Vancouver Tries Free Heroin Program

[lazs2]

sciaf... no... you have it wrong yet again.  I do not think it is a necessity for everyone to carry firearms... I think it is a necessity that everyone have the right to bear arms if they so wish.

I think it is also very good that some people wish to carry.  I think we would all agree that we feel more secure when there is an armed policeman around.   I extend that to feeling more secure when I know that a percentage of the people I see will be carrying concealed.  It is not rocket science.  Converly... criminals feel uneasy when they see armed police and when they know a certain percentage of their victims may be armed.

Now... your idiotic stance on guns seems to be rivaled by your lack of understanding about drugs.   I sense a pattern... you are either very young with little life experiance or... just parroting what you hear in the media and from your friends.

lazs

[Siaf__csf]

Lazs2 idiotic is only to guarantee the right to bear arms to people who can't handle them. In thier hands guns become a general threat to everyone.

There has to be some control in order to ensure convicted criminals, insane people etc. won't be able to gain access to weapons (legally at least.)

In countries where weapons are more strictly controlled, there isn't an abundance of weapons like you guys have down there. The worst criminals are armed also here, but they're relatively rare.

Most petty criminals or loonies simply don't have firearms and therefore pose a significantly lesser threat than they could otherwise.

I prefer it that way.

It's interesting that you feel fit to critizise my opinnions on drugs where I'm addiction free compared, well, to you.

[lazs2]

there you go..  our petty criminals are not armed.  We have increased penalties for gun crime and that is as it should be.

People who are insane or retarded should not be allowed to have firearms nor should very young/imature children.   I have no trouble with letting people who have served their time in prison being allowed to have firearms when they get out. (if you didn't trust em to have a gun why did you let em out?)

I most certainly do not want your version of gun control and think that you have little or no knowledge of what works or doesn't.

Our firearms ownership in the U.S. is at an all time high yet crime is at an all time low.   The Department of Justice just released their 350 page study that shows that no gun control measure yet involked has been shown to lower crime in any way.

no study has ever shown that any safe storage law has had any effect on gun accidents or safety.

I think that you are simply a product of your countries brainwashing.   You can't imagine that people be allowed to make choices without their governments sanction.  

I think your stance on drugs shows this same type of thinking.  You seem incapable of exploring any alternatives to more and more control... you definetly have control issues.  What frieghtens me more than my neighbors having fireams is the fact that there are so many control freaks like you out there who think they know what is best for me.

lazs

[lazs2]

and... no one is addiction free.  we all have addictions.   I was able to overcome some of my worst ones as was nash.  I don't know if you could or not but you seem to be incapable of taking any personal responsibility and lean heavily on a strong government... this would tend to make me belive that you are a very weak individual (or simply young and idealistic)... either way... I doubt that you would be one of the small percentage of addicts that recovered.

lazs

[mora]

Originally posted by lazs2
Now... your idiotic stance on guns seems to be rivaled by your lack of understanding about drugs.   I sense a pattern... you are either very young with little life experiance or... just parroting what you hear in the media and from your friends.

lazs

No disrespect to Siaf but he does seem a bit clueless about them, and it's very typical in here(assuming he is Finnish..).

The drugs are not very common here and more importantly the scene is very underground. Most people grow up without never realizing that there are drugs around them. Most of their knowledge about them comes from the naive education received on the 8th grade.

No one except maybe some populist politicians are suggesting executing them or anything like that. Actually the laws are much more lax than in the US for example.

[lazs2]

I have no idea where he is from.   Aparently he is ashamed of admiting it.

lazs

[Siaf__csf]

I most certainly do not want your version of gun control and think that you have little or no knowledge of what works or doesn't.

Just out of curiosity, what is my version of gun control?

Mora: I know there are addicts everywhere. If you would have read my posts (not that you should) you'd realize I've been in contact with them through work as well as friendship.

I know exactly what drugs and addiction can do and all that knowledge does nothing but increases my hostility towards the substances and thier users. Addicts lose thier sensibility and they shouldn't be treated as sensible persons. Mandatory treatment is the way to go.

Lazs2 how can you say nobody's addiction free when you can't know everyone? That's contradictive. Speaking for myself only, my worst addiction must be posting on UBB's if you can call it an addiction.

Lazs2 since UBB posts are not a nationalistic issue and I do not represent the official statements of my country in any way, I prefer to keep it secret.

I have no desire to turn every discussion to country x is better than country y and country z has this and that. I'm speaking for myself.

[Siaf__csf]

I think that you are simply a product of your countries brainwashing. You can't imagine that people be allowed to make choices without their governments sanction.

There's a word for a situation where individuals are allowed to make choices without the governments sanction: Anarchy.

I think your stance on drugs shows this same type of thinking. You seem incapable of exploring any alternatives to more and more control... you definetly have control issues. What frieghtens me more than my neighbors having fireams is the fact that there are so many control freaks like you out there who think they know what is best for me.

Alternatives for control? Do you think there will be less problems if we got rid of control? Losing control would only mean free distribution of drugs, free marketing to potential users, free examples for anyone even thinking of starting the use, free opportunity to destroy ones life.

The use must be made as difficult as humanly possible. Criminalization of use as well as distribution is in order.

[lazs2]

freedom and human rights is not anarchy any more than libertarianism is.

Not everyone will become addicted to drugs even if they were free but... I am not advocating free drugs.  I do feel that criminalizing use tends to make things worse.

I don't blame you for bieng ashamed of where you are from.   It really doesn't matter tho that you claim you are seperate from it's ideals.  The place you are from taints your reasoning.   I am tainted by a constitution that respects human rights for instance.  Apparently you are from a place that feels that government should have the control of people in every aspect that is potentially harmful to the individual or the government.

lazs

[Siaf__csf]

Lazs stick to the discussion, not to the would be legislation of a country. This is exactly why I wanted to avoid bringing it up.

I don't see why you're so hostile against me. From what I've read we pretty much agree on the issues on gun control. We both feel guns should never end in the hands of the inept and the only way to achieve this is bringing effective administration i.e. gun control.

Each gun owner should be licensed and the license should be revoked if necessary. Apart from UK I don't know places where any normal law-abiding citizen would have any trouble in getting a firearm for himself.

Personally I've made a decision to avoid getting firearms to my house as long as I have underage children playing around. If I made the mistake to leave the weapon accessible even once, the price could be too high to pay. Therefore I choose not to risk it.

[lazs2]

no.... we don't even begin to agree on gun control.

I do not worry about whos hands guns end up in only on how they are used.   If a rapist has one and never uses it in a crime then that is fine with me.

I do not believe that any gun should be registered because the potential for government abuse is too high.   I don't want gun owners to be licenced at all but have no problem with a basic firearm safety course be part of buying a gun.  I believe gun safety should be taught in school.

you make your own decisions and weigh the risks for children.  I assume that means that you have nothing in your house that has the potential to harm them then?   Could I go into your house and find items that are potentialy fatal if your children get them?  where do you store your car keys?

better that children learn to respect dangerous things than to live in a house that is just a big padded bare room.

lazs

[Siaf__csf]

I do not believe that any gun should be registered because the potential for government abuse is too high.

That's quite heavy paranoia there. Do you think your government is your enemy and if you do, why?

I assume that means that you have nothing in your house that has the potential to harm them then? Could I go into your house and find items that are potentialy fatal if your children get them? where do you store your car keys?

Nothing that can kill them with one press of a trigger, no.

And I store my car keys in my pocket naturally. Even if my kids would have access to them, they're way too small to even think about getting in the car less that they knew how to use the remote. A gun however a child can easily pick up and pull the trigger.

[lazs2]

are you saying that the UK governments never used the regestration information that they had to confiscate or force compliance when they finally banned most firearms?   Paranoia?  I think not.

you say you have nothing that will kill in your home with one press of the trigger... how bout one gulp or one stab or one trip or one drowning?   as to "one press of the trigger"  I have a loaded 45 Kimber on the counter and my 3 year old grand daughte is in the other room.   she can press the trigger all she wants and it won't go off.   I am more worried she will open the door and get into traffic or pull the knives down from the counter or fall down the stairs.   I can find a whole lot of things in a home that are more dangerous to children than a gun.

lazs

[Siaf__csf]

I can't think anything more dangerous in a childs hands than a gun. Is it a week or two now that the 3-year old shot his brother in the states? Safe..

It's necessary to have stairs, it's necessary to have bathtubs, it's necessary to have knives and scissors. It's not necessary to have weapons. So I don't keep them around. I don't keep other dangers accessible to the kids either. I block the stairways so that the kids can't wander and fall there.

Lazs2 for what use do you absolutely need firearms? I've never found any use for them outside the firing range.

[lazs2]

ah... so one accident last week in a country of allmost 300 million is your reason to ban guns in the home?   you say that knives and cars and stairs and all manner of cleaning chemicals are necessary in the home but not guns?  Guns prevent from 1.5-3 million crimes a year in the U.S so I would say that they have some use other than a small group of elite shooting at paper when their government allows.  

Our forefathers felt that government had the tendancy to become tyrannical and made sure that the human right to defend ouselves was called out in "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"  it has worked very well for us so far.   Our burglary rate is low for homes burglarized while the people are in em...  criminals all admit that armed citizens scare the hell out of em.   The japs admited that invading a country that had it's citizens well armed was foolhardy...  Not necessary?  

States that pass right to carry laws enjoy a reduction in crime... How is this not necessary?   the fact that criminals and government know that the population is armed is enough... you don't have to have each and every one of the armed citizens fending off wild gangs in order to prove necessity.   You will probly never be killed by a drunk driver.  Does that mean that drunk driving laws are "unnecessary"?

You claim that saying where you are from is not "necessary" to the discussion yet you use where you are from to prove that guns are not needed.  How does that work?   For all I know you are from one of the countries with a very high crime rate.  Probly why you are ashamed of where you live.   I am proud of where I live and am only ashamed that the women like yourself are taking away more and more of our rights.

You say that I have to have a reason to have a gun... I have shown that it is a deterent to tyranny and crime and probly the duty of any person who is a responsible citizen..  but... even without that... It is a human right to defend yourself and there is no concievable reason to stop law abiding citizens from owning fireams.

but keep talking... you are proving just how rabidly anti gun you are.  

lazs