Reality Check: Liberal handgun ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ani_Ibi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, you are downplaying the significant achievement the Canadians made. No question about it.
Click to expand...
As for accepting what you know to be incorrect: you seriously overstate your case. We have shown that your notion of English military supremacy is incorrect, yet you persist.
Click to expand...
Ultimately, I remind you that this is not a thread on WWII. If you want to discuss English military supremacy then please do so ā€“ but on a separate thread.
Click to expand...
PS: The days of the British Empire are over.
Click to expand...
PPS: For a clear insight into the actual behavior of gun-toting criminals, please read the statement made by Governor Schwartzneggar on not commuting Tookie Williamsā€™s death sentence: STATEMENT OF DECISION (corrected version) Request for Clemency by Stanley Williams
Click to expand...
I am not downplaying the acheivement of the Canadians, now if you refuse to let this go, then the thread will be closed. I have tried to get past this topic ā€¦

P.S. I know the days of the british empire are over, and I do not evem like imperialism
 
But maybe, although everyone knows that British Naval supremacy has won this one, we should get back to the guns topicā€¦
 
40.png
Achatius:
I donā€™t think that anyone can take Governor Schwarznegger seriously.
Click to expand...
Or Tony Blair for that matter šŸ˜‰
 
40.png
Libero:
We invented the Dreadnought which inspired and won the Naval Race, it also revolutionised armed naval craft, our navy has been the most powerful throughtout history, the French ofcourse are notably powerful, we have far more than rough sea on our side.
Click to expand...
The question was this: if you were so confident of your military supremacy what was the need for us to come to your assistance? Were you in fact crying wolf?

Your reply about having far more than rough sea on your side only digs you deeper into the notion that you didnā€™t need any help from us and that you were crying wolf.

Now we both know full well that it was not wolf you were crying.
40.png
Libero:
Tell me, where the Canadians and the Americans when war was declared, when Poland was attacked, and when France surrendered? In all reality the Canadians decided to join the war at a late stage, Hitler had suffered signifcant defeats, and was waiting to be destroyed, with the Americans, Canadians, French and British, and all others, a pre emptive strike was launched and Hitler was ā€œfinished offā€ as I have put it.
Click to expand...
If the English military was sufficient for the job then you didnā€™t need us to finish Hitler off. Which then puts the question once again: were you crying wolf?
40.png
Libero:
I am not downplaying the significant acheivement the Canadians made, but I am not going to accept what I know to be incorrect.
Click to expand...
You are downplaying the significant achievement the Canadians made. It seems to me that you are not going to accept what you know to be correct.

This thread is not a pretext for promoting the idea of English military supremacy. It is on the Liberal Partyā€™s desire to ban handguns in Canada. If you wish to continue, please find a news link and start a separate thread.
 
Ani Ibi:
So, in your interpretation, what is the Vatican saying about private citizens owning small arms for self-defence?
Click to expand...
In my interpretation, the Vatican is saying that private citizens should be allowed to own small arms to protect their family - that it is a right and possibly a ā€œserious dutyā€ to do so. I donā€™t believe the Vatican is saying you should own a gun or must own a gun.

However, an argument like Mikeā€™s could be made on the necessity of owning them. While I donā€™t agree, it would be similar to the capital punishment debate - allowed versus necessary. It is a fair argument to make.
 
40.png
Libero:
I am not downplaying the acheivement of the Canadians
Click to expand...
You clearly are.
40.png
Libero:
now if you refuse to let this go, then the thread will be closed.
Click to expand...
You are the one who refuses to let it go. I have asked you and others more than a few times to stay on topic.
40.png
Libero:
I have tried to get past this topic ā€¦
Click to expand...
You have made no effort whatsoever to get past this topic. A gesture of getting past this topic would like one of the following two options:
  1. start a thread on what you want to discuss, or
  2. drop it altogether.
40.png
Libero:
P.S. I know the days of the british empire are over, and I do not evem like imperialism
Click to expand...
We can agree on this then.
 
Ani, I have stated that the Navy was incredibly strong. I have never claimed that our RAF or our army were still intact, and yes, I agree they suffered considerable losses, but I do not accpet that you bailed Britain out, they could still have defended themselves is what I said, and we also did have Northern Ireland, and many Irish volunteers helping us.

I am not downplaying the importance of the Canadian forces, where in stating that Britain could defend itself have I implied that, infact I have gone out of my way to ensure that I do not downplay the Canadian contribution, I believe you have taken this so personally that you are misinterpretting my posts.

If this topic is mentioned again, I will simply ignore it

P.S. Britain was not crying wolf.
 
Ani,

In post No 198 I replied to you earlier. Thus my attempt to get beyond the topic.
 
40.png
Libero:
Is this not pesimistic thinking?
Click to expand...
Is it?
40.png
Libero:
How did the song go again? ā€œAlways look on the bright side of lifeā€¦ā€ šŸ™‚
Click to expand...
I take it that if you are reduced to singing songs and asking rhetorical questions which do not lead to clarification then you have conceded the argument.
40.png
Libero:
Appeasment is not guarenteed to go wrong
Click to expand...
Why not?
40.png
Libero:
but is a gun really a solution?
Click to expand...
Asked and answered.
40.png
Libero:
It is infact a way to combat the issue, not to address the issue
Click to expand...
95% of gun confrontations are situations in which no shots are fired. No shots. Zero shots. Therefore the issue is not combatted but addressed.
40.png
Libero:
and whilst you may argue that there is no real way to address the problem
Click to expand...
,

I have not argued this. I take it that if you are reduced to putting words in my mouth, then you have conceded the argument.
40.png
Libero:
I am sure that the police, with some of their best officers, and the community could make a way.
Click to expand...
The police can apprehend a criminal after a crime has been committed. The purpose of private citizens carrying hand guns is to prevent the crime from being committed in the first place.

The police can also do what is called community policing which is part of the solution.

Community prevention is also part of the solution.
40.png
Libero:
Sorry if you think it is a personal attack, it is not meant to be, šŸ™‚ however there is some truth behind it, to me, the typee of people that are talked about as performing these crimes seem to be filled with such hate and no other aim that they are unimaginable.
Click to expand...
The use of the word ā€˜howeverā€™ and your repetition of the accusation that your opposition is hate-filled negates your apology. I take it that if you are reduced to making personal attacks that you have conceded the argument.
40.png
Libero:
I dont know, but it wont take 30 seconds.
Click to expand...
10 minutes. 30 seconds. How are you coming up with these numbers?
 
40.png
Achatius:
anywho I think guns should be banned for domestic useā€¦
Click to expand...
Try telling that to the criminals and until you get guns out of the hands of the bad guys, it isnā€™t a good idea to take guns out of the hands of the good guys because it will leave the innocent without a means to defend themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top