Posted on 12/12/2005 4:45:22 PM PST by pabianice
CRIMINALS ‘LAUGHING’ AT MARTIN’S PLAN . . . During a campaign stop in Toronto, Canada’s Prime Minister Paul Martin announced Thursday that his party would ban handguns outright. The Liberal Party leader says his plan would be used to curb violence in cities, but critics say the only thing it will accomplish is stripping law-abiding citizens of their rights at the expense of taxpayers. "This man goes into the ghetto and says he wants to ban guns—they are laughing at him," said a Toronto parent whose son was killed in a violence-torn section of the city. Under the ban, only law enforcement officers and a small number of target shooters would be exempt. Collectors, who own half the estimated 560,000 legal handguns in Canada, would need to surrender or disable their guns in areas where the ban is enforced. Martin’s election promise has also further fueled resentment in rural areas, where voters are still angered by the government’s long-gun registry that has been more of a high-priced headache than a crime-reducer. Alberta has already said it would reject the ban.
This guy is a nutcase. Guess he thinks the widespread fear of guns (or confusion about whether they are machines or penile substitutes) will be sufficient to distract the voting public from being concerned that the Liberals running for office are a pack of thieves and cut-throats.
My money's on the Liberals ~ they will succeed in continuing to fool the Canadian voting public.
We'll be over-run with illegal aliens from Canada next, if we haven't already.
Good for them. Man, I wish some of our states would show the same fortitude once in a while.
Calling all criminals, calling all criminals, Canada is open for business.
So let's see, between military cuts and gun bans, what's to stop say, a North Dakota girlscout troop from annexing the entire country? Martin better keep a close on eye on new merit badge requirements...
Gotta hand it to them. When Canadian Liberals run for office, they tell what they really are. Unlike the DemocRATS here who run from their ideas at election time because they know they would lose big-time. Hellary knows full well she's against the Iraq war, but won't DARE say it.
agreed. better to deal with the devil you know than the devil you don't. DIMs love photo ops of them hunting(aka
'Goose Slayer' Kerry) ,but when an actual mention of the individual right or right to carry or .50 BMG's come up they suddenly love a watered-down 2nd Amendment.
http://www.fightthebias.com/Resources/gundebate/history_of_gun_control.htm
PERPETRATOR GOVERNMENT DATE TARGET # MURDERED (ESTIMATED) DATE OF GUN CONTROL LAW SOURCE DOCUMENT
Ottoman Turkey 1915-1917 Armenians 1-1.5 million 18861911 Art. 166, Penal CodeArt. 166 Penal Code
Soviet Union 1929-1953 Anti-CommunistsAnti-Stalinists 20 million 1929 Art. 182 Penal Code
Nazi Germany& Occupied Europe 1933-1945 Jews, Gypsies, Anti-Nazis 13 million 19281938
Law on Firearms& Ammunition, April 12Weapons Law, March 18
China 1949-19521957-19601966-1976 Anti-CommunistsRural PopulationsPro-Reform Group 20 million 19351957 Arts. 186-7, Penal CodeArt. 9, Security Law, Oct. 22
Guatemala 1960-1981 Maya Indians 100,000 18711964 Decree 36, Nov 25Decree 283, Oct 27
Uganda 1971-1979 ChristiansPolitical Rivals
300,000 19551970 Firearms OrdinanceFirearms Act
Cambodia 1975-1979 Educated Persons 1 million 1956 Arts. 322-8, Penal Code
CANADA ????
At least, Martin is honest...bald faced telling the people what they are going to do. Our liberals here would lie, hoping to sucker in enough people, then doing it in the dead of night after they were elected .
If the Canadian people go ahead and elect these lunatics, they deserve what they get.
I bet the Australians wish they had elected people who preserved their right to have firearms.
So Canada will be crime free....hahahahaha
A mob of 50 can do what they want to one or two unarmed individuals, with no risk to themselves. If the victim has a gun, the equation changes. It changes even if the mob is itself armed, because suddenly each member has a non-zero risk of getting shot, and each individual member doesn't want it to be him
I forgot to add: and Canada has a growing Muslim population. It may be close to the point where they start to see civil unrest, hence the drive to ban guns
I wish Alberta was one of our states. I'd take everything west of Ontario.
Attention ! Open season for Detroiters across the river.
That's just like a scene in one of the 'Gambler' movies. Kenny Rogers pulls a derringer on three dudes who want to cut him up. So he asks which two want to get shot so the other one can do the cuttin'! A .410 derringer is a nasty little device.:-)
Why Moslems bother to immigrate there is a very good question ~ maybe they are simply crazy people.
All Americans should A. Buy their next few weapons from newspaper ads, B. Buy plenty of ammo for each unregistered weapon and C. Order an Asp baton. The Asp baton fits nicely in the pocket until needed and isn't detectable while the authorities are taking away your baseball bats and beer bottles as you wait for the next wave of islam rioters....a la Australia.
It's something I discovered back in my college days. I was in a subway station, and this pack of about 6 teens was making like they were going to beat up this gay guy.
I walk up and just look at them with my hand in my packet (holding my knife). Not saying a word. After some blustering, they went away. As a group, they knew they could take me. As individuals, they knew I would kill the first one to come within reach of me.
Nobody wanted to be first
Yep.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.