Canada bans handguns

[Jarod]

King Trudeau has announced that handguns can no longer be purchased, sold, transferred, or imported and that any handgun can be seized at government whim.

Trudeau has decided to try to join the ranks of Venezuela, the USSR, China, and Cuba.


Now watch the gangs in the streets shooting each other and taking God knows how many innocents with them in claiming their share of the Black Market.

Can the citizens of Canada regain control without war and bloodshed now? I doubt it.

I wonder why Canada does not have problems with so many mass shootings?
Why are their people so much happier?

 

[Into the Night]

True. But calling abortion murder is similar to calling eating meat murder.

Only for cannibals.

It's not the typical understanding of what the word means.

Abortion is killing your offspring. It's murder when it's done for convenience, which is what you are arguing for.

If your particular religion forbids abortion or meat-eating, then you should, of course, have every right not to get an abortion and not to eat meat.

Most religions forbid cannibalism.

And you are fully at liberty to try to convince others that killing a fetus or a pig is murder.

A human fetus is not a pig. Strawman fallacy.

The problem is when you try to hijack our shared government in order to impose your personal religious taboos by force against those who don't share your faith.

You are describing yourself. Inversion fallacy.
Murder is not a 'personal religious taboo'.

 

[Into the Night]

there are half a dozen federal court cases that specifically declared the 2nd Amendment an individual right that needed no membership in a militia..........why didn't the Supreme Court correct those?

They have no authority to.

 

[Into the Night]

The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power." [Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)]

Exactly right.

The right of self defense requires no constitution, no government, no permission of any kind.

 

[Into the Night]

That's a human baby in development, not a slab of cooked meat on the dinner table. Stupid comparison, but not surprising coming from a diapered lunatic such as yourself.

Abortion is wrong and the SC knows it. It's why they kicked Roe to the curb. They should've made it illegal across the nation but we'll take what we can get.

Maybe he's a cannibal. He equates dead human tissue as meat.

 

[gfm7175]

Abortion is an easy one:

That it is.

just let people decide what to do with their own uteruses.

Men do not have a uterus. Women can already decide what they wish to do with their respective uteruses, but that doesn't free them from any consequences resulting from said choices. A baby is not a uterus, and there is no right to murder said baby for convenience.

That was more or less what the rule was when the federal government recognized a fundamental right,

There is no right to murder.

but now that the Republican operatives on the court appear to be punting the issue to the states,

... where the issue belongs....

we'll get government stripping away basic human rights.

Murder is not a basic human right.

 

[Into the Night]

The citizens voted for Trudeau

No, they didn't. The Prime Minister is not elected by popular vote in Canada.
There is no functioning constitution in Canada.

 

[Into the Night]

It's a fetus, as opposed to born animal, which potentially has much more developed capacity for thought than a fetus. But I get that under your particular religion, the unborn fetus has more of a right to life.... just as under someone else's religion, the born pig has more of a right to life. We're fine as long as you follow your rule, she follows hers, and neither of you tries to force the other to follow your rule by way of law.

You don't get to speak for all religions. You are not God.

You are arguing for murdering your own offspring, dude.

 

[Into the Night]

I am curious how one can keep a gun with an altered magazine if the gun is confiscated?
In the US shotguns are required to be altered when hunting waterfowl so they can only carry 3 shells. I don't see anyone claiming that is confiscation. Only a fool would do so. But then you prove every day that you are that fool.

It is infringement. Unconstitutional.

 

[Mina]

That it is.


Men do not have a uterus. Women can already decide what they wish to do with their respective uteruses, but that doesn't free them from any consequences resulting from said choices. A baby is not a uterus, and there is no right to murder said baby for convenience.


There is no right to murder.


... where the issue belongs....


Murder is not a basic human right.

Wouldn't you save time if you just replied using one account, rather than using both this one and the Into the Night account?

 

[Jarod]

No, they didn't. The Prime Minister is not elected by popular vote in Canada.
There is no functioning constitution in Canada.

He was elected by Canadians, and those who made him prime minister were elected.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Trump doesn't want to be a dictator. You are describing Pelosi and Biden.

Disagreed. If not, why was he giving Kim Jong-un handies in North Korea?

 

[gfm7175]

Wouldn't you save time if you just replied using one account,

That's what I do.

rather than using both this one and the Into the Night account?

I am not Into the Night.

Why do so many liberals see so many sock people?

 

[Into the Night]

They haven't intimated anything of the sort.

Perhaps it would make sense to think it through in some other context. Like say you want liposuction because you're not happy with your beer belly.... but some religious cultists in government take the view that God wants you to have a beer belly and so they want to criminalize the procedure. If you insist on your right to control your own body, would it make sense to suggest you were intimating that you were incapable of saying no to junk food?

There are all sorts of things that we could reduce the risk of, by way of different behaviors. Those wrinkles you've got may not have shown up if you'd been better about wearing sunscreen. The tear in you meniscus might not have been an issue if you'd warmed up before exerting yourself the way you knew you should. Your teeth might not be so dingy if you'd avoided coffee and wine. You might not even need glasses if you had spent less time staring at screens and more time out in the sun. But we don't jump from that to saying that, therefore, it's OK for religious zealots in government to deprive you of medical procedures to address those. So, why treat pregnancy differently? Sure, a woman may have only gotten pregnant because she chose to have sex, just as you may only have gotten fat because you chose to eat poorly, but in each case it's your own damn body and you retain the moral right to deal with it as you see fit. Other people's religions shouldn't trump that.

False equivalence fallacies. Whataboutism.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You don't get to speak for all religions. You are not God.

You are arguing for murdering your own offspring, dude.

Rule 18. Present your authority to make that determination.

Bulverism. You don't get to speak for her, Sybil.

 

[Granule]

That's what I do.


I am not Into the Night.

Why do so many liberals see so many sock people?

Because keeping their fingers pointed at others is the only thing they've got.

 

[Granule]

That's what I do.


I am not Into the Night.

Why do so many liberals see so many sock people?

Because keeping their fingers pointed at others is the only thing they've got.

 

[Into the Night]

We already restrict rights all over the place. I have the right to peaceably assemble, but not in the Oval Office.

You have the right to peaceably assembly in any public place. The Oval Office is not a public place.

I have the right to free speech, but I'm still subject to noise ordinances.

Noise ordinances do not restrict free speech.

There's freedom of the press, but the government can still force me to pay someone else money if I use that freedom to libel someone.

You are free to print what you wish. You are responsible for what you print. You are free to say what you want. You are responsible for what you say.

My freedom of religion doesn't, for example, give me the right to murder witches, even though the Bible very clearly orders me not to suffer a witch to live.

Presentism fallacy. Contextomy fallacy. You are not living under ancient Jewish law.

I have a right generally not to be searched without a warrant, but if I want to fly on a commercial airline or visit a secure government building, or all sorts of other daily things, I'm going to have to submit to a search without a warrant.

Which is unconstitutional.

Press freedom doesn't mean you can broadcast anything you want on any frequency you want.

You can't broadcast a printing device by radio. Frequency coordination does not restrict free speech or freedom of the press.

The advent of radio communications created a bunch of issues that were different in key ways

None.

from what the founders were thinking of when they spoke about a free press,

You can't transmit a printing device by radio.

and so we have FCC regulations limiting what you can do.

The FCC does not govern printing presses.

Similarly, the advent of semi-automatic weapons created a bunch of new issues,

None. Both automatic and semi-automatic weapons existed in the 1700's. Nothing in the Constitution specifies any weapon by type, action, size, power, size of magazine, range, color, how scary it looks, or even that it must be a gun.

and new regulations make sense.

Unconstitutional.

As for the Niemoller, the argument wasn't that if you allow one government regulation, then it's a slippery slow to totalitarianism. In fact, the first people they came for were the communists, who were pushing for more government regulation. Niemoller was talking about attacks on individuals, not regulations about what you can buy.

Irrelevant.

The liberal cities in liberal states tend to be in pretty good shape,

Lie.

and that's partly due to gun control at the state level. NYC,

Lie.

Boston,

Lie.

Seattle,

Lie.

San Francisco, etc.,

Lie.

all have lower murder rates.

Lie.

They're not as peaceful as big cities that are in COUNTRIES with tighter gun control (London, Berlin,Tokyo),

Irrelevant.

but they're not bad. Sadly, there are also big cities in red states, where gun regulations are a whole lot looser, and they tend to be shitholes. Memphis, KC, St. Louis, New Orleans, etc., are all plagued by guns.

These cities are Democrat controlled cities, dude.

Gun control can definitely help with that.

Unconstitutional.

It's no coincidence that most of the high-suicide states have high gun ownership.

irrelevant.

If we want to focus on suicides, a good start would be figuring out what's going wrong in shitholes like Wyoming, Alaska, and Montana (which lead the nation in suicide rates), and what's going right in happier places like NJ, NY, and MA (the lowest suicide rates). Since I take it you aren't interested in coming at the issue through the obvious method of gun control, what other ways would you work on to make WY, AK, and MT more like NJ, NY, and MA? How do we clean up the shitholes?

Vote Democrats out of office. If they attempt election fraud, put them in prison.

 

[Into the Night]

you are aware that sex can result in pregnancy, right?

Maybe he's not!

 

[Into the Night]

Sooo...you'd do nothing until they were 18 then shoot them down or put them in prison?

What kind of pervert are you accusing me of being, Granny?

Anything like this?:

Word stuffing. Rule 14.