Shakeyhands Posted June 1, 2007 Report Posted June 1, 2007 http://www.thestar.com/News/article/220538 or http://www.thestar.com/News/article/220569 I just don't understand the logic of the second story... Its like Heston had his arm up Days rear end! Such a move would be useless, and might do more harm than good really? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
scribblet Posted June 2, 2007 Report Posted June 2, 2007 Nonsense, there's no point to 'banning hand guns' , its allready a restricted weapon and criminals will get them anyway. Paul Martin tried that tactic as a last ditch desparate measure to get votes, Dalton McGuinty is trying to do the same thing. There's an election coming and he's trying to get the monkey off his back and put it onto the feds - nothing but a diversion tactic. What we need is tougher sentencing, but mandatory sentencing for the use of a gun during a crime is being held up by the Liberals, even though its watered down. And Remember this one from the Liberals - hmmm "Liberal government will reintroduce legislation to crack down on violent crimes and gang violence, and to double the mandatory minimum sentences for serious gun-related crimes. The effect of that is that there would be an eight year mandatory minimum of mandatory minimums." Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Vancouver King Posted June 2, 2007 Report Posted June 2, 2007 http://www.thestar.com/News/article/220538or http://www.thestar.com/News/article/220569 I just don't understand the logic of the second story... Its like Heston had his arm up Days rear end! Such a move would be useless, and might do more harm than good really? In Stockwell's Alice in Wonderland universe, humans run along side dinosaurs and proliferation of hand guns decreases gun shot victims. Quote When the people have no tyrant, their public opinion becomes one. ...... Lord Lytton
hiti Posted June 2, 2007 Report Posted June 2, 2007 It's already been proven by the USA that tougher sentences and mandatory sentences do not work. Yet the House just passed a bill putting in place tougher and mandatory sentences for gun crimes. Which will prove to be not worth the paper it's published on. To prevent crime, one has to go to the cause and banning hand guns plus restricting their import and manufacturing may help to lower handgun crimes. People will then resort to knives and other weapons. So we go back to square one.......... working on the cause of crime. Quote "You cannot bring your Western standards to Afghanistan and expect them to work. This is a different society and a different culture." -Hamid Karzai, President of Afghanistan June 23/07
geoffrey Posted June 2, 2007 Report Posted June 2, 2007 It's already been proven by the USA that tougher sentences and mandatory sentences do not work. If that's the case, then it's proven by Britain and Australia that heavy handed bans and prohibition don't work either. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
hiti Posted June 2, 2007 Report Posted June 2, 2007 Read those stats again. Quote "You cannot bring your Western standards to Afghanistan and expect them to work. This is a different society and a different culture." -Hamid Karzai, President of Afghanistan June 23/07
geoffrey Posted June 2, 2007 Report Posted June 2, 2007 Read those stats again. Why should I? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm People that break the law and kill people aren't likely going to follow the law and turn in their handgun. It's not even logical. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
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.