Worthy congressional presentation opposing government monopoly on force multipliers

For the record, this site is very much in favour of gun control.

Every freedom loving adult should own a gun, and be able to control it.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

17 Replies to “Worthy congressional presentation opposing government monopoly on force multipliers”

  1. The Founding Fathers believed that owning and carrying firearms was a moral duty of all free men who wanted to remain free.

    Having said that Gun Control is the ability to hit what you are shooting at.

  2. I own a rifle. An inheritance. The main reason I still have it is that, back in 1995, the Liberals said all guns had to be registered. I illegally (albeit secretly) refused. I still have it. I would have taken it to the town dump but for that. It grieves me that an aunt of mine surrendered her husband’s NWMP revolver (a Smith & Wesson I think) to the police after he died. What a keepsake that would have been.

    • Wow.

      A neighbor reports you have an illegal rifle and every government will send their armed police to your door.
      https://youtu.be/n1pJe_Tcdeg

      So why do contributers bomb this site from time to time with claims of illegal activities? Because, the onus is now on the site owner to report the illegal activities of its posters. It’s like providing ‘evidence’ for a spy agency to claim to a judge, “look at what this site attracts, see here, here, here, here, here and here. Now will you sign an investigative order, here.”

      Why do it? “I illegally (albeit secretly) refused” Then why did you not keep this albeit-secret to the grave?

      Luckily, you posted anonymously, and could simply be a troll using deception to advance an agenda or just plain disrespectful to this site, or simply stupid in the ranks of the counter-jihad that gets everyone killed by revealing secrets to the world.

      There is no discussion to be had around breaking the law. You had the vote. Creches and nurseries were the order of the day and not the freedom to carry a gun for self defence. The Sikhs still get to carry knives. Civilizations know their priorities. Move to a country that has freedom of speech and self-defence.

  3. You make a valid, albeit a poorly expressed point, but ownership of unregistered non-restricted (long guns) is no longer illegal, at least not outside La Belle Province.

    Another example: Possession of marijuana is still illegal, but as of this summer it will not be. Therefore, if you happen to be a marijuana smoker right now, you are committing an offence (subject to medical exemptions) but you’ll be at liberty to admit your prior offence a few months from now without penalty or threat of charges.

    Admitting an earlier offence, as I did, which is no longer an offence is not an offence.

    • OK johnhenry, you wrote you did something illegal with a gun, and now you say you did not.

      I will take your abrogation as the valid statement.

      Now, what will happen for you and your long gun, according to this?:

      “Quebec’s provincial long-gun registry is set to come into effect on Monday — the one-year anniversary of the Quebec City mosque shooting.

      Public Security Minister Martin Coiteux told reporters on Sunday gun owners will have one year to register their existing firearms through a “simple, quick, free” process that can be done online.

      The process requires them to provide a detailed description of the firearm as well as proof of identity.

      He called the registry “an important tool” that will both prevent and solve crimes by allowing authorities to trace a gun’s ownership.

      “It will help for suicide prevention, domestic violence prevention, the kind of operation by police forces when they know who is owning what (firearm), where, and how many,” he told reporters in Montreal.

      Coiteux said the Jan. 29 date was not chosen to coincide with the anniversary of the mosque shooting where six men died, adding he wants to treat the events separately.

      “I don’t want to mix the two issues. They’re not mixed in the mind of the government or in my mind, either,” he said, adding he’d chosen to speak about the new law a day early to allow Monday to be fully dedicated to commemorative events.

      The province began plans to establish the log after the Conservative government abolished the federal long-gun registry in 2012.

      A Quebec judge upheld the constitutionality of the registry last October, after a legal challenge sought to block it on the ground it infringed on federal jurisdiction.

      The National Firearms Association, in conjunction with a Quebec-based pro-gun lobby group, had argued in court the province was wading into federal territory when it passed its own long-gun registry law in June 2016.

      Opponents of the registry have also argued it will be unworkable and costly, as well as ineffective in stopping those who are intent on committing crimes.”
      https://www.google.co.uk/amp/montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebecs-gun-registry-law-effective-monday/amp

  4. Your first sentence is incorrect. That is not what I said. To have not registered a long gun in 1995 was illegal. That illegality was later excused by repealing legislation in 2012. What was once an offence became a non-offence. For 17 years (roughly) I might have been subject to a non-registration charge, but no longer am due to a change in the law

    Again, if you smoke marijuana right now, best not admit it until this summer, when it will no longer be illegal. Then you can blithely admit to doing so before July 1st.

    As for Quebec and its Public Security Minister, why should I care what the Quebec authorities say or do, having not set foot there for more than half a century?

    • Making dung into perfume
      The fashions we consume
      Change the Brand and all assume
      Their life becomes a boon.

    • So you see johnhenry abrogation is making a wrong into a right.
      Muhammad lusted after his adopted son’s wife, (haram), and Allah suddenly makes it all right, (halal). The nature of the beast did not change, the law did.

      This is the argument you presented. An illegal dope-head before, a good dope-head after.
      An illegal gun holder for 17 years before, an honest gun holder now. You did not have to change.

      Like Muhammad, did you also have no father to tell you this?

      • This is the difference between a Dom-Socialists and a Sub-Socialists:

        The National Socialists change the laws to revolve around them and they own it; the International Socialists clamor for others to make the laws for them, so to remain pure and blameless.

        The same bitch inside them but one trying to be macho and the other feminist to mask their knowledge of inferiority.

        Islam and Communism will take care of it for you.

        Laws to create the righteous, and never will.

        • The Boss bestows to the Muslim the cure of their inferiority of status need; The Comrade befriends the rejected Socialist who needs to belong; their children only have sexual-perversions left to escape into and live their fake lives until they come out to fruition, told that they are Superior new genders by their x-men.

          Always a devil on top of unresolved resentments.

          ‘For years sodomy was illegal, but now I can blithely declare I was good all along and boast of my pride and courageousness.’

          I’m happy that you are happy.

          Don’t make me pay to sustain you in your stasis.

          • The beaten infant seeks approval, the naughty-step child seeks belonging, the gender-rejected seek removal; these who right their wronging.

            • Cutting off body parts, Yucki.
              They take on the identity of the perpetrator.

              Masiochism becomes a pride. Victim, Submitter, Hater-of-Self where they reside in their intellect and not the hearts they vacated.

              They tear down where women, men and children live, respectively, to corrupt them with offerings of superiority to leave their homes too.

            • And you missed my mistranslation:

              The beaten infant seeks approval, the naughty-step child belong; the gender-reject peeks removal; these who right their wrong.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*