Really nice video of a canadian anchor warning us americans what's coming down the bend, this is exactly how they did it in canada. Call for a national registry, said everyone was a conspiratard for thinking the government would eventually seize guns, and then 20 years later, that's what they did.
Registration WILL lead to CONFISCATION. Don't trust the takers.
- Thread starter BRUTALITOPS
- Start date
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Also Canada has since defunded and is about to eliminate the rifle registry, citings its absolute failure to be useful in solving crimes.
oh you dont say. I wonder if that will be applicable to our debate given we have a country that has already tried what we are proposing.
unless of course, there are ulterior motives for a gun registry . .
unless of course, there are ulterior motives for a gun registry . .
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
Damn. I don't know what I'm going to do without a car.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
Oh, btw - no emotional fearmongering on this thread. Not!
no one is trying to take cars. there are people trying to take guns. Ironically though, cars kill more people than guns. if it was about saving net lives to you, you'd ban cars.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
There is no evidence of any kind that shows registries are useful in solving crimes. That alone should be reason enough to dismiss the notion entirely.
it's just a fact, liberals will take our guns. they have banned guns before, they have restricted guns before, other countries have had national registries lead to gun confiscation, so it's pretty asinine to assume that wont be the case in america.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Cars only need to registered for use on public roadways.
Or preventing it. I don't know if it will lead to confiscation, but I doubt it will lead to anything worthwhile and we know for a fact that government databases are abused, even the ones for driving records.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...w-enforcement-users-misused-driver-data.shtml
if you guys watch the video, the person that made the call for confiscating the gun in question was an unelected bureaucrat. the guns had different purposes and functions but merely looked the same, so some mouth breather with far too much authority gets to decide which guns can and can't be owned.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
Boo!
Remember how you said no one should pay attention to me if I cite some poll about conservatives? No one should mind you - at all - when you say gun control posters are being emotional, or fearmongering, or pulling heartstrings.
No one.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
So then you are a proponent of registration? Or has the lack of Yurt made you antsy for pointless arguments?
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I am absolutely a proponent of registration. Most sane Americans are.
It DOES help solve crimes. It helps identify people who own guns who are later deemed mentally ill, or convicted of a violent crime. It does not infringe upon anyone's rights.
It's things like the opposition to something as simple as regisration that separates reasonable-thinking gun owners from the nutters.
everything I cite is based on facts and data. It's not pie in the sky emotional appeal like you idiots use with some irrelevant dead childrens brains. There is a history to the things I am talking about, in spite of the denial from your side. You want to, and will take our guns. You have ALREADY DONE IT with various weapons, so to suggest it will continue really isn't that bold of a claim.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
We have required gun registration for a long, long time. People still own guns - lots of people.
You're thread title is wrong, as you are. It is not a fact - it's wrong.
Sorry.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
No, it does not. It's been deemed unconstitutional as well and costs BILLIONS of dollars.
saying something is wrong doesn't make it so onceler. Canada had a national registry and then used it to start confiscating guns. We have precedent.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
We have equal precedent in our own country, specifically California.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
Well, allow me to help you with the English language. What you meant to say is that it "can" lead to confiscation. Not that it "will."
Hope that helps.