A rational Canadian approach to firearms.

"Mike from Ottawa" <mev@tikaCANOE.ca> wrote in message
news:55lbq25ko7v90pi5nvgbv27sd09scv7hid@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 21:03:35 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote:

>>> >>
>>> >> We've been assured, time, and time, and time again,
>>> >>
>>> >> That Canadians
>>> >>
>>> >> -Never-;
>>> >>
>>> >> -Ever-;
>>> >>
>>> >> Think about things like this.
>>> >>
>>> >> Not only do they not consider it,
>>> >>
>>> >> They have no reason to.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Cite please.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll get right on it.
>>
>>I take it Cam has never read JOF's posts on guns?
>>
>>Dennis
>
> Right, and John said *ALL* Canadians *NEVER EVER* think about this
> kind of crap?

Many times.

Blanket statements.

> I seem to recall it being more like *most Canadians*.

Not till we started proving you wrong.

As we continue to do.

> Whatever. Let Peanut spout off against Canadians, just like he always
> does.

Must be pretty embarrassing to have a 13 yr old Canadian version of a
Valley Girl make you look so stupid.

> It's still a boring, lame old ruse from a xenophobe. Must be
> time for Chester to show up...

Methinks thou doth protest too much...

Nice to see you're still obsessed with my genitals, though.

You need a hobby, dude.

Hwæt! "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid>, men ne cunnon
secgan to soðe:

> "Douglas W "Popeye" Frederick" <Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com>
> wrote in message news:12qa8fh5pqlps32@news.supernews.com...
>> "Cam" <cam.barr@beer.com> wrote in message
>> news:1168447625.865783.17890@p59g2000hsd.googlegro ups.com...
>> > Popeye wrote:
>> >>
>> >> We've been assured, time, and time, and time again,
>> >>
>> >> That Canadians
>> >>
>> >> -Never-;
>> >>
>> >> -Ever-;
>> >>
>> >> Think about things like this.
>> >>
>> >> Not only do they not consider it,
>> >>
>> >> They have no reason to.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Cite please.
>>
>>
>> I'll get right on it.
>
> I take it Cam has neve rread JOF's posts on guns?

You'll never produce the quote either, fuckwit.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Hwæt! "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick"
<Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com>, men ne cunnon secgan to soðe:

>> I take it Cam has never read JOF's posts on guns?
>
> And it wasn't just JOF.
>
> Cam's said it himself.

More lies by Fatboy.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Mike from Ottawa" <mev@tikaCANOE.ca> wrote in message
news:55lbq25ko7v90pi5nvgbv27sd09scv7hid@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 21:03:35 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote:
>
> >"Douglas W "Popeye" Frederick" <Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in
> >message news:12qa8fh5pqlps32@news.supernews.com...
> >> "Cam" <cam.barr@beer.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1168447625.865783.17890@p59g2000hsd.googlegro ups.com...
> >> > Popeye wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> We've been assured, time, and time, and time again,
> >> >>
> >> >> That Canadians
> >> >>
> >> >> -Never-;
> >> >>
> >> >> -Ever-;
> >> >>
> >> >> Think about things like this.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not only do they not consider it,
> >> >>
> >> >> They have no reason to.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Cite please.
> >>
> >>
> >> I'll get right on it.
> >
> >I take it Cam has neve rread JOF's posts on guns?
> >
> >Dennis
>
> Right, and John said *ALL* Canadians *NEVER EVER* think about this
> kind of crap? I seem to recall it being more like *most Canadians*.

I recall, it being more like "we have no reason to...."

>
> Whatever. Let Peanut spout off against Canadians, just like he always
> does. It's still a boring, lame old ruse from a xenophobe. Must be
> time for Chester to show up...
>

Ahh....so when folks say stuff like "Americans are ....." instead of "most
or some Americans are ...." will you stand proudly and say "that's
xenophobic! you can't generalize like that!"

Dennis

"Douglas W "Popeye" Frederick" <Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in
message news:12qbv5t4sdqpa55@news.supernews.com...
> "Dennis (Icarus)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote in message
> news:74706$45a5c78f$1860878d$11918@KNOLOGY.NET...
<snip>
> >
> > I take it Cam has never read JOF's posts on guns?
>
> And it wasn't just JOF.
>
> Cam's said it himself.
>
>



Dennis

Mike from Ottawa wrote

> Right, and John said *ALL* Canadians *NEVER EVER* think about this
> kind of crap? I seem to recall it being more like *most Canadians*.

> Whatever. Let Peanut spout off against Canadians, just like he always
> does. It's still a boring, lame old ruse from a xenophobe. Must be
> time for Chester to show up...

OK, you're right. We don't know that all Canadians don't think about the
need to defend themselves. It was a mistake. How about "all Canadians in
this forum?" Know any that don't agree with John's position?

Lee

Hwæt! "Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net>, men ne cunnon secgan to
soðe:

> Know any that don't agree with John's position?

Why don't you and your fuckwit buddies first accurately present his
position instead of the strawman argument you're whacking.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Kari wrote

> Perhaps someone could succintly present the "position" ?

If it were possible to state it succinctly, there wouldn't be thousands of
messages on the topic.

The best I can do is say that John believes, and has repeatedly stated, that
Canada is a kinder and gentler place where there is no need for citizens to
concern themselves with the kind of crimes that would warrant defense by
potentially deadly force and, therefore, no need for the right of private
ownership of defensive firearms.

Lee

Hwæt! "Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net>, men ne cunnon secgan
to soðe:

> there is no need for citizens to
> concern themselves with the kind of crimes that would warrant
> defense by potentially deadly force and, therefore, no need for
> the right of private ownership of defensive firearms.


The RKBA in the USA is not based on a "need" for protection from
potentially deadly crimes.

Feel free to produce any section of the BOR or USA constitution that
makes such a statement, or a USA SCOTUS ruling to that effect.

I know you won't because I know you can't.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Lee Bell wrote:
> Kari wrote
>
> > Perhaps someone could succintly present the "position" ?
>
> If it were possible to state it succinctly, there wouldn't be thousands of
> messages on the topic.
>
> The best I can do is say that John believes, and has repeatedly stated, that
> Canada is a kinder and gentler place where there is no need for citizens to
> concern themselves with the kind of crimes that would warrant defense by
> potentially deadly force and, therefore, no need for the right of private
> ownership of defensive firearms.
>
> Lee

Lee, do you believe that holding the position above makes one a
"sheep"? I think you implied that in your first post, and I took
"sheep" in that context to be derogatory - perhaps I'm going too far.

And do you think there might be other reasons for not feeling the need
to arm oneself besides thinking you'll never encounter a situation
where you might find a weapon useful? Being a pacifist, for example?
Would that make one a "sheep"?

"You must be the change you want to see in the world."

Kari