Help revoke Bowling for Columbine's Oscar

[funkedup]

Originally posted by Gman
Haha Deja, don't worry, that's never made my resume.  I only brought it up because Paintball is very sociably acceptable here in Canada, yet shooting sports are not.


Mid Targut, you're right.  What I was trying to get over the table to the person that was directed at is that a firearm of any type and description is lethal when used by a trained person against a crowd of unarmed people, while the reverse, a full auto M16 used by someone who had never touched a firearm would result in a lot of noise, 90% misses, and fewer dead than the anti-gun movement would have the public believe.

Yeah man I can't hit anything on full auto in Raven Shield.  

[Imp]

Originally posted by Erlkonig
True AP bullets aren't even legal here in the US.  Only the military (and law enforcement?) has access to that kind of stuff.  According to FBI tests, the 5.56mm bullet is actually less likely to blast through walls than pistol bullets - due to a combination of the former's high velocity, lesser mass, and bullet construction.  This includes the standard stuff issued to our military.

Thanks for the info. With no insults???? What happened here????

A BAR is fully auto matic? No kidding, I thought he was refering to hunting rifles. So my comment refered to those only. If you dont know what im talking about, maybe you should ask instead of throwing insults.

If the 5.56mm is such a bad round then why the hell are you using it? I thought the US military used it because it was good, guess I was wrong. I also thought the M16 had fully auto setting like most sub-machinegun, thanks for the info.

I never claimed to know more than anyone else here either.

A fully automatic weapon fires more bullets which means more chance to hurt innocents. Thats all I was saying. So why dont you put your insults away and discuss like civilized folks.
I didnt send insults to anyone who disagreed with me, did I.

I know that the M16 without AP is used by SWAT teams. But they dont use those AP rounds for a reason, because it could go through some criminal and hurt innocents. Thats all I was saying.
I said the military M16 (with AP ammo) was dangerous because it could go through people and hurt others (like a family member in the wrong place.)

Why do you always assume I mean in every situations.

Next time I will write sentences that cover every possible situation

[Mini D]

Cover every possible scenario imp?  How about you just cover one possible scenario.  Or at the very least, a realistic one.

You can argue that automatic weapons fire sprayed throughout a communitity can cause collateral damage all you want.  Its not a scenario that has happend in the U.S. that I know of... anyone else that knows of it happening?

You can argue about the now mythical armor penetration of the .223 too as if somehow that round is the end all be all of lethality.  Its one of the smallest centerfire rifle rounds available.  It doesn't have a magical bullet in it that goes through stuff much better than any other round.  Its just a bullet.  A small one.

Actually, I find bowser's statement in regards to how much thought gun-rights people put into the whole debate somewhat amuzing.  Its a really neet way to excuse people like yourself, that don't really put much thought into it at all.

MiniD

[Imp]

Originally posted by Mini D
Cover every possible scenario imp?  How about you just cover one possible scenario.  Or at the very least, a realistic one.

You can argue that automatic weapons fire sprayed throughout a communitity can cause collateral damage all you want.  Its not a scenario that has happend in the U.S. that I know of... anyone else that knows of it happening?

You can argue about the now mythical armor penetration of the .223 too as if somehow that round is the end all be all of lethality.  Its one of the smallest centerfire rifle rounds available.  It doesn't have a magical bullet in it that goes through stuff much better than any other round.  Its just a bullet.  A small one.

Actually, I find bowser's statement in regards to how much thought gun-rights people put into the whole debate somewhat amuzing.  Its a really neet way to excuse people like yourself, that don't really put much thought into it at all.

MiniD

I never said it was the most lethal bullet around. I only said that military AP could go through a guy and kill another. Since they are restricted, they dont pose a problem.

How many people in the US own working BAR?
What use do they make of it? Its not good for hunting, or defending your house. A non working one would be just as good a showpiece. The only use I can see is to use it at a firing range.

All I said was that automatic weapons fire more bullets which means more chances of someone being hit by accident.
Which is true no matter how you put it. I never said gun owners were all idiots who would fire wildly. I just said the possibility existed.

The US as gun violence problems that make many other countries' problems seem like a joke. There as to be a way to reduce that violence. Its not just street gangs, we have plenty of those in Canada.

Anti gang law adopted by Canada would certainly help the US.
So why isnt anyone in the US pushing to adopt one. Have they heard of the law? Are they unwilling to adopt a concept from Canada? No problem is unsolvable if you try to solve it of course.
I just dont see much will to do that in the US. Thats unfortunate, your country would be so much better if it had less violence.

I never said people in the US fired auto weapons in a crowd either. But how many times do you see crazy shooter in the US?
Compare that to Canada (taking into account population ratio of course.) Why is it that much higher? Its not the black people's fault. All races are involved. Why is that happening?

[Gman]

3600 shootings in the greater Toronto area since Jan 1 1997.  Care to explain that?

Of these 80% involve someone with a previous violent criminal record.  80% of these are a visible minority.

Sorry, but it IS a racial problem.  Solution = kick them the **** out of the country.

[bowser]

“…Sorry, but it IS a racial problem. Solution = kick them the **** out of the country….”.

Congratulations, I knew you had it in you.  You are now an official card-carrying gun nut.

P.S.  And to think you almost had me fooled with that impressive resume.

bowser

[vorticon]

solution = kick racist pigs outta the country

[Mini D]

Anti gang law adopted by Canada would certainly help the US.
So why isnt anyone in the US pushing to adopt one. Have they heard of the law? Are they unwilling to adopt a concept from Canada? No problem is unsolvable if you try to solve it of course.
I just dont see much will to do that in the US. Thats unfortunate, your country would be so much better if it had less violence.

Isn't that the law where you deport gang members to the U.S.?

MiniD

[Gman]

Please, what idiocy.

You assume because I'm of the gun culture and say kick out immagrants with criminal records that I'm a "racist".  Typical left wing garbage, and right out of the little red book playbook.

My fiancee is a minority (Jewish).  My best man for our wedding is Asian.  My former partner and best friend is black, currently serving with 2 Para in the Brit Airborne.  Out of the 20 employees working at my shooting range, 3 are East Indian, 3 are Asian, 1 is from Singapore, I'm part Jew, and the rest are tightie whities.  Major racism going on there, better call the CBC for a special documentary.

By the way, my fiancee was sexually assaulted at her place of work once while closing down at 2 am about 3 years ago.  A Somalian, with over 20 dings on his record.  Good thing our liberal "diversity" kept him in the country.   Of the 20 shootings in Calgary since Jan 1 this year, EVERY ONE has involved Asian gang members.  Of the 3600 shootings in Toronto in the last 6 years,, nearly 2800 of them have involved racial minorities, and in particular gangs.  Is it racism to think that these violent offenders with past records should be deported?  As I just stated, it IS A RACIAL issue when well over half of all shootings involve people who have immigrated to Canada.  Instead of giving them short or no sentences, they should be tossed out on their ears.

If you disagree with this, please tell me why.

The thousands of other immagrants who do nothing but tap the system and run up unreal criminal records should be tossed, but NOT the people who come here to make a better life, and are productive people in society.


So Bowser, be a good liberal and put your hands on your hips and purse your lips, and tell me what is good for me and that I'm a racist if I disagree.  After all, facts can't help you as they are all on my side of the argument, all you liberals have left is the racism card, and you'll rise up and take that bait at the first instant it is offered, as noted in the above few posts from you and Vorticon.



edit>  As for our vaunted "gang law", nice to see how well it has worked so far.  It's responsible for less than a dozen Hell's Angels in jail at the moment, and maybe 100 or so arrests total.  Nice how they haven't gone after the imported crime gangs huh?  Oh ya, like Bowser said, that would be "racist", as they are immigrants.


P.S. Bowser:  You never had me fooled, I knew you wouldn't fail me from the start.

[Imp]

I was only saying it could help, if they use it of course.

I never said gang violence didnt exist, on the contrary it does happen. I just said we had alot less, although in the last few years it seems to be climbing higher every year.

Criminals with records are there because our laws are too forgiving. This problem comes from criminals being liberated too easily. Which is a easily recognized problem in Canada.

Gangs should be given the same treatment as the Hell's Angels got. The law needs to be used alot more. We dont need those dirtbags around here.

Our immigration laws are pathetic, a few years ago we kicked out a family that had found work. I thougth people who work spend that money, which helps the economy.
Of course I could be wrong

The problem comes from our bad laws. Maybe they should kick out any immigrant that commits a crime (like a probation period). That way we can get rid of some bad apples. If we enforce it, of course.


MiniD, that as nothing to do with it. Although that does sound like a good idea. We could just dump our problems on you guys.

[lazs2]

well... actually... we had a gang law of sorts here in the 70's and 80's where known criminals couldn't consort.   I was a biker and seen it work.. it virtually killed the organized crime end of biker "clubs"... we couldn't ride three abreast without being pulled over and rousted and... we all had warrants or were "consorting" with fellow parollees or whatever and ... the public and the ACLU was not about to worry about our "rights"  as a bunch of ex con nazi's...  A lot of club members loosened up the recruiting so that they could use "prospects" to go to jail for the regular members... prisons are full of "prospects".

flash forward... Mexican and black gangs swooped in to fill the vacum...  Gang laws no longer work becaus they lack enforcement ability... rousting known criminals cars if "profiling"... you must allow themn to continue on their way... parole violations hardly exist... there are hardly any parole violations possible... you don't have to be employed for instance to be out on parole... you can visit your fellow criminals and hang with em...

gman is correct... as your racial mix get's higher so will your gun crimes including murder... to make the law abiding defensless will not be a viable solution.   Here in the U.S. we have firearms preventing from 1-3 million crimes a year.   you may need to prevent crime there too... hopefully you will have the tools.

I'm sure MT would agree that if we only allowed whites to have fierarms the U.S. rate of homicide and gun crimes would drop to canada levels..... increase minorities in canada and your rates for gun crime and homicide will approch ours.   I doubt that such a simple solution will be adopted since it may seem slightly racist to some.
lazs

[midnight Target]

Without getting too hot...

I hope you all realize that the issue has nothing to do with RACE!

In the mid-late 19th century it was the Irish

Then it was the Italians

Then it was the Jews

Do ya think maybe crime might have something to do with poverty? Unemployment? Opportunity or lack thereof?

Match crime rates to the economy... direct correlation.

[Mini D]

Only let whites have guns?  May seem racist to some?  I believe that is an understatement lazs, and highlights the pure fault in your logic:

A) You admit that guns are the problem and removing them is the solution.
B) It is racisist and bigoted.  No perception needed.

I think the problem is thinking that if minorities cannot behave themselves, we keep removing privileges and rights until they see the folley of their ways.  Seems lack of hope is what causes most of the problems in the first place.

MiniD

[Mini D]

Originally posted by midnight Target
Without getting too hot...

I hope you all realize that the issue has nothing to do with RACE!

In the mid-late 19th century it was the Irish

Then it was the Italians

Then it was the Jews

Do ya think maybe crime might have something to do with poverty? Unemployment? Opportunity or lack thereof?

Match crime rates to the economy... direct correlation.

On this one... we are in direct agreement.

MiniD

P.S.  I notice you didn't list "availability of hanguns" as one of the problems there;)

[lazs2]

Ok then... we won't discriminate.   Everyone can enjoy their second ammendment rights and only those who commit criminal acts will be punished.

fair enough?
lazs