Article View: mtl.general
Article #935Re: Reply to Colin Leech
From: Rosco
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 00:00
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 00:00
92 lines
5630 bytes
5630 bytes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <4bn29e$qap@ra.isisnet.com> Holly Irving (ae326@ccn.cs.dal.ca)
wrote:
> Garry B. Dormody (gdormody@calvin.stemnet.nf.ca) wrote:
> : Colin R. Leech <ag414@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
[REGARDING "GUN CONTROL"]
> : > The public receives the benefit of having better knowledge and control
> : > over lethal weapons that are in circulation.
> To this I have to say. That it is not so much a matter of control as a
> message to the gun owners that says owning a gun is a serious business
The firearms community already knows how to respect their firearms. That is
why there accident rate is so low.
> If you own a gun you are responsible not only for what YOU do with it but
> what ever else the gun may be used for.
In other words, you want to make the victim accountable for what they have
no control over. Tell me, do you think YOU should be held accountable if a
thief steals your vehicle and runs down a pregnant mother with it? If you
say "no", then you have demonstrated that you are a hypocrite. In a free
society, individuals are accountible for their own actions, not those of
others.
> It is not a ACCIDENT if
> your children use it on themselves but an act of willful disregard.
And in my house that would mean that my children had been irresponsible, not
me. I teach them respect, but they have a mind and will of their own. If
they choose to disregard the knowledge that I give them, THEY should be held
accountable, NOT me.
> : "Laws alone can't stop someone who is intent on committing a
> : violent act." -- Allan Rock Nov. 8, 94
> Intent.... Laws can stop those who do not iNTEND to commit these crimes.
There aren't enough such incidents to worry about.
> : "I think it [C-68] will help. But I don't want to overstate it. I don't
> : want to give any guarantees."' Ottawa Citizen, December 1, 1994, A3
> Ifg we save only a couple of innocent lives is it not worth it??
NO! That is by far the weakest argument out there. Further hypocracy: If
saving lives were the object, you (and all the other ignorant hopolophobes)
would be screaming for the banning of private ownership of automobiles,
cleaning products, knives, etc., since none are a necessity, and all are
involved in more deaths and injuries than firearms ever were. Pardon my
anger, but I, for one, am getting pretty tired of such silly talk: If it was
worth it, we'd all submit to being locked in a padded room for all of our
lives.
> When you realize that many of the gun crimes are not ones of intent but
> of neglect and rage then you will realize that there is no such thing as
> a responsible gun owner. For we all to varing degrees have committed both.
Well, Holly, I submit to you that most firearms owners (and certainly all
who have obtained their FAC), are CERTIFIED that they are responsible by
virtue of the fact that they have had their background checks, have come up
with a clean record, and had to go through so many legal and procedural
hassles just to peaceably pursue their hobby. I'm sure that that is more
than you can say about yourself, and the last thing we need is people of
questionable responsibility, such as those without such certification as an
FAC, making rules which unfairly restrict our activities, while trying to
imply that we are not responsible people. Such action and words as yours
indicates nothing more than ignorance, bigottry, and unreasonable fear.
Coming from Rock, it indicates feeble attempt to justify more control over
our lives.
- --
SysOp, CUE Here BBS (403) 465-7715
Roger_Walker@CUEHere.bohica.net
Roger_Walker@CUEHere.Edmonton.AB.CA
PGP Public Key from: Roger_Walker_PGP@CUEHere.Edmonton.AB.CA
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQEVAwUBMOMp/6Z872JZyB+1AQH9uQgAtCWnmZ2X3P00HlzcBDdZvXXEa/6xztHl
215ooyWQ/Nbp+O60nhgV9iS5h0ugGOCIWE38vNEiG4/Dq+kt5dbq0DLE6/O2hVf3
7GveUyipbdMioBzg47EQqXVm2RjQnKBvjrQE4tiBNltgn0GA0iFVuAzT8OLe1hHy
ZpSixefY2YIWtJBC8z4Em8AWHTisOynlVcqdiltV4zA1DYhXIZ7QHp6VMo0E8oxp
8owuSvOVp4zzvu8TGMWE5dR18tTUwxPoySIFMvf/n7uf1yUc+eN0KmCR7bIRfPZF
7i/jG011JtrBu30Ql26cvw12SyXJ+ZlDAFgG+7kJ2awTuLlcfxXMcA==
=4GiJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<Roger_Walker.7280@CUEHere.bohica.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<DJ6n9B.6GF@freenet.carleton.ca> <damboisc.818529361@alize.ere.umontreal.ca> <Roger_Walker.6wuk@cuehere.edmonton.ab.ca> <DJMLFz.7G5@freenet.carleton.ca> <4as2j6$8b5@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca> <4av5iv$p0g@bottom.mts.net> <30D32472.7B7420B@mindlink.bc.ca>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f504b,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gidf504b,public X-Google-Thread: 114af9,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gid114af9,public X-Google-Thread: 112f74,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gid112f74,public X-Google-Thread: f7b9c,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gidf7b9c,public X-Google-Thread: 106cdd,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gid106cdd,public X-Google-Thread: 10ea42,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gid10ea42,public X-Google-Thread: 111b2d,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gid111b2d,public X-Google-Thread: 100c8e,1cce3fa1d2950587 X-Google-Attributes: gid100c8e,public From: Roger_Walker@CUEHere.bohica.net (Rosco) Subject: Re: Reply to Colin Leech Date: 1995/12/28 Message-ID: <Roger_Walker.7280@CUEHere.bohica.net> X-Deja-AN: 123110799 distribution: can references: <DJ6n9B.6GF@freenet.carleton.ca> <damboisc.818529361@alize.ere.umontreal.ca> <Roger_Walker.6wuk@cuehere.edmonton.ab.ca> <DJMLFz.7G5@freenet.carleton.ca> <4as2j6$8b5@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca> <4av5iv$p0g@bottom.mts.net> <30D32472.7B7420B@mindlink.bc.ca> followup-to: can.talk.guns organization: CUE Here BBS newsgroups: mtl.general,qc.general,can.general,ab.general,bc.general,nb.general,nf.general,ns.general,can.talk.guns