost as many as guns do every day...a lot.

BTW I'm NOT in favour of gun control beyond handguns and assault weapons. Shotguns and hunting rifles are food gathering or varmint control tools and are very important to many rural people. I support hunting and have lobbied my government representatives to allow more hunting especially of deer, and geese which are in a state of overpopulation. You have to remember that we are natural predators too, and not hunting can upset nature's balance as much as too much hunting I do not hunt anymore, but do shoot the odd skunk or coyote when they start raiding my chicken coop. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of claiming that gun ownership is is some kind of inaliable right and at the same time claiming that plant ownership is not. Either we are free to own things that we do not use to harm others or we don't. A gun is a LOT more potentially harmful than a pot plant, saying otherwise is really just being silly.

Edited October 8, 2008 by DrGreenthumb

wulf42 · October 8, 2008

Exactly zero people have died from a cannabis overdose....ever. Legal pharmaceuticals on the other hand...probably kill almost as many as guns do every day...a lot.
BTW I'm NOT in favour of gun control beyond handguns and assault weapons. Shotguns and hunting rifles are food gathering or varmint control tools and are very important to many rural people. I support hunting and have lobbied my government representatives to allow more hunting especially of deer, and geese which are in a state of overpopulation. You have to remember that we are natural predators too, and not hunting can upset nature's balance as much as too much hunting I do not hunt anymore, but do shoot the odd skunk or coyote when they start raiding my chicken coop. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of claiming that gun ownership is is some kind of inaliable right and at the same time claiming that plant ownership is not. Either we are free to own things that we do not use to harm others or we don't. A gun is a LOT more potentially harmful than a pot plant, saying otherwise is really just being silly.

Well if you read all the posts you will see.........most people on here have no problem banning assault weapons or handguns.....nor do i !

its the rifles and shotguns we are focusing on..........and as far as pot not killing people well marijauna use has been...PROVEN to lead younger people on to harder drugs such as Crack...which drops people dead and ruin lives everyday...so saying drug use is okay...is the most

stupid and idiotic arguement i have heard yet!! not to mention damage to the lungs is a lot more servere from pot use!

White Doors · October 8, 2008

Let the wolves and bears keep the dear population in check. Or food supply. Or natural selection.
Taking a life of an animal that you didn't raise when you don't need its flesh for sustenance is wrong.

In my opinion it is not wrong. I think all of the deer or any hunted animal should be shown respect by eating all there is to eat and as long as the poplulation is healthy then there is nothing more wrong with it than having a steak. To claim there is a moral difference between eating venison and beef is hypocritical - at best and more than a little ignorant. Veal on the other hand...

And at least my opinion is an informed one which makes it more valid than yours.

White Doors · October 8, 2008

Exactly zero people have died from a cannabis overdose....ever. Legal pharmaceuticals on the other hand...probably kill almost as many as guns do every day...a lot.
BTW I'm NOT in favour of gun control beyond handguns and assault weapons. Shotguns and hunting rifles are food gathering or varmint control tools and are very important to many rural people. I support hunting and have lobbied my government representatives to allow more hunting especially of deer, and geese which are in a state of overpopulation. You have to remember that we are natural predators too, and not hunting can upset nature's balance as much as too much hunting I do not hunt anymore, but do shoot the odd skunk or coyote when they start raiding my chicken coop. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of claiming that gun ownership is is some kind of inaliable right and at the same time claiming that plant ownership is not. Either we are free to own things that we do not use to harm others or we don't. A gun is a LOT more potentially harmful than a pot plant, saying otherwise is really just being silly.

I congratulate you on being consistent Dr.

PoliticalCitizen · October 9, 2008

Yes the USSR did a marvelous job of disarming the population, and systematically Murdering Millions of people as well. USSR is a golden child of gun control.

The weapon ban for civilians had nothing to do with the deportations of dissidents.

PoliticalCitizen · October 9, 2008

No,not because one may disagree, because you state opinion as "fact" and it is anything but .
Just to remind you that you posted...

That is not a fact.

I used strong words. Most armed people do not murder anyone. But...

A firearm is designed to inflict damage using a high-velocity projectile that penetrates and disrupts tissue, nerves and bone on impact thus disabling or killing a human or animal target.

There are NO reasonable alternative uses. It is a weapon ONLY.

You have been pantsed about the whole aboittoir vs hunting thing , and you refuse to admit that.
Just to make it clear for you, many people in this country do not have access to the "white styrofoam wrapped in plastic " steaks that you do. Should they not eat meat ?

So they hunt, a very legal and highly regulated industry. Not to mention providing sustenance to many people , not only in game, but in dollars for housing guiding and whathaveyou.

Farmers need guns to protect livestock from being killed by predators.Their livlihood is at stake.

I said when not needed for sustenance. Your examples would be exceptions.

Here is a fact for you........you own weapons. I absolutely guarantee it.
Care to tell us who you plan on using them on?

Now what?

You mean kitchen knives or a car or anything else that can BECOME a weapon?

That's just not the same...

PoliticalCitizen · October 9, 2008

Here is someone who also supported gun control and we all know how that turned out!!!........I can't believe how similar Canada's gun laws are to the ones in this article!!
http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitl...ftist/id14.html

Sorry dude... that site is filtered as "Hate"...

AngusThermopyle · October 9, 2008

Sorry dude... that site is filtered as "Hate"...

Huh! You censor your own machine?

Very bizzare.

So, if we hold to your guns are meant only to kill and should be banned point, do we then ban bows and arrows too? After all, the British Long Bow packed more kinetic energy than a modern sporting rifle projectile.

wulf42 · October 9, 2008

Sorry dude... that site is filtered as "Hate"...

lol........................the the site is describing that a monster like Hitler even tried to implement gun control........the site has nothing to do with

any political belief or any hate agenda whatso ever.... unfortunately whenever you try to make a point somebody who is losing an argument will turn it into something else..... but hey no problem just to save the hassle i will delete the link.....the point i was making with the link is Hitler tried to take all guns away so his troops could do whatever they felt like with no resistance .......not to say that could happen in Canada.........but what gives the Government the right to take away weapons that are used to hunt with but have no control over guns that the real criminals have.

Edited October 9, 2008 by wulf42

guyser · October 9, 2008

I used strong words. Most armed people do not murder anyone. But...
A firearm is designed to inflict damage using a high-velocity projectile that penetrates and disrupts tissue, nerves and bone on impact thus disabling or killing a human or animal target.

You used "fact" in the absecence of any.

Ask Myriam Bedard how many "tissue, nerves and bone" she has put a bullet through a "human or animal target"

There are NO reasonable alternative uses. It is a weapon ONLY.

Uh oh, there is that "fact" thing again. Not to mention you are wrong.

You mean kitchen knives or a car or anything else that can BECOME a weapon?
That's just not the same...

Yes thats what I mean, just like the gun can "BECOME" a weapon.

Sorry, dude. You tripped on that one.

PoliticalCitizen · October 10, 2008

Huh! You censor your own machine?
Very bizzare.

So, if we hold to your guns are meant only to kill and should be banned point, do we then ban bows and arrows too? After all, the British Long Bow packed more kinetic energy than a modern sporting rifle projectile.

No. Websense on my work machine...

PoliticalCitizen · October 10, 2008

lol........................the the site is describing that a monster like Hitler even tried to implement gun control........the site has nothing to do with
any political belief or any hate agenda whatso ever.... unfortunately whenever you try to make a point somebody who is losing an argument will turn it into something else..... but hey no problem just to save the hassle i will delete the link.....the point i was making with the link is Hitler tried to take all guns away so his troops could do whatever they felt like with no resistance .......not to say that could happen in Canada.........but what gives the Government the right to take away weapons that are used to hunt with but have no control over guns that the real criminals have.

Sorry, I should have checked it our from home...

Why aren't people allowed to carry chemical weapons "for protection"? Kind of like pepper spray that kills? Or small nuclear devices?

Isn't that a deprivation of rights?

PoliticalCitizen · October 10, 2008

You used "fact" in the absecence of any.
Ask Myriam Bedard how many "tissue, nerves and bone" she has put a bullet through a "human or animal target"

Uh oh, there is that "fact" thing again. Not to mention you are wrong.

Yes thats what I mean, just like the gun can "BECOME" a weapon.

Sorry, dude. You tripped on that one.

Dude, explain yourself or stop posting riddles.

You make no sense.

AngusThermopyle · October 10, 2008

Why aren't people allowed to carry chemical weapons "for protection"? Kind of like pepper spray that kills? Or small nuclear devices?

Are you asking that seriously? If so then I really feel for you bud.

Anyway, in answer to what constitutes either a really bad question or a really defficient understanding of the subject. People are not allowed to carry personal weapons in Canada i.e. you are not allowed to conceal carry. So, if you are not allowed to carry a handgun then why would you be allowed to carry chemical weapons or a Nuclear device.

Your question is one of the poorest I've seen yet on these forums.

moderateamericain · October 10, 2008

The weapon ban for civilians had nothing to do with the mass murder of millions of people by those who have guns against those who dont.

If thats what you mean. Your right. The civilians gave up there rights along time ago and became lambs to the slaughter

GostHacked · October 10, 2008

Exactly zero people have died from a cannabis overdose....ever. Legal pharmaceuticals on the other hand...probably kill almost as many as guns do every day...a lot.

What about all the other drugs out there?? Even the ones that get prescribed to you by your doctor??

A gun is a LOT more potentially harmful than a pot plant, saying otherwise is really just being silly.

Walking across the street can be just as dangerous. You are being silly by just only brining up the pot not being harmfull.

Angus

People are not allowed to carry personal weapons in Canada i.e. you are not allowed to conceal carry. So, if you are not allowed to carry a handgun then why would you be allowed to carry chemical weapons or a Nuclear device.
Your question is one of the poorest I've seen yet on these forums.

It is interesting that he keeps on this, when most of the guns he is worried about are safely stored in millions of homes across the country. Forget the concealed weapons!!! Now those ones we know for SURE are the raving lunatics who want to kill people with the killing gun, because the only thing it does is kill.

We might want to get him a foam helmet to make him feel safe... Or flack jacket and a good armoured helmet. Cause everyone that has a gun, wants to kill.

guyser · October 10, 2008

Dude, explain yourself or stop posting riddles.
You make no sense.

NIce dodge.

IN case it wasn't, Myriam is an Olympic Gold medalist in Biathlon. She shoots a gun in competition. So, who is she planning on killing.

Same question for you. Who are you going to kill with the weapons you have?

moderateamericain · October 10, 2008

You know whats more Harmful than guns? Governments that restrict guns from there citzenship.

guyser · October 10, 2008

You know whats more Harmful than guns? Governments that restrict guns from there citzenship.

I'll assume the Heller ruling was applauded by you.

PoliticalCitizen · October 10, 2008

Are you asking that seriously? If so then I really feel for you bud.
Anyway, in answer to what constitutes either a really bad question or a really defficient understanding of the subject. People are not allowed to carry personal weapons in Canada i.e. you are not allowed to conceal carry. So, if you are not allowed to carry a handgun then why would you be allowed to carry chemical weapons or a Nuclear device.

Your question is one of the poorest I've seen yet on these forums.

Your disdain for my question could be explained by your deficiency in abstract thinking.

All these objects are designed to kill in different ways.

If it is legal to own a projectile weapon, then why not a chemical one? Concealed or not... that's details.

I think I begin to undersand you and other posters of this thread. The idea of owning guns is so deeply embedded into your minds and lifestyles that the simple fact that a rifle has the same purpose as any other weapon ever designed doesn't register.

Oleg Bach · October 10, 2008

Call me a hick but as a kid not once did we even THINK of pointing a fire arm at a human being. This is not a gun issue it is a media and value issue . These cultureless black kids live in fantacy land thanks to the high priests of debached sensationalism that produced socially destructive music and film - where else did they get the idea to kill each other? Oh yah - that abandoned fend for yourself former slavery depot - Jamacia...might as well ban bricks while you are at it.. :blink:

guyser · October 10, 2008

I think I begin to undersand you and other posters of this thread. The idea of owning guns is so deeply embedded into your minds and lifestyles that the simple fact that a rifle has the same purpose as any other weapon ever designed doesn't register.

Never owned a gun in my life.

Shot a .22 once in my life, 25 years ago.

Now what ?

I dont think you understand anything when it comes to guns but your own prejudice.

Why not just tell us you dont like guns and move on?

PoliticalCitizen · October 10, 2008

If thats what you mean. Your right. The civilians gave up there rights along time ago and became lambs to the slaughter

Who can you be possibly planning to protect yourself from with your rifle if the government turns against you?

The Police? Special Forces? The Army?

How much did the guns help the adventists in Waco?

PoliticalCitizen · October 10, 2008

IN case it wasn't, Myriam is an Olympic Gold medalist in Biathlon. She shoots a gun in competition. So, who is she planning on killing.

Consider it a military sport as she sure as hell is practicing killing. Most likely not planning though

Same question for you. Who are you going to kill with the weapons you have?

I own nothing that's designed to kill.

PoliticalCitizen · October 10, 2008

Never owned a gun in my life.
Shot a .22 once in my life, 25 years ago.

Now what ?

I dont think you understand anything when it comes to guns but your own prejudice.

Why not just tell us you dont like guns and move on?

It's beyond liking or disliking.

It's a matter of principle.

Something that's designed to kill should not be legal unless your profession gives you a licence to kill (which is also wrong - but that's a different topic).