That's funny, I could swear the Liberal Party of Canada has had a confiscation...er, I mean "mandatory buy back" scheme in place, they just can't seem to agree on what it will cost the tax payers for this false sense of security.
I'm old enough to remember a time when parents took accountability for their sons actions.
Why should I come up with any ideas?
No Liberals did not try to convince the public that criminal guns came from gun owners. That's just BS.Let me guess, you think Canadian criminals also drive to Indiana where they buy guns at retail, with allegedly no questions asked.
A few years ago, Liberals tried to convince the public that criminal guns came from gun owners, which was false even back then, but now that they've painted themselves into a corner with orders-in-council we can see with our own eyes, what we've known all along. Responsible gun owners have nothing to do with gun violence.
Yes confiscation and mandatory buy backs are very different.
"A huge source".
Are you worried about hunting rifles or guns designed only to kill other people?"A huge source".
A lie perpetuated by gun grabbers. Theft? That isn't a gun owner's fault, now is it?
Tracking? Thanks for supporting my argument regarding "progressive" hypocrisy; hope you support carding too, for consistency's sake.
Yes, guns are initially purchased legally, and then diverted illegally through theft, straw purchases, or trafficking. That’s why stronger tracking and regulation are necessary."A huge source".
A lie perpetuated by gun grabbers. Theft? That isn't a gun owner's fault, now is it?
Tracking? Thanks for supporting my argument regarding "progressive" hypocrisy; hope you support carding too, for consistency's sake.
Ah yes, the minimum six degrees of separation between initial owner and criminal, way into the future. Thanks for illustrating how weak that argument is.
I'm worried about a specific group of responsible citizens being constatlntly harassed and made to share blame when it isn't deserved.
What are you talking about? Police randomly checking gun owners? Where did I say that?Ah yes, the minimum six degrees of separation between initial owner and criminal, way into the future. Thanks for illustrating how weak that argument is.
So you're against police randomly checking up on individuals, unless those individuals are licensed gun owners with registered firearms.
Yup, pretty inconsistent, same level of inconsistency as voter IDs. Don't worry, I was expecting as much.
What a load of utter hyperbolic bullshit.
That's like arguing car drivers are constantly hassled because they have to be licensed, insured, tested and obey street laws.
Oh the irony; if people can't be bothered to show ID and explain their reason for being somewhere, they are free to go somewhere else...ring a bell?
Yes, yes. If one solution is implemented for one problem, it needs to be implemented for everything else too, regardless of whether the solution works or not.
When was the last time a car owner was charged with "unsafe storage" after having their vehicle stolen? Is it illegal to park on the driveway when a garage or underground parking is available? What about leaving gas in the tank when it's not in use?
Wow, sure are a lot more rules for car owners, even though cars have actual useful roles for society.When was the last time a car owner was charged with "unsafe storage" after having their vehicle stolen? Is it illegal to park on the driveway when a garage or underground parking is available? What about leaving gas in the tank when it's not in use?
Where's the confisc...er..."mandatory buy back" for gas powered vehicles, now that green shaming is en vogue?
I wish car owners and operators were treated like gun owners, it would be an eye opening experience.
And what about previous examples? When someone is carded and asked to explain their presence in a particular neighbourhood, it's "racist". If someone is asked to provide ID at a polling station, it's "discrimination". Yet here you are, wanting to do the same thing to gun owners.
BULL. SHIT.
"There aren't that many", let me guess you have no clue what you're talking about.
