Public opinion survey of Canadians

[Trimdingman]

I've lived in NS too. You could keep your doors unlocked because it was Nova Scotia, not because of the guns.

 

I'm not "anti-gun" by any stretch of the imagination. I am all for protecting yourself. I've owned guns, don't have an issue with using them. I've trained on submachine guns, a variety of hanguns and longrifles in the military.

 

However, I question the purpose of owning an UZI or an assault rifle in the home, other than being able to say, "Hey, I'm a tough guy, I keep a weapon of war under my bed so I can sleep at night." :shrug:

 

I lived in a Nova Scotia fishing village until I was 18. There was a murder rate of about 1 per 10000 per year. For the GTA, that would be the equivalent of over 500 murders per year. I still felt safe.

 

If you want to kill someone, you do not need a UZI. You can do it in many different ways. Some people want to own pythons. As long as they abide by the rules, it is legal. If someone has a gun hobby, why is it automatically assumed that he is a danger to the public? Well, he may be robbed by a criminal. Let the criminal buy the gun legally. Let everyone who wants one buy one legally. If someone is inclined to rob a bank, and he does not know how many of the customers standing in line are carrying concealed weapons, I believe that he would choose another line of work.

Edited June 3, 2006 by Trimdingman

[kracker]

I guess that's the difference between where we live and where you live. Not too many crack smokers here, and I don't feel the need to cower in a corner with a gun in my hand. If you feel that scared and paranoid then I truly feel sorry for you.

 

Our guns are locked up in a SAFE manner where I don't have to worry about one of my children or their friends blowing their heads off. But I guess protecting your "stuff" is more important than protecting "people".

 

 

Wouldn't surprise me that a cannuck wouldn't have any idea of what I'm talkin about....no cowering here moron and that's the point. There is a little thing called a right to bear arms down here in the land that didn't want to be stuck in the King's ass. I guess you don't have to worry about crackheads so much there, it's just the faggots that are takin your kids away.

 

I keep a gun in my house and plan to keep a gun in my house, I may need it if people here start to believe the greenpeace lunatics like you.

[OAC_Sparky]

If someone has a gun hobby, why is it automatically assumed that he is a danger to the public?

I totally understand the collecting hobby. I have a large sword and knife collection. That doesn't mean I feel the need to sleep with my Hibben bowie under my pillow or my Christian Fletcher Redeemer under my bed.

 

Collectors can still collect, hunters can still hunt, shooters can still shoot here. What you can't do is walk nto a surplus store and buy an RPG. Is that a bad thing?

 

Wouldn't surprise me that a cannuck wouldn't have any idea of what I'm talkin about....no cowering here moron and that's the point. There is a little thing called a right to bear arms down here in the land that didn't want to be stuck in the King's ass. I guess you don't have to worry about crackheads so much there, it's just the faggots that are takin your kids away.

 

I keep a gun in my house and plan to keep a gun in my house, I may need it if people here start to believe the greenpeace lunatics like you.

I'm an American citizen as well.

 

Only I graduated from the need to have a security blanket or teddy bear; whether it's the fluffy kind or the Smith and Wesson variety.

 

Scared is as scared does, dude.

[06StangAwesomecar]

Thats the thing here in the Usa, if I want to own a Ak47 I can, unlike in Canada you cant, tell me how many murders and robberys were commited using ASSULT weapons, tell us on here how much money Canada has wasted. On their scare theorys, I read a article that says all crime in Canada has increased, just from the simple fact that criminals are not scared. The theorys you people come up with are really hilarious, like others have said, ban all sharp objects, stop selling machetes too.

[Trimdingman]

Thats the thing here in the Usa, if I want to own a Ak47 I can, unlike in Canada you cant, tell me how many murders and robberys were commited using ASSULT weapons, tell us on here how much money Canada has wasted. On their scare theorys, I read a article that says all crime in Canada has increased, just from the simple fact that criminals are not scared. The theorys you people come up with are really hilarious, like others have said, ban all sharp objects, stop selling machetes too.

 

 

You hit the nail on the head. I say that we should be able to possess any weapons that the criminals can possess. We don't need cops. We citizens have the capability of wiping out the criminals. The law only protects them. They need them in order to keep their jobs. That is why convicted felons always get a slap on the wrist. Before the law came, there was minimal crime. Law brought crime with it. Law protects criminals. There are more criminals, proportionatly, in the law profession than in the general public.

Edited June 2, 2006 by Trimdingman

[kracker]

I totally understand the collecting hobby. I have a large sword and knife collection. That doesn't mean I feel the need to sleep with my Hibben bowie under my pillow or my Christian Fletcher Redeemer under my bed.

 

Collectors can still collect, hunters can still hunt, shooters can still shoot here. What you can't do is walk nto a surplus store and buy an RPG. Is that a bad thing?

I'm an American citizen as well.

 

Only I graduated from the need to have a security blanket or teddy bear; whether it's the fluffy kind or the Smith and Wesson variety.

 

Scared is as scared does, dude.

 

 

LOL....IF you are truly a US Citizen as you claim then you should know the right to bear arms has absolutely nothing to do with being scared.....it has more to do with freedom and defending it.....but then again you work in Canada right? I won't hold you responsible for your ignorance since that is the case.....but if I were you I wouldn't let the Govt or some pinko tell you that you shouldn't defend yourself........oh wait a minute ....maybe you're one of those bedwetters that has to ask mommy permission to do everything......

[OAC_Sparky]

Notwithstanding the "ability" to buy, I'm questioning the "why?".

I can understand having a gun. Even a handgun for personal protection

But c'mon You have to be suffering from a deep-rooted paranoia to feel the need to keep an Uzi under your bed..

 

.. tell me how many murders and robberys were commited using ASSULT weapons

I say that we should be able to possess any weapons that the criminals can possess.

While you agree with each other, you're actually disproving the others point. Right, not many murders and robberies were committed by assault weapons. Even in Canada. So to allege that you need assault weapons to combat criminals doesn't hold water if criminals aren't using them to commit crimes.

If people started getting held up at machine gun point, I could see it. Until then, no.

 

At the same time, you would think that since American citizens have free right to bear arms that the crime rate would be decreasing. Is it?

 

tell us on here how much money Canada has wasted.

I never agreed with the gun registry, and never will. That is a waste of money. Criminals are not going to register their guns, and on that point we can agree. However, apart from the registry, having a safe, legal process (ie my Possession and Acquisition License) to teach proper use and storage is a good idea, regardless of a minor inconvenience. Needing an FAC has been around since the '70s, have no real bearing on recent crime increases.

 

Which will bring about the next point. Crime rates are increasing in Canada. But they are also rising in the US. Given the difference in accessibility to firearms, why is that? By the premise of "protection", then the US crime rate should be falling while Canada's is rising. Is it?

 

There are other factors at work here in both countries. Apart from firearms control.

 

There are more criminals, proportionatly, in the law profession than in the general public.

:lol: That's true enough!

 

 

LOL....IF you are truly a US Citizen as you claim then you should know the right to bear arms has absolutely nothing to do with being scared.....it has more to do with freedom and defending it.....but then again you work in Canada right? I won't hold you responsible for your ignorance since that is the case.....but if I were you I wouldn't let the Govt or some pinko tell you that you shouldn't defend yourself........oh wait a minute ....maybe you're one of those bedwetters that has to ask mommy permission to do everything......

You might feel better sucking your thumb and calling everyone pinkos and commies, but take away your gun, do you think you could protect yourself? Doesn't sound like it.

 

The "right to bear arms" has nothing to do with being scared. Owning an Uzi and keeping it under your bed "for protection" does. :rolleyes:

Edited June 2, 2006 by OAC_Sparky

[unionj]

The answer is simple for me.

 

"WHEN THEY PRY MY COLD DEAD FINGERS OFF OF IT"

 

Actually I now feel like going and putting 5-600 rounds through my M-4 which should take no time at all using pre loaded 30 round mags! "LET FREEDOM SING"

 

I also noticed that after 9-11 I saw many sidearms in plain sight around here. Funny thing was I also noticed no celebrations or people of the terrorists ethnic backround out and about. Funny what the threat of someone retaliating will do to ones demeaner. "Unrestrained" superior firepower has always had a major effect on the way people act throughout history.

[OAC_Sparky]

I also noticed that after 9-11 I saw many sidearms in plain sight around here. Funny thing was I also noticed no celebrations or people of the terrorists ethnic backround out and about. Funny what the threat of someone retaliating will do to ones demeaner.

An American citizen is an American citizen; regardless if they are white, black,, red or have a Polish, English, German, Chinese, Japanese background or people of the "terrorists ethnic background".

 

So, is this the meaning of "freedom", that we feel good by intimdating other Americans based on their ethnic origin? If this is the case, that makes us no better than the terrorists.

[unionj]

An American citizen is an American citizen; regardless if they are white, black,, red or have a Polish, English, German, Chinese, Japanese background or people of the "terrorists ethnic background".

 

So, is this the meaning of "freedom", that we feel good by intimdating other Americans based on their ethnic origin? If this is the case, that makes us no better than the terrorists.

 

Do not insinuate.

 

An "AMERICAN" citizen would have no problem turning in anyone they thought had bad intentions towards the USA not harbour them until it was too late. An "AMERICAN" citizen would denounce such violence no matter the religious affiliation. An "AMERICAN" citizen would never fly the flag of a foreign country before his own. An "AMERICAN" citizen would never approve of or celebrate such terrorist actions. An "AMERICAN" citizen is not going to leave the USA when things get better in a former homeland, this is there homeland forever and fighting for it and it's founding values are a "CITIZENS" duty.

And as for intimidating the answer is no but protecting and being precatious probally invloves some type of racial profiling. Looking at someone of Anglo Saxon origin is kind of stupid if the terrorists are Arabs! If a crime is commited by a chinese guy are you going to question a white or black guy? NO!

All your touchy feely PC left wing liberal hippy we can all get along bullshit has gotten people killed and destroyed the middle class with taxation to fund the stupid programs to help everyone but the hard working "CITIZEN".

[OAC_Sparky]

Do not insinuate.

I did not. I quoted you directly.

 

I also noticed that after 9-11 I saw many sidearms in plain sight around here. Funny thing was I also noticed no celebrations or people of the terrorists ethnic backround out and about. Funny what the threat of someone retaliating will do to ones demeaner. "Unrestrained" superior firepower has always had a major effect on the way people act throughout history.

 

Nothing was said about "terrorists" being out and about, what was said is "their ethnic background" as if every person from the Middle East is a suspect. That is not the case, nor is it even close to being the case.

 

You can RahRahRah America all you like, racisim isn't what my Grandfather spent nearly 30 years in the USAF fighting for.

 

Nobody here is supporting, condoning, admiring or celebrating terrorism. But rejoicing that people, who are American citizens, of Muslim origin had to hide from FEAR of being attacked by some Right Wing NUTBAR for something that they had absolutley nothing to do with is a TRAVESTY and speaks volumes.

[Trimdingman]

I do not feel the need to be armed living in Ontario; however, I do not like it when the government can tell me that I cannot own a handgun. It is none of their business what I own. Some day there could be danger in this area. They could open up a half-way house near-by. You never know when you are going to need protection. The number of break-and-entries would drop drasticly if the burglars feared that the home-owners may be armed. Bank and store hold-ups would end. I would rather be shot to death than stabbed or bludgeoned to death.

[OAC_Sparky]

Looking at someone of Anglo Saxon origin is kind of stupid if the terrorists are Arabs!

Funny, Timothy McVeigh and the Una bomber didn't look like Arabs to me...

 

however, I do not like it when the government can tell me that I cannot own a handgun.

The government isn't telling you that you cannot own one. But it does make you get a permit.

 

I know a few people that have legal handguns. Unless you've already got a criminal record or a history of violence, you can have one too.

 

 

 

The number of break-and-entries would drop drasticly if the burglars feared that the home-owners may be armed. Bank and store hold-ups would end.

You mean like they've ended in the US?

[Bluecon]

In Canada handguns have been registered since the 1940's and all guns of law abiding citizens havw

been registered for several years.

 

Yet murder and crime is epedemic with the drug dealers in the Toronto area.

Register the drug dealers then arrest them and the problem will be solved.

[OAC_Sparky]

In Canada handguns have been registered since the 1940's and all guns of law abiding citizens havw

been registered for several years.

 

Yet murder and crime is epedemic with the drug dealers in the Toronto area.

Register the drug dealers then arrest them and the problem will be solved.

And for once we agree.

 

:o

[Bluecon]

And for once we agree.

 

:o

Damn. That's going to take all the fun out of it!

[unionj]

And for once we agree.

 

:o

The NAZIS new who had guns.

[OAC_Sparky]

The NAZIS new who had guns.

Yes, and they were also bent on world domination.

 

I think that the Germany-US parallels are stronger than the Germany-Canada ones.

[electrocutioner]

We don't need cops. We citizens have the capability of wiping out the criminals.

 

Trimding with a gun running around in a posse playing vigilante.Considering there is no way to go back and edit reality after you kill somebody the way you edit every post you ever make,that's an awful scary thought,dude :titanic:

[JIMBO2]

"To disarm the people [is] the best and most effective way to enslave them..."

George Mason, 1836

 

"And to those who say the Second Amendment doesn't mean what we say it means: Let's settle that right now. The purpose of every line of the Bill Of Rights was to protect people from the state. Our founders refused to ratify a Constitution that didn't protect individual liberties. They were just a bunch of old dead white guys, but they invented this country and they meant what they said. The Second Amendment isn't about the National Guard or the police or any other government entity. it is about law-abiding, private U.S. citizens. Period"

Charlton Heston, April 20 1996

 

" The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall"

Adolph Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938

[Trimdingman]

Funny, Timothy McVeigh and the Una bomber didn't look like Arabs to me...

The government isn't telling you that you cannot own one. But it does make you get a permit.

 

I know a few people that have legal handguns. Unless you've already got a criminal record or a history of violence, you can have one too.

You mean like they've ended in the US?

 

 

I know that I could buy one if I jumped through a lot of hoops like a trained monkey, but I would not be able to carry it on me. I should have the same rights as criminals. They don't even pay the GST when they buy guns, and they walk around armed all the time. If I did that and got caught, I would lose everything, so I can't do it. If criminals do it and get caught, they will get a couple of months stay at a resort for free.

[OAC_Sparky]

Jimbo2, yes, I am familiar with the "reasoning" behind the Second Amendment. The Canadian government hasn't outlawed guns.

 

 

I should have the same rights as criminals.

You do, hold up a bank and see.

They don't even pay the GST when they buy guns, and they walk around armed all the time.

Non sequitur.

If I did that and got caught, I would lose everything, so I can't do it. If criminals do it and get caught, they will get a couple of months stay at a resort for free.

All you have to do is be a criminal to be treated the same as one. Really. I don't see the basis of your argument.

[cal50]

The Canadian government hasn't outlawed guns.

 

 

Not entirely correct.

 

Many firearms were put on the "prohibited" list. I had a friend who lived in Saskatchewan that owned a .50 rifle and competed in the national matches here in the U.S.

His rifles was placed first on the "restricted" list. He had to register it with the local police. Not long after he registered his rifles all those classes of guns were moved to the prohibited list meaning you had to demilled (destroy it) or export it out of the country. You could not legally keep it.

Here in the U.S we have some equally stupid gun laws that were created to deal with non-problems.

Legal machine guns are an example. New manufacture and sale were banned in 1986. Everything still out there can be kept and transfered but no new ones into the system. My cheap machine gun went from a few dollars in steel tubing to several thousand dollars in value because it's on the books legally in the system and transferable. Legally owned machine guns are a non issue in crime yet they were banned.

A .50 BMG caliber rifle is a large weapon at +20lbs. I doubt they are used in drive by and such here or in Canada yet there is a move to ban them here as Canada already has.

Any gun is only a hand tool and it's the operator that is responsible not the object.

I like all firearms. Rant mode off-

[OAC Lineman]

Hand guns are made to kill people. That is the sole reason for their invention. To encourage legal ownership, is to encourage murder. We saw that young girl murdered on Younge st. in Toronto by crossfire from a "gang" shootout. Can you imagine the amount of casualties had there been, say 10 citizens who may have pulled their "legal" guns, and fired back at the "gang bangers". Two wrongs, don't make a right! I won't pretend to know the answer to get illegal hand guns off the street. But to have a Trimdingaling running ramped with a "legal" hand gun will not solve a thing! And, although a lot of criminals have hand guns, there are many more who want one, and can't get one. The more people with "legal" hand guns there is, the more hand guns there will be for criminals to steal.

[DSenstad]

Way to stay on topic guys.

 

As far as criminals, I watched a show once where they interviewed robbers and the sound they most feared wasn't a dog, or a hand gun or a rifle, it was a shotgun. You don't have to be accurite with a shotgun nor does it have to be a clean shot, gut wounds are the worst I hear.

 

That said, I would like to collect a uzi or another automatic. Does it seve a purpose? Does having a car that can drive 2-3 times the legal limit serve a purpose? Does having a vehicle that can transverse the rubicon trail have a purpose? Does having professionsal sports teams and performing arts have a purpose? To some yes, others no.

 

Hand guns are made to kill people. That is the sole reason for their invention. To encourage legal ownership, is to encourage murder. We saw that young girl murdered on Younge st. in Toronto by crossfire from a "gang" shootout. Can you imagine the amount of casualties had there been, say 10 citizens who may have pulled their "legal" guns, and fired back at the "gang bangers". Two wrongs, don't make a right! I won't pretend to know the answer to get illegal hand guns off the street. But to have a Trimdingaling running ramped with a "legal" hand gun will not solve a thing! And, although a lot of criminals have hand guns, there are many more who want one, and can't get one. The more people with "legal" hand guns there is, the more hand guns there will be for criminals to steal.

Spoken like true paranoia. I hate it when a young girl gets hit by a car and killed, neglects to put on her seat belt and gets killed, tries to beat a train accoss the tracks and gets killed. Which do you think happens more often, your cross fire death or my automobile deaths?

 

We also hunt with our hand guns, I hate to bow hunt for bear without a .50 caliber to walk me back to my truck or boat. I feel that gives me an almost equal chance. When Florida enacted the right to carry weapons in public violent crimes went down... go figuare.