Re: [Serious] Scarborough block party turns violent

Author	All Replies
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	reply to digitalfutur Re: [Serious] Scarborough block party turns violent said by digitalfutur: Thank you for confirming that evidence-based outcomes are subject to a political filter by progressives. While I agree with your original post in its entirety, this comment here is pretty rich. I don't think you're in a position to comment about other people's political filters.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-21 23:44:38 ·

digitalfutur Sees More Than Shown Premium join:2000-07-15 BurlingtonON kudos:2 1 edit	You missed the part upthread where DKS posted "foolish destruction of the gun registry", making no distinction between the long gun and the handgun registry. And the "tiresome" response to my post pointing that out. When policies are advocated and continue to be supported where there is no evidence of their effectiveness, that is political filtering. One only has to review this list of mass murders to see that banning handguns or gun control laws will not stop them from occurring: »www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012···ist.html Again, this does not mean that handguns and long guns ownership should not be be regulated, but the clear implication from gun control advocates is that gun control prevents mass murders, and its logical conclusion: If all guns are banned, there will be no mass murders. There is no evidence of either, and none will be provided by its proponents. -- Logic requires one to deal with decisions that one's ego will not permit. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing - Edmund Burke.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 00:42:14 ·
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	I didn't miss anything. You must have missed the part where I said I agree with what you posted with regards to guns and the gun registry, though. Read that again - I agree. I've never hid the fact that I believed the long gun registry to be a fiasco that we're better off without and that further restrictions on handgun ownership are a futile effort which would have no realistic impact on public safety seeing as how they are severely restricted right now as it is. I merely pointed out that you're not in a position to make comments about someone else's "political filters" as you're just as guilty of having those same filters on any different number of occasions as the person who you're attempting to call out. But hey, you've called me a "progressive" in the past despite the above noted view completely contrary to the "progressive" you called out just now - hopefully you read it this time before repeating yourself a third time - so what do we all know, eh?
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 01:09:49 ·
DKS Damn Kidney Stones Premium,ExMod 2002 join:2001-03-22 Owen Sound, ON kudos:2 Reviews: ·Bell Sympatico	reply to digitalfutur said by digitalfutur: When policies are advocated and continue to be supported where there is no evidence of their effectiveness, that is political filtering. Perhaps you should ask the Chiefs of Police in Canada about the effectiveness of the long gun registry? Again, the political right whines, carps and complains from their bankruptcy. Again, this does not mean that handguns and long guns ownership should not be be regulated, but the clear implication from gun control advocates is that gun control prevents mass murders, and its logical conclusion: If all guns are banned, there will be no mass murders. There is no evidence of either, and none will be provided by its proponents. Both points are nonsense and not part of any legitimate gun control argument. They are only the paranoid arguments of the right, attempting to reduce the argument to their believed point of ridiculousness. Such strategies may assist in reduction of harm to society, but never reduce it to a zero point. That's impossible. -- Need-based health care not greed-based health care.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 07:32:17 ·
IamGimli join:2004-02-28 Canada kudos:1 1 edit	said by DKS: Perhaps you should ask the Chiefs of Police in Canada about the effectiveness of the long gun registry? Again, the political right whines, carps and complains from their bankruptcy. Why should I ask political lobbyists who accept gifts from the main company holding Government contracts for the maintenance of the long gun registry about the long gun registry? I might as well ask a new car salesman whether I should buy new or used. BTW before you blindly follow the CACP you should look into their position on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Unless you want that gone too. »www.ualberta.ca/~clement2/cacp.pdf said by DKS: Both points are nonsense and not part of any legitimate gun control argument. They are only the paranoid arguments of the right, attempting to reduce the argument to their believed point of ridiculousness. Such strategies may assist in reduction of harm to society, but never reduce it to a zero point. That's impossible. Yet there's no evidence of any potential "reduced harm to society" either, whatever that means. You want to "reduce harm to society"? Ban alcohol. Alcohol has no useful purpose and is involve is many more Canadian deaths than firearms. Oh wait, you've tried that already and only created MORE crime and "damage to society" as a result. The very definition of insanity is repeating the same actions expecting different results.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 07:47:01 ·
NCRGuy join:2008-03-03 Ottawa, ON	said by IamGimli: BTW before you blindly follow the CACP you should look into their position on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Unless you want that gone too. »www.ualberta.ca/~clement2/cacp.pdf Now we're trotting out 30 year old policy statements to attack current policies? #FAIL
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 10:31:08 ·
urbanriot Premium join:2004-10-18 Canada kudos:3 Reviews: ·Cogeco Cable	reply to IamGimli said by IamGimli: You want to "reduce harm to society"? Ban alcohol. Alcohol has no useful purpose and is involve is many more Canadian deaths than firearms. Oh wait, you've tried that already and only created MORE crime and "damage to society" as a result. Funny you brought that up, a group of us discussed that idea last night after dinner and it stemmed from a discussion on gun control! I relayed that I was frustrated that despite my and 'our' (being my friends) respect for responsible behaviours and proper societal conventions, the rest of society may not be. Thus, people in power create laws that won't solve the problem that creates this fear in the citizens they're placating... Then I suggested "why don't they ban alcohol? Look at what happens downtown St. Catharines on a Saturday night, fights everywhere, sometimes broken windows, or in the down town bar scene of Toronto? There they need officers everywhere, some on horses, and those booze fueled situations hurt plenty of people... and even encourage shootings." I then compared to countries where alcohol is banned, where Thursdays and Fridays are social nights where people get together and eat and laugh and eat again later. But then we also discussed countries like Italy, Spain, Austria, Germany, etc. where people use alcohol to enhance their social interactions without the same issues that we experience in North America and the UK. Hrm.. Then we realized that if people want alcohol or drugs, they'll find a way to get it like they've already done... just the same as they'll get guns, just the same as they've been getting guns - imported from other countries. At that point the conversation ended.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 11:37:38 ·
IamGimli join:2004-02-28 Canada kudos:1	reply to NCRGuy said by NCRGuy: Now we're trotting out 30 year old policy statements to attack current policies? #FAIL The only #FAIL is gun control. It has failed everywhere it's been attempted and it's always the fascists that push for it in their quest to control every aspect of everybody else's life. The goal of the CACP is to get Canada as close as they can to a police state and their policies (all their policies) have been proof of that ever since it's creation.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 13:08:22 ·
digitalfutur Sees More Than Shown Premium join:2000-07-15 BurlingtonON kudos:2 3 edits	reply to DKS The Chiefs have not produced any evidence that the long gun registry reduces gun crime. As usual you are equating credentials with evidence. The long gun registry was established in 1995 as a direct result of a single incident in Montreal in 1989, for the express purpose of reducing long gun crime, and was reported that way by the govenment in power at the time. Since there is no evidence that the long gun registry reduces crime, there is no reason for it to exist. In other words, establishment of a long gun registry for all long gun owners is not proportionate to the very rare incidents of mass murder that the registry was ostensibly designed to prevent. -- Logic requires one to deal with decisions that one's ego will not permit. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing - Edmund Burke.
	to forum · permalink · 2012-07-22 17:02:21 ·

O Canada! > Canadian > Canadian Chat > [Serious] Scarborough block party turns violent