Well, it’s official now. Jack Layton will not be whipping his caucus into voting against Mullet head Hoeppner’s Bill c-391, the scrapping of the long gun registry which will no doubt, set the precedent for Stevie Spiteful to go the way of no gun control, just like Texas and Arizona. Way to go Jack! Furthermore, Jack doesn’t want Canadians to blame the NDP if c-391 passes.
“In terms of where the fate of the gun registry lies, there’s an enormous Conservative caucus right there that is going to be responsible if this thing is not carried on,” he said. “Let’s be absolutely clear where this initiative is coming from. This is coming directly from Mr. Harper, and it goes way back to the Reform days.”
Hmmm, this kinda sounds familiar. Didn’t Jack and other NDP MPs accuse the Liberals of cowering when propping the Harpercons when they claimed “it was the Harpercons idea”? This doesn’t come to me as a surprise, though. For sometime now, I’ve had a distrust for Jack Layton and the NDP and have expressed it before. How, they too, have cozied up to Stevie spiteful in the past. They are no longer the party of Ed Broadbent.
Layton goes on to say:
Despite the mostly rural NDP MPs who want the registry scrapped, Layton said there is a “very large” contingent in the NDP caucus that wants to keep the registry, albeit changed significantly to decriminalize non-compliance.
Yes, that is true, I’ll give them that. Very much the same way Iggy and the Liberals found most of the shit they either reluctantly voted with or abstained from voting on quite hideous. However, during those days, the Harpercons’ polling numbers were teetering in majority territory despite the stranglehold on Quebec Gilles Duceppe and the Bloc Quebecois hold. We all know how dangerous and unthinkable that would be, especially after the actions of Stevie and his sock puppets and pit bulls as of late. That is not the case today. Besides, Bill c-391 is not a confidence motion. No one would have gone to an election on this. So, Jack, what is your reasoning behind this then? You’re willing to risk losing a great many urban ridings including whatever inroads you started having in Montreal for the sake of a handful of rural ridings? That makes no sense. More importantly, you claim to lead the only party that really cares about the needs of Canadians above all, including partisan politics. Shouldn’t the safety of Canadians by means of strong gun control laws fall into that category? The Bloc Quebecois MPs for the most part represent rural ridings; hunting country; folks who love their guns just like the rest of rural Canada, yet they, no doubt are being whipped by Gilles Duceppe, are going to vote against Mullet head Hoeppner’s bill for the greater good. Why can’t you?
So, Jack, why shouldn’t we blame you if the long gun registry is killed? You had no problem blaming the Liberals when the Harpercons passed other insidious motions and legislation when a Harpercon majority was potentially looming.
I also have to ask the question, if the Liberals do come out with more confidence from their bus tour and if the polling numbers for Steve continue to remain weak and those of the Liberals remain stable or even go up some, and they do actually vote against the Harpercons, will the NDP actually cooperate with the Liberals or will they vote with the Harpercons just for the sake (what it seems like) of being contrary to the Liberals? I often wondered if the Liberals hadn’t voted so often with the Harpercons, would the NDP have stepped in their place and voted along with Steve?
Too bad, Jack, the NDP was a party I used to support wholeheartedly many years ago. But since 2004, I have become increasingly distrustful. I became a reluctant liberal voter, largely in part because of close polling numbers with the Harpercons but also, my increasing distrust. Now your refusal to whip your caucus to voting against a bill authored by a redneck who sports a mullet has cinched it for me. You accuse the other federal parties of being partisan. It’s true that they are. Guess what? You’re no better.
Shit! Is there any way we can get the Liberals and the NDP to cooperate with each other (cooperate, no coalition) to bring down the Harpercons sooner rather than later? Otherwise, we’re going to be stuck in never ending Stevie Spiteful shit.
![[small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WGczmWu7Wwc/SdCJyy2LN1I/AAAAAAAABWE/ABYCkbJaKaQ/s1600/small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg)
Rants are good, great in fact; but on gun registry, I’m losing it. I don’t see objectivity anymore. I’m becoming bored with it in fact, the stats are out there. It’s def time to move on. What if that three to four million was spent on things like women’s shelters and proactive violence reduction programs instead? How many lives might that save? Of course we know the xtra money won’t be spent on women’s shelters, ntl, this is becoming a disturbing waste of time. It’s just not a good use of finite resources. Blaming Jack isn’t going to make it right. In fact, it’s stoopid.
ck Reply:
August 21st, 2010 at 12:40 AM
But killing the long gun registry sends the message to Steve that it’s ok for him to scrap gun control. the operation costs aren’t all that much. I already produced stats on how firearms crimes have been reduced since it was brought in. I don’t want to see Canada becoming like Arizona or Texas where yahoos walk the streets packing a gun. Look at how many get killed in the US every year because of lack of gun control laws. And yes, he could have taken the high road and whipped his caucus for the safety of all Canadians. If the long gun registry wasn’t helpful and such a waste; why did Steve send Marty Cheliak away for French training he doesn’t need? And where did data regarding the long gun registry disappear to? Jack is being accomplice to this if he doesn’t whip his MPs.
Besides, I’ve been getting the vibe that Jack does and says stuff often to simply be contrary to the Liberals. When was the last time he cooperated with the Liberals on something? Their cooperation is necessary to bring down Steve. Otherwise, we’ll be stuck with the dictator for a very long time. I’m sure that must terrify you as much as it terrifies me. You may not like the Liberals, but as I mentioned over at Jymn’s place, the I hate Iggy Brigade won’t get Steve out of office; it’s red meat for him. It is in both the Liberals and the NDPs as well as their respective supporters to cooperate with each other to bring down Steve As soon as humanly possible before his numbers start teetering in majority territory again.
Steve ain’t gonna spend the money on women’s shelters. The misogynist thinks women should be at home with their husbands, no matter what, barefoot and pregnant.
If Stevie’s numbers start to teeter to majority territory, then its time to emigrate. Because that means I have nothing more in common with Canadians. Sad, but true. OTOH, we can ride this out with as much hutzpah as we can muster and wait…our time will come.
ck Reply:
August 21st, 2010 at 1:34 AM
No, time is a luxury we don’t have. An election must happen sooner rather than later. Most of us don’t have the stomach to ride out this megalomaniac’s reign of terror.
Some of us don’t have the luxury to be able to emigrate. I looked into it for us. My husband is over 45 and most of the countries we’d be interested in emigrating to have a 45 year age cap.
ck Reply:
August 21st, 2010 at 9:58 AM
Sorry Toe, Forgot to approve your comment after replying to you. Was getting tired.
The Candace Hoeppner gun event in Churchill MB
was a major failure. This link tells about the
event.
http://cowboysforsocialresponsibility.blogspot.com/2010/08/what-if-tories-hed-gun-rally-and-no-one.html
I notice that Hoeppner’s road show is only in the northern part of Ontario and only a few places.
The whole thing started on Aug. 12(the date of the press release)
and here’s the itinerary–all of it.
http://www.scraptheregistry.ca/summer-tour/
She’s missing cities and settled southern areas and the Atlantic
provinces are ignored entirely.
Dog and pony show and taxpayers are paying for this .
Having slept on it I fired off yet another letter!
You know one of the problems, Michael and Jack both still believe in majorities and won’t face the reality that permanent minorities are here to stay. With that in mind they have got to co-operate or even coalition without the Bloc, otherwise Stevie’s permanent minority will never be gone.
ck Reply:
August 21st, 2010 at 1:22 PM
Hi Toe,
Minorities seem predictable, but I wouldn’t underestimate Steve not getting a majority though. His numbers have already teetered around there on a number of occasions. I believe his numbers shot past 40% when Dion, Duceppe and Layton were about to form that fateful coalition. The trouble with many is that they still underestimate Steve despite the precedents he’s already set.
Iggy could potentially get a minority, but he needs to strike now. But never a majority. However, I could see someone like Justin Trudeau pulling off a majority however slight. Perhaps even Domenic Leblanc.
Ck – LOL, not to worry, we won’t be going the way of the Wild West anytime soon. Canada has had gun control for decades, and rightly so, and we’ll still have it after the long gun registry is scrapped. The registry isn’t “gun control”, it’s just a registry — it doesn’t “control” anything or keep anyone from getting a gun if they want one.
It’s funny: this issue gets people so fired up. Yet I’ve repeatedly asked registry supporters to tell me how it prevents or solves crime or makes anyone safer, and so far the answer has basically been “Because we say so”.
ck Reply:
August 21st, 2010 at 1:17 PM
Well, why did Steve shove Marty Cheliak off for French courses he doesn’t need? Why did he hide data on the gun registry?
http://sistersagesmusings.ca/2010/05/07/tommy-why-is-your-research-so-biased-why-gun-registry-must-remain-this-time-with-feeling/
There are two graphs on on how certain crimes with firearms have gone down since the registry was put into place. The police use it everyday in their work.
Let me ask you this. Why is it so difficult for such law abiding citizens to take five or ten minutes out of their precious time to fill out the forms to register their guns? If they’re such law abiding citizens then they should have nothing to hide, now should they? Are they too lazy or too illiterate? We register our cars and our dogs. Why shouldn’t firearms be registered?
And yes, it seems that the wild west is exactly what Steve’s utopia is: just like Dubya.
“Well, why did Steve shove Marty Cheliak off for French courses he doesn’t need?”
I don’t know, but it’s definitely troubling that someone would be removed from office because he’s not toeing some ideological line. I say let’s see his report. Maybe it can do what nobody else has been able to do thus far.
“There are two graphs on on how certain crimes with firearms have gone down since the registry was put into place. The police use it everyday in their work.”
All the graphs show is the continuation of a downward trend that started in the 70s. Although it’s hard to prove a negative, who knows? Maybe without the registry the downward trend would have suddenly reversed itself and bounced back up.
As for the cops using it every day, they access it every day, because every police query — including non-firearms-related ones — automatically accesses the registry. That’s quite a bit different than actively “using” it every day.
“If they’re such law abiding citizens then they should have nothing to hide, now should they?”
Well, some of us value our privacy and don’t concur with the “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” mindset. Unless there is a good reason for my name being on yet another vast government database, I don’t see why it should be, and would prefer that it was not.
As an aside, I wonder if I’m the only one who sees a contradiction in the fact that after the G20 protest, the cops were brutal thugs abusing their power, stomping on democracy and not to be trusted, a sentiment with which I wholeheartedly agree btw, but when it comes to the gun registry, they’re the good guys who have only our best interests at heart.
Good on Jack. For Lieberal leader Iggy to be whipping the vote on this issue speaks to just how tenaciously those boneheads will hold on to a failed policy simply because they initiated it. He only whipped the vote because he’s scared shitless the Bill will pass if he doesn’t. How very democratic of you Iggy!
The long gun registry is useless and a gross waste of funds which could do society much better if spent in any number of other USEFUL ways.
As to gun control, I suggest using both hands, at least for the first couple thousand rounds!
ck Reply:
August 26th, 2010 at 10:24 PM
Yahoos like you are exactly why I strongly believe private gun ownership and hunting should be banned!
Wow wouldn’t that be great!
And all crooks would then have a magical change of heart, turn over a new leaf and turn in all their bad bad illegal guns to police and pass the time petting some very old animals which are slowly and painfully starving to death due to overpopulation. And everybody would live happily ever after!
Keep your head buried in the sand if you wish, but I prefer to live in the real world.
ck Reply:
August 27th, 2010 at 3:28 PM
overpopulated with animals? Check the endangered species list as of late? That list grows everyday.
I lived in hunting territory and disgusting doesn’t begin to describe it! The stench in the air for openers. Many leave their kill to die a slow painful death with a bullet hole in them. Others drive around with the carcasses stapped ontop of the roofs of their bad -assed gas guzzling vehicles, honking as if it were a wedding procession just to show their manhood or lack thereof. Really nasty!
And, if you thought hunters were such law-abiding boy scouts; think again! At least, not in in and around Lac Megantic! They’re allowed only 1 moose per 2 people (so much for your over population theory) and 1 deer per person; but to them, those limits seem to be mere suggestions; they kill more than that. They’re not allowed to kill babies and only a select few have a license to kill females (those are selected as a lottery; random), but many who don’t have the special license kill them & yes, babies are killed regularly. Poaching (out of season hunting is a regular happening) in those parts.
You love guns so much and are one of those paranoid types that must parade all over the place including the toilet with a gun, then perhaps you’re the one with the problem and better rethink the company you’re keeping. Or move to Texas.
I would love to see you tell one of the survivors or the parent of a victim of the Polytechnique massacres what you wrote on my comment board.
And all crooks would then have a magical change of heart, turn over a new leaf and turn in all their bad bad illegal guns to police
So your answer would be to turn Canada into the OK Corral, then? Just turn all of us into vigilantes? hell, do like the US and even show up to town halls armed when we know there’s a politician we don’t like? Oh yeah! That would definitely make society more civilized.
To the best of my knowledge animals on the endangered list are not open to hunting. Man’s encroachment into wild areas and factors such as changing climate are more to blame for the growing list of endangered animals then is over-hunting. Indeed, typically hunted animal numbers are well monitored and well maintained and hunter groups such as Ducks Unlimited do tremendously good work in helping maintain appropriate habitat for wildlife. What have you done lately to that effect?
Moose and deer are definitely not on the endangered list but I absolutely abhor cruelty to animals. What you are describing is not hunting and your area obviously needs more wildlife officials on patrol to curb some of the atrocities that are occurring. Such activities give responsible hunting a bad reputation. If you have been a witness to the atrocities you describe and have not reported them then you aren’t really much better then those out doing it.
I have no special LOVE of guns. I view guns as I do my computer, tv, tools, vehicles, clothes, etc or any other of my possessions that are very useful and enjoyable things in my life. And, like with my vehicles and some tools, I recognize the potential danger of firearms in the hands of the ignorant and untrained which is why I’ve taken the time to complete courses in safe handling, transport, and storage of firearms and properly adhere to the recommendations and regulations regarding these activities outlined in the courses and in the Canadian Firearms Program literature. I further recognize that firearm ownership by the populous is what separates so-called democracies from police states (a form of rule which you obviously desire, and I don’t!) My firearms are kept securely in a gun safe and not in my toilet thank you very much!
You obviously have major ISSUES about feminism (honking as if it were a wedding procession just to show their manhood or lack thereof. Really nasty!) and you relate guns and masculinity as an attack on feminism, hence the Polytechnique shootings reference.
What I would say to the survivors or parents of a victim of the Polytechnique shooting is that my heart goes out to you and I can’t possibly imagine the extent of suffering this tragedy has brought on you. What I would not do is continuously rehash this terrible event over and over and use it for the selfish, self-serving purpose of promoting my belief in a political agenda of gun control as if that would have somehow prevented the actions of a madman! Frankly, I find this as outright disgraceful. To make use of such a terrible tragedy that these people have suffered to promote failed, feel-good gun control policy. Disgusting!
I do not condone vigilantism. I do, ever, support the right of every individual to self defense. If that means carrying a firearm then so be it. Fortunately for me I live in a relatively crime free area and I don’t need anything for self defense. Plus I’m large enough to defend against all but the largest of males without a weapon of any kind. If, however, I lived in a crime riddled area or had a job which constantly put my life in danger I would certainly like the RIGHT to carry a sidearm for self defense should I deem it necessary. Gee, policemen fell the same way! Do they make society less civilized?
ck Reply:
August 27th, 2010 at 8:02 PM
You obviously have major ISSUES about feminism (honking as if it were a wedding procession just to show their manhood or lack thereof. Really nasty!) and you relate guns and masculinity
Excuse me, they measured their own masculinity that way. I certainly didn’t. I always felt like I was in the middle of a scene from “Deliverance” every Fall.
And of course I reported many of these incidents I caught to the Surete de Quebec. What kind of animal rights activist would I be if I didn’t? Didn’t do a whole hell of a lot, though. Mainly tickets and fines issued, if not a simple slap on the wrist. Hardly a deterrent it would seem. In fact, it’s one of the reasons I moved back to Montreal. Couldn’t live in the middle of that anymore. I couldn’t even bring my then-step kids into the woods to play anymore for fear they may get shot. I always thought those woods would be a fun place for the boys to play; but not in the Fall. Sad state of affairs. And they said the city was too dangerous for children. Ha!
The survivors of the Polytechnique massacre don’t feel exploited; they’re leading the charge! They want it and they’re campaigning seriously and tirelessly for stricter gun control lawsm as are the parents of young Anastasia De Souza (btw; Kimveer Gill bought his semi-automatic legally; can you justify why anyone would need a machine gun outside of law enforcement or the military? I can’t. Perhaps if there were more stringent criteria for obtaining a gun of any kind, Gill would never have obtained one and Anastasia De Souza’s life would not have been cut short at 18).
Gee, policemen fell the same way! Do they make society less civilized?
Cops aren’t supposed to carry a side arm when they’re off duty. And, yes, some cops do indeed make society less civilized; Hello G20? That said, their job is to protect society and they too support stronger gun control laws and they certainly have the data to show how important a tool the long gun registry is to their work. Fact is 14 out of 16 cops not long ago were killed by long guns.
“Deliverance” is a classic movie, but just that, a movie. Let’s not confuse real life with Hollywood productions.
I think anybody familiar with the Canadian north woods would be well advised to wear safety clothing such as blaze orange if wandering around in the Fall during hunting season. Even hunters do this for safety sake. Not too wise to take children to play in the woods anyway in my opinion. There are many dangers that could befall them other than careless hunters. Were you not concerned about big game animals? Moose are particularly dangerous during the Fall rut and bears are always unpredictable. Kind of easy to get lost in the woods also if not careful. Let me try to understand though. You want hunting banned so that kids can safely play in the woods in the Fall. Hmm!
The survivors of the Polytechnique shooting may be leading the charge since they may have bought into the Lieberals false premise of gun control as madmen control but they’re CERTAINLY being exploited whether they feel so or not. Sadly they are being exploited by the gun control lobbyists and the disingenuous politicians who, knowing full well that gun control is an empty, false promise for a population’s safety continue to promote this pseudo solution rather than address the real societal problems causing the violence in society. We have had gun control on handguns in this country since 1939 yet handguns remain the type of firearm most commonly abused by criminals. If gun control really worked don’t you think that’s a long enough time to have gotten that firearm type out of the wrong hands?
Kimveer Gill had a Beretta Cx4 Storm carbine, a Glock 9mm handgun, and a Norinco HP9-1 short barreled shotgun. No machine guns in any of those. The Cx4 Beretta is typically a law enforcement weapon but is also used for sport and self defense. The Norinco is a pump action shotgun. Again, another tragic killing by another madman for you anti-gunners to shamelessly berate every law abiding gun owner in the country over. Once more, it is sickening how you insistently use such tragic events to promote your political agenda. If gun control had any true merit as a safety net for society it would stand out as such without you people having to use these tragedies as a springboard for your argument.
Really!
The criteria for obtaining any firearm in Canada is already very stringent. So stringent in fact as to walk over pretty well all other so-called rights people generally enjoy in a democratic country. Again you are quite willing, without a care, to toss all the responsible law abiding firearm owners to the wind in the hope of stopping some madman. Gill would have found a way to carry out his shooting spree irregardless of gun control laws and it would make no difference if the victims involved had been shot with legally obtained guns or illegally obtained guns, the result would be the same.
Incidentally you’ll find that such shootings typically occur in areas of high gun control. That’s because these nuts know no one’s going to take them out before they can do their dastardly deed. You won’t find these incidents occurring as often in places where citizens are typically armed and may present an obstacle to them. They’re just cowards anyway and your gun control policy feeds right into their hands.
You had better read the latest polls on the police supporting the long gun registry. The majority of the front line officers definitely do not support the registry. It is only the Police Chiefs organizations which support it. A classic conflict of interest since the company that administers the registry has been a leading contributor to the coffers of those organizations. The long gun registry has never been proven to have solved one gun crime since its inception. It’s a gross waste of public funds and it will thankfully be axed after the vote on Bill C-391 next month.
ck Reply:
August 27th, 2010 at 10:58 PM
waste of public funds? only 4 million annually to operate; pretty nominal considering what government’s spend. Those cops you point out, are Harper’s friends; his yes men. Hardly reliable. So, if we’re to go by your thinking, gun control doesn’t work, so we just shouldn’t attempt it at all? Well, gee, we can’t control murder neither, so perhaps we shouldn’t find better ways of preventing it then? Steve’s big assed prisons for unreported criminals and his new tough on crime bills are to cost far more than to operate the gun registry.
Polytechnique survivors being exploited whether they feel so or not
I suppose you think organizations like MADD are being exploited as well, whether they feel so or not. Statements like that make me wonder if you would just rather silence victims groups from lobbying governments to shape legistlation.
you know, I’m a bit concerned about your knowlegge of firearms. Please tell me you’re a police officer or in the military. Otherwise, I have to say, you definitely need a hobby and am thankful you don’t live next door to me.
Please insert “Perhaps if there were more stringent criteria for obtaining a gun of any kind, Gill would never have obtained one and Anastasia De Souza’s life would not have been cut short at 18″ before “Really” in the above rant.
ck Reply:
August 27th, 2010 at 11:01 PM
As for someone like Kimveer Gill, he was an odd sort; not the kind to know where to begin to find organized crime; too geeky. wouldn’t know how to find the black market. If he wasn’t allowed to buy all those guns, he wouldn’t have been able to get them; he wouldn’t have been able to go on his rampage and yes, Anastasia De Souza would more than likely be alive today. Try and tell the De Souzas otherwise. And yes, they too have been tirelessly working toward tighter gun control laws. You’re going to tell them they’re being exploite?
Not only does gun control NOT work, it has been proven to exasperate the problem. As I stated previously, there’s nothing a criminal like more than an unarmed public on which to prey. Your desire is to give them just that.
Previously you also remarked that some cops do make society less civilized (re G20). Yet at the same time stating that there should be no private gun ownership i.e. you desire a police state as opposed to a democracy. Then you go on to say (falsely) that they too support the long gun registry. You are very confused. You would turn society over to be run by police, police you know sometimes can become rogue entities! I’d rather leave the power to the people in a democracy myself.
Harper’s tough on crime legislation is certainly a step in the right direction and unlike the long gun registry would not be a waste of public funds. For much too long we in Canada have suffered under the Lieberal ‘value’ of coddling the criminal and forgetting the victim. Indeed the criminal now becomes the victim and has every right known to mankind when before the law. And again, unlike the long gun registry, tough on crime legislation would be a true attempt to ‘prevent murder’ because some of the main culprits may actually end up in prison where they belong instead of paroled and out on the street to repeat their crimes as under the Lieberal justice policy.
I think all people in a democracy should be able to lobby Governments to help shape legislation including victims’ groups. There are many different facets to shaping legislation and many different experiences by a vast array of different groups and ALL should have a say. You obviously think that ONLY victims’ groups should be allowed to shape legislation hence to hell with all the hunters, sport shooters and responsible gun owners in the country. To hell with their point of view, we want strict gun control because of these victims of madmen.
Finally, your inability to argue in a meaningful way shows itself and you, the one who’s supposed NOT to be paranoid remember, must resort to put-downs (thankful you don’t live next door to me) as with this innuendo.
Also since you put so much trust in the military and police don’t forget another madman, Denis Lortie, a Canadian soldier who in 1984 shot up the QC Legislature. What would your cure for that be? Are we to enact strict gun control inside the military to prevent this happening in future? Let’s just take away all their guns too to prevent this happening again, we could issue baseball bats instead I guess!
I probably do have a pretty good knowledge of firearms thank you. At least I know that Cx4 Beretta isn’t a ‘machine’ gun.
Any nut, including K. Gill, who is intent on going on a rampage, geeky or not, would find a way to carry it out. Gun control does not stop madmen. I would tell the De Souza’s that as well. And while they may honestly believe in what they’re doing, they, too, are buying into a feel-good non-solution and are most certainly being exploited, shamelessly and disgustingly by the pro gun control lobby and their political cronies in Ottawa.
ck Reply:
August 28th, 2010 at 2:10 PM
So, to follow your logic; gun control can never happen, so we just shouldn’t even bother trying for it. Quite logical; logical as saying governments aren’t going to stop tax evasion, so let’s not have any tax laws. Or stores can never completely prevent shoplifting, so they shouldn’t even bother even attempting to implement preventative measures. What you suggest is insanity.
Denis Lortie obviously fell through the cracks. I would like to believe the military go through more rigorous medical and psychiatric evaluations throughout their military careers as a way of preventing more incidents like that of Lortie. But, to follow your logic, psychiatric and medical evaluations should just be scrapped because there is always one who can fool the ol’ shrink, right?
http://sistersagesmusings.ca/2010/05/07/tommy-why-is-your-research-so-biased-why-gun-registry-must-remain-this-time-with-feeling/ how the registry saved one household from potential tragedy. Oh, but you probably think that woman’s coke head unstable son should have access to guns to shoot his ex, right?
Also there, two graphs showing how certain crimes with firearms have gone down since the registry at that page.
I know rednecks like you don’t like facts, but below are some more myths and truths.
http://www.truthsandmyths.ca/top-10-myths.html
And below, regarding conjugal violence, which more often than not, involves long guns:, but I bet you beat your wife around on a regular basis like all good redneck gun nuts do, eh? Save it, I already know that you more than likely smack your woman around and probably advocate otherst to do so; can tell by your writing.
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/853793–the-duel-over-gun-control-pits-law-and-order-tories-against-the-police?sms_ss=twitter