Skip to comments.
Report adds fuel to gun registry debate
EDMONTON SUN ^
| October 7, 2005
| DOUG BEAZLEY
Posted on 10/07/2005 11:30:57 AM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
1
posted on
10/07/2005 11:31:00 AM PDT
by
neverdem
To: neverdem
And the weapon of choice for most murders is still the humble knife. Ban knives. It's for the public good...
2
posted on
10/07/2005 11:32:45 AM PDT
by
akorahil
(consider this space filled with yet another witty and irreverent tag line instead of this...)
To: neverdem
Cukier pointed out that the majority of handguns used to kill in Canada are smuggled up from the States - something the registry wasn't designed to address. They need better border security.
3
posted on
10/07/2005 11:35:07 AM PDT
by
Brilliant
To: neverdem
"It's the reason why we need to establish better international protocols on gun trafficking," she said. What does that mean? Isn't already illegal to take guns across the border? What they need to do is enforce their existing laws.
4
posted on
10/07/2005 11:36:57 AM PDT
by
Brilliant
To: akorahil
What's going to happen when the weapon of choice becomes baseball bats?
5
posted on
10/07/2005 11:38:34 AM PDT
by
MarkeyD
(Cindy - The new 'C' word! I really, really loathe liberals.)
To: neverdem
Most murder guns in Canada are never registered with the Canadian Firearms CentreGee, y'think? Maybe the thing to do is register the criminals' guns first.
6
posted on
10/07/2005 11:39:25 AM PDT
by
Marauder
(The height of hypocrisy: Members of congress upset because someone lied to them.)
To: neverdem
What's this? Registering the firearms of law-abiding people DOESN'T effect people that break the law? I feel that sharp, stabbing pain that comes from a blinding flash of the obvious. There's tax dollars down the tube...
7
posted on
10/07/2005 11:41:52 AM PDT
by
faloi
To: neverdem
Report adds fuel to gun registry debateWhat debate? The facts are on one side, and the emotion-drenched rhetoric is on the other.
The 'two solitudes' of Canada are becoming more clear every day, and they really have nothing to say to each other except 'Good-bye'.
8
posted on
10/07/2005 11:42:26 AM PDT
by
headsonpikes
(The Liberal Party of Canada are not b*stards - b*stards have mothers!)
To: MarkeyD
Why, we will then need to ban baseball bats.
Nay, ban baseball altogether! Remember, public good and all...
9
posted on
10/07/2005 11:42:29 AM PDT
by
akorahil
(consider this space filled with yet another witty and irreverent tag line instead of this...)
To: neverdem
your timing in posting this proved serendipitous: it provided me with another nail in the coffin for an argument elsewhere on the net. Thanks.
10
posted on
10/07/2005 11:47:42 AM PDT
by
King Prout
(19sep05 - I want at least 2 Saiga-12 shotguns. If you have leads, let me know)
To: neverdem
"Most murder guns in Canada are never registered with the Canadian Firearms Centre..."What the hell is a "murder gun"?
11
posted on
10/07/2005 11:50:17 AM PDT
by
Cobra64
To: akorahil
Ban knives. It's for the public good... Or, at least, do what the "enlightened" Brits are doing...
Ban all knives with icky, scary, sharp POINTS.
Ah, the wonder of the all powerful, all knowing NANNY STATE.
12
posted on
10/07/2005 11:56:59 AM PDT
by
DocH
(Gun-grabbers, you can HAVE my guns... lead first.)
Comment #13 Removed by Moderator
To: neverdem
whats the difference, soon canada & mexico will be annexed
with the u.s. & the un will be in control...
wake up, wake up ron...phew, i just had a bad daydream
14
posted on
10/07/2005 12:30:29 PM PDT
by
ronnied
(we are the only animals that bare our teeth in greeting...)
To: neverdem
Cukier ... might that be pronounced koo-key-er?
15
posted on
10/07/2005 12:32:55 PM PDT
by
NonValueAdded
("Freedom of speech makes it much easier to spot the idiots." [Jay Lessig, 2/7/2005])
To: Brilliant
What it means is that she wants the UN proposal on small arms trade [essentially a world-wide ban on civilian ownership of firearms] to go into effect so that Canada will not have to do its own policing and will not have to take responsibility for its own criminals (including the ones in Parliament) Not that such a scheme would have any effect on violence except to ensure that only criminals have weapons.
16
posted on
10/07/2005 12:35:32 PM PDT
by
45Auto
(Big holes are (almost) always better.)
To: Cobra64
the stolen guns from here in Murderapolis , MN.??
17
posted on
10/07/2005 12:45:52 PM PDT
by
Rakkasan1
(Peace de Resistance! Viva la Paper towels!)
To: faloi
paging Michael Moore. your 10 pound crow pie is ready.
18
posted on
10/07/2005 12:48:59 PM PDT
by
Rakkasan1
(Peace de Resistance! Viva la Paper towels!)
To: Rakkasan1
Ahhh. Now I get it.
Series, is it that bad in Minneapolis? My wife is from St. Paul.
19
posted on
10/07/2005 1:14:11 PM PDT
by
Cobra64
To: Cobra64
not as bad as in 1998. I think that's the year MPLS got that national nickname. "Boy mayor" Rybak hasn't helped much with the situation,neither has the moonbat city council there. Too busy writing resolutions declaring Iraq an "unjust war" ,banning legal,local, city-licensed businesses from having concealed handguns and other important things.St.Paul will end up being the same gelatinous turd if/when Chris Coleman becomes mayor there.
20
posted on
10/07/2005 1:46:51 PM PDT
by
Rakkasan1
(Peace de Resistance! Viva la Paper towels!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson