![]() |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 10945229)
I'm a reasonable and responsible citizen with no criminal record and as an enthusiast/collector and I should be able to own any gun with whatever size magazine I choose. I have no problem with there being restrictions on how I use a gun and even how it is transported but I think it is an infringement of my freedom to regulate what I use.
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 10945229)
And a five round clip? Would you keep that gun in your purse? ;)
I fail to see how a 5 round clip is any less restrictive to me than one with a 10 round clip. I certainly don't see the need for any one, outside of the military, to require a magazine that is capable of firing more than 5 rounds without reloading. |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 10945259)
If someone gave me a rifle, even a rapid fire one with a large capacity magazine, I believe I should be able bring it into Canada without them getting all menstrual about it, and I should be able to take it to a range or out in a quarry or some place and blast away for fun. As long as its properly stored at home and transported unloaded and not within immediate reach, I don't see a problem.
|
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10945339)
America's experience seems to suggest your "there's no problem" mantra is somewhat flawed.
|
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10945339)
America's experience seems to suggest your "there's no problem" mantra is somewhat flawed.
|
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
I thought this paragraph from the Comments section under that article was quite valid:
"I am anti guns. But Ameica is not dedicated to guns, America is dedicated to violence. The violence may be at home with guns, or overseas with drones or cruise missiles. A foreign policy at the barrel of a gun, and people at home sort out their difference at the barrel of a gun." It's an attitude thing. Americans, on the whole (nice big generalisation coming up), can sort their differences with a gun - because they can. Because they always have. Because they are so easily accessible. Feeling a bit on edge tonight? Buy a gun. Don't want to walk down that street again? Buy a gun. Don't like the look of that fella that's moved into No 42? Buy a gun. This grows into more of the same: Don't like the way that 11th grader looked at me - betta bring in my gun. Don't like the way that shop assistant spoke to me - gonna take my gun next time. Feeling a bit crap today - gonna take out my gun and shoot some people - they're all pissing me off anyway, it's their fault I'm having a crap day - they deserve it. It's an unstable, paranoid and easy-to-violence society. The ownership of some 300 million guns is absolutely bonkers. But we'll never change it. A few laws might manage to tweak it but will never do away with gun ownership altogether. And besides, I can do a bit of paranoia too - ever watched those docu-dramas about when all the petrol runs out, or a terrorism attack on a power system? America will eat its own, society will crumble in a matter of weeks, and a shooting at a school or mall will be an everyday occurrence. Oh happy times - I watch The Walking Dead - I'm gonna get me a gun. |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by ann m
(Post 10945381)
It's an attitude thing. Americans, on the whole (nice big generalisation coming up), can sort their differences with a gun - because they can. Because they always have. Because they are so easily accessible.
Feeling a bit on edge tonight? Buy a gun. Don't want to walk down that street again? Buy a gun. Don't like the look of that fella that's moved into No 42? Buy a gun. |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by ann m
(Post 10945381)
I thought this paragraph from the Comments section under that article was quite valid:
"I am anti guns. But Ameica is not dedicated to guns, America is dedicated to violence. The violence may be at home with guns, or overseas with drones or cruise missiles. A foreign policy at the barrel of a gun, and people at home sort out their difference at the barrel of a gun." It's an attitude thing. Americans, on the whole (nice big generalisation coming up), can sort their differences with a gun - because they can. Because they always have. Because they are so easily accessible. Feeling a bit on edge tonight? Buy a gun. Don't want to walk down that street again? Buy a gun. Don't like the look of that fella that's moved into No 42? Buy a gun. This grows into more of the same: Don't like the way that 11th grader looked at me - betta bring in my gun. Don't like the way that shop assistant spoke to me - gonna take my gun next time. Feeling a bit crap today - gonna take out my gun and shoot some people - they're all pissing me off anyway, it's their fault I'm having a crap day - they deserve it. It's an unstable, paranoid and easy-to-violence society. The ownership of some 300 million guns is absolutely bonkers. But we'll never change it. A few laws might manage to tweak it but will never do away with gun ownership altogether. And besides, I can do a bit of paranoia too - ever watched those docu-dramas about when all the petrol runs out, or a terrorism attack on a power system? America will eat its own, society will crumble in a matter of weeks, and a shooting at a school or mall will be an everyday occurrence. Oh happy times - I watch The Walking Dead - I'm gonna get me a gun. |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 10945375)
They need better enforcement of the laws rather than more restrictions but that's not my problem right now. My concern is bringing guns over the border without the hassle of namby pamby guards giving us grief. If you're legally allowed to own and possess then in the US then the Canadians should let us bring them up here with us while we're here and stop being so petty and sanctimonious about the whole thing.
Why would one need the type of weapon that is legal in the US but is not legal in Canada when in Canada? What type of weapon are you talking about? |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10945409)
I am confident your argument is tongue in cheek but why would anyone need a weapon that can fire more than 5 rounds without reloading.
Why would one need the type of weapon that is legal in the US but is not legal in Canada when in Canada? What type of weapon are you talking about? |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 10945395)
I rebut your generalisation with anecdote. I know an American who bought a gun for protection only when she moved to Canada!
She sounds like the American that felt threatened when some locals asked him a question when he was walking in a park during Stampede, as he didn't have his gun with him. |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10945414)
What type of protection was she seeking?
I pointed out that I'd lived here for years and wasn't dead; it's as safe in Canada as it is in the mid-west but you know how it goes, people only know what they see. Canadians think they'll be shot dead if they go farther into the US than the Walden Galleria and Americans think Toronto's all Jamaicans and Somalis shooting random children throught their bedroom windows; that and men kissing each other on the street. |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10945409)
I am confident your argument is tongue in cheek but why would anyone need a weapon that can fire more than 5 rounds without reloading.
Why would one need the type of weapon that is legal in the US but is not legal in Canada when in Canada? What type of weapon are you talking about? Various rifles that I've collected over the years are now sitting in someones safe taking up room while I should be able to have them up here without having to go through unnecessary paperwork. There's lots of reciprocal agreements with US as the two countries are so intertwined. It just obtuse for them to get sticky about legal firearms. If you can tell me a better way get rid of fishing stealing seals than blasting a 30 round clip at them, I'd like to know. :) |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 10945488)
Various rifles that I've collected over the years are now sitting in someones safe taking up room while I should be able to have them up here without having to go through unnecessary paperwork. There's lots of reciprocal agreements with US as the two countries are so intertwined. It just obtuse for them to get sticky about legal firearms.
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 10945488)
If you can tell me a better way get rid of fishing stealing seals than blasting a 30 round clip at them, I'd like to know. :)
|
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10944293)
Why does a civilian require a multi shot automatic weapon?
In Canada, a magazine of 5 is the maximum permitted. What is wrong with that? |
Re: Piers Morgan on guns
Originally Posted by cjones
(Post 10946422)
One might be a really bad shot, rather short sighted, heavily medicated, or even a bit drunk?... Surely having the option of more bullets and it being an automatic weapon would vastly improve one's chances of hitting a target/critter/ex co-worker/school child?
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 6:45 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.