http://www.luxlucre.com/flash/AtlantaDeclaration.swf

You know that old saying about free speech that goes "If you can't say 'fuck', you can't say 'fuck the government'"? Well, if you don't have a gun, you can't shoot at the government!

[ 24 January 2004: Message edited by: drunken American gun nut ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
With friends like that, does the gun lobby really need any enemies?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:

OK, what's wrong with civilian gun ownership?

---

Anyone at any time getting any weapon they want and children too?

Pay attention. The flash said "responsible" child.

Stupidity that only serves to hurt the gun lobby's position.

I still don't understand what "stupidity" you're talking about. Self defense is a human right, the same as privacy or free expression, whether it be against criminals or totalitarian governents. Owning the means of delf defense is also a human right.

[ 24 January 2004: Message edited by: drunken American gun nut ]

[ 24 January 2004: Message edited by: drunken American gun nut ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by The UberGopher:
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/6431396.htm
This might shed some light on how people form their opinions about guns.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cougyr:
Gun nuts are like the common cold: they just keep comming back. There is no cure.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:

What do you have against guns? Are we going to have a reasoned debate here or just call names?

---

Crime rate up; Remington, Inc. stock pays dividend.

Father of three gunned down; kids can now attend university on life insurance windfall.

5-year-old drive-by shooting victim will walk again!

Terminally ill man shoots self, months of pain avoided.

Bush stormtroopers routed by Fort Lauderdale militia.

[ 24 January 2004: Message edited by: drunken American gun nut ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hinterland:
Your continued aping of American-inspired values such as the right to bear arms and the use of guns in self-defense are pushing more Canadians (like me) to think banning ALL guns might not be a bad idea.

---

quote:

---

If some knife wielding maniac was kicking in your door to kill you and do God knows what with your wife and children, and one of us happened along with one of our guns, would you send us away?

---

That's never happened to me and I doubt it ever will (..it's also never happened to anyone I've ever known or heard of personally; ancestors, relatives, neighbours, acquaintances..although I've heard it happens a lot in the States...I do watch Cops, after all).

Gee, I don't know. I know for certain that some panicky, hysterical gun-toting lunatic would be the LAST thing I need.

[ 24 January 2004: Message edited by: Hinterland ]

quote:

---

Since you don't seem believe in the use of guns for self defense, I have one question for you. If some knife wielding maniac was kicking in your door to kill you and do God knows what with your wife and children, and one of us happened along with one of our guns, would you send us away?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:
Since you don't seem believe in the use of guns for self defense, I have one question for you. If some knife wielding maniac was kicking in your door to kill you and do God knows what with your wife and children, and one of us happened along with one of our guns, would you send us away?

---

Hey gun nut. I wasn't presenting any debating points--just making it clear that I don't see no up-side to the proliferation of guns in my society. The article I was mocking doesn't make any sense to me. Must be a cultural thing. You'll have a very tough time convincing most Canadians that importing American gun culture into our country is a good thing.

You're a believer raised in the faith; I'm not--different world view, different planets.

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:
Since you don't seem believe in the use of guns for self defense, I have one question for you. If some knife wielding maniac was kicking in your door to kill you and do God knows what with your wife and children, and one of us happened along with one of our guns, would you send us away?

---

I lived in some of the “worst” neighborhoods in Toronto as a student because the rent was low enough for me to afford. At one point I lived in one of the highest crime areas in Toronto which actually had police-designed plans to seal off the area in case of a riot. Not once did I feel my life was threatened, or that some crazed maniac would break down my door.

Even now in the summer I leave my back door open to let a cool breeze go through the house at night…. all night.

If I did own a gun for “my protection” and lived in fear all the time, I would have probably shot my roommates on several occasions because of their forgetfulness of their keys and clumsily bashing around the house at ungodly hours. (or because they kept leaving their dirty dishes in the sink for days on end)

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:
You know that old saying about free speech that goes "If you can't say 'fuck', you can't say 'fuck the government'"? Well, if you don't have a gun, you can't shoot at the government!
[ 24 January 2004: Message edited by: drunken American gun nut ]

---

[ 25 January 2004: Message edited by: The Oatmeal Savage ]

[ 25 January 2004: Message edited by: The Oatmeal Savage ]

I see no excuse for urban people to keep guns.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cougyr:
There is no doubt that the Canadian gun registry has been a financial boondoggle. I would rather have seen the money used to confiscate all hand guns, and all guns that are designed as assault weapons.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bee's Knees:

The right to bare arms in the US was a reactionary clause for a time when governments were not at all representative of its people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:
[QB]Nothing is wrong with rifle ownership for sport.

What about for self-defense? Or for use against totalitarian governments?

---

You think your rifle will help you against the Marine Corps?

Think again.

quote:

---

Owning the means of delf defense is also a human right.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Courage:

The problem is that (as statistics clearly show) "self-defense" very quickly becomes "self-offense".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:

What statistics are those? And as far as my rifle not protecting me against the Marines, I'm sure that my rifle plus the rifles of everyone else in ny community will. That's what the Second Amendment to the US constitution is all about--insurrection. And I think we're due for one real soon.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

Not really. It was about the need to keep out those nasty British soldiers should Britain decide to retake America; and being able to do it without the then insupportable expense of maintaining a large standing army. It's about the collective defence of the country, not about legalizing rebellion.

---

You're wrong. National defense is not the only reason the Founding Fathers of the U.S. wanted the citizeny armed.

"(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation... (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."- James Madison

"To disarm the people (is) the best and most effectual way to enslave them..."
-George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States."
-Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principles of the federal Constitution (1787) in Pamphlets to the Constitution of the United States (P. Ford, 1888)

[ 26 January 2004: Message edited by: drunken American gun nut ]

[ 26 January 2004: Message edited by: drunken American gun nut ]

I posted some stats relating to this issue on a different string, so I won't do it here.

Suffice to say, I am a gun owner; I oppose the long-arm registry as a waste of money and an invasion of privacy (and does nothing to fight crime); I believe that working class people have a right to possess guns and, by God, even form militias if the situation warrants. In short, I'm a socialist, not a guilty liberal Have-faith-in-the-state type.

Having said that (I'm sure I've already made some folks really mad), I have more time for Madonna music than I do for the NRA paranoid wingdings and the "my cold dead fingers" crowd.

>"If some knife wielding maniac was kicking in >your door to kill you and do God knows what >with your wife and children, and one of us >happened along with one of our guns, would you >send us away?"

It's this type of stupid analogy that is so exemplary of US politics.

If some knife-wielding maniac was kicking in my door, the last thing on my mind would be wondering what a Drunken American Gun Nut was up to and could he come and give me a hand.

If I had a gun in hand at that point would I use it? Most likely yes. But then again, if I had a flame thrower in hand at that point I might use it too. This doesn't make it OK for people to carry flame throwers around.

Conversely, if I had a frying pan in hand, I would likely use it just as readily (and that would likely be far more effective). This doesn't mean we should have to register frying pans as weapons.

The facts show (see other post) that gun ownership doesn't correlate to gun violence.

The latter is clearly based on cultural and economic factors, not on whether people have guns--just like car ownership has little bearing on drunk driving.

It seems that for most people in Canada, owning a gun is kind of like owning a lawn mower: you don't use it unless it's absolutely necessary.

Of course there are exceptions for both: some people like mowing lawns, or do it professionally; and some folks like to join gun clubs or hunt for sustenance or sport (the latter activity I have no use for).

The rest keep guns for safety against predators (in rural or farming communities), or because of family tradition. Self-defense is rarely a primary concern.

These tend to, in majority of cases, be long arms. There is no excuse what-so-ever for the Liberal regime to force people to register them or pay all kinds of fees, which amount to little more than yet another cash grab from mostly working people while it doles out more goodies to the rich.

Conversely, I can see an argument, although I'm still far from convinced, for some sort of registry or tracking method for hand guns, since they are the weapon almost exclusively used in gun violence. These are quite often stolen--although polcie reports show most criminal-related guns come in from the US or Asia, not from Canadian homes.

None the less, since hand guns do get stolen far more than long arms, a registry would make them easier to retrieve and trace their moves--a key component in tracking down the perps Like with cars).

>"I would rather have seen the money used to >confiscate all hand guns, and all guns that are >designed as assault weapons."

Wow! From lefty to Brown Shirt in two seconds! Again, it's this type of knee-jerk reactions that are typical of the US liberal-left.

A confiscation of that sort would not only be anti-democratic. It would be a national trauma on millions of people and would end in disaster.

How many doors would the RCMP, who in many instances have behaved like knife-wielding maniacs, have to kick in to do this? How many mass arrests? How many phone taps? Illegal searches? Interrogations? How many Charter rights would they have to violate? Whatever it takes, as GW Bush says?

And what of all the hand guns they don't find? People who get FACs, take shooting lessons, join gun clubs or register hand guns aren't the ones using them for criminal gain.

quote:

---

Originally posted by drunken American gun nut:

That's what the Second Amendment to the US constitution is all about--insurrection. And I think we're due for one real soon.

---

We could quibble about the first part, but we can certainly agree on the second. How's it feel to be of a mind with a bleeding-heart islamo-socio-fascist commie pinko faggot Cong varmint?

I guess we won't be doing anything since you were banned....

why????

i'd bet dollars to doughnuts that most of the anti-gun crowd has never even used a rifle.

quote:

---

i'd bet dollars to doughnuts that most of the anti-gun crowd has never even used a rifle

---

Jesus wept.

I declay-ah, them big, paaah-ful guns is just too scary for a little ole' lefty such as mahself. The sahight of your hahd, steely barrell, all hot and a-steamin' has dun give me the vapours! *waves fan into face and collapses on velvet setee*

Suburbanite- Afraid of guns.
Gun nut- Afraid of everything else.

[ 27 January 2004: Message edited by: Jingles ]

It's sure worth the small chance that this pistol might have fallen into the wrong hands, and if someone is shot with this missing pistol I will know it was all worth it in order to protect our highly trained, completely repsonsible $7.95/hr security forces from the 2 or 3 armoured car robberies over the last century.

There have been plenty more than that, dude. I did a Google Search and found at least that many in the past week.

Google News that is.

[ 27 January 2004: Message edited by: paxamillion ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by person:
it seams like your average suburbanite centrist is awfully afraid of guns.

---

Not that I'm a centrist, but, well, yes. Guns. Afraid of. Uh, huh, you betcha. That is kind of the point.

quote:

---

why????

---

Uh, because they're extremely effective at killing people. Seems like a reasonable reason. Similarly, I'm afraid of drunk drivers, bombs, cougars, AIDS . . . you get the idea (oh wait, this is person, you probably don't. But everyone else does).

quote:

---

i'd bet dollars to doughnuts that most of the anti-gun crowd has never even used a rifle.

---