Charlton Heston wants long-gun registry scrapped...

[Saipan]

Will Charlton Heston Have To Give Up His Guns?

It was drunken Ted kennedy who killed someone in his car.

Not Charlton Heston.

Back to drawing board.

[Oleg Bach]

Rich and privledged conservatives want the ability to shoot poor folks trying to take their stuff or screw them up physically with lethal force for being a protected bunch of crimminals....and poor people want the ability to shoot anyone harming their person....Liberals on the other hand think that there is no right or wrong and everything is just dandy - In fact a killer was just granted compensation..by the liberal Human Rights tribunal....cos' he does not want to stand during role call at the jail house - cos' his back hurts...and the tribunal is now going to give this guy some cash for killing a cop in utter cold blood...seems that the liberals believe that good should be rewarded and so should EVIL - equal rights for God and Satan...I say no rights granted to evil...I guess that would make me a conservative of the good.

[eyeball]

Oleg, I guess if you people insist on forever making this an issue of the left versus the right I might as well arm myself to the teeth too. Given the polarized tone of the times I really do have to conclude the greatest threat to my well being comes from those on the right.

Probably because of your misperceptions about those on the left.

What a freakin' world stupid we live in eh?

[guyser]

In fact...

Uh oh , here comes a non-fact

a killer was just granted compensation..by the liberal Human Rights tribunal....cos' he does not want to stand during role call at the jail house - cos' his back hurts...and the tribunal is now going to give this guy some cash for killing a cop in utter cold blood...seems that the liberals believe that good should be rewarded and so should EVIL - equal rights for God and Satan...I say no rights granted to evil...I guess that would make me a conservative of the good.

Right on time too!

But no, that would make you silly....or stupid, your call.

[WIP]

Just who is behind Harper's agenda to scrap the registry?

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/gunregistry/article/860808--tories-nra-playing-wedge-politics-on-gun-registry-liberals-say

I'm not a gun owner, and haven't ventured enough into the Gun Registry issue to start posting comments on it. What I'm concerned with is the nightmare across the border that's been created by a rich and powerful Gun Lobby, and their expertise at lobbying (which became the template for lobbyists ever since) because most of the gun crimes that are committed in Canada are not with rifles or legally owned handguns -- they're coming from the wave of U.S. purchased guns that are smuggled into this country. If we could get together with the Mexican President (who has raised this issue), I'd be happy to see this one dealt with.

[Saipan]

Oleg, I guess if you people insist on forever making this an issue of the left versus the right I might as well arm myself to the teeth too. Given the polarized tone of the times I really do have to conclude the greatest threat to my well being comes from those on the right.

Right, shoot all those who disagree with you.

As Mao and Pol Pot were preaching.

[eyeball]

Right, shoot all those who disagree with you.

As Mao and Pol Pot were preaching.

No, be prepared to defend myself from people who are so delusional they're convinced I'm as dangerous as Pol Pot and Mao.

[guyser]

I'm not a gun owner, and haven't ventured enough into the Gun Registry issue to start posting comments on it. What I'm concerned with is the nightmare across the border that's been created by a rich and powerful Gun Lobby, and their expertise at lobbying (which became the template for lobbyists ever since) because most of the gun crimes that are committed in Canada are not with rifles or legally owned handguns -- they're coming from the wave of U.S. purchased guns that are smuggled into this country. If we could get together with the Mexican President (who has raised this issue), I'd be happy to see this one dealt with.

Seems one hasnt ventured enough into the NRA or guns in the US either.

We have a border, smuggling into CAN is our problem, and smuggling pot into the US is their problem.

[Saipan]

No, be prepared to defend myself from people who are so delusional they're convinced I'm as dangerous as Pol Pot and Mao.

How many invaded your house so far?

[Saipan]

I'm not a gun owner, and haven't ventured enough into the Gun Registry issue to start posting comments on it. What I'm concerned with is the nightmare across the border that's been created by a rich and powerful Gun Lobby

Did that "lobby" imported the nightmare from Mexico and Caribbean?

Btw, no need to explain you're not a gun owner, it's more than obvious.

most of the gun crimes that are committed in Canada are not with rifles or legally owned handguns -- they're coming from the wave of U.S. purchased guns that are smuggled into this country.

And that's why all gun owners should be punished?

Why not simply close places like Kanasatage Reserve where most of the smuggling goes on - both ways?

If we could get together with the Mexican President (who has raised this issue), I'd be happy to see this one dealt with.

Don't forget to mention the thousands of illegals from Mexico. Many whom are criminals.

[treehugger]

Do you feel that every person should believe the very same thing?

Some believe the registry should be scrapped and some say no to the scrapping of it. This is the way it should be.

At any rate it isn't the long guns that are causing crimes. They are used by hunters and sports people.

[eyeball]

How many invaded your house so far?

How many shot you for being disagreeable?

[Saipan]

How many shot you for being disagreeable?

They would - if they had the balls

[Saipan]

Why the Gun is Civilization

by Marko Kloos

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interac¬tion falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang¬banger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defend¬er.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legisla¬tive fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting over¬whelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beat¬ings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

Marko Kloos is a “profes¬sional Dad” and freelance writer, who lives in New Hampshire with his wife Robin, their two children and four dachshunds.

This article has made the rounds on the internet, usually attributed to some¬one other than Marko.

[segnosaur]

f you are referring specifically to those affected by aging, do you have any evidence that those affected by "senile dementia" (or things like Alzheimer's disease) are more likely to engage in shooting incidents than their unaffected peers?

You mean, this really isn't a no-brainer?

Well, obviously it must be more than just a no-brainer, since you haven't actually, you know, provided proof that people with senile dementia provide a substantially elevated risk for gun violence. You have pointed to articles that talk about the difficulty of removing guns from the homes of such people (a reasonable action), but nothing about just how much "added risk" is caused by elderly people loosing control of mental faculties.

Guns and Alzheimers Don't Mix: Removing Weapons from Loved Ones' Possession

Will Charlton Heston Have To Give Up His Guns?

The first article talks about the number of guns in the homes of elderly people, and gives guidelines on how to get them to give up their firearms. Nowhere does it give any sort of statistics giving increased risk.

The second article talks about how, in the U.S., people who are suffering from Senile Dementia can have a conservator appointed, who would have the right to remove firearms from the home. Personally, I think that's a much saner method than eliminating all private gun ownership and storage.

PENTICTON, British Colombia, August 31, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An elderly man shot his wife and then ended his own life in a murder-suicide at Penticton Regional Hospital Tuesday afternoon, in a murder-suicide referred to as an “act of compassion” by media reports. John McCadden was 77—his 80-year-old wife, Lorna McCadden, had been diagnosed with early onset Alzheimers disease the previous week, the Globe and Mail reported.

Ummm.... according to that article, the person was responsible for the shooting was not the wife (the one suffering from Alzheimers), but the husband. There's nothing in the article to suggest the husband had lost any of his mental faculties.

This last story links to a Nat. (US) Firearm Survey that says more than a quarter of people ages 65 and older own guns.

Yup. And how many of them are improperly using their firearms (causing death/injury)? What proportion of gun crimes are caused by people with senile dementia?

[eyeball]

Well, obviously it must be more than just a no-brainer, since you haven't actually, you know, provided proof that people with senile dementia provide a substantially elevated risk for gun violence. You have pointed to articles that talk about the difficulty of removing guns from the homes of such people (a reasonable action), but nothing about just how much "added risk" is caused by elderly people loosing control of mental faculties.

The first article talks about the number of guns in the homes of elderly people, and gives guidelines on how to get them to give up their firearms. Nowhere does it give any sort of statistics giving increased risk.

The second article talks about how, in the U.S., people who are suffering from Senile Dementia can have a conservator appointed, who would have the right to remove firearms from the home. Personally, I think that's a much saner method than eliminating all private gun ownership and storage.

It's good to see someone is giving some thought to the issue. It's easy to imagine there must have been a time when the idea of conservators had to fight an uphill battle against the tide of gun advocacy too.

Ummm.... according to that article, the person was responsible for the shooting was not the wife (the one suffering from Alzheimers), but the husband. There's nothing in the article to suggest the husband had lost any of his mental faculties.

No, I cited it as an example of a caregiver at their wits or perhaps financial end. The lack of facilities or help available now to people in these situations is bad enough, not to mention public attitudes towards mental illness in general. The strain of mental illness on most families is often as staggering as it is unrelenting. Given these things and in the wake of the million or so new cases of dementia I think the evidence of added risk will be apparent soon enough.

Yup. And how many of them are improperly using their firearms (causing death/injury)? What proportion of gun crimes are caused by people with senile dementia?

Probably just a small one right now. As it grows with it's incidence it'll just be one more reason to argue for better gun control.

Edited January 16, 2011 by eyeball

[Saipan]

It's good to see someone is giving some thought to the issue. It's easy to imagine there must have been a time when the idea of conservators had to fight an uphill battle against the tide of gun advocacy too.

WHEN did it become an "issue" and why?

Given these things and in the wake of the million or so new cases of dementia I think the evidence of added risk will be apparent soon enough.

There are more cased of heart problem. How's that connected to registration?

As it grows with it's incidence it'll just be one more reason to argue for better gun control.

Can you post any, even one, "incidence"?

[eyeball]

Florida has a high rate of murder-suicide, most of which involve very elderly

people. Cases of elderly murder-suicide are often defined by ambivalence related

to caretaking requirements and a sense of helplessness in dealing with the ravages

of old age. These cases can be considered altruistic because of the couple’s

belief that the world is better off without them. The typical scenario is that the

wife with late stage Alzheimer’s is cared for by a devoted but increasingly frail

husband who can no longer handle the situation. So instead of calling on family,

or going to a nursing home, he takes their lives in his own hands.

Source

It's pretty clear there is an association between senile dementia and murder/suicide. The more I look into this the more apparent it becomes that it is care-givers who are the one's driven to desperation. I'm simply arguing that guns will clearly be one of the means of death chosen given they're so handy, quick and painless.

I think the numbers we do have any reasonable handle on kind of speak for themselves, 5 million guns or so in Canada - 65% of owners in the US are senior citizens so it stands to reason the percentage is probably similar in Canada, and if a million of these are likely candidates for dementia...I'm simply wondering if this is a cause for concern, especially in light of the association between dementia and murder/suicide.

I've written the Alzheimer's Society to see what they have to say and I'll share that when they respond.

[Saipan]

It's pretty clear there is an association between senile dementia and murder/suicide.

Depends on "association".

1) Elderly are indeed easier to rob. (is that why elderly Canadinas flock there?) That's why NOW Florida has concealed carry and homicide went DOWN.

2) Japan (not legal ownership of ANY firearms there) has higher suicide rate than Canada, And Canada higher than USA. Why? Do Japanese kill themself because they are not allowed any guns?

5 million guns or so in Canada

Actually five times that number.

65% of owners in the US are senior citizens

Total fabrication. Next thing you'll claim seniors form street gangs

I've written the Alzheimer's Society to see what they have to say and I'll share that when they respond.

Will they remember?

Edited January 17, 2011 by Saipan

[guyser]

Actually five times that number.

Total fabrication.

You have those reversed , but then again, you spew tons of shite that's incorrect.

Go ahead, prove me wrong.

[Saipan]

Go ahead, prove me wrong.

That's pretty easy. Ratio of handguns to long guns in Canada is 1:20 and 1.2 million handguns are registered.

[guyser]

That's pretty easy.

It sure is, when you are wrong constantly.

I asked for proof. English a problem?

Heres a hint, there are probably less than half what you think there are, but again, provide proof or shut up.

Oh, and numbers include all police forces guns.

Edited January 17, 2011 by guyser

[Saipan]

It sure is, when you are wrong constantly.

Prove it.

Heres a hint, there are less than half what you think there are

Prove it.

Edited January 17, 2011 by Saipan

[guyser]

Prove it.

Prove it.

I will, as soon as you back your stats up. Afterall, you are the one who idiotically states 25M guns are in Canada. Of course we all know thats a lie, much like many many assertions you make all over this board.

You are a troll. You generally have no idea what you are saying, in poor language no less. You resort to bullshit troll type quotes, in many cases posting a quote that was never said.

Why you revel in stupidity is anyones guess. BUt stupidity is a forte of yours.

[Saipan]

I will, as soon as you back your stats up.

I'm still waiting for the evidence to the 5 million.