• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

Right to Bear Arms

Myso

Myso

Active Member
Orange Room Supporter
Lately, in Canada, they imposed a new nonsensical, mindless, name-based Gun Ban. It mostly fully banned guns (about 1500) that were already prohibited (you needed police approval to move them or take them to the gun range) such as the AR-15.

Mr. Trudeau and some idiotic woman kept talking about how it didn't make sense to own "assault rifles" and "military-style guns". This is a common misconception. Assault rifles are already fully banned from the 1970s. AR-15 stands for ArmaLite Rifle 15. It's a sporting rifle and not an "assault rifle" by any stretch of imagination. No soldier in the world would use one in service.



The main argument given was that "you didn't need an AR-15 to kill deer" and "no justificaiton to have 30 rounds". Even when Ar-15s used to kill deer are the unrestricted type, semi-automatic, limited to 5 rounds and already under heavy laws and regulations. Heck, not even ONE mass shooting in Canada was carried out with an Ar-15. Truth is, almost EVERY DAMN semi-automatic is pinned to 5 rounds (but very few exceptions, as in those that take handgun magazines and come with 10 rounds) . There's no such thing as an unrestricted Ar-15 with "30 rounds" that I could take out for hunting. Moreover, what's funnier is that they retracted this law from appyling to Native Americans. Well, because, it turns out Native Americans mostly use Ar-15s to hunt down deer. How lovely. A racial-based gun ban too that falls on its own logic.

I understand that many of you don't live in Canada. And so was just wondering, what are your thoughts on this subject as a whole and as it applies to your country of residence? Is it a rather dull mindset to keep saying "enough is enough" and banning weapons each time a catastrophy happens, even when the banned weapons were not used in the incident, and in many times smuggled AND illegal weapons were used instead?
 
Last edited:
  • Advertisement
  • Orangina

    Orangina

    Legendary Member
    I do not know a lot on the subject....and not sure that I know the regulations

    but I personally do not oppose gun ownership with wise regulations. There should be gun control rather than a ban on the ownership of private gun.

    As I am sure that the american gun culture is different than the Canadian gun culture
     
    Orangina

    Orangina

    Legendary Member
    Events like the following always raise questions concerning the freedom of bearing guns

    the sandy hook school massacre in Connecticut for example

     
    Manifesto

    Manifesto

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    So what if it's a sporting rifle? Hunting is a barbaric and brutal practice that has no place in a civilized society like Canada and should be banned too.

    What do I think? I think you're an idiot with a strange fetish for violence and guns who only opened this thread to go on a pro-gun ownership rant.

    Maybe Isabella was right about you guys after all...zalamneha.
     
    Orangina

    Orangina

    Legendary Member
    So what if it's a sporting rifle? Hunting is a barbaric and brutal practice that has no place in a civilized society like Canada and should be banned too.

    What do I think? I think you're an idiot with a strange fetish for violence and guns who only opened this thread to go on a pro-gun ownership rant.

    Maybe Isabella was right about you guys after all...zalamneha.
    you opened a new subject here about hunting....

    hunting is a controversial issue actually

    Some people hunt for the fun of it....by killing wild animals that are often endangered...I personally don't approve this kind of hunting

    but hunting animals for food is a whole different story.....
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    Lately, in Canada, they imposed a new nonsensical, mindless, name-based Gun Ban. It mostly fully banned guns (about 1500) that were already prohibited (you needed police approval to move them or take them to the gun range) such as the AR-15.

    Mr. Trudeau and some idiotic woman kept talking about how it didn't make sense to own "assault rifles" and "military-style guns". This is a common misconception. Assault rifles are already fully banned from the 1970s. AR-15 stands for ArmaLite Rifle 15. It's a sporting rifle and not an "assault rifle" by any stretch of imagination. No soldier in the world would use one in service.



    The main argument given was that "you didn't need an AR-15 to kill deer" and "no justificaiton to have 30 rounds". Even when Ar-15s used to kill deer are the unrestricted type, semi-automatic, limited to 5 rounds and already under heavy laws and regulations. Heck, not even ONE mass shooting in Canada was carried out with an Ar-15. Truth is, almost EVERY DAMN semi-automatic is pinned to 5 rounds (but very few exceptions, as in those that take handgun magazines and come with 10 rounds) . There's no such thing as an unrestricted Ar-15 with "30 rounds" that I could take out for hunting. Moreover, what's funnier is that they retracted this law from appyling to Native Americans. Well, because, it turns out Native Americans mostly use Ar-15s to hunt down deer. How lovely. A racial-based gun ban too that falls on its own logic.

    I understand that many of you don't live in Canada. And so was just wondering, what are your thoughts on this subject as a whole and as it applies to your country of residence? Is it a rather dull mindset to keep saying "enough is enough" and banning weapons each time a catastrophy happens, even when the banned weapons were not used in the incident, and in many times smuggled AND illegal weapons were used instead?
    In sane countries with no threats of foreign invasion, arms should only be held by the state and its agencies. People should not bear arms under any guise of freedom or defense.
     
    Orangina

    Orangina

    Legendary Member
    In sane countries with no threats of foreign invasion, arms should only be held by the state and its agencies. People should not bear arms under any guise of freedom or defense.
    you know in the United states they believe that holding guns is necessary to protect their rights and democratic values.

    They believe it is necessary in order to keep safe their freedom of speech and free assembly.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    you know in the United states they believe that holding guns is necessary to protect their rights and democratic values.

    They believe it is necessary in order to keep safe their freedom of speech and free assembly.
    In other words, they hold arms on standby to threaten the government.
     
    Orangina

    Orangina

    Legendary Member
    In other words, they hold arms on standby to threaten the government.
    Someone once said

    "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

    I guess the right to hold guns is a way to intimidate the government , and to make the country a better place by making the government officials live in constant fear of gun violence.

    However, In his book "Do Guns Make Us Free?: Democracy and the Armed Society" Firmin DeBrabander discuss how holding guns in America make people less free.
     
    NewLeb

    NewLeb

    Member
    Canada is taking one more step towards Stalinist authoritarianism.

    Almost every household in Lebanon owns a gun, and you don’t hear about monthly massacres.
     
    Orangina

    Orangina

    Legendary Member
    Canada is taking one more step towards Stalinist authoritarianism.

    Almost every household in Lebanon owns a gun, and you don’t hear about monthly massacres.
    what do you think about what happened in baakline like 2 weeks ago?
     
    NewLeb

    NewLeb

    Member
    what do you think about what happened in baakline like 2 weeks ago?
    I don’t blame the firearm. I blame the loser male with low self-esteem issues who can’t even keep his girl from having sex with the Syrian plumber.

    The problem is not guns. There’s a lot of angry and lost males walking around these days...and that’s not good for anybody (guns or no guns)

    Guns don’t kill- people do!
     
    loubnaniTO

    loubnaniTO

    Legendary Member
    Staff member
    Super Penguin
    Someone once said

    "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

    I guess the right to hold guns is a way to intimidate the government , and to make the country a better place by making the government officials live in constant fear of gun violence.

    However, In his book "Do Guns Make Us Free?: Democracy and the Armed Society" Firmin DeBrabander discuss how holding guns in America make people less free.
    iN a democratic society there is a better way to bring down a government , it’s called elections.
     
    loubnaniTO

    loubnaniTO

    Legendary Member
    Staff member
    Super Penguin
    Guns don’t kill- people do!
    This is the lamest line I’ve ever heard.
    so if we walk amongst stupid people, it’s ok to have dangerous arms available to them as long as we blame them and not the guns???

    so let’s legalize chemical weapons and nuclear weapons around the globe, and if one stupid regime uses them, we can just blame the regime, because:
    It’s not chemical weapons that kill people , it’s stupid reckless regimes that kill people.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    Someone once said

    "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

    I guess the right to hold guns is a way to intimidate the government , and to make the country a better place by making the government officials live in constant fear of gun violence.

    However, In his book "Do Guns Make Us Free?: Democracy and the Armed Society" Firmin DeBrabander discuss how holding guns in America make people less free.
    Of course people would feel less safe. When there is government tyranny, you know you should only be scared of government or law enforcement agents. And they wear uniforms. But when everyone is armed, you wont know from whom to feel scared. You are scared of everyone. And you wont know who's mentally ill and armed and when someone could open fire in a public place.
     
    NewLeb

    NewLeb

    Member
    This is the lamest line I’ve ever heard.
    so if we walk amongst stupid people, it’s ok to have dangerous arms available to them as long as we blame them and not the guns???

    so let’s legalize chemical weapons and nuclear weapons around the globe, and if one stupid regime uses them, we can just blame the regime, because:
    It’s not chemical weapons that kill people , it’s stupid reckless regimes that kill people.
    A stupid reckless regime is going to kill people with or without chemical weapons (see ASSad regime use of barrel bombs).

    Banning guns is not going to fix the core problem.
     
    CitizenOfTheRepublic

    CitizenOfTheRepublic

    Legendary Member
    This is the lamest line I’ve ever heard.
    so if we walk amongst stupid people, it’s ok to have dangerous arms available to them as long as we blame them and not the guns???

    so let’s legalize chemical weapons and nuclear weapons around the globe, and if one stupid regime uses them, we can just blame the regime, because:
    It’s not chemical weapons that kill people , it’s stupid reckless regimes that kill people.
    tsk tsk tsk! Canada should have learned from the US, I mean who else to follow but the FIRST nation with the most mass shooting and gun death in the world (Eat that Sudan!!!)
    Gun control is for wusses, guns don’t kill people, people do. So forget about guns the people are the problem. You think making it harder for people to kill is the goal? Pfffffffft primitive thinking!!! Ban cars while your at it!!! Listen, all you should have offered is hope and prayers and called it a day. Now that sir is called efficient governance!!!
     
    proIsrael-nonIsraeli

    proIsrael-nonIsraeli

    Legendary Member
    This is the lamest line I’ve ever heard.
    so if we walk amongst stupid people, it’s ok to have dangerous arms available to them as long as we blame them and not the guns???

    so let’s legalize chemical weapons and nuclear weapons around the globe, and if one stupid regime uses them, we can just blame the regime, because:
    It’s not chemical weapons that kill people , it’s stupid reckless regimes that kill people.
    "so if we walk among stupid people, it’s ok to have dangerous arms available to them as long as we blame them and not the guns?"
    We are not walking among stupid people.
    We in USA have enough laws to prevent firearms getting into wrong hands.
    However, we fail to enforce those laws properly and ironically anti-gun-ers are as much to be blamed for that as pro-gun-ers if not more.

    "so let’s legalize chemical weapons and nuclear weapons around the globe"
    First, neither type is illegal, states can have them and you will not do a damn thing about it.
    Second, chemical and nuclear weapons are hardly valuable argument unless you want to BS the issue rather than solve it.

    PS. Only dummy would blame a gun for firing instead of blaming a person - you might as well blame a fork and knife for you getting fat.
     
    Steven Gerrard

    Steven Gerrard

    Member
    "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
    If you live in an authoritarian Machiavellian country ok it would make sense.

    other than that I call it paranoia.

    I agree with @AtheistForJesus
     
    Steven Gerrard

    Steven Gerrard

    Member
    "so if we walk among stupid people, it’s ok to have dangerous arms available to them as long as we blame them and not the guns?"
    We are not walking among stupid people.
    We in USA have enough laws to prevent firearms getting into wrong hands.
    However, we fail to enforce those laws properly and ironically anti-gun-ers are as much to be blamed for that as pro-gun-ers if not more.

    "so let’s legalize chemical weapons and nuclear weapons around the globe"
    First, neither type is illegal, states can have them and you will not do a damn thing about it.
    Second, chemical and nuclear weapons are hardly valuable argument unless you want to BS the issue rather than solve it.

    PS. Only dummy would blame a gun for firing instead of blaming a person - you might as well blame a fork and knife for you getting fat.
     
    Top