Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Presidential Poll (Bush or Kerry)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 171819
Poll Question: Who do you want to be the next US President?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
350 [74.95%]
117 [25.05%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Barretm82 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1368
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Barretm82 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 November 2004 at 11:13pm
Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Actually, as I understand it, Canada has very liberal gun ownership laws...


Unfortunately not at all.

Our latest gun laws are misdirected; as currently our government just wasted nearly 2 Billion dollars on a gun registry. As I understand it, current police force officers rarely do a look up on the registry and are generally upset that these funds could have been better spent in our police departments for training, equipment or personnel on the street.
--Heck it could have been spent on better border security with the U.S.--

I can only base this from conversations with friends in law enforcement in my local city, perhaps officers in Toronto have a different view, I donít know.

Some registry problems are;

. Bad guys don't register illegal fire arms.

.Things such as nail guns are registered.

. Most of the registered guns are long rifles used for hunting, not hand guns which are generally preferred in crimes.

. Lately, there have been more signs of improvised guns/weapons, so I am told.

. The problem was never the guns laws, there are plenty of laws on the books (as there should be) prohibiting brandishing a firearm, improper storage, reckless usage, etc. The problem is enforcing the laws we have.

As I understand it, the initial reasons given for our over the top gun laws had to do with Quebec nationals/separatists about 30 years ago, and the law has gotten progressively sillier. Such as costly registration for sporting/hunting long rifles or for target/game shooting clubs, the goal was to price the sport rifles out of existence in Canada through "Yearly" registration fees.

Edited by Barretm82
Back to Top
Badsmitty View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member

Parental Advisory Non Conformist

Joined: 22 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1760
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Badsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2004 at 5:36am

Originally posted by Barretm82 Barretm82 wrote:

To each their own Smitty, I just don't want to see Kerry learning the ropes over the next four years.

IMO a newbie president is going to make a lot of mistakes and during a war that translates into life and death.   

(For the record, A newbie anything makes a lot of mistakes, you must still remember what it was like to be a newbie paintball player, no?)

Ignoring one's military advisors and experts in the field of terrorism and war in order to embrace the civilian advisors who tell you what you want to hear is not "learning the ropes," it is hubris. 

Bush = guilty.

Back to Top
Barretm82 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1368
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Barretm82 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2004 at 8:31am
Originally posted by Badsmitty Badsmitty wrote:


Ignoring one's military advisors and experts in the field of terrorism and war in order to embrace the civilian advisors who tell you what you want to hear is not "learning the ropes," it is hubris.†


Bush = guilty.



Which military advisors? I would like you to name them.

"Experts in the field of terrorism", the bureaucracy burden your experts have to navigate prevented them from making a coherent warning prior to 9/11.

That same bureaucracy burden tripped up experts who were not able to be definitive on the status of Saddam's WMD programs.

The bottom line is that there are fundamental flaws in the pillars that support corporate "type" organizations.

Large organizations will never be able to turn on a dime, rarely see outside the box without outside observers, and have great difficulty making quick adjustments when nessarary over an extended period of time.

It is not your expertís fault, it is just the nature of cumbersome bureaucracy that encompasses every large mega company, one has to take this into account and understand its implications, based on your comments Smithy, I don't think you do. IMHO.



Edited by Barretm82
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2004 at 8:33am

Originally posted by Multi-Colored J Multi-Colored J wrote:

If there's no reason in making assault weapons illegal, there's no reason in making narcotics illegal, right?

Hell, the government could make a killing if they taxed marijuana. It's pretty much the same as alchohol.

See? Flawed logic. Same situation with assault weapons.

Nope.  Entirely different.

Outlawing "assault weapons" is like making red cocaine illegal, but making white cocaine legal.

Making all guns illegal would be logical.  Making guns with pistol grips illegal is just goofy.

Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2004 at 8:33am

Originally posted by Barretm82 Barretm82 wrote:

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Actually, as I understand it, Canada has very liberal gun ownership laws...


Unfortunately not at all.

Huh.  Live and learn.

Back to Top
rmorey View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Made it by a Hair

Joined: 18 November 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1002
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rmorey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2004 at 6:25pm

Originally posted by a-5dude a-5dude wrote:

dude. who the hell needs an Ak 47 to defend a burgler. 1, 2, 56 bullets, it's all the same isn't it! All that does is make the cops jobs harder. Usually the bad guys used to have assualt riffles anyway, but it was atleast alittle harder. I read this one article about how this cop went it on this drug bust and there was an AK on the bed, right next to him. Luckily, the cops got the dude before he could grab it. So ur saying that its fine to have Ak's laying around on people's beds. It just infuriates me when people think as moronically as that. I mean, seriously, c'mon!

I know we live in a world much different than when the 2nd amendment was passed.  There are much more powerful weapons now than then.  But we all need to ask ourselves, why was the 2nd amendment passed?  It wasn't really to protect us from burglars.  It was to protect us from the government.  England tried to limit firearms to make the population more obedient, but it did just the opposite.

You are never beaten until you admit it.
- G. Patton
Back to Top
Ilovepaintball1 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Guested. Trouble maker.

Joined: 02 August 2004
Location: Christmas Island
Status: Offline
Points: 4532
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ilovepaintball1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 November 2004 at 6:45pm
If I was old enough to vote Id vote Bush.


Props to my Dogg BLAND
Back to Top
rmorey View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Made it by a Hair

Joined: 18 November 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1002
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rmorey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 November 2004 at 6:28pm
Interesting...
25% Kerry
75% Bush

Not in the same proportion, but the same result.

(now this thread can die like some wanted)
You are never beaten until you admit it.
- G. Patton
Back to Top
BigGun View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Strike 1: Flaming and general idiocy

Joined: 09 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 355
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BigGun Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 November 2004 at 6:40pm
Banning all guns would be stupid. It would cause an uprising like nothing ever seen before. The government knows this, and that's why they haven't done it. They just make it a pain to get cool guns now. Personally I think the age to be able to own a rifle or shot gun needs to be raised from 18 to 21 just like it is for hand guns here in Texas.
A-5 w/ 12IN. Lapco Bigshot.
R/T
20oz. and 16oz. tanks.

98c with 14In. Terminator
14oz. and 9oz. tanks.
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 November 2004 at 9:42pm

Originally posted by BigGun BigGun wrote:

Banning all guns would be stupid. It would cause an uprising like nothing ever seen before. The government knows this, and that's why they haven't done it.

Any other conspiracy theories you would like to sell?

Back to Top
untouchable555 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Strike 2, moronic filter dodge X 2 5/12

Joined: 03 November 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 527
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote untouchable555 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 November 2004 at 9:59pm
 Why does nobody ever want the 3rd party to win. Nader is a good guy for the job. But i want bush and i will go insane if kerry wins
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 November 2004 at 10:02pm

Because third party candidates are always extremists, like Nader.  Most people (thankfully) don't like extremists, and so we end up with the two large moderate parties.

 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 171819
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.265 seconds.