Massage Adagio

Tasers

username999

Member
Sep 20, 2010
230
0
16
I am a law abiding gun owner that has to keep up with several permits just to own, store, transport and shoot my guns. The way this world is going I have to adjust my way of thinking that maybe regulation is good for society. The USA is having a debate to change the laws of gun ownership, there are many opposed to changes. I do agree that there must be some background checks before a person can own a gun. The way it is now, all you have to do is buy one at a gun show in the USA, just like buying a bottle of Tylenol. While background not stop all gun violence. It will stop some.

It is against the law in Canada to possess a Taser or pepper spray. Possession and or use of these items can result in prison time. The law will deter many, but not all from using these restricted wepons.
For the second time, tasers are prohibited not restricted. If you are a gun owner then you should know the difference. You can buy pepper spray from just about any store that sells camping, hunting and fishing gear. It's called bear or dog spray. (Canadian Tire) Its not illegal to buy, own or possess. If you use it against another person you could get charged.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/06/07/gatineau-clerk-stops-robbery-with-bear-repellant-spray.html
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,317
4
0
all the guys have been confronted by the weapons before. personally i had a bullet graze the side of my noggin and i have been stabbed and slashed over 30 times. hell i was even lit on fire once lol.
damn if you accept that much risk in life you should now be proudly running a serious criminal organization of some sort or be retired, not work for a living as a regular Joe Schmoe
 

simon482

internets icon
Feb 8, 2009
9,965
177
63
damn if you accept that much risk in life you should now be proudly running a serious criminal organization of some sort or be retired, not work for a living as a regular Joe Schmoe
one has a future, one doesn't. when you get to a certain age you become smart enough (even without a grade 12 diploma) to figure out which is which and it might be time to give one up.
 

username999

Member
Sep 20, 2010
230
0
16
I am a law abiding gun owner that has to keep up with several permits just to own, store, transport and shoot my guns. The way this world is going I have to adjust my way of thinking that maybe regulation is good for society. The USA is having a debate to change the laws of gun ownership, there are many opposed to changes. I do agree that there must be some background checks before a person can own a gun. The way it is now, all you have to do is buy one at a gun show in the USA, just like buying a bottle of Tylenol. While background not stop all gun violence. It will stop some.

It is against the law in Canada to possess a Taser or pepper spray. Possession and or use of these items can result in prison time. The law will deter many, but not all from using these restricted wepons.
Gun Control Does Not Mean Murder Control

http://mises.ca/posts/articles/gun-control-does-not-mean-murder-control/

In 2010 the RCMP gave its employees who roam about Parliament Hill Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine guns. The MP5 can be configured for fully automatic operation. Such a weapon is off limits to the average citizen, though. Whereas the political class in Canada has reserved the right to protect itself with all available gun technology, it has intentionally deprived Canadian citizens with the same ability to protect themselves and their families via its gun control laws.

Starting in the early twentieth century, gun control has been on a tear in Canada. Instigated by state-infatuated special interest groups and supported by the RCMP, the movement to disarm the Canadian population has been unrelenting. Politicians have traditionally been more than happy to oblige because an armed population is a threat to their social, economic and technological ambitions. An armed population is also able to take care of itself against gangs and criminals. A disarmed population, on the other hand, is one that is both subservient to the will of the political class and completely dependent upon government-operated police for protection (even though, as the saying goes, “when seconds count, the police are only minutes away”).

The propaganda dispensed by the MSM says that gun control results in fewer gun murders. Data from the mid-1970′s to the present day is often used to back-up the claim. After all, it was in 1977 that Bill C-51 was passed. Bill C-51 was the first law which required both a criminal background check and a firearms acquisition certificate in order to legally purchase and own a gun. However, the MSM data typically fails to show the rate of gun murders prior to the 1970′s. The following graph, which includes the rate of gun murders in Canada since 1935, helps to explain why MSM reports do not look too far back. (Note: The data is derived from Statscan and Firearm Control in Canada).



The graph shows that the gun murder rate was the lowest between 1930 and 1960, and that Canada has failed to return to that level in spite of all the gun control legislation that has been passed by the politicians in Ottawa. Bills C-17 and C-68 (passed in 1990′s) were introduced at a time when the gun murder rate was already decreasing. In fact, since those two bills were passed, the murder rate has stabilized and has not decreased much further. It is obvious from the graph that the correlation between a decreasing gun murder rate and gun control legislation does not exist.

One could argue, albeit incorrectly, that the increasing gun murder rate of the period 1960 to 1975 was tamed by this legislation. However, if one looks at a comparison between the normalized Canadian and U.S. homicide rates (which include gun murders) as shown in the next graph, it is easy to see the same trends occurred in both countries. Because the U.S. was not subject to the same gun control laws as Canada, it must be concluded that the increase in the gun murder rate in Canada for that period was simply a reflection of the general increase in the rate of homicide.



In spite of the propaganda that has been parroted by the MSM, some magazines and even university professors are going public with the truth about the failure of gun control. For example, Dr. Caillin Langmann of McMaster University, an emergency medicine doctor, has concluded, “It appears that Canadian firearms legislation has had no significant beneficial association in regards to firearm homicide and spousal homicide by firearm.”

The unmitigated failure of gun control in Canada combined with its outrageous costs ($2 billion and counting) have prompted the federal Conservatives to scrap the long gun registry. Not surprisingly, however, it has decided to keep the registration of handguns and the long list of prohibited guns even though the data supporting the effectiveness of any gun control is absent. The same goes for the licensing of gun owners. After all, the political class and the RCMP want to reserve the right to come to the doors of gun owners and ask them to turn over their weapons (if fact, this has already been done).

In conclusion, gun control does not mean fewer gun deaths. It does mean, though, that more law abiding citizens will become victims in their own homes and businesses and that the costly iron fist of the state will further intrude upon the peace and tranquility of their lives. The government knows it, for it is fortifying its headquarters with the Heckler & Koch MP5.



Tags: Canada, gun control, Heckler & Koch MP5, MP
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,317
4
0
one has a future, one doesn't. when you get to a certain age you become smart enough (even without a grade 12 diploma) to figure out which is which and it might be time to give one up.
I think if you are prepared to put your life on the line and be slashed or stabbed or shot at you should be able in a few years to make the amount that a truck driver makes during his life time and retire as an expat
 

simon482

internets icon
Feb 8, 2009
9,965
177
63
I think if you are prepared to put your life on the line and be slashed or stabbed or shot at you should be able in a few years to make the amount that a truck driver makes during his life time and retire as an expat
i had a good run, it was fun, then i had kids. priorities changed.
 

kkelso

Well-known member
Apr 27, 2003
2,467
28
48
why is it again that these good people don't qualify for a firearm acquisition license?
I have a former friend who is now just someone I run into from time to time. He's a full-time dealer, part-time thief and general thug. Needless to say, he can't qualify for a gum permit.

He owns six.
 

strongman38

New member
Dec 19, 2007
26
0
0
The main problem with being a registered gun owner is you have to have everything so safe and locked away by the time you hear someone break into your'e house you can either call 911 and be put on hold or spend ten minutes unlocking and loading all your gun safes,neither a safe option.When I lived in St.Catharines we were having a party and a gun accidentally went off,leaving a 45 cal. hole through the the floor,the neighbor called the the police,it took them 45min to show up, said they had a report of a gunshot,we just said no sorry a box fell from the loft,making the noise,they didn't even check it out .but you have never seen 2 cops happier two leave a scene in your life,lol.
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,317
4
0
I have a former friend who is now just someone I run into from time to time. He's a full-time dealer, part-time thief and general thug. Needless to say, he can't qualify for a gum permit.

He owns six.
that makes more sense than owning a taser
 

Cobra Enorme

Pussy tamer
Aug 13, 2009
1,177
22
38
I dont want you to pm me info about how to get one of these tasers for $120 because i dont want one and i dont want to give you $120 cash for it anytime this week.
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,317
4
0
I dont want you to pm me info about how to get one of these tasers for $120 because i dont want one and i dont want to give you $120 cash for it anytime this week.
that put a smile on my face
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,749
3
0
By the way Talhat Rehman, 54, has appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court and is charged with affray and possessing a bladed weapon in public.
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,317
4
0

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,749
3
0
I don't think it would cost 30,000 in legal fees if the abuse was obvious...something is missing here
At the same time she has been suspended from the practice of law for a year which presumably the Law Society of England and Wales would not have done, unless something rotten was shown during the course of their disciplinary process.

I entirely agree with you though that there is not enough in the article to definitely form an opinion one way or the other.
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,317
4
0
At the same time she has been suspended from the practice of law for a year which presumably the Law Society of England and Wales would not have done, unless something rotten was shown during the course of their disciplinary process.

I entirely agree with you though that there is not enough in the article to definitely form an opinion one way or the other.
AFAIK in England costs follow the event (like in Canada and unlike in the US) so defending a slam dunk theft of trust funds might not be a cheap proposition in the end of the day.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
all the guys have been confronted by the weapons before. personally i had a bullet graze the side of my noggin and i have been stabbed and slashed over 30 times. hell i was even lit on fire once lol.
You are living live the wrong way. You are precisely the kind of person who we should not be arming.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
Gun Control Does Not Mean Murder Control

http://mises.ca/posts/articles/gun-control-does-not-mean-murder-control/

In 2010 the RCMP gave its employees who roam about Parliament Hill Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine guns. The MP5 can be configured for fully automatic operation. Such a weapon is off limits to the average citizen, though. Whereas the political class in Canada has reserved the right to protect itself with all available gun technology, it has intentionally deprived Canadian citizens with the same ability to protect themselves and their families via its gun control laws.

Starting in the early twentieth century, gun control has been on a tear in Canada. Instigated by state-infatuated special interest groups and supported by the RCMP, the movement to disarm the Canadian population has been unrelenting. Politicians have traditionally been more than happy to oblige because an armed population is a threat to their social, economic and technological ambitions. An armed population is also able to take care of itself against gangs and criminals. A disarmed population, on the other hand, is one that is both subservient to the will of the political class and completely dependent upon government-operated police for protection (even though, as the saying goes, “when seconds count, the police are only minutes away”).

The propaganda dispensed by the MSM says that gun control results in fewer gun murders. Data from the mid-1970′s to the present day is often used to back-up the claim. After all, it was in 1977 that Bill C-51 was passed. Bill C-51 was the first law which required both a criminal background check and a firearms acquisition certificate in order to legally purchase and own a gun. However, the MSM data typically fails to show the rate of gun murders prior to the 1970′s. The following graph, which includes the rate of gun murders in Canada since 1935, helps to explain why MSM reports do not look too far back. (Note: The data is derived from Statscan and Firearm Control in Canada).



The graph shows that the gun murder rate was the lowest between 1930 and 1960, and that Canada has failed to return to that level in spite of all the gun control legislation that has been passed by the politicians in Ottawa. Bills C-17 and C-68 (passed in 1990′s) were introduced at a time when the gun murder rate was already decreasing. In fact, since those two bills were passed, the murder rate has stabilized and has not decreased much further. It is obvious from the graph that the correlation between a decreasing gun murder rate and gun control legislation does not exist.

One could argue, albeit incorrectly, that the increasing gun murder rate of the period 1960 to 1975 was tamed by this legislation. However, if one looks at a comparison between the normalized Canadian and U.S. homicide rates (which include gun murders) as shown in the next graph, it is easy to see the same trends occurred in both countries. Because the U.S. was not subject to the same gun control laws as Canada, it must be concluded that the increase in the gun murder rate in Canada for that period was simply a reflection of the general increase in the rate of homicide.



In spite of the propaganda that has been parroted by the MSM, some magazines and even university professors are going public with the truth about the failure of gun control. For example, Dr. Caillin Langmann of McMaster University, an emergency medicine doctor, has concluded, “It appears that Canadian firearms legislation has had no significant beneficial association in regards to firearm homicide and spousal homicide by firearm.”

The unmitigated failure of gun control in Canada combined with its outrageous costs ($2 billion and counting) have prompted the federal Conservatives to scrap the long gun registry. Not surprisingly, however, it has decided to keep the registration of handguns and the long list of prohibited guns even though the data supporting the effectiveness of any gun control is absent. The same goes for the licensing of gun owners. After all, the political class and the RCMP want to reserve the right to come to the doors of gun owners and ask them to turn over their weapons (if fact, this has already been done).

In conclusion, gun control does not mean fewer gun deaths. It does mean, though, that more law abiding citizens will become victims in their own homes and businesses and that the costly iron fist of the state will further intrude upon the peace and tranquility of their lives. The government knows it, for it is fortifying its headquarters with the Heckler & Koch MP5.



Tags: Canada, gun control, Heckler & Koch MP5, MP
You don't actually support the argument in this cut and paste do you? Have you really thought about it?
 
Toronto Escorts