|
|
|
|
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/11/2007 7:58:03 AM | The government hasn't failed us in any of this. You REALLY have that much faith in government?? Wow. That's scary. The government can legislate anything it wants, but it will be completely ineffective unless ALL of us completely and sincerely agree to abide by it, or the government creates the kind of oppressive Police-state where ALL violations are detected and enforced. The former is a Utopian fantasy, and the latter is a Facist nightmare.
We have all failed ourselves and each other by abusing our freedom to make choices about how to conduct ourselves and co-exist with others. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/12/2007 7:24:35 PM | As far as I am concerned, if you drink and drive or use a hand gun, it is still the
same, you are committing murder and should be punished for it! Both should carry huge penalities no matter what, I think that it is time the government, whether on the provincial or federal level should start tightening up the laws again, alot of other people may not agree with me but that is what I think should be done! The trouble is that the people who complain about the laws being too tough are those who have never had a crime committed against them or lost a loved one because of a crime happening, I sometimes think that the only time that these people will agree with me on my view of it, is when it finally hits home with them and affects them personally, that goes for both levels of government as well! Then it is too late for them!
A lot of these crimes of violence you see and hear about in the media are usually committed by young people, I wouldn't say all young people are bad or do these types of things to other people because I really think that the vast majority of young people are innocent but it only takes a few to spoil it for the rest! This minority of young people who commit crimes of this nature should receive a punishment that fits the crime they have committed in a way that will make them think twice before doing it again and not get the slap on the wrist they get now! Right now all they do is laugh at the police when they get arrested and charged with a crime because they know that they are not going to receive the kind of punishment that fits the crime and are only going to get a tap on the wrist kind of punishment, it is time it was stopped! The kind of solutions the different levels of government is coming up with don't work and don't make these young people who commit offenses think twice about doing it again! I think if the punishment actually fitted the crime these young people commit, they would soon learn to stop it, maybe not all of them and make something of their lives that is a lot better instead but it isn't going to happen that way!
I think that a lot of people, including myself, who think like I do about tightening up the laws and making criminals, whether they are young or not, think twice about committing such things again, are only dreaming because it will never happen, the different levels of government will never do it until it hits home! We can talk all we want on this thread about it and voice our opinions in doing so but it won't get us anywhere! That is the extremely sad thing about it, isn't it, who is going to listen? | |
|
scwl13
|
Joined: 10/20/2007
Msg: 53 | |
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/25/2007 7:21:47 AM | Gun related crimes...
Most gun related crimes are related to gang violence or psychotic people, and gun laws aren't going to prevent these people from getting a gun. I suppose you can say I live in a Utopian world, but I still believe that a proper education and nourishment is more important. Many psychotic people, if given the attention or professional help will not resort to shooting people in a high school or a university campus. A lot of kids will not end up in gangs if they are receive proper attention from their parents when they are home.
We tend to shift the blame on one another when tragedies happen, which is unacceptable. Parents blame the law enforcement for not stopping crimes, politicians for not imposing stiffer penalties, or the teachers for not looking after their kids, when they neglect to realize that they don't even spend enough time with their kids. Some parents are too busy making money and don't ever see their kids. Other parents have way too many kids, beyond what they can financially and pyshically handle. Some parents are just bad examples themselves, and then there are those who put up with a relationship with an abusive spouse. News flash, all these scenerios have a negative influence on your kids. Even if you are doing a great job bringing up your kids, maybe your neighbour isn't. If you see your neighbour's kid going through this kind of trouble and you don't do anything, then you are just as guilty as being a bad parent. There are a lot of professional organizations that will help these kids get a better life.
Onto drinking and driving...
People who commit gun related crimes are often misguided, but people who drink and drive aren't. You don't need a phD to know that 1) you can choose not to drink and 2) you can choose not to get behind the wheels. Perhaps it should be a legal requirement for public places that serve alcohol to have a "key check" where people will be required to check their keys in. Of course if it's a restaurant, than only check your keys in if you order alcoholic beverages. With house parties, the host should be held accountable as well if one of the patrons end up DUI, because it's something that can be planned and forseen. Stiffer penalties won't stop people from DUI, but I still think people should have their license to kill - their driver's license - taken away for life on the spot.
That's just my two cent... | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/25/2007 9:55:35 AM | alright this always pisses me off.
why ban handguns and ruin it for legal and responsible gun owners?
first of all do any of you know what you have to go through to purchase a hand and posses it legally????
first and the most obvious is to obtain you're restricted firearms licence. (which yes i have) you take a full course. write a test and the instructor will teach you safety, firing, storage and cleaning.
alright next. to buy a hand gun. purchase it from a legal gun shop. register it. the government now knows that you own a hand gun. now you have to be part of a firing range and the hand gun must be kept at the firing range at all times. if you want to transport the handgun you must call the police ahead of time tell them were you're going with it and what time.
now if you wanna keep it at home you have write a massive essay to the police stating why you want to keep it at home and why you should be allowed to. if they approve of us than you must surrender to random searches at any time. meaning you could be in the middle of dinner and they can come say we would like to search and inspect you're guns. if you say no you go to jail.
so with that being said. great we ban hand guns make them completely illegal. but we are forgetting something. the handguns criminals have are already illegal. so banning them wont do shit. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 2/29/2008 4:39:29 AM | [[[[ Leeanne I think comparing one against the other is just sick!! ]]]]
There is only so much revenue per year and with that only so much police. Therefore, when deciding on where you want to put the effort and resource to combat a problem you do have to compare one against the other. It is not sick it is just the way things are in the real world. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 2:08:44 AM | Someone said - Hold the home owner of a party where ppl drink, leave, have an accident also responsible. Why? Bar owners already get sued by ppl who drink there then have accidents, many times ppl drink outside of the bar (have a few in the parking lot) then drive and have an accident , yet they still sue the bar owners. I've allways hated this crap. Why cant the drinker be totally responsible for them selves? Lets drag bar owners in cuz they seem to have $$$$ BTW - Im not a drinker, but I think there should be something (like free overnight car parking) for those who want to, as was said.
Lady doesnt drive well in winter conditions, skids on ice and crashes, sues the gov, gets 6 Million, WHY ? She obviously wasnt driving according to conditions, has a single vehicle collision and gets $$$
Handguns - anyone can go online and learn how to make a handgun that does not actually qualify as a handgun (due to velocity of bullets or something - I know nada bout guns) and kill someone, or hair spray bombs, or surgical tubing spear guns, cross bows, etc.... Guns arnt the problem. You might say "you dont NEED them". Well we dont NEED a lot of things, so should we stip away all but the necessitities?
Guns are for one thing only and thats killing ppl - WRONG - think self defense, think shooting without killing, use yer heads ppl.
To the goof who cals anyone using a gun a pansy - well ya, maybe they are (too old, to small, to weak, physically diminished in some capacity, dont know how to fight, etc..) so what? Just cuz you might be a tuff guy and dont need one means nada, ppl have their own reasons. Im sure I could find something out about you and call you worse, so there , take those beans............
Just cuz YOU dont do something, doesnt mean you should try and remove things from ppl who DO (guns, cars, drinking, music, sports, art.....) I hate stinky food and think that ppl dont NEED to cook stinky food, therefore I think it should be illegal - grow up ppl, learn to accept others for their differences, being a tolerant person makes you a better person - if we were all intollerant, we'd all be dead. Let them have their guns. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 5:48:27 AM | so with that being said. great we ban hand guns make them completely illegal. but we are forgetting something. the handguns criminals have are already illegal. so banning them wont do shit
I'm a bit on the fence with this issue. There are a few things I am wondering.
1 What do you do with your handguns besides keep them for defensive purposes? (which is a very weak argument)
2 Is there shooting competitions, etc., that are sanctioned and legal?
3 Do most owners join these competitions?
4 What about those who don't?
5 What advantages does a handgun give over a shotgun and/or rifle?
6 Are those supporting handgun ownership also supporting use of a handgun if someone breaks into your house? If so, why?
7 If a person can use a bullet for self defense, why can't people from other cultures use a knife, sword, dagger, etc.? Afterall, saving your own life should not be relegated only to those who own guns.
8 If a handgun owner uses his/her gun for "defensive" purposes and the perpetrator does not have a weapon (during a break-in for example), should there be an automatic jail term? If not, why not?
If anyone cares to answer these questions, it would help me better understand your position for owning a handgun.
edit:
The impact of drunk driving far out ways that of gun violence, yet the government continues to ignore its impact and chooses to focus instead on gun violence, that in reality affects far fewer people overall
The impact? Gun violence is an act where killing is the desired result. Drunk driving is an act of ignorance and not linked to the desire to kill someone. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 10:39:38 AM | I have an issue with the bleeding heart tree huggers who want to punish legal firearms owners because we are easy to legislate and ban.
Why don't you stop the illegal imports of guns coming into this country....or are you too busy scratching your head pondering if a border guard would be infringing on privacy searching a car for illegal firearms.
Why dont you bleeding hearts jail a criminal who uses firearms for crimes instead of giving them easy bail conditions and soft jail terms.
If you bleeding hearts started jailing thugs instead of hugging them....gun crimes would be significantly lower and this wont even be an issue.
The UK is living proof that gun control laws do not work. UK gun crime is spiralling despite the outlawing of most types of guns. When are you bleeding hearts gonna stop punishing legal law bidding citizens who go through extensive screening to even own one and start jailing career criminals you bleeding hearts are afraid to punish.
There are hundreds of stabbing incidents in Canada...yet no one is even proposing banning kitchen knives or sharp implements.
Do you bleeding hearts plan to ban steak knives too......remember we have hundreds of stabbing incidents a years.....we should punish every Canadian by prohibiting the use of a sharp object. Just think of all those stabbing crimes disappearing...
When are we gonna hold people accountable for their actions and instead of legal law-biding citizens who demonstrate they are accountable for theirs..there is the old addage that nobody is remembering....guns don't kill people...people kill people.
A car isnt a dangerous weapon if its sitting idly in a parking lot..it becomes a weapon when a drunk driver...yes bleeding hearts I meant when a drunk person gets behind the wheel does it become a weapon.
And for the record...more people die from drunk driving accidents than gun crimes...but still no one wants to ban cars....is their a double standard here....vehicle accidents kill more people per capita than any other crime. Yet everyone is afraid to ban vehicles...
I wish people addressed the real issue of a problem by treating the cause instead of cosmetic "feel good" bandaid solutions that do nothing but punish the lawbidding and excuse the accountable. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 10:53:11 AM | These are my own opinions on My I questions:
1) You use a handgun for target practise. The ability to shot a bulls eye with a handgun is an achievement. A bulls eye with a rifle is also achievement but is easier than a handgun. No different than the feeling you get when you get a hole in one in golf. Also the design of handguns vary. Some have ivory hand grips and some do not. Some handguns have historical value as well. Maybe the Red Baron owned it or Billy Bishop, etc. No different than someone collecting a hockey stick that someone who made a name for themself owned it first. Note: In Canada you cannot use a handgun for hunting.
2) Yes there are competitions for shooting. Even the olympics have a shooting part in one of there sports.
3 & 4)No. Most owners do not join these competitions however the ones that do not might have some unofficial competition among their friends.
5)Handguns are for close range. The main advantage is that a handgun can easily be carried in a holster. They are lighter than a rifle or shot gun. A handgun can be made smaller than the palm of your hand. These are usually known as ladies guns or purse guns. In the US you can even get a hand gun that doubles as a belt buckel. Note: Police and security uses hand guns for the fact if they are discharged in a city the bullet does not travel as far and they are a lot easier to carry while walking the beat.
6)This is a hard question. The reason is that I do not support the laws of Texas that state if someone breaks into your house you can shoot them. However if an individual shoots and kills someone breaking in their house in self defense than I cannot see justice in punishing them.
7) Reffer back to answer 6.
8) If the theft is shot in the back trying to escape there should be automatic jail time for the home owner. If the theif is shot in the leg then there should be no jail time.
If My I is serious in understand, I suggest they go read some of the posts under the thread, "gun control in the US". It is up to 68 electronic pages. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 11:09:12 AM | to all the people that think banning guns, or establishing a registry would (or will) do anything
a criminal won't take the time to get his FAC or register their weapon. . . they'll be using something off of the black market as it's much easier to get and a little harder to keep track of than something that's registered
while I am STRONGLY against gun violence, I am also equally against banning something simply because it has the potential to kill someone in the right hands. cars ARE a weapon in and of themselves simply due to their size and the speeds that they travel. does that mean we ban the general public from using them?
I think that prevention in the form of education on how to be a responsible driver as well as how to be a responsible gun owner should be the largest part of stopping both gun violence and drunk driving. barring that, if someone does show blatant disregard for the safety of someone else by either shooting them (I'm talking in the criminal sense here . . .I firmly believe if someone were to use any kind of weapon to stop them from being a victim of a crime they shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of the criminal who tried to do something to them) or driving under the influence then they should be held accountable for it (lack of proper enforcement of any firearm/drunk driving laws is the issue as far as I'm concerned. . .tougher laws won't guarantee anything if the current ones aren't enforced) | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 12:08:40 PM | If the theif is shot in the leg then there should be no jail time
Irrespective of the body part shot, it's as if some gun owners think they are gunslingers and can accurately shoot at a particular body part - especially in an unexpected, frantic situation. Like any other sport, some people are legends in their own mind... even though they suck at the sport they play.
Ironically, a police officer is interrogated and temporarily suspended from duty while being investigated if an unarmed man gets shot. If trained police make mistakes and poor judgements, I can understand why government would restrict people from becoming vigilantes.
As long as someone has an excuse for using a gun on another person, they should not be allowed to carry any firearm. Self defense is an ambiguous claim. Anyone can shoot to kill and claim it was self defense. Murderers already use that excuse.... and the crime is usually committed on someone they know.
If a gun isn't used to hunt or used as a legal, competitive sport, I support banning them. The reason I support this is because a coworker of mine had two functional, antique firearms in his house. They were stolen and now they can be presumed as "in the wrong hands". Rifles and shotguns are not that easy to steal, inconspicuiously.
I understand what some owners complaint is. But the truth be told... if your gun was taken during a robbery, that's a safety concern for everyone... that gun is now on the street.
I also think it's a good safety measure for Police officers. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 1:09:30 PM | My I when I made that comment it was in the tone that an individual has broken into your home. As far as police are they can shoot an unarmed man if they feel there life is threatened. For example, the RCMP are trained to shoot twice in the chest if they feel it is necessary. The reason for the chest is for the fact it is the biggest target and they do not want a wild bullet. A wild bullet is a bullet in the air. As long as that bullet is in flight it is dangerous. Therefore, when a RCMP officer is trained to shoot they aim for the biggest target. This is why they do not shoot out tires. They are accountable for their bullets. Now when an officer draws a gun out of their holster they will shoot. I have witness this action before in real life and not on TV.
Next I have been around guns my whole life as my father was a hunter and his brothers were war vets. For this reason I have an outstanding practicle knowledge of guns. When I challenge the gun test, I wrote in less than 1/2 hour and recieved 96% on it. I can also tell you at close range with a colt .22 I can put the shots in a 4" circle. Done it before. Therefore I am able to shoot someone in the leg if I can get over the fact of shooting someone. Note: I am also a hunter since I was 15 which means I have shoot and killed different animals in the pass so I do know my own abilities when it comes with guns. Now each gun will have there own characteristics. That is not all guns shoot alike. Some will have more recoil than others. In the pass I have been involved in using a 12 gauge pump action, 410 single bolt action, .22 bolt action rifle, 30-06 Springfield bolt action, .303 Lee-Enfield bolt action, .308 bolt action, 300 Savage lever action for hunting purposes. I know how each of these firearms shoot. Also to keep the basic skills of shooting I practise from time to time with a CO2 pellet gun. Nice thing about the pellet gun is I can set it up in the basement safely and shoot there. The ideal is to practise the skill of shooting and gun etiquette. You will probably find most hunters are good shots.
My I if you have specific questions I will try my best to answer them but I realy suggest you look at the thread, " gun control in the US ". You might enjoy debating there. If you print up the thread it is only over 500 pages.
To shoot a rifle you aim and squeeze the trigger. There are different sights with a rifle.
To shoot a shot gun you just point and pull the trigger. There are usualy only a single sight on the front of the barrel.
To shoot a handgun you aim and squeeze the trigger. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/8/2008 2:40:31 PM |
My I when I made that comment it was in the tone that an individual has broken into your home.
First off, For Eternity. You do appear to be a responsible person with firearms. However, I think the laws are looking at this differently because you are not the type of person who is enacting violence against others. Handguns are the choice weapon for killers who decide to use a firearm. The government can't be ignorant of that fact. The government has instilled laws recently regarding race cars... it's under the same objective regarding safety for others.
Unfortunately, when laws like this are enacted there are those who would suffer unfairly because of it. You appear to be one of those who would suffer because of the delinquents.
On the issue of break-ins. I would tend to think many gun owners who use this argument are not locking their guns at night. If I recall, the law states the gun(s) must be stored in an approved locked cabinet. Now, given the fact that law is in place, how does a gun stored in a locked cabinet help during a break in?
Based on some of the coments, I'm beginning to think many gun owners have a gun very close to their beds... not in locked cabinets. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/9/2008 1:42:20 AM | A gun is consider to be safe stored in a gun case and out of sight. It does not have to be locked in a safe. Therefore, it could be possible for an individual to have a gun in a soft case, trigger lock on, in their bedroom closet out of sight. I knew an RCMP officer who use to handcuff his service revolver to the kitchen drain. Also if you have it stored in a gun safe while keeping a cool head you could have the safe open, firearm out, trigger lock off, and loaded in less than 5 minutes. If the safe is in your bedroom probably quicker. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to consider there would be enough time to have a firearm loaded and ready to fire when a theif is still in your home.
Also note that it takes no time to turn a rifle into a home made handgun. They are known as sawed off. Most people probably have heard of a sawed off shot gun from the movies. All you have to do is use a hack saw and saw the barrel down. Then you saw the butt off as well. Therefore, what purpose does banning handguns have at all with the criminal element. It has none. The only people it effects is the law obiding citizens. That is all. Since the ban of guns in Australia the sales of illegal firearms has risen by an estimated 20 000/year.
The biggest concern that I have about banning handguns is the fact that once that is done the activist will pressure the government to ban rifles next. The line moves so they work on moving the line again. This is why I feel that every person who is a gun owner has the responsibility to finally stand up and fight the issue over handguns. They should not just be quiet about it. The gun owners themselves should start to be the activist. Maybe they should organize and push to make fully automatic weapons legal once again. This is not for the intention of making them legal but to take the focus off the handgun issue as the argument becomes about the fully automatics. You can kind of call it a smoke screen play. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/9/2008 7:18:06 AM | I'm not supporting the idea that banning handguns will solve the problems. But, I'm sure you can agree it will help reduce the problem to some degree. Modifying guns with hacksaws and other ridiculous changes like that prove there are people who cannot be trusted with a firearm of any type.
Maybe banning handguns is simply a political thing whereas some politicians want to seem concerned. At least it is a step in the right direction. How effective it will be is another question because, as we all know, violent minded people could care less about laws when they want to go on a rampage.
I quickly browsed through the USA thread you suggested. Unfortunately, I ran across a post in that thread which made me shake my head. The person who posted the comment clearly stated that he would shoot a thief if he saw him/her running down the street with "my T.V.". That's the scary thought. The thief is out of the house and those in the house are safe yet, this gun owner would go all "Jessie James" and shoot bullets down a public street over a television.
That's what is totally messed up about gun ownership... too many people play god with others lives just because they have a gun.
I live in a border city so I get many US tv channels/news. The use of guns in violent crimes is staggerring. We all hear about the latest trend of school shootings in the usa yet, what is being done to prevent the problem? I disagree with the argument we should "put them away for life" as a remedy. Reacting to a violent crime that has been committed is not a remedy... even though he should be in for life, that didn't prevent the crime from occurring. Trying to take measures in order to reduce that crime from happening is the important matter. Let's face it... people using guns against other people are not thinking about, or worried about, serving jail time, whatsoever. Those who are concerned usually commit a murder/suicide.
Personally, I think all gun owners should not only submit to giving fingerprints, they should also give DNA. By doing such a thing it would show, to a degree, that the person is cognitive of the fact that he/she can be traced in the event a crime has been committed.
Some may think I'm off the wall re: DNA but really, if you have nothing to hide, what's the problem? Of course, some will say they will use that DNA for other things as well. My response is, "It's a trade off because some of you gun owners will commit a violent crime against another human."
Which is more important? | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/9/2008 7:30:32 AM | | Did you check to see if the guy who said that comes from the US. The governor of one of the states made it manitory that all drivers have a hand gun in the vehicle. This was to combat the hijacking of autos. What the gangs were doing was shooting the driver and stealing the cars. Yes this would be done in daylight. The gangs just did not care. The cops could not keep up. Civilians was being murdered everyday. Therefore, the governor issued a law that could fine anyone without a handgun in their vehicle. That law worked. The hijacking of the cars went down drasticaly. The reason behind it is if someone is hijacking your vehicle and goes to kill you another person in another car might shoot the hijacker. Just wonder if that is the State where the person mentioned about stealing the TV. Peoples perspective change with laws. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/10/2008 7:14:43 PM | "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." - Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764. That was 230 years ago. -Thomas Jefferson
"The constitutions of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves;
that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property and freedom
of the press." Thomas Jefferson
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.-Thomas Jefferson
Bush wants to give amnesty to millions of illegals in the USA, wants them to join the army, Canada/Mexico/USA secretly forming the SPP + NAU + NAFTA SuperHIghway, creating a one north american government, DESTROYING Canadian sovergnty, as well as stripping away your rights under the charter. These illegals in the army will be used against the ppl of the USA and Canada (sinse we wont have borders). This is a good reason to keep arms at home, actually everyone should get a gun(s), to protect yourself from whats comming in the next couple years and what was started years ago. Disarm the ppl, no one should need a gun at home, sounds like Hitler to me.
Do a search on:
SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership)
North American Union
NAFTA Super Highway
10's of millions of illegals taking your job, lowering the minimum wage to under $4hr, dissintigration of the OHIP/National Healthcare, loosing your civil rights, being forced to carry biometric RFID cards to be replaced with human chip implants
OK, sounds a lil off topic and crazy conspiracy - then why is Harper doing this in secrecy? | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/10/2008 8:46:35 PM |
Therefore, the governor issued a law that could fine anyone without a handgun in their vehicle. That law worked
This simply proves the point that all handguns should be banned. It's a rather idiotic thing to suggest everyone must possess handguns in order to combat the handgun problem.... that's primate thinking. Next thing we'll learn about is that same governor ordered all families to own uzi's and assault rifles because that is what gang-bangers use in crimes.
Besides, I am sure that governor was motivated by some other force ( weapons manufacturers).
As I stated before. I can understand your frustration but, a valid reason has not been presented in favour of owning handfguns, in my opinion. Owning handguns based on hypothetical situations is not a valid reason; In my opinion, it's a valid as demanding that all Canadian buildings be constructed on steel I-beams in case there is a catostrophic earthquake. It can happen but... the likelihood is not that great. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/11/2008 8:02:32 PM | MY I Canada is not like the USA yet. The governor probably put the law in effect because he had no other choice. Some areas the gangs are so bad that the residence will not even go out at night for it is a death sentence. Back around 1990 I took a motorcycle trip alone to the West Coast and back. Due to vacation time running out I decided to leave Vancouver and come back through the US since it was shorter. The distance through the USA was approx. 4300 km. On the way back I went through two places where I was lucky it was day light. The one place was the worse area of Chicago that you could imagine. Worse than any area of Toronto could be. Reason for riding in this area in the first place was searching for gas off the inter state. The short time I was there over 10 people notice I did not belong and each one told me that I need to get the hell out of there before night fall. One even went to the point of saying the only reason you are not dead yet is for the fact of the State troopers driving around. But when nightfall comes they will not be around at all. After that the gangs take over the neighbourhood. He also pointed and said; “The holes in those building are not moth holes. “ If one person said it I would tend to believe they were trying to pull my leg but when 10 different ones have stated the same then you tend to believe them. Also the lady who attended the gas booth explained to me that her co-worker was just killed in front of her the night before. Robbers held the co-worker at gunpoint demanding she open the door. She refused so they shot the co-worker. She even explained that there was nothing she could do and if she opened the door to the booth they both would be dead. The way she explained it to me was if she was trying to clear her conscience for piece of mind. Not sure where I would be if it were not for an individual who leant me $5 for gas. Since all I had on me was Canadian and the banks were closed for the State holiday I could not find a place to change to American funds. No gas station would do the exchange. A gentlemen in a gas station overheard me talking with the girl at the counter and gave me $5 US. The only thing he ever said is if he ever was stuck in Canada and I remembered him to pay back the favour. At the time I was grateful to him. It was not till I got to a toll both that I learned they have to exchange since they are government. If I had known that I would have exchanged Canadian funds for US. The second place was the worse area of Detroit just on the other side of Windsor. Drove through what is known as Crack valley. There are abandon building down this stretch and I guess the crack heads to residence in those buildings. Another American notices I did not belong and told me to stay away from that area if I wanted to stay alive. Then he escorted me by driving ahead of me to the street I was looking for so I could take the bridge back to Canada.
What I am trying to get at, there are some real bad areas in the US and if you have never travelled them you cannot comprehend how bad they actually are. One person I meet that grew up in the worse part of Boston told me she use to eat on the floor and at night the whole family would stay on the floor. The reason being is that the gangs are on the street and the bullets go right through the house. One childhood experience, which she told me, was when her family was eating dinner at the table. A gang shooting went on and a bullet went through their house and killed her sister. She has never got over it. For this reason she goes through deep bouts of depression She becomes so numb to life she will take a razor blade to her arms. She makes deep cuts. When I saw her arms I asked her if it hurts to do that. She said yes but at least it makes her feel alive. After that she told me the story of her sister.
What I am getting at am that the governor probably did not do it for the fact of paybacks from the gun manufactures. He probably did it out of necessity. The only thing is that I sure would not want to be a State trooper in that area. | |
|
agw
|
Joined: 1/2/2008
Msg: 70 | |
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/12/2008 2:46:39 PM |
There is only one reason for the existance of a hand gun or any gun - and that is to kill. There should be no reason for anyone to have a gun if they were all banned - period.
Even if guns were completely banned, gangs and criminals would still get a hold of them.
It would only disarm law abiding citizens. I for one have no desire to own a handgun, I enjoy
target shooting with a pellet pistol, but I have no need for the real thing. I do not wish to see handguns banned however, the laws already regulating ownership of handguns are extremely strict as is. The gang members shooting each other don't have licenses for their weapons, they don't have them registered, would they really pay attention to a ban? | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/12/2008 9:56:47 PM | I think both are in serious need of attention.
I have lost 6 friends...yes 6 friends in the last year. All from drunk driving. It's disgusting to think that people have not learned what it can do to everyone around them and even people they have never met. Two died after rolling and coming to a stop hitting a tree. The other 4 died a year and ONE day later(they had been at a memorial for the previous accident a couple of days before) and they still got behind the wheel and drove...they hit house and tragically all died at the scene.
The gun violence is repulsive. I was living out west last year and came home(Hamilton) to find out that downtown has turned even worse. Toronto is scary....it really is little NYC....but I think it's heading towards the Bronx.
Where are they getting the guns(appearently border security is at it's tightest). WTF. I don't think it's only our government that has failed us. I think society has failed us. Where are the morals?! | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 3/13/2008 2:17:07 AM | {{{{Where are they getting the guns.}}}}
There is many ways to get an illegal gun just like drugs. But believe it or not illegal guns are easier to get than drugs. The hardest accomplishment is to get into the circle. First of all there are Zip guns. Zip guns are homemade guns, which you can goggle with the help of the Internet. Then there are the shipping yards. See a boat from another country can legally have a gun on board even in port. As long as it is on board a ship or yacht it is legal. Once it is removed off the boat and comes on shore than the law change. Therefore guns can be smuggled by ship through the ports. One type of handgun, which was made in China and being smuggled, was known as the midnight special. The problem with this gun was it was unreliable. After that there is the USA & Canada border. Can be shipped through the bunk of a transport truck. The bunk becomes the home of the trucker, which means if customs want to search the bunk they need a search warrant. Therefore unless they have probable cause they will not search the bunk. Do you know how many trucks pass the boarder? Then finally as the demand for illegal firearm go up with the more restriction made on legal owners the price will go up. When the price of an illegal firearm becomes high enough there will be skilled full machinist and tool and die makers who will just make the guns here at home. Now a POF member quoted that you can purchase an illegal firearm as cheap as $25 but according to an article that I goggled, illegal firearms are more in the price range of $1000 to $1200. The midnight special use to sell on the streets of TO for approx. $300 over 15 years ago. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
