Toronto mayor wants shooting ranges shut down

[friendly_iconoclast]

From:

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/431333

Miller wants shooting ranges shut down


May 27, 2008 04:30 AM
John Spears
Robert Benzie
Staff Reporters

Mayor David Miller wants to close recreational shooting ranges in Toronto, along with giving the city power to block gun manufacturers and wholesalers from opening new plants or warehouses.

"Nobody can deny that hobby directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of our city," Miller said of sport shooting yesterday, amid debate on a possible gun bylaw.

Canadian Olympic pistol shooter and downtown resident Avianna Chao begs to differ. She says that if Miller gets his way, it could mean an end to her sport – and it won't make the streets one bit safer.

Miller wants to terminate leases with two gun clubs that have shooting ranges on city property, one at Union Station, the other at Don Montgomery community centre.

Not being from the area, my question would be: Is Mayor Miller sincere or posturing? I rather doubt
his proposed actions will lower the gun crime rate very much.

[krispos42]

1. Well, if it saves just one life

I'm sure it's definately worth it.

Although I wonder why Canadians give any though at all to their homicide rate? Even if it doubles, it is still a lot lower thant he US's rate and only a tiny fraction of them would be gun-related deaths.

No worries, eh?

[beevul]

2. I was just reading an editorial from a canadian source, roasting that mayor. Linked.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/05/27/the-post-editorial-board-how-did-a-demagogue-like-david-miller-become-the-mayor-of-canada-s-biggest-city.aspx

The Post editorial board: How did a demagogue like David Miller become the mayor of Canada's biggest city?

Posted: May 27, 2008, 3:36 PM by Marni Soupcoff
Editorial

Let’s see if we have this right. Toronto has a problem with young gang members using smuggled handguns to kill one another in rave clubs and warehouses — and in order to fight this trend, mayor David Miller wants to … take away target pistols from Olympic shooters and close down law-abiding gun clubs.


Mr. Miller’s logic is so bizarre, it’s hard to know where to begin to dismantle it. He either completely misunderstands the causes of crime in his city — or, worse, he is cynically redirecting public anger from criminals to law-abiding gun collectors and target shooters. Whichever the case, Torontonians ought to be outraged.


Brandishing a report from city bureaucrats that claims “up to” 40% of gun crimes in Toronto are committed using firearms stolen from their rightful owners — RCMP and Ontario Provincial Police estimates are closer to just 10% — Mr. Miller said shooting sports are a “hobby … that creates danger to others.”


The mayor’s choice of language is telling: He insisted many of the crime guns used in his city “are stolen from so-called legal owners.” But there is nothing “so-called” about the legal status of rightful owners. They are law-abiding Canadians — unless of course you are a spin-doctoring politician out to demonize them.

[DonP]

6. Interesting point of view

It pretty much parallels the way we do things in Chicago.

Gang members shoot each other and innocent civilians up with handguns and the mayor wants a statewide ban on "assault weapons". As if somehow limiting target shooters downstate at shooting ranges will scare the gang members into behaving themselves. I'm starting to think there should be an IQ test for all politicians.

[iverglas]

10. ya never learn, do ya?

An editorial from the National Post ... couldn't find anything at FoxNews or WorldNewsDaily?

When the assembled masses want far right-wing news and views, they probably know where to look without you pointing them ...



Just to clarify a little further: David Miller has turned in his party card, but the National Post knows where his heart is:

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/204293

Miller leaves NDP, shifts to neutral
Mayor doesn't want to be seen as partisan by Ottawa and Queen's Park
Apr 18, 2007

Miller told the Star yesterday he has let his party membership lapse because he has important dealings with both the federal and provincial governments this year. He said his understanding of party membership is that it ends at the end of each calendar year and that he simply didn't renew his membership for 2007.

"There are very critical inter-governmental issues for the City of Toronto, and I don't want to be in a position where people could accuse me of being partisan," he said. "I haven't been. But I want it to be very clear I'm not. My role as mayor inter-governmentally is far too important right now."

... Does this mean he's rejecting NDP philosophy?

"No," Miller said, "but as mayor it's a very practical job. You do lose interest in partisan politics. I have to work with a provincial government that's Liberal and a federal government that's Conservative and occasionally with other provinces that are NDP, and I need the ability to work with all of them on behalf of the people of Toronto. And, yes, city councillors also belong to many parties."

Some views on the issues mentioned in my other post, from a Star columnist (the Star itself sticks pretty close to the Liberal Party):

http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/263882

Only NDP offers hope for Toronto
Oct 05, 2007

If the NDP election plan for urban centres, particularly Toronto, is too good to be true, then city lovers might consider the others and weep.

John Tory, who boldly stepped out into the faith-based funding morass that most politicians dreaded, is not nearly as adventurous when it comes to funding cities – even his own, the very Toronto he wanted to lead as mayor.

The Tory party's offerings are too little, too undefined, too late.

{Yes, the leader of the Tory party is John Tory. Talk about too good to be true.}

Liberal Dalton McGuinty talks a good game about Toronto. It's Ontario's economic engine, he says. And it's a wonder Toronto has survived, bound as it is in a fiscal straitjacket. But is he about to free the city? Maybe. Maybe over the next two decades. And here are a few dollars to show good faith and secure the silence of Mayor David Miller during the election.

The Liberal party vision is too much of the same old slow, sad song.

With that reality staring Toronto in the face, you'd think Miller and city councillors would be out beating the drums for a Howard Hampton government next Wednesday.

The Liberals won the provincial election.

[beevul]

19. Canadian media...

I don't know acceptable Canadian media from not acceptable.


Sue me.

[iverglas]

20. it's really pretty easy

When you see something like what you quoted, you know it's from the far right wing of the media spectrum.

[beevul]

21. Based on the subject matter? N/T.

[iverglas]

22. sigh

It was an opinion piece.

Ergo: based on the opinion.

It's right-wing opinion. It's usually found in right-wing rags, unless it happens to be some op-ed piece or columnist or letter published by less right-wing rags for that fair and balanced stuff.

Here's another example:

http://westernstandard.blogs.com/

David Miller is a couple of items down the page at the moment. The top item is something about "Hussein-Obama". Need any more clues there? I was pretty sure I'd read that the dear old Western Standard had breathed its last smelly breath, but it seems still to be around.

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/index.php


Poor Mayor Miller has been upstaged this week I'm afraid, though.

Google news "maxime bernier" (and disregard anywhere you see him referred to as 'she'). The tale of the buffoonery of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the boobs of his biker moll girlfriend and the top secret documents that one of them left lying around the boudoir of the other ... that's the only talk of the town today.

[Skittles]

3. I'd question his assumption

that people who indulge in said hobby are responsible for street killings

[DonP]

7. Then I guess they should be charged with the crimes, right?

And if your car is stolen, and later involved in a hit and run death, you should be charged and do prison time as well, right? After all, you obviously didn't take adequate care to keep your car from being stolen.

[iverglas]

23. I'd question that misrepresentation of what he said

Sorry.

[MercutioATC]

4. The "hobby" does NOT result in crime.

It sounds as if his supposed logical argument is that people who shoot recreationally occasionally have there guns stolen by people who use them to commit crimes. The same can be said for people who drive cars or own cutlery.

This seems to me to be a case of an anti-gun politician attempting to legitimize his bias with faulty logic.

[TPaine7]

5. If faulty logic is all you have. . .

and you lack integrity, there is no reason not to deploy it.

A significant fraction of the population is pathetically ignorant of guns, criminology, and the basics of logic. Others are brainwashed into anti gun phobia. Yet others see through the BS but play along because it meets their preferences.

In many countries, few understand the issues and have the intellect and interest to resist official stupidity.

[slackmaster]

8. Hey Mr. Miller, I deny it!

:hi:

[bossy22]

9. the problem is no one can see the difference between correlation and causation

just because when A increases B increases does not mean B increases because A increases.

i honestly believe if mayor Miller got his way he would be unpleasently surprised about how violent crime rates would not change

[iverglas]

11. always fun to read the views of the uninformed

Miller's not doing too well in Toronto ... as a columnist in the Star or the Globe was just noting in the weekend, the crumbling Gardner expressway is still ... crumbling; the harbourfront is still being blighted by condos; the TTC (public transit / subway system) is still rumbling downhill ...

Most of Toronto's problems, like the problems of big cities all over North America, are not things that can be addressed by mayors. Our political systems simply fail to recognize the urban nature of our societies, and treat cities like Toronto (home to about 1/6 of Canada's population) like minor outcroppings, when they are in fact the economic engines of the society and the loci of many of its problems. Federal politicians campaign on promises to give the cities the funding they need to restore infrastructure and the like, and then do nothing. Cities have to deal with the lion's share of our societies' social problems, and have only property taxes to do it with.

Miller called for a ban on handgun possession a while in the past. At the time, crimes and homicides were being committed all over Toronto with restricted weapons (mainly handguns) that had been stolen from "collectors" in the Toronto area, a couple of large hauls in particular. The streets would indeed have been a good deal safer if those collectors had made appropriate security arrangements for their collections -- or just not had them.

Then the Conservative government was elected (not by voters in the cities). Miller has been left to deal with a government that loves guns and hates cities, and holds the purse strings.

I happen to think Miller should be targeting collectors rather than sports shooters as the first priority. But collectors aren't the only firearms owners whose improperly stored firearms continue to be stolen on a regular basis.

Some day, maybe someone like "Canadian Olympic pistol shooter and downtown resident Avianna Chao" could consider making some constructive proposals of their own to address these problems.

Mine would be that shooting ranges continue to operate, and that users (people with permits to possess restricted weapons, including handguns, for sporting purposes) be required to store their firearms permanently at those facilities, except when transporting them to other facilities for practice or competition. Those are the only places they are allowed to use them now; what purpose is served by storing them off the premises? Why doesn't Ms. Chao suggest this?


Well, I don't recall reading about this one:

"After John O'Keefe's tragic killing, I don't think there's any defence for sports shooters any more," Miller said, referring to the man shot in January by a stray bullet. The gun was legally owned by the man charged in the killing.

Improper storage doesn't seem to be the only problem.

Oh no, that's right -- I'd read about the incident, just not the details:

http://www.insidetoronto.ca/News/Scarborough/article/48732

Miller brought the policy forward after the shooting death of John O'Keefe in January, as he walked past a strip club on Yonge Street {Toronto's main street}. Miller pointed out that the alleged firearm in the shooting was legally owned.

http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_23150.aspx

The mayor was likely referring to the recent murder of John O'Keefe, an innocent bystander who was killed on Yonge St. The gun used in the crime turned out to be legally registered and the man accused of pulling the trigger was a member of a gun club in Gormley.

A member of a gun club, with a permit to possess restricted weapons for sporting purposes (which provides that the firearms may be used only on approved club/range premises and may be transported only in accordance with a transport permit to and from those premises), carrying a handgun in a strip club. Quel law-abidin' gun owner he.

Let us not forget that Kimveer Gill, who killed one woman and seriously injured other people at a college in Montreal not long ago and would have killed more had police who happened to be present not killed him first, was a member of a gun club and in legal possession of the restricted firearms he had with him, a handgun and the rifle he used for the shooting. Someone who really wants a handgun to carry around on visits to strip clubs need only qualify for membership in a gun club in order to get legal access to the firearms s/he wants for whatever purpose s/he wants them for.

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/419373

Council backs mayor's bid to ban handguns
Councillors vote 39-3 to ask federal government for action, suggest minimum five-year sentence
Apr 29, 2008

... In Canada, some 84,000 legally registered, restricted weapons have been reported lost or stolen since 1974, Miller said. He wants to prevent those weapons from ending up in the hands of violent criminals.

"It's those guns that, if we prohibit the ownership of handguns, we can get off the streets. It's that simple. We can cut those sources off if we ensure handguns are no longer allowed to be owned in this country."

Council voted 39-3 (three councillors were absent) to request Parliament to make it illegal for anyone in Canada except police and military to sell, buy or own a handgun, with a minimum five-year sentence.

Councillor Mark Grimes (Ward 6, Etobicoke-Lakeshore) wanted a 10-year minimum sentence, while Councillor Raymond Cho (Ward 42, Scarborough-Rouge River) suggested anyone charged with gun offences not be eligible for bail. Those ideas will be considered by council's executive committee in June.

The federal Conservatives and their bible-thumpin' gun-lovin' Alberta constituency don't give a shit about people in Toronto getting killed by people using legally owned handguns -- whether in the hands of the legal owners or of the people who relieved the legal owners of them. There's your real culture war.

[Tejas]

24. Canada's version of the Patriot Act

"anyone charged with gun offences" - No chance of bail but a big chance of a 5-10yr sentence?



By the way, what are they planning to do about the 84,000 guns currently in possession of criminals? I can understand that some have been recovered, but what about the rest? What about the criminals, they have a plan for that too?

What a mess!

[iverglas]

26. what have I missed?

what are they planning to do about the 84,000 guns currently in possession of criminals?

Has a census been taken?


Recover them as and when, I'd imagine. And not worry about the yammering of people pretending that if utopia cannot be brought about on earth, things should just be allowed to go to hell in a handbasket.


Canada's version of the Patriot Act
"anyone charged with gun offences" - No chance of bail but a big chance of a 5-10yr sentence?

Sorry, you done lost me there. This was Toronto City Council's recommendation? And your question is?

In the meantime, background: an awful lot of the shooting in Toronto has been done by people out on bail (which generally means released on conditions; actual "bail" is a rarity here). The Conservatives have been messing around with reverse-onus laws in the last few months.

Our Supreme Court takes a dim view of mandatory minimum sentences in many cases, but it's one area where it will sometimes defer to Parliament as being a matter of public policy.


Canada does have a version of the Patriot Act. You might call it Patriot Act super-ultra-extra-lite maybe.

http://www.canlii.org/ca/as/2001/c41/whole.html
An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Official Secrets Act, the Canada Evidence Act, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) Act and other Acts, and to enact measures respecting the registration of charities, in order to combat terrorism

[beevul]

27. Question...

"reverse-onus laws"

What exactly is a "reverse-onus law"?

[iverglas]

28. burden of proof

At present (although some bill may have been passed to the contrary recently; it's hard to keep up with how these buggers are buggering my world up), the onus is on the Crown to show that a person should not be released pre-trial. The reversal of the onus would put the burden on the accused in certain cases to show that s/he should be released, basically.

It's a clear Charter violation:

11. Any person charged with an offence has the right
... e) not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause; ...

but that doesn't mean that the govt couldn't show it was justified under section 1:

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Governments don't have a lot of luck with section 1, generally speaking. But this could be an instance in which the courts would defer.




typo fixed

[beevul]

29. That would be a disturbing change.

"At present (although some bill may have been passed to the contrary recently; it's hard to keep up with how these buggers are buggering my world up), the onus is on the Crown to show that a person should not be released pre-trial. The reversal of the onus would put the burden on the accused in certain cases to show that s/he should be released, basically."

Yep. Disturbing indeed. If I were going to advocate the doing of anything where thats concerned - which I am not going to do, it would be to leave the burden on the crown...

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

31. Re: always fun to read the views of the uninformed

How ironic then that you go on to demonstrate your own profound ignorance (assuming, of course, that you're not simply being disingenuous.)

I happen to think Miller should be targeting collectors rather than sports shooters as the first priority. But collectors aren't the only firearms owners whose improperly stored firearms continue to be stolen on a regular basis.

Have you failed to note that only a small fraction of the firearms used to commit crimes in the Toronto area were stolen from legal owners in Canada?

Some day, maybe someone like "Canadian Olympic pistol shooter and downtown resident Avianna Chao" could consider making some constructive proposals of their own to address these problems.

Perhaps. But not offering a solution of her own does not (and should not) preclude her from speaking up regarding the stupidity of the action in question. Your comment above is a transparent logical fallacy. On the other hand, I think she (Chao) did suggest an alternative approach. Namely, cracking down on the criminals.

The federal Conservatives and their bible-thumpin' gun-lovin' Alberta constituency don't give a shit about people in Toronto getting killed by people using legally owned handguns

More likely, they do care about it (even though it represents a small fraction of the overall incidence of homicide by firearm), but simply aren't in favor of mindless, knee-jerk reactions that ultimately serve to benefit no one, and only punish those who have done no wrong.

A member of a gun club, with a permit to possess restricted weapons for sporting purposes (which provides that the firearms may be used only on approved club/range premises and may be transported only in accordance with a transport permit to and from those premises), carrying a handgun in a strip club. Quel law-abidin' gun owner he.

So, wait a minute....you're telling me that the possession of a handgun while in that strip club was already illegal? You mean that people who are prone to break the law (you know, like stealing, murdering, etc.) are also prone to ignore the laws that are supposed to prevent them from committing the more serious crimes? I wonder what the implications of that are for even more feel-good legislation.

But you're right. I'm sure that were possession of a handgun in a strip club *twice* as illegal this never would have happened.

[iverglas]

34. I have a true devotee!

All of your posts to date, devoted to moi! When cometh the marriage proposal??

Have we been properly introduced? Don't be coy now.


Have you failed to note that only a small fraction of the firearms used to commit crimes in the Toronto area were stolen from legal owners in Canada?

Have you offered some proof of the alleged facts that you assert that you would like me to "note"?
(edited: note, not notice)


But not offering a solution of her own does not (and should not) preclude her from speaking up regarding the stupidity of the action in question. Your comment above is a transparent logical fallacy.

Gosh. If only I had suggested that she was precluded from anything.

The logical fallacy we are seeing here, folks, involves taking up arms against things made of straw.


On the other hand, I think she (Chao) did suggest an alternative approach. Namely, cracking down on the criminals.

Aaaaah. "Alternative", as in "different from what's being done now", which would be not cracking down on criminals. Well there we go. Why did Miller and Toronto City Council and the provincial government not think of that?? Why did they not do things like set up the Guns and Gangs Task Force?? and set up the Toronto Drug Treatment Court??? And call for federal involvement in / funding for guns/gangs prosecutions????

Oh wait ...


More likely, they do care about it (even though it represents a small fraction of the overall incidence of homicide by firearm), but simply aren't in favor of mindless, knee-jerk reactions that ultimately serve to benefit no one, and only punish those who have done no wrong.

Gosh, maybe you can round up a few of those fellas for us and get them to come here and speak for themselves. I see no evidence of the truth of your assertion, myself (not to mention how it's about to break under the weight of those, er, mindless, knee-jerk characterizations of what you allege your western friends aren't in favour of ...). So I'll just wait quietly until something or someone that could help you out comes along.


You mean that people who are prone to break the law (you know, like stealing, murdering, etc.) are also prone to ignore the laws that are supposed to prevent them from committing the more serious crimes? I wonder what the implications of that are for even more feel-good legislation.

Gosh, I wouldn't know. I've never really had much of an emotional response to a statute or regulations, myself, but maybe some do. Maybe someone who wants to join you in your musings will come along and join you.
(edited because I figured out where the breadcrums for those "more serious crimes" were coming from.)

Me, I'll go for policies and measures likely to result in fewer such people getting their hands on firearms.

Can ya think of any? Hmm ...

I know! How about not allowing people to keep restricted firearms in their homes! Strikes me it will be kinda hard for those stealers and murderers to steal those restricted firearms .. if they aren't there ...

Things may look different through your spectacles, of course.

[TPaine7]

12. I wonder

If Mayor Miller has made any attempt to quantify the positive results of handgun use--defensive gun uses, crimes prevented and/or lives saved by legal gun owners--or whether he simply assumes it to be zero. In the US, most defensive gun uses are with handguns. (Of course, severely restricting possession by the law abiding skews the data as otherwise innocent gun possessors are then "criminals").

I also wonder if he actually believes that gun clubs relocated just outside the city's jurisdiction would make much difference.

[bossy22]

13. doesnt matter

you can't own a handgun for self defense in canada...unless you have a special permit which is very rarely issued

[TPaine7]

14. Even if you own the gun for sport

does Canadian law require you to die or suffer assault rather than to use it in self-defense?

Is anyone else as stupid as the District of Columbia?!

[krispos42]

15. I doubt there are any

At least, officially.

If you do actually scare off an intruder or street thug with your handgun, I doubt anybody will call the cops. If you're carrying the handgun, then you're doing it without a permit and I'm sure there is serious jail time involved.

And if you're doing it in your home, I bet the police are going to ask some very interesting questions about how you got your handgun in action so quickly from your child-proof, theft-proof, safe-storage area.

[TPaine7]

16. I was just getting ready to clean it?

You're right though. The deck is stacked against honest, defensive gun use.

[iverglas]

17. clueless

The only people you will find promenading around with pistols on their person in Canada -- other than the 27 or whatever it is who have permits for the purpose -- are criminals.

Really. Truly. There's a clue for you.

This has always been the case. Always. Unless you want to go back to the early 19th century or something.

Read something and learn. Handguns are restricted weapons here; they may be owned for two purposes:

- sports shoooting
- collecting

(other than the 27 people or whatever it is who have permits to carry them)

Evidently, some criminals / would-be criminals have sussed out the game, and have joined gun clubs in order to meet the requirements for permits to possess restricted weapons. Viz. the one carrying the handgun in the strip club. Viz. Kimveer Gill, although we don't really know what he was up to when he started; he was pretty much a loon, as compared to a mercenary-type criminal in it for the money, and was attracted to firearms and other weapons like many loons.

Storage requirements for restricted weapons are stricter than for other firearms. They may be transported only in accordance with the conditions of a permit to transport, only to and from the site of competitions and practice ranges.

So --

If Mayor Miller has made any attempt to quantify the positive results of handgun use

then he would have had the answer in damned short order. He might have assumed it to be zero, and he would have been pretty much right.


(Of course, severely restricting possession by the law abiding skews the data as otherwise innocent gun possessors are then "criminals").

Yeah. That would be true. If there were any such "otherwise innocent gun possessors" fending off homicidal maniacs on some regular basis.

There are no such "otherwise innocent gun possessors" in Canada. People who possess handguns without permits are criminals. By definition, and by nature.

It's kinda funny how nobody but criminals has handguns illegally here, and people who have handguns who do not have criminal intentions do not promenade around with them or have them lying around the house ready to use, and yet there aren't thousands and thousands more robberies and "home invasions" and carjackings and homicides and suchlike awful things happening in Canada than there are, the way one would expect to see among such a disarmed populace, isn't it just?

Kinda makes one doubt all those claims about all those crimes "prevented" by the gun toters south of the border ... as if there weren't enough reason to laugh at them already.


I also wonder if he actually believes that gun clubs relocated just outside the city's jurisdiction would make much difference.

I wonder whether it might have occurred to you that he doesn't have jurisdiction over anything outside the city's jurisdiction. Or whether you have the first clue about how many gun clubs there are in, say, Ontario, and where they are.

Not to mention the fact that the city has no jurisdiction over the issuance of firearms permits, the rules governing storage and transportation of firearms, and other criminal law matters like that. And the fact that the present right-wing federal government of Canada is using its right-wing approach to firearms law as a way to solidify its right-wing western base at the expense of urban central Canada and the safety and well-being of the people who live here, and there's nothing the mayor or anybody else in Toronto can do about that. They get to attend the funerals of schoolchildren shot with stolen handguns.

Had the federal government responded to the problems within its own jurisdiction, the cities wouldn't be left picking up the pieces and trying to think of ways of stemming the violence and killing.

Doesn't sound like you give too much of a crap about that, either. If you did, you wouldn't be yammering about the things that Toronto City Council tries to do, you'd be lambasting the right-wing assholes in Ottawa for not doing what they should be doing. Oh well.

[Tejas]

25. clue: he didn't mention "carrying" in his post n/t

[TPaine7]

30. Clueless indeed.

Iverglas totally missed the points. Even the one point she read correctly she botched in her attempt at refutation. Everything she says doesn't fit, and I just don't have the time or interest to take it apart.

It's not fun anymore. It never was challenging.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

32. Re: clueless (the author could not have chosen a more ironic subject line)

Evidently, some criminals / would-be criminals have sussed out the game, and have joined gun clubs in order to meet the requirements for permits to possess restricted weapons.

Yes, because if there's one thing criminals are concerned with it's complying with the law.

Now you only need to explain the overwhelming majority of firearms homicides in Toronto (and elsewhere in Canada) that are committed by those who have no connection with gun clubs, did not steal their guns from club members or collectors, etc.

Kinda makes one doubt all those claims about all those crimes "prevented" by the gun toters south of the border ...

Only if one is inclined to ignore all available documented fact on the matter. Reading your posts convinces me that's almost certainly true in your case.

[iverglas]

33. and that would be ...

Now you only need to explain the overwhelming majority of firearms homicides in Toronto (and elsewhere in Canada) that are committed by those who have no connection with gun clubs, did not steal their guns from club members or collectors, etc.

... why?

Why would I want to be explaining this, even if it weren't an unsubstantiated allegation by you?

If we were discussing one of the brotherhood's favourite topics -- drunk driving, and efforts to reduce the incidence of it -- would you be wanting me to explain all those traffic violations and crashes that have no connection with alcohol?

I guess so.


Only if one is inclined to ignore all available documented fact on the matter. Reading your posts convinces me that's almost certainly true in your case.

Yes, it's always nice to have a fresh view of all that "available" and yet uncited "documented fact". Why, one would think it's never been shown for the bumph that it is. And yet one would think that an obvious fan such as yourself would have seen me (and others) do that ... repeatedly ...

[iverglas]

18. Men don't wear pistols in Canada

and the Klondike is Canada.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lab6gyWsMXo

Now pack those pistols in your saddlebag or get back to US territory.



Oh - and basketball is Canada, too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzsbZ3oem3Y

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.