Tory MP tells high schoolers they should carry guns

[stopstaaron]

Let's say there are 1 million??? high School kids in Canada.

So far we have had what?? 20 or 30 shooting incidents in Canadian Schools

11 actually

only 4 at a high school

Edited March 30, 2012 by stopstaaron

[Tilter]

By "individual" I think you mean adult, and minors with parental permission.

An MP has no right, however, to tell minors to carry guns without having their parents' permission to do so.

It's extremely irresponsible of him.

Also, his focus on girls carrying guns to protect themselves from sexual assault is just another way of telling girls that getting sexually assaulted is their own fault ... because they didn't have a gun to shoot the guy with, presumably.

I'm not opposed to shooting rapists. It would improve the human gene pool considerably. However, I seriously question the sanity and fitness for public office of someone telling children that it's their responsibility to do so.

Of course, most of those sexually assaulting teenage girls will be teenage boys ...

Gee---- I don't know where you get the stats that point this out---- the only things we read in the papers & on TV are the "unknown 30 year old male wearing a hoody, last seen fleeing in the dark"

[Tilter]

Self-defense classes are the worst thing a woman can do. They give them a false sense of security. Instead of fleeing from an attacker, they may try to stay and fight.

Riiiigght--- keep them at home, barefoot & pregnant--- that's where they belong.

Wow--- a 1910 thinker.

[Tilter]

Tilter the last thing we need is the American gun culture here with american style gun violence

I guess you don't spend a lot of time at night, alone, walking around Hastings area in VR or around Jane & Finch in TO.

[stopstaaron]

I guess you don't spend a lot of time at night, alone, walking around Hastings area in VR or around Jane & Finch in TO.

even torontos worst neighbourhoods pales in comparison to many of the USAs

[Big Guy]

Some interesting logic shared here. It seems that if you are armed then the chances of you being violated decrease. Therefore, if everyone is armed and the majority is not criminals then the “good guys” (or people with the white cowboy hats) outnumber the “bad guys” (or people with the black cowboy hats) and will dominate any encounter and perhaps discourage any confrontation.

Therefore, to solve the problem of crime, we make it mandatory that everyone over the age of 16 carry a sidearm.

Problem solved!

[madmax]

Yeah I cant relate to that I guess. My guns are for hunting and fun. If I lived in a place where I was so afraid that I felt I needed to carry a gun around all day, I would go and live somewhere else.

If you even GET to the point where people are afraid to go out in public without firearms, then you have some serious problems that WONT be fixed by gun ownership.

Two Excellent posts back to back..

I now wish I could have said it as well as you have.

[madmax]

Let's say there are 1 million??? high School kids in Canada.

High school kids are, generally responsible enough to carry firearms to class if we eliminate the blighted areas of Toronto, Montreal & Vancouver.

Holy crap man.. stop now.. before you bury yourself any deeper.

[Tilter]

If you defend yourself with a gun, you're engaging in gun violence. You might agree with that gun violence. You might even think it's a right. It's still gun violence.

but it wouldn't be "I'm dead now" violence

[Tilter]

Holy crap man.. stop now.. before you bury yourself any deeper.

Oh yeah--- I forgot--- in Canada if we site the real reason for crime (or the real areas) we have to make the same apology that the Police Chief of Toronto had to make after he correctly stated that a certain 10% segment of the population was responsible for 95% of the crimes.

Mea Culpa

Edited March 30, 2012 by Tilter

[g_bambino]

but it wouldn't be "I'm dead now" violence

That depends on your firearm skills verus those of your opponent.

[g_bambino]

High school kids are, generally responsible enough to carry firearms to class if we eliminate the blighted areas of Toronto, Montreal & Vancouver.

"Generally" isn't good enough in this case; it would have to be 100%, which, of course, is impossible. Teenage kids in schools that serve predominantly "white" neighbourhoods are still prone to the same hormone fuelled temper fluctuations and therefore fights, not to mention reckless drinking, as kids in "blighted" areas. You can't say one argument between two middle class caucasian football jocks wouldn't be much different if both were carrying a firearm.

[ed.: +]

Edited March 30, 2012 by g_bambino

[madmax]

Oh yeah--- I forgot--- in Canada if we site the real reason for crime (or the real areas) we have to make the same apology that the Police Chief of Toronto had to make after he correctly stated that a certain 10% segment of the population was responsible for 95% of the crimes.

Mea Culpa

You are not citing any reason..

You are digging yourself a hole, and seem to function on .. if i change the channel with every post I make, no one will notice.

You said..

High school kids are, generally responsible enough to carry firearms to class

and I think

you are making a foolish statement , much like the MP to make such an irresponsible and foolish statement.

However there is a difference between you and an MP.

He has an audience and should be speaking responsibly to our youth and have the Wisdom to know that we don't arm kids and send them to school.

[Shakeyhands]

Some interesting logic shared here. It seems that if you are armed then the chances of you being violated decrease. Therefore, if everyone is armed and the majority is not criminals then the “good guys” (or people with the white cowboy hats) outnumber the “bad guys” (or people with the black cowboy hats) and will dominate any encounter and perhaps discourage any confrontation.

Therefore, to solve the problem of crime, we make it mandatory that everyone over the age of 16 carry a sidearm.

Problem solved!

Or outlaw black cowboy hats... duh

[stopstaaron]

Does the media not have an obligation to report facts, or at least objectively look at all sides of the accusation before making a headline out of it?

Since you're a cheerleader for the Conservatives, does the Conservatives, the government of Canada not have an obligation to base their policy decisions on facts? or at least objectively look at all sides of the issues before deciding?

Yes I am derailing the thread

They are the ones who claimed we need mandatory sentences because of unreported crime

Edited March 30, 2012 by stopstaaron

[stopstaaron]

What does this have to do with the topic??

Since when the hell do you care? I've seen you participate in other threads on off topic issues, am I not allowed to use your logic against you by pointing out your hypocrisy?

now answer the question

Edited March 30, 2012 by stopstaaron

[cybercoma]

Actually the leap was yours. Notice your terminology:

The word "guilty" has a very specific meaning.

I repeated the assertion that I was responding to.

[cybercoma]

As I said, the mere act of carrying a gun is a form of defense, whether it is drawn and used or not. There is a reason that police wear sidearms in full view of the public, and it's not just for easy access when needed. The implication that they are guilty of gun violence for wearing a sidearm is off base in my opinion.

And I said specifically that using your firearm is gun violence. Now you're saying just showing your gun is self-defense. Either way, someone strolling into a gas station and pointing a gun in the face of the clerk would be gun violence as well. So, even if you don't discharge your gun it can be used in a threatening manner, which would also constitute gun violence.

This sidebar is pretty stupid anyway. If you arm teenagers in high schools, you will see an increase in gun violence and successful suicides. Youth already get into fights at a much higher rate than adults. If they were to carry guns, that's certainly not going to make things better. It's going to make things more deadly.

[stopstaaron]

This sidebar is pretty stupid anyway. If you arm teenagers in high schools, you will see an increase in gun violence and successful suicides. Youth already get into fights at a much higher rate than adults. If they were to carry guns, that's certainly not going to make things better. It's going to make things more deadly.

Yep, all you need to see is the 130 school shootings in the U.S, guns are so easily attainable down there because its accepted as part of their culture

[cybercoma]

Let's say there are 1 million??? high School kids in Canada.

So far we have had what?? 20 or 30 shooting incidents in Canadian Schools, 99% of which are gang related which has nothing to do with your argument, and 1 related to an irresponsible high school student.

High school kids are, generally responsible enough to carry firearms to class if we eliminate the blighted areas of Toronto, Montreal & Vancouver.

What kind of argument is this? I hope you know this probably doesn't make the point you think it makes.

[cybercoma]

but it wouldn't be "I'm dead now" violence

I never said it would be.

[stopstaaron]

as for the idea that a massacre could be stopped if everyone was armed ... there are no statistics to back that claim up. who knows what could happen. Someone might panic and shoot the wrong person. Someone might panic and since the situation is intense they might miss and hit someone else. they might shoot, miss, and then get shot by the gunman.. if everyone has a gun..how will you be able to know who the gun man is if that person is wearing a mask like some shooters do? all they'd have to do is wear a mask, shoot and kill as many people as they want in like 5 minutes and then run away, take the mask off, and act scared

[g_bambino]

now answer the question

Shouldn't you answer his before demanding he answer yours?

[cybercoma]

as for the idea that a massacre could be stopped if everyone was armed ... there are no statistics to back that claim up. who knows what could happen. Someone might panic and shoot the wrong person. Someone might panic and since the situation is intense they might miss and hit someone else. they might shoot, miss, and then get shot by the gunman.. if everyone has a gun..how will you be able to know who the gun man is if that person is wearing a mask like some shooters do? all they'd have to do is wear a mask, shoot and kill as many people as they want in like 5 minutes and then run away, take the mask off, and act scared

The number of firearm-related deaths in the United States with their gun culture is more than double what it is in Canada. Why the hell would we emulate that model?

So what happens when someone needs to react quickly and use their gun in self-defense?

20/20 did a segment that explored that question.

[stopstaaron]

The number of firearm-related deaths in the United States with their gun culture is more than double what it is in Canada. Why the hell would we emulate that model?

So what happens when someone needs to react quickly and use their gun in self-defense?

20/20 did a segment that explored that question.

Seems like right wingers aren't happy until we're all killing each other

Edited March 30, 2012 by stopstaaron