VIDEO: Want less crime? Get more guns!

- August 10th, 2012

Categories: Politics

Subscribe to the post

3 comments

  1. Jim Griffith says:

    I agree with and support any move to bring back the right to carry a concealed weapon for law-abiding people. However, I don’t think this will ever happen because of the anti-gun mindset of bleeding heart fools who think that any gun is “bad” plus the political mindset of the Association of Chiefs of Police whose view is that any “crime control” is their job only and they exist to “protect” their member’s 100k salary plus benefits, thus their support for the failed long gun registry and their wish to dis-arm the general (law-abiding) public. Preserve the status quo is their mandate while the public pays even more taxes for their services while paying more insurance, etc. to guard their property.
    Criminals need to fear for their lives and when ordinary Canadians can arm themselves for protection of life and property then we will all be better off.
    “Gun Control” should only mean one thing; that is the ability to hit your target. The Police establishment (not the cop on the street) and left wing criminal coddlers only want the police to have guns, well we know how stupid that concept really is because criminals will always get guns and they are not afraid so it is time to make them afraid, start shooting them dead!! We can’t afford to arrest them anymore…

  2. Pat Vetzal says:

    As one of those who had a permit up until the liberals did away with them in the 70′s, I agree with him 100%. The permits were hard for us to get and proof of a squeeky clean record that we didn’t want to loose.
    I did know of a few people who were able to obtain their permits because they had “friends on the Force” but I don’t know that any of them caused a problem.

  3. Bill Elder says:

    A responsible armed and legally empowered public acts as an auxiliary police force and reduces crime – History and modern statistical study validate this – and common sense (the type the founders had) should dictate this is a no-brainer. But we live in an era where more malefic elements of society in, partisan politics, academia, media, government and political pressure groups believe in and propagate some of history’s most errant and discredited ideologies.

    One of these “bad ideas” is about denying the public the right to armed self defence and disarming us via so-called gun control. I could be flippant and say that civil disarmament is a soviet idea but the reality is a arms control/banning is an autocratic policy that predates the soviet tyranny by thousands of years. Civil disarmament has been used by the greatest tyrannies in history to subjugate the public and then run pogroms. Every major genocide in the 19th and 20th century was preceded by public disarmament laws.

    That may seem historically irrelevant in this era of Pollyanna-eque pseudo security and so-called stable government, but history also tells us nations can change drastically, and very quickly. The common sense rational traditional Canadian viewpoint of civil firearms ownership is that the firearm is a dangerous but useful if not necessary tool no different than an axe, a car, a can of gas, or any other dangerous tool we may encounter. We realize that in spite of all our best efforts to make safe responsible use a priority there will always be irresponsible individuals who abuse these tools and cause damage. We have a vast body of law to cope with these miscreants through the reasoned and convergent application of law and punishment.

    One of the unreasonable and dangerous applications of law is to ban items from public use because a small minority abuse them or on speculation they may be abused or engage in “pre crime” control regimes of the responsible and legitimate use of such items. Then we step into the soviet police state style of law enforcing which is anathema to our constitutional and legal tradition. However this is exactly what firearms banners and gun control fanatics want us to do.

    Personally, I view anyone who thinks they have the right to demand the confiscation of property on speculation or demand the oppressive regulation of peaceful individuals based in personal biases/phobias and in absence of any evidence to justify such phobias, to be uncivil, unCanadian and contemptuous of the inherent fairness in our equitable rule of law. Demanding responsible citizens surrender their property and their right to effective self defence because of the fear spread by a small violent irresponsible criminal element (and malevolent pressure groups) is not only diametrically opposed to our traditional sense of justice, it is civilly irresponsible and immoral.

Comments are closed.