Joe; Let's try this one again. I'm going to reply to your garbage all in one email so that you can understand the whole picture without having to run to some bullsh$t statistic info. And just for you, I'll try to keep the words small, so that even you can understand. While I agree that you can have an opinion about war even if you don't have the guts to stand on your convictions and put it on the line for something you believe in, I'm also pretty sure that being involved in an actual shooting war would give you a distinctly different perspective. I'm also sure that when the fighting stopped, you'd be the first person to crawl out of your "hidey-hole" with an entirely new perspective.
It's very easy to have an opinion when you stand on the sidelines, but try to stick to your convictions when you're hip deep in the fight of your life. Next; Please make up your mind. First you insult Frankie because in Australia things are not the way you think they should be? Then it's off to the U.S for the same thing? Now you have this bullshit notion of how things are in Canada? PUh-Lease! Send me your fax number, and I'll be happy to drown you in statistical data from the RCMP, and the O.P.P. which clearly demonstrates that you're looking at the wrong info. Are you looking at gun-related crimes on a "per-capita" basis? Are you looking at the budget increases to most major police forces in Canada where they increase their budgets on violent crimes, and extended firearms training? Do you know anyone on a legitimate Police Force (that hasn't tried to put handcuffs on you, that is), that can give you the real facts? One of my best friends works for the Vancouver Police in forensics and the data he has is completely different from the drivel you've been spouting. Load that fax machine up with paper, Pal. You'll need it. Then come back to this list. Or do the real facts scare you? Are you afraid of the truth? Idealism is a great thing, but it must be balanced with reality. Give it a try some time. You'd like to see everyone disarmed, right? Get in line! But since reality seems to indicate that this will not happen in our lifetime, then it does make sense to be able to defend yourself with equal force. At least that way you have a chance. Think about the fact that the government doesn't want you to own an unlicensed/unregistered firearm, and the fines that go with it. Then ask yourself why the criminals who get caught with guns almost never get any serious prison time for breaking that law. Kind of strange don't you think? Since you feel so strongly about it, why don't you do something about it? I'm sure that you could start a petition, or contact your MLA or something? I admit that most people who legally own firearms should be made to take some serious training in crisis situations, and how to hang onto their weapons, and maybe they should be held responsible ( at least in part ) for any crimes in which their stolen weapons are used, but how are you going to get our government to take something like that seriously? In other words, what's your solution? Do you have one, or are you just satisfied with sitting on the fence and pronouncing judgement? Must be awful safe up there, eh? I think that the fence you're sitting on is a little too high, and the air must be pretty thin up there. Other people on this list have provided facts, and web-sites that prove your theory to be completely wrong, but I don't see you replying to them. Their information holds at least as much truth as yours. Or are you so arrogant that you refuse to see that fact, or to give them the benefit of the doubt? Why would anyone want to believe anything you say if you're not prepared to even try to believe them? Guess the air is getting thinner upon that fence, HM? Now let's look at the stats Joe. Canada has about 10 percent of the population that the US has. Or did you forget that little fact? Therefore it makes sense that things like this would happen more often in the States than in Canada, right? At least 10 times more often wouldn't you think? That's a real easy leap of logic Joe, so I'm sure you can follow along with the rest of us. We have a better system of gun control here, but even so it's not your version, so it's not great, right? Did you also know that the amount of instances where kids in Canada are bringing guns to school is also on the increase? Even in Toronto they're installing metal detectors. Think they'd be spending the cash if there wasn't a real possibility of it happening? And yes, that one incident was about 15 years ago here in Montreal, but it's not the first and not the last. I see you've been rather selective about those items you've responded to. Afraid to concede the ones you didn't reply to? Didn't hear a peep out of you about the motorcycle gangs here in Montreal, or the gang wars in Vancouver, and you've artfully dodged points that others on the list have posted in response to your many remarks. It would be interesting to restart this whole thread and to see you respond to every single point made by all, with facts and figures to support your point of view. I'm trying to understand what happened to you as a child that makes you think like an arrogant ass. I just don't get it. You say in a reply to me, and I quote ; "But of course, with some people who have no ability at critical thinking, it's an "all or nothing" proposition, know what I mean? What makes you think you're capable of "critical thinking"? Is this Joe's idea of creating a new term for all of us to learn? How can you think that a person's opinion is "critical thinking"? It's just an opinion. That's all. And I don't know what you mean Joe. If the governments don't start applying an "all or nothing" approach to gun control, how can you possibly believe that anything else would be effective? History shows us that half-measures have never worked. Even you, in your diminished capacity can surely see that? But why stop the fun here? Let's move onto the next "gem" from Joe; Less than in the US, yes, by a margin of 100 to 1. If you dispute that statistic, you are truly an idiot." Where did this "statistic" come from Joe? Did you pull it out of your ass to make room for your head? Or can you provide us with a reference? A web-site from a proven source? I'd be a lot closer to giving you a margin of credibility if you could quote on factual reference. Oh, and here's another good one; "And where are they getting the guns? Oh, right, from the US. Again, a singular lack of brain power at work here...why don't you ask the police officers in Detroit where they would rather work, I bet the answer would surprise you, though it shouldn't if you had even a bit of sense left." Uh, Joe? most of the weapons that the Asian gangs in Vancouver have hidden away are from communist China, and other Asian sources. Not from the US. Have you ever actually spoken to anyone who knows anything about the organized crime in Vancouver? I've not only spoken to them, but I've seen these weapons and a few of the weapons seized from the rare raids that the police in Vancouver have actually managed to perform. Their information is that they've scratched the surface. We're talking about weapons made in Russia, and copied in Asia, not US weapons, and the quantities are a little to big to be hauled around from the US into Canada. With the exception of a small percentage of typical small firearms, we're not talking about something you can buy in large quantities in the US. The Vancouver Police destroy tons (literally) of weapons made in China and Russia every year. The Customs department in Vancouver has such a low budget, that they can't afford to inspect every container that comes into Vancouver ( this has been reported by several news agencies in Vancouver - much to the chagrin of the Customs officials), but when they do they find large amounts of weapons from Asia, and relatively small shipments of drugs. In fact, their version of "small shipments of drugs" adds up to thousands of kilo's, and if that's small, imagine how many weapons are brought in! You know, just because you say something, doesn't make it a fact. I'm prepared to put it on the line here, and I'll be happy to send you the data by fax or courier if you've got the guts to send me your info. I'm not playing here. I'll send you the info, but if I'm right, you need to be a man about it and return to this list and start apologizing for a lot of erroneous statements you've made. I dare you! Put your money where your mouth is, so to speak! If I'm wrong, I'll apologize, so wouldn't you if you were wrong? Or is that arrogance going to kick in again when you get this post? I'm sure you'll start by trying to insult me, and to put me down ( the obvious sign of a weak mind ), but I wonder if you'll be man enough to take your licks when you realize how wrong you've been? I think not. I think you're good at flapping your lips and insulting people because it's convenient, quick and nasty. I'm hoping you've got the balls, because I've already called several of my friend's who have the info I mentioned, and they're ready to send it to me by overnight courier tomorrow. I'm expecting you to come back to this thread and to say something like " who cares" or "what's the relevance", instead of responding to each of my points, so why don't you surprise me, and do the opposite? I'll tell you why. Your facts are either from the wrong types of sources, they're only assumptions on your part, or they're a total piece of crap. That's why. And if people find out that the mighty Joe Hill is wrong, then Joe might have to apologize for a lot of things he's said here today. So go ahead and bluff your way through this Joe. I expect nothing less! For example - here's a good one Joe! "Well, for one, it's "empirical", not "imperical", but then that only adds to the correct perception that you are not firing on all cylinders." Total bullshit. Let me see now, the world according to Joe says that a spelling error means that I'm mentally deficient? OOOhhhh! Good one there! That was a real sharp leap of intelligence on your part Joe. A clear example of your "rapier wit". Boy do I feel like I've been chastised! Ouch! Tell ya what, once we get through this little mess you've created, why don't we sit down and compare degrees, doctorates, and bank accounts, and see whose been the smarter one? You'll lose, big time, unless you're good at counterfeiting a lot of documents and currency. And I say that without even knowing what you may be worth, or what you may have accomplished in your pitiful painful life. See what I'm doing Joe? Unlike you, I'm responding to all of the points you made in your last post/reply to me. I'm not skipping anything noteable, if you can call sarcasm and insults noteable. You know what they say about sarcasm, don't you Joe? It's the lowest form of wit: ie; humour and intelligence. But here's another little sample of intelligence; "What does this have to do with gun control? See, you have not the slightest idea even what you are arguing anymore. Next you'll be predicting a Martian invasion? You are grasping at straws" By the way, one quick note here - if I spelled "empirical" wrong and I'm not running on all cylinders, what does it make you when you forget something as simple as a period on your sentences? It makes you an complete waste of skin by your reckoning, since a period is used considerably more than the word "empirical". What does war have to do with gun control? I'm sorry Joe. Didn't realize that I was going way over your head on that one! Wouldn't you say that war is the worst kind of gun control there is? If we are to enforce a strict set of laws regarding gun control, should we not take the weapons away from the military as well? We can starty by shooting all the criminals who have guns (hmmm, actually not a bad idea), and once they are disarmed or dead, we can move on to the police, and subsequently, the armed forces of every country, and disarm all of them while we're at it. I'm sure the police will want to stay on the job if that happens! I was just taking your point of view to it's logical conclusion, that being the complete disarmament of every single person on this planet, no matter who they represent. How could that possibly be hard to follow? Isn't that what you believe in? Well finally we arrive at your last remark. Man, do you know how to say a lot when you don't say anything of importance or what? Here goes. Again, I'll try to use small words for you Joe. Try to keep up, OK? "Now, this bunch of hooey just makes no sense at all. Sputtering mad gibberish, from someone who has overheated at being completely unable to argue one valid point, and knows it. Now the US is going to invade us because our pot is better than theirs? Hey, whatever. No amount of Canadians armed with handguns is going to stop that, I would wager. You haven't the slightest grasp of what the "real world" is, evidently. You have not presented one iota of evidence that gun control does not work, only that you know some scary facts about violence in Canada, which, according to *every* authority, including the police themselves, has been declining in Canada for over a decade. Guess you missed that one in your comic books." Try calling the FBI Joe. They have clearly stated that if the RCMP, the Attorney General of British Columbia, as well as his counterpart in Ottawa, and other police forces in Canada do not stop the amount of drugs coming into the US through B.C., Ontario and Quebec, they will come into Canada and forcibly control our side of the border, and conduct their own investigations and raids in B.C. I'm not guessing here, I saw the interview that the FBI gave to reporters when this news story was released. I ask you , how will Canada defend it's borders when the US marches in? Most Canadians will not stand for this, and therefore will reach for their,....brooms and shovels? Your version of gun control would certainly have a lasting effect on Canada! I didn't have to provide you with any evidence of the effects of gun control. Others tried, and you ignored them, so why waste my time? But at the same time, what factual data have you provided to support your claims that gun control actually works? I haven't seen you post anything except your own comments, opinions and insults in a desperate attempt to fool people on the list into thinking that you actually know something about it. What can you show us to back up your claims. Then let's move on to whether or not this is a realistic approach considering the times we live in. To sum up then Joe, you have no evidence that your version of gun control will totally eradicate the sort of violence that you apparently can only imagine, having never been in a situation where you needed one. Your solution to the problem of gun control is unrealistic, your comments are insulting and just plain foolish, and you resort to sarcasm when someone provides you with facts. Not much of a leg to stand on, is it? I'd love to see you test your convictions in a "real-world" scenario. You'd be reaching for the first pop-gun you could find. Good Ole Joe. He's all Bluff and Fluff. Don't bother wasting my time with some sort of reply, unless you've got cold hard irrefutible facts to support your position on gun control. By the way, how many guns would you want to control? Only the ones used by criminals? Or would your version also include respectable citizens? Police? Federal Forces? What? Where does this idealistic tripe stop Joe? How are you going to convince prople to accept your ideals? This I gotta seee! Oh, I left another spelling error in the previous sentence for you to criticize! Go for it! It will come across as being as hollow as your ethics obviously are. Why not move to a Microsoft List and criticize them? You'd be of more value to this list there, than you are here! Best Regards, Lanman But what this all boils down to is that your only response to Frankie's post was that he was "unintelligible and stupid". Is this the reply of an enlightened person? I think not!
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
