December 08, 2005

• they should also make certain types of crime illegal.
• Fuckity shit-bags.
• I have no problem with the banning of handguns. If someone invented a similar weapon that could blow someone's head up with the touch of a button, then I find it pretty difficult to believe that any society would make it legal. Handguns are legal because they always have been. They do not make people safer as people who own handguns are more likely to be killed by a gun than people who do not. Self-defense weapons simply do not have to be lethal. WPDK -- You don't think that less people drive drunk now that driving drunk is illegal? You don't see a social good that has been accomplished by drunk driving laws?
• I personally think that taking this FPP seriously and getting into any heavy discussions about it is a mistake that will come back to taunt us in the ass.
• My ass revels in the tauntings of mistakes.
• My ass is your mistake!
• No, wait, that doesn't sound right... Can I go out and come back in again?
• I don't think we know enough about his proposal to know it it has a chance of working. I don't get the impression HE knows too awful much about it at this point.
• Making something illegal will not make it go away. Brenokle - People still drive drunk regardless of it being illegal. I don't have the statistics, but I feel with enough digging I could show more innocents are killed / maimed / families destroyed by drunk drivers than by hand guns in Canada. (Remember, there are lies, damn lies and statistics.) I should have stated this in the first place, but I am a registered handgun owner. I target shoot with it - I do not have it as a self-defense weapon. It is stored as federal law requires - the pistol has a trigger lock on it, is kept in a locked gun-rug (bag) in a locked vault. The ammunition is kept locked in a separate location. The time and effort required to access it as a 'self-defense' weapon makes the Inuit sculpture on my night stand, (a.k.a. my Cretien). much more valuable. The guns being carried by criminals are in the overwhelming percentage illegally obtained. How is banning handguns going the stop the 'bad-guys' from obtaining them? I'm not aware of many poppy fields here in Canada, yet heroin is still available here. BTW... Taunting in the ass? I've been bitten in the ass, kicked in the ass, and even had my ass chewed off, but taunted in the ass? Kinda Monty Python-esque, I'd say. "Now go away or I will taunt your ass a second time!"
• My taunt is your Ass! No, still not right...
• My taunt is your Ass! My aunt is taut? Or so I've heard...
• yeah, we've all heard that one...
• Heard about this hand-gun proposal on the Ceeb's eight o'clock news this morning, and already it was being torn apart as not addressing the root problems of crime, as well as being uninformed as to the laws already in place. So far in this election -- another day, another issue, each as disposable as the last. Move along, nothing to see...
• We're taking election promises seriously, now?
• We're taking election promises seriously, now? Oh crap, you're right. Sorry for over-reacting. L'ass de ma tante est taut.
• That'll teach the bum!
• This totally ruins my business plan. I was going to drive around drunk dealing heroin while firing a handgun in the air to let the children know I was in the area. Now I am going to have redo my plan and look for more venture captital. Guess the IPO will have to wait.
• Fine, but they're going to have to pry my footgun from my cold, smelly toes.
• Reminds me of an old Kids in the Hall show where Dave Foley says, "I'm Canadian. It's like an American, but without a gun." I guess they've caught up. Hooray!
• arguing about gun control is like arguing about creationism. Neither side will ever convince the other that they aren't total morons. That being said, I come from a rural area where I would be surprised if 4 out of 5 houses don't have handguns. Number of murders in my county of which I am aware: one in the last 5 years. (and actually that guy was just driving through the county when he killed his estranged wife). Of course my county doesn't even have a Wal-Mart, K-Mart or a shopping mall and only one McDonalds, so the crime rates of my county many not be statistically reliable...
• I'm agin' it, just as I was agin' gun registration. Neither are particularly effective against people who are already criminals. I do believe that crimes committed with guns deserve far more severe, non-negotiable minimum sentences. Vote Layne, Lady Layne in 2006!
• So a handgun owner makes an FPP about the stupidity of anti-handgun laws. I'm just sayin'... Anyway, the two sides on this issue shall ne'er meet, least of all on the intarwebs, so let's just resume campaiging for livii in 2006. You know that layne, lady layne's just sweetalking y'all now...
• I'm not saying that livii has a tentacle fetish, nor am I saying she lights her hookah with hundred dollar bills earmarked for building daycares. I have no doubt that these terrible allegations of livii being a corrupt, twisted, untrustworthy deviant are completely false. Vote Layne, Lady Layne in 2006!
• As far as handguns go, here in Vancouver we'd be better off building a Berlin-style wall at the border extending from the Peace Arch to somewhere in Manitoba.
• A wall? On this end, we have that ditch with the highest white-water ratings imaginable, but that's not keeping them out.
• Ahhrrrr!
• Oh yeah? Well my wall also has dogs with bees in their mouths and when they bark they shoot bees at you! Your puny frothy puddle simply cannot compete.
• What bugs me most about the current election campaign is that both major parties are making promises they don't need to make, and when they do it, they only encourage each other to make more of them, and when they do that, they only encourage cynicism of the political process. In some possible world I suppose I might be wrong, but I can't see how we'll end up with anything other than another minority government. The sooner both parties accept that fact, and stop making ill-considered ad hoc promises they don't intend to keep, the better off this country will be. Otherwise, we'll have to endure this shit for another month and a half. And for what purpose?
• I kind of like having something to grind my molars over now besides the it's-a-Christian-holiday-you-must-spend-money thing. It's sort of entertaining, in a Lewis Carroll caucus race sort of way. First it marked out a race-course, in a sort of circle, (`the exact shape doesn't matter,' it said,) and then all the party were placed along the course, here and there. There was no `One, two, three, and away,' but they began running when they liked, and left off when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over. However, when they had been running half an hour or so, and were quite dry again, the Dodo suddenly called out `The race is over!' and they all crowded round it, panting, and asking, `But who has won?' This question the Dodo could not answer without a great deal of thought, and it sat for a long time with one finger pressed upon its forehead (the position in which you usually see Shakespeare, in the pictures of him), while the rest waited in silence. At last the Dodo said, `everybody has won, and all must have prizes.'
• I kind of like having something to grind my molars over now besides the it's-a-Christian-holiday-you-must-spend-money thing. Just replace "you" with "we" and insert "your" between "spend" and "money" and that pretty much describes the election campaign. The Christmas spirit is alive and well!
• Paul Martin should be taken outside and shot.
• We're Canadian. We'll beat him to death with a beaver.
• Why bother the icebound beavers? More effective animal reinforcement: rouse the bears who in consequence will be so grumpy and disagreeable as to level the whole of Ottawa. We hosted a pair of bear cubs on our kitchen porch recently because some nincompoop (no, not me, for once -- the condition is herediatary here) left the dog's dish out there. We didn't concern ourselves over the cubs (except for the hysterical collie whose dinner was being STOLEN. so do SOMETHING) but Mama Bear's whereabouts gave us...[succumbs]...paws.
• Hilariously, practically everyone's against the ban—including the NDP. This is a crass political ploy by the Liberals to gain voters in the GTA, and will only serve to further alienate rural and western voters. Usually I'm in support of restricting gun ownership. But this is just stupid.
• I suggest we toss this whole election thing - nobody wanted it but that fuckstick Harper anyways - and Martin and Harper have a gunfight to settle it. Incidently, if there is a god, Layton will be struck by a stray bullet. I saw Svend Robinson being fawned over at Crystal Corner this afternoon. I wanted to tell him we were calling Vancouver Centre the Suicide Riding because most people would rather kill themselves than vote for either his sorry ass or his opponent Hedy Fry. God. It's going to be the battle of two screechy centres of the Universe. Kind of like Barbra Streisand and Liza Minelli pulling hair in a parking lot. Somewhere, a cross of stolen rings is burning...
• You know, I have this debate with my friends (collectors of antique weapons) all the time, and it always goes something like this: me: But if you banned [class of weapon] they could arrest the bad guy before he committed the crime! them: Nonsense, guns are so readily availible you'd have to be arresting every second or third person. me: But, excepting your fine selves, I've never even seen a handgun being weilded by a civilian on the streets. them: Pah! If I wanted to get a gun, it would take me all of five minutes. Five minutes from now I could have you an illegal gun bought off the street. me: Ok? ... How? them: Seriously, this country is awash with illegal firearms! me: Really? So where would you get this gun? them: Five minutes, mark my words! me: I don't beleive you. If I wanted to get a gun I wouldn't have the first idea where to begin looking. If I wanted one, I would have to make a whole string of shady, illegal and thus risky connections and I'd probably have to pay through the nose because of the smuggling markup and if I let anybody see it on the streets I would attract immediate suspicion, which is another risk and, on the whole, things are really looking up for the good 'ole blunt instrument. them: Seriously, dude, you go to the right club in this city and you could get a gun in an instant! me: Which club? them: They exist! me: You don't actually know, do you? them: But I bet I could find out pretty easily!
• Do you think there are more heroin addicts or fewer because heroin is illegal? Do you think there are more drunk drivers or fewer because it is a crime? Do you think the Japanese and English are genetically predispositioned against violence, or do you think gun control works? (As a side note, the late Patrick Moynahan argued for bullet control. America has enough firearms to last for over a century- but only a two-year supply of bullets.)
• Well, Canadians do have an awful lot of guns, and yet far less gun violence than the US, right? However, I have to go with Dreadnought. I live in London, and would not have the first idea of where to go to get a gun. There _is_ gun crime in Britain, but it is still primarily limited to people who are taking the whole business quite seriously - which is to say, not most criminals. I suspect that a greater availability of guns would make the level of criminality at which getting a gun is considered a productive use of time a lot lower, but that's just my guess.
• Speaking of Svend Robinson, how the hell does he manage the stones to run again? Not because he's a theif, but because his public mental breakdown doesn't reassure people's confidence in his stability. Hell, I vote for theives and liars anyway. As for guns, it's really hard to care. People will find ways to kill each other as long as they have murder in their hearts. It just so happens that it's currently the flavor of the week in Canada. And if it's done right, it's a more humane way of killing. Bludgeoning, burning, strangulating, stabbing and Tony Danza all invoke nightmarish images compared to the relatively fast bloodloss from a good gunshot.
• One thing that bannination advocates often fail to take into account is 400 lb Gorilla of handguns currently owned by citizens. To truly have anything like the ban that I envision they're proposing, they'll have to come up with some way to confiscate what is most likely several million legally purchased and owned handguns. To grandfather those millions of legal guns does a couple things: for one, it turns your ban into a something akin to stop in manufacturing - and also, like what happened with the assault weapon ban here, there were dozens of caveats for legal owners to acquire ammo, clips, parts, etc. For two, it creates a perceived pre-ban run on the market, basically, a rush of people buying handguns before the ban kicks in. For three, it creates enhanced opportunities for black marketeers afterward. If you think that carloads of stolen guns cross the border now, wait until a ban drives up prices. If they decide to confiscate, well, that'd be a whole nother can of worms.
• As a side note, the late Patrick Moynahan argued for bullet control. Chris Rock had a similar take in one of his stand up routines, basically being: Forget gun control, what you need is ammunition control. If every bullet costs $5000, there are no more innocent bystanders. You hear about someone being shot on the news, you know he truly deserved it. I honestly don't get the "from my cold, dead hands" thing that hardcore gun owners have about their weapons. That doesn't sound like it's motivated by a concern for safety, but by an unhealthy fetish about guns. Does anyone know if a study has ever been done on activist NRA members looking at possible personality traits such as persecution / inferiority complexes, lack of developed social skills, etc? I ask because I was related by marriage to a 'gun nut' (ie my guns first, wife and children a distant 2nd, so don't make me choose) and he exhibited some very intriguing personality traits.
• Does anyone know if a study has ever been done on activist NRA members looking at possible personality traits such as persecution / inferiority complexes, lack of developed social skills, etc? That would be a really interesting study, good idea. Have four groups: NRA activists, gun owners, non-gun owners, and non-gun activists.
• I don't really want to get into an argument about this, but I only want to suggest that maybe some of you who don't understand the pro-gun position come from urban families and you don't get it because you haven't been exposed to the kind of culture that values gun ownership. I don't like guns, personally. I don't have the slightest inclination to own one. But, growing up and living in Saskatchewan, you come to understand that other people do value them, for whatever reason. They're part of the culture. When the anti-gun people want to restrict (or ban) guns, and when they formulate their arguments based on safety, they have a responsibility to say what level of insecurity they are willing to tolerate before they advocate more restrictions. If they say that no level of insecurity is tolerable, then they are implicity saying that gun ownership itself has little or no value. To say this is to deny the legitimacy of a culture that values gun ownership; rightly or wrongly, that culture exists. It strikes me as at least presumptuous to deny the legitimacy of it. planetthoughful, for example, readily considers the proposition that such a culture reflects an "unhealthy fetish about guns." I sometimes think this about fervent gun owners. But then I remember all the good, intelligent people I've known who happened to own guns and who expressed deep outrage at the Liberal-initiated gun registry. These people don't like to be treated like criminals for something that, to them, has value in itself. I think the anti-gun people ought to remember that; even if they don't see any value in guns, others do.
• ...a culture that values gun ownership; rightly or wrongly... ...planetthoughful, for example, readily considers that such a culture reflects an "unhealthy fetish about guns. I think you're reading too much into what planetthoughtful said. The comment was directed at a specific type of gun owners, not to be a generalization of a culture which values gun ownership. At least, I can't find any other way to read that comment.
• me: But if you banned [class of weapon] they could arrest the bad guy before he committed the crime! This, I think, demonstrates my point. Dreadnaught seems to assume one of two things with this argument: first, that ownership of [class of weapon] has little or not value, or; second, that ownership of [class of weapon] implies that its owner is a bad guy, or far more likely to be one. These attitudes deeply offend a lot of people in the West when [class of weapon] includes almost all guns. (There is middle ground, of course. I don't see a huge lobby in Canada to legalize ownership of automatic weapons.) On preview: Maybe I am. If we're talking about two different groups, then of course my comments don't apply. But I wonder how many people fall into planetthoughtful's "hardcore gun owner" umbrella. If it's anyone who thinks safety isn't the only concern in this debate, then that might include every gun owner. So, my comments are directed at the (false) dichotomy set up between people who care about safety and people who care about their guns, which is what I saw in this: "That doesn't sound like it's motivated by a concern for safety, but by an unhealthy fetish about guns." it's not a simple either-or, unless you deny any value to guns.
• I honestly don't get the "from my cold, dead hands" thing that hardcore gun owners have about their weapons. Nor do I, and one of those types is a very close friend I often disagree with. While I respect vegans, I find they are just as vocal and stubborn as hard-core gun owners, telling me how evil I am for eating meat or wearing a leather belt. I can't understand the youngun's who spend a fair bit on money to trick out their cars and race on public streets, but for them it is a passion they will pursue and defend. Stop and think - is there nothing in your life you are as passionate about? Nothing that could fall into the "dead, cold hands" category? Does it imply possible personality traits such as persecution / inferiority complexes, lack of developed social skills, etc in you? If there is nothing like that, does that lack of passion demonstrate a potential problem? I grew up in Northern Ontario where hunting and fishing was a way to supplement the family food supply not a hobby. With labour strikes and mine shut-downs, hunting at times was an economic necessity. As such I grew up around firearms and learned that they are not 'evil', rather someone who uses any weapon with intent to harm another human was evil. Does that demonstrate a lack of developed social skills? BTW - in Canada, we have Bullet Control. You must have a Firearms Acquisition or Possession Certificate to purchase ammunition. Regardless of what Michael Moore portrays in "Bowling For Columbine", long gone are the days of walking into a department store and buying ammunition.
• I'd be in favor of bullet control as a more tenable way to go than gun control. In fact, it's something my mom exercises over my dad: he has several antique (working) rifles and shotguns in the house, but no bullets. When he goes to the range to shoot skeet, he buys bullets, and he shoots until he's out. That way, everyone's happy. I can see the value of gun ownership in rural areas or for people who hunt. I even thought of buying a shotgun for myself when I lived in Houston and my apartment was broken into a couple of times. I decided that pepper spray was a better alternative for me. I guess I'm saying that I can sort of see both sides of the argument.
• I am talking about a specific group of gun owners, but one that I believe has a disproportionate impact on the gun debate because of their unceasing activism and their unwillingness / inability to accept any form of debate where less guns might just possibly equate to better community safety. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that this group exercises a similar level of influence on the gun debate that the Moral Majority, which obviously didn't represent the 'majority' at all, did on a wide range of social and political issues in the 80s. I'm struggling to think of a less pejorative label for this group than 'gun nuts', since obviously that's just a way of writing off the group without attempting to understand the members of it. If the person I used to know (and know quite well) that falls into this group can be considered in some way representative of others of that group (and there's no reason for me to think that he didn't, since Googling turns up thousands of web sites on which his gun-related opinions are echoed almost word-for-word), then I'd argue that their claims that guns equate to safety are disingenuous, because I seriously doubt that many members of this group ever feel anything more than temporary and fleeting safety, despite their guns. That's why I'm interested about whether or not any research material exists that has looked at personality traits of 'extreme gun advocates' (I'm experimenting with that as an alternative to 'gun nuts') to see if those personality traits lead to a disposition where feeling safe is a largely unattainable state. For example, despite owning a dozen or more guns, the individual I knew still felt threatened by the possibility that 'the bad people' owned more and better guns. The solution? Need more guns. This despite the fact that I live in the same community and the only person I could have said I felt any predictable threat from was the guns-equals-more-safety proponent himself. It didn't help that he used to periodically hand me inch-thick and photocopied-a-thousand-times manifestos on how 'the government' was preparing Australia for an invasion by the UN by disarming the population, or that the Port Arthur Massacre was really committed by a crack team of 'government wetwork operatives' so that, again, the population could be disarmed in preparation for a UN invasion. Apparently the UN really wants Australia, for reasons that remain mysterious. It also didn't help that his family were only allowed to speak about his guns in code, because of 'the people who were listening.' Apparently police surveillance technicians are smart enough to bug a house but not smart enough to work out that 'GR' might mean 'Gun Room'. I also think that at the core of the 'if everyone is armed, then everyone is safe' argument is a tragically misguided assumption. It pre-supposes that everyone has the same level of preparedness to use lethal force in a confrontation, making the use of lethal force by anyone unlikely. Maybe that looks great on paper, but the two boys responsible for the Columbine massacre were more than prepared to die. They weren't operating on an "Oh, you've got a gun too? Dang, guess we'll just lie down and wait for the police, then" level. After all, as the old saying has it, "Guns don't kill people, people use guns to kill people. But that's okay, as long as we, you know, don't ever give any of the blame to the availability of the shiny, beautiful, sexy, makes-me-just-as-cool-as-all-the-kids-who-used-to-make-fun-of-me-back-in-school guns. That I own a lot of..."
• planetthoughtful, another thing to add to the "fleeting level of security" hypothesis is the gun stockpiling in Waco, Texas by the Branch Davidians. To say that the religious deprograming that was involved would be detrimental to the hypothesis would be overlooking the nature of Apocalypse cults. John R. Hall wrote a paper about how Apocalypse cults are created by instilling an irrational fear of others on the members. The paper was specifically focused on the incidents at Jonestown and what led to the massive suicide/slaughter. I tried to find a link, but there's nothing out there. I suppose I could scan the article and post it somewhere, but I'm not that savvy. If anyone can point me in the direction of how to post some images I'd be glad to. Otherwise, the article is called "Apocalypse at Jonestown" by John R. Hall.
• Ooops, I didn't mean to bring that with me!
• Simple mistake, but sheesh. Whenever I find a loaded Glock handgun in my glove compartment, underwear, microwave, fast food order, newspaper recycling bin, or church pew I always think, "So that's where that was. It's the darndest thing!