Boges Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/07/23/matt-gurney-toronto-disinvites-elite-youth-target-shooters-from-city-sports-event/ An email sent out by a city official last night has revoked the invitation of two of the athletes, teenagers both, to participate in public events promoting the Games. The two athletes, who had been selected as ambassadors for the event, have been told they are no longer welcome on stage with the other ambassadors. The reason given: They are competitive rifle shooters, and given the recent spate of gun violence in Toronto, “We can no longer have the Sporting Rifle Athlete Ambassadors present on stage.” The official who sent the email apologizes for the decision, noting that he does not agree with it. But, he says, the directive has come down, and he must follow it.The teenagers were specifically supposed to be involved in an event known World Record Camp Games. To build buzz ahead of August’s Summer Games, the organizers at the city of Toronto are planning to hold a day of athletic competition at the dozens of summer day camps scattered across the city. By getting all of the kids enrolled at these camps playing sports together at the same time under the banner of a single event, the organizers hope to set a new world record for “the most athletes competing in a multi-sport games event.” The purpose of the event is to “create awareness around the Games, as well as inspire youth throughout the Province to become active in sport and lead healthier, active lifestyles.” Yes because competitive target shooting, gang violence and shooting up a movie theatre go hand in hand. This is the type of stuff that banning gun ownership gets you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/07/23/matt-gurney-toronto-disinvites-elite-youth-target-shooters-from-city-sports-event/ Yes because competitive target shooting, gang violence and shooting up a movie theatre go hand in hand. It's silly, yes. Worse than silly. Edited July 23, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) This is what Gun Control Absolutism gets you Nope. This is what overly-sensitive, butt-covering games organizers and city officials (whoever they are) get you. It has zero to do with "gun control absolutism".... Nowhere in the article does it say gun banning advocates asked for this to happen. It looks like some "officials" decided to do this of their own volition due to perceived political correctness. Biathlon is my favourite Olympic sport. Edited July 23, 2012 by The_Squid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderfish Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Nope. This is what overly-sensitive, butt-covering games organizers and city officials (whoever they are) get you. It has zero to do with "gun control absolutism".... Nowhere in the article does it say gun banning advocates asked for this to happen. It looks like some "officials" decided to do this of their own volition due to perceived political correctness. Biathlon is my favourite Olympic sport. To quote you from a different thread: More guns equates to more deaths by gun violence. The pro-gun lobby is completely wrong and should be ignored when it comes to making policy about gun control. Scientific studies have shown that if a society has more guns then there will be more gun violence and death by guns. More guns equates to more violence. The proof is irrefutable. Now..... What do we do about it? Statistics show that more guns equates to more gun homicides/deaths. You have made your position clear that guns are mostly to blame for violence and homicide rates. These athletes own potentially dangerous weapons that can jeopardize the safety of people. Since more guns is correlated to homicide and violence as you have indicated, are they not contributing to the problem as you see it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 if all gun owners were bi athletes or the target shooting or hunter types we wouldn't have a problem...the problems come from guns ending up in the hands of those seeking the "cool" or "macho" image, combine those factors with criminal behaviour or mental illness and then we've got a problem... so how do we keep guns out of the wrong hands and how do get rid weapons that have no business being in the hands of anyone but the police(or other law enforcement) or military... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderfish Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) if all gun owners were bi athletes or the target shooting or hunter types we wouldn't have a problem...the problems come from guns ending up in the hands of those seeking the "cool" or "macho" image, combine those factors with criminal behaviour or mental illness and then we've got a problem... All legal and law abiding gun owners are bi-athletes, target shooters and hunters or collectors. We don't have a problem with law abiding gun owners. Gangbangers don't obtain licenses and register their glocks. Edited July 24, 2012 by Spiderfish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 You have made your position clear that guns are mostly to blame for violence and homicide rates. Not my position.... my point, taken from research. I also asked, what should be done about it? Do you have any ideas? Or is it not a large enough concern to you? If not, why isn't it a concern? (because there are car accidents is not a legitimate answer) These athletes own potentially dangerous weapons that can jeopardize the safety of people. Since more guns is correlated to homicide and violence as you have indicated, are they not contributing to the problem as you see it? Thanks for asking. You see things as black and white. Guns = good. My opinion is a little more nuanced. I can look at an athlete with a rifle and I know that this isn't part of the problem. I view hunting (did you ignore my post where I said that I hunt and own guns?) and owning long-guns as legitimate. I see an issue with handguns where the only purpose is to shoot targets or people. They are easily concealable. They are the weapon of choice for killing people. How can we change that? Are there any more restrictions that we can put on them that would help, or is it time to get rid of them completely? Is it time to get rid of rifles too? Or maybe anyone living in the city can't keep them there? Perhaps hunters from cities should have to pick up their weapons at a facility (range?) if they want to go hunting or can sight them in at the range? There are things that we as a society could do..... we just need to think outside the box. The "all guns = bad", or "all guns = good" argument does not suffice. Neither does the "cars are bad, ban cars" argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) Yes because competitive target shooting, gang violence and shooting up a movie theatre go hand in hand. This is the type of stuff that banning gun ownership gets you. No, this is the type of stuff that non-logical thinking gets you! More and more I am becoming convinced that logical thinking is becoming very scarce in the population at large. With respect to gun control, if you are a non-logical thinker you believe that putting a ban on something in legal writing actually solves the problem! You don't think any deeper than that, like a chess player who can only see one move ahead. The idea that a ban would need enforcement never occurs. The idea that those malignantly motivated would simply ignore such a ban also never occurs. Meanwhile, idea diarrhea erupts, if you'll pardon the pun! People will come up with ideas only loosely related to the concept and stretch them all out of proportion, as if playing intellectual games relates one on one to the real world! They will call for bans on toy guns, saying that they can lead to children becoming adults who look upon guns as toys. They will equate sport shooting with gang violence, simply because in both cases guns are involved and perhaps because the terms share some of the same letters, if only the vowels! With the common baseline of the population, we seem to be losing common sense and perspective. The academic viewpoint is accepted over that of hands on experience. Hands on experience is derided and ignored! Already after the recent Toronto shootings the subject of discussion has shifted from preventing gang shootings TODAY towards giving more money to community programs in the hope of changing things TOMORROW! I am not against long term plans but the problem is that auditing such plans can often become inpossible, since you need decades if not generations to see the results of different approaches. Meanwhile, innocent bystanders are being hurt and killed TODAY! As a society Boges, I think we may be past it! We may already be so far down the path of decadence that we no longer understand how to fix such problems. If so, then it's already too late! We are just going to see more of the same at an escalating level. Edited July 24, 2012 by Wild Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 My opinion is a little more nuanced. I can look at an athlete with a rifle and I know that this isn't part of the problem. I view hunting (did you ignore my post where I said that I hunt and own guns?) and owning long-guns as legitimate. I see an issue with handguns where the only purpose is to shoot targets or people. They are easily concealable. They are the weapon of choice for killing people. How can we change that? Are there any more restrictions that we can put on them that would help, or is it time to get rid of them completely? Is it time to get rid of rifles too? Or maybe anyone living in the city can't keep them there? Perhaps hunters from cities should have to pick up their weapons at a facility (range?) if they want to go hunting or can sight them in at the range? There are things that we as a society could do..... we just need to think outside the box. The "all guns = bad", or "all guns = good" argument does not suffice. Neither does the "cars are bad, ban cars" argument. ya I can agree with that...responsible gun owners should be looking to solve the problem rather than resisting finding a solution...if they can't or won't help to find a solution then we need to look at eliminate the types of guns that are causing the problems...1st thing I'd suggest is taking all handguns out of the hands of everyone but dedicated target shooters...there's just no need of these in the hands of the public...and for collectors make them inoperable... limit rate of fire, when I was young the only rifles I had were bolt action, and reload was slow, clips were small, my shotguns were either single shot or double barrel...and neither bolt action LRs or shotguns ever proved a hindrance hunting...anything else is originally intended/designed to kill many people quickly not animals that don't shoot back...if a collector wants something exotic/restricted they need to made permanently inoperable... really punish smugglers and illegal owners, we need to it make very unappealing to caught with illegal possession... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderfish Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 You see things as black and white. Unfortunately, so do the policy makers and anti-gun advocates. My opinion is a little more nuanced. I can look at an athlete with a rifle and I know that this isn't part of the problem. I view hunting (did you ignore my post where I said that I hunt and own guns?) and owning long-guns as legitimate. I see an issue with handguns where the only purpose is to shoot targets or people. They are easily concealable. They are the weapon of choice for killing people. I see many people at the local range using handguns, these people don't seem like the problem either, guess they are since their legally registered weapons are concealable. How can we change that? Are there any more restrictions that we can put on them that would help, or is it time to get rid of them completely? How about trying to find a solution to the actual problem...illegal guns. The majority of gun crimes are committed with illegal guns, and most of these are smuggled across the border from the states. These guns are untraceable, and illegal to own/buy/use. More law enforcement in this area may bring great results. Is it time to get rid of rifles too? Or maybe anyone living in the city can't keep them there? Perhaps hunters from cities should have to pick up their weapons at a facility (range?) if they want to go hunting or can sight them in at the range? I just don't think more punitive rules and regulations piled onto legal gun owners will solve anything. This is where you and I disagree. There are things that we as a society could do..... we just need to think outside the box. The "all guns = bad", or "all guns = good" argument does not suffice. Neither does the "cars are bad, ban cars" argument. There are more things society could do in a lot of areas where the safety of society are concerned. It needs to be a balance between the government imposing policies to try and keep people safe, with the freedom of law abiding people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 No, this is the type of stuff that non-logical thinking gets you! More and more I am becoming convinced that logical thinking is becoming very scarce in the population at large. With respect to gun control, if you are a non-logical thinker you believe that putting a ban on something in legal writing actually solves the problem! You don't think any deeper than that, like a chess player who can only see one move ahead. Logical thinking is becoming scarce. Agreed 100%. This is why we have the TSA in airports. This is why we have a war on terror. This is why we have warrant less wiretapping. This is why we have more restrictions and surveillance on citizens and not the people who need to be targeted. The government implementing all of these items has lost all sense of logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 I just don't think more punitive rules and regulations piled onto legal gun owners will solve anything. This is where you and I disagree. There are more things society could do in a lot of areas where the safety of society are concerned. It needs to be a balance between the government imposing policies to try and keep people safe, with the freedom of law abiding people. we've got punitive rules and regulations coming out of our butts when it comes to vehicle ownership and use and no one is fighting to have those laws repealed or diminished...how many billion dollars do you think that costs us every year to enforce those rules? yet car's and trucks weren't designed to kill, they're just transportation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderfish Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) we've got punitive rules and regulations coming out of our butts when it comes to vehicle ownership and use and no one is fighting to have those laws repealed or diminished...how many billion dollars do you think that costs us every year to enforce those rules? yet car's and trucks weren't designed to kill, they're just transportation... Legally owned guns and rifles weren't designed or intended to kill people either. The firearms that are designed explicitly for this purpose are illegal in this country. How many driving tests have you taken that require you to fill in a psychoanalysis of your personality and character reference and sign-off from your ex-wife prior to your being eligible to drive? Edited July 24, 2012 by Spiderfish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) Legally owned guns and rifles weren't designed or intended to kill people either. The firearms that are designed explicitly for this purpose are illegal in this country.improved rates of fire were expressly designed for war not hunting or target shooting...ultimately all guns were designed to kill people in war they weren't initially intended for hunting...How many driving tests have you taken that require you to fill in a psychoanalysis of your personality and character reference and sign-off from your ex-wife prior to your being eligible to drive? Wasn't someone mentioning comparing apples to oranges earlier? I guess you can do that when it substantiates your viewpoint.no apples and oranges here I'm not comparing car to guns, it's rules and regulations I'm comparing...we have different qualifications, graduated licenses, extensive training and testing for each type of vehicle, motorcycles, car, taxi, bus, multi-axle, even forklifts and many more...and medical qualification and disqualification as well...and there are always more restrictions being added...and restrictions what can or cannot be driven on public roads.... does anyone seriously complain? nope because it's done for public safety ...and all that for something wasn't designed to kill people...gun regulations are insignificant when compared to those required for vehicle operation.... Edited July 24, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Logical thinking is becoming scarce. Agreed 100%. This is why we have the TSA in airports. This is why we have a war on terror. This is why we have warrant less wiretapping. This is why we have more restrictions and surveillance on citizens and not the people who need to be targeted. The government implementing all of these items has lost all sense of logic. Good examples! Security at our airports actually makes me MORE afraid! It's all smoke and mirrors, administered by minimum wage police "wannabees". Meanwhile, every so often a scandal will be revealed about how bike gangs have infiltrated the cargo handling at Pearson Airport. We have a war on terror to make it look like we are doing something about terror. It pacifies the general population as it LOOKS like the authorities are doing SOMETHING! No one digs a little further to see if what they are doing is actually effective. So we have the same screening process for little old Italian grandmothers as for people from the groups where the contemporary terrorism is coming from - Islamist terrorists can hide under burkhas and our security treats them with kid gloves, for fear of being accused of profiling. Profiling! The most basic and effective tool of any law enforcement agency is verboten for not being politically correct! I would like to see us copy the Israeli model. Well paid, college educated and extremely well trained agents stand around Israeli airports holding Uzis and carrying handguns! They are very capable of picking up on something wrong in a crowd. Cargo handling is screened even more carefully. Our security is driven by politics. The Israelis do it for REAL! It is not surprising that Israeli airports have an unblemished record - the best in the world! As for warrantless wiretapping, I have mixed feelings about that. I can see a real need and a positive benefit. I just wish it would not be done by Curly, Larry and Moe! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 improved rates of fire were expressly designed for war not hunting or target shooting...ultimately all guns were designed to kill people in war they weren't initially intended for hunting... no apples and oranges here I'm not comparing car to guns, it's rules and regulations I'm comparing...we have different qualifications, graduated licenses, extensive training and testing for each type of vehicle, motorcycles, car, taxi, bus, multi-axle, even forklifts and many more...and medical qualification and disqualification as well...and there are always more restrictions being added...and restrictions what can or cannot be driven on public roads.... does anyone seriously complain? nope because it's done for public safety ...and all that for something wasn't designed to kill people...gun regulations are insignificant when compared to those required for vehicle operation.... For someone with so many opinions about guns you ought to know that we have a graduated license system for firearms in this country, with different levels of testing and different requirements for use and transport, look it up, educate yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Nope. This is what overly-sensitive, butt-covering games organizers and city officials (whoever they are) get you. It has zero to do with "gun control absolutism".... Nowhere in the article does it say gun banning advocates asked for this to happen. It looks like some "officials" decided to do this of their own volition due to perceived political correctness. Biathlon is my favourite Olympic sport. So you honestly, actually believe that this decision was made in a vacuum and has nothing to do with the perception of gun owners by and large created by the ban brigade and the media? Nahhh.. Btw the the decision was reversed, at least in part due to pressure from the 'Canadian gun lobby', those evil guys who don't believe in blaming athletes for the transgressions of scum drug dealers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 It would have been nice if all the others had declined to attend as a protest to these anal twits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 So you honestly, actually believe that this decision was made in a vacuum and has nothing to do with the perception of gun owners by and large created by the ban brigade and the media? Nahhh.. I said it was done for political correctness reasons.... Isn't that the same thing as what you just said? Btw the the decision was reversed, at least in part due to pressure from the 'Canadian gun lobby', those evil guys who don't believe in blaming athletes for the transgressions of scum drug dealers. Gun lobby? Hardly. Probably the public at large. Even people who don't use guns knew that this was an unfair slight to the target shooters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 Maybe we should put less attention on gun laws and more attention on educating our children and youth about how absolutely stupid guns designed to kill humans are. Western culture is obsessed with gun violence as entertainment. People, mostly males, think guns are cool. I grew up playing with G.I. Joe's and water guns and cap guns. I, like many others, expose myself to movies/tv shows/video games/comics/books & other media that glorifies gun violence and war. This is fun for me and many others. WHY? Why are we brought up in a society, and by parents, who find this acceptable? What's even more odd is what would possess a human being to want to pick up and fire a human killing machine at times when their lives aren't imminently threatened? The firearm is arguably the worst invention in the history of human civilization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 (edited) Maybe we should put less attention on gun laws and more attention on educating our children and youth about how absolutely stupid guns designed to kill humans are. Western culture is obsessed with gun violence as entertainment. People, mostly males, think guns are cool. I grew up playing with G.I. Joe's and water guns and cap guns. I, like many others, expose myself to movies/tv shows/video games/comics/books & other media that glorifies gun violence and war. This is fun for me and many others. WHY? Why are we brought up in a society, and by parents, who find this acceptable? What's even more odd is what would possess a human being to want to pick up and fire a human killing machine at times when their lives aren't imminently threatened? The firearm is arguably the worst invention in the history of human civilization. I think we are programed or hardwired to be that way, it's in our DNA...weapons have always been in our tool basic kits since our most primitive times...I destroyed my rifles and shotgun 20yrs ago, I disassembled them, then smashed the parts with a sledgehammer...but still I'm fascinated with weapon/tool technology...I agree it's stupid and we should grow out of this because it's completely unnecessary, I watch the Hollywood movies and every single one seems to have everyone with a gun in their hand...either that or that's just what I choose to watch ... but action packed story telling around the campfire is what our ancestors did as well, movies are just a different venue... agree firearms are the all time worst WMD... Edited July 26, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 Did you break all of your knives too? Maybe someday we can go back to the time before guns when there was no violence, or perhaps some of you are and will forever be to immature to think about this rationally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 Did you break all of your knives too? Maybe someday we can go back to the time before guns when there was no violence, or perhaps some of you are and will forever be to immature to think about this rationally. You are OK comparing knives to guns and cars to guns and smoking to guns, etc, etc, but grenades to guns???? Why, that's just crazy talk!! The knife/gun comparison is as absurd as the gun/grenade comparison that I made to prove a point in a different thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Yes because throughout history no one has ever been killed by an edged weapon. You want to save lives don't you? Or do you only want to save the lives of people who happen to be shot at the same time in one place? Should we ban fertilizer too? Where does it end. You and others seem to think that people won't be killed if we don't have the guns, im telling you that more people are stabbed now then shot, you seem to think that is irrelevant, and that more people won't be stabbed or beaten with fewer guns, i disagree. I also disagree that shooting victims are special, or that groups of people being shot are even more special, every victim deserves the same consideration. I didn't start this game of false equivalencies, the people who think that a shooting is worthy of massive discussion when multiple people are shot did that, the fixation on firearms is the issue. You want to save lives? Lobby for alcohol prohibition, it's been done, but you never know the second time might be the charm. The gun registry focused on about 2% of all homicides, was useless, and we told you so, o but there were fewer firearm suicides, but not fewer suicides, more people just hung themselves, what a victory. But of course if you ban hand guns more people won't be shot with long guns, and if you ban long guns more people won't be stabbed, or beaten, no of course not. I don't want anyone to be shot, if i truly believed that taking guns out of the hands of us legitimate owners would really save lives i would have to consider it and weigh it against the freedom we would lose. But that thought isn't required because it simply isn't going to prevent the vast majority of gun crime which is already committed by people who WILL NOT ABIDE BY ANY LAW. It hasn't worked in the UK and it won't work here even sitting next to our anti gun neighbors to the south.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 Hey gunrutz, Knives serve a purpose other than killing shit. Cheers, Common sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.