Another "Good Guy" with a gun murders family and friends in Phoenix Home

[buddhallah_the_christ]

If there wasn't a gun there odds are it would have resulted in only a fist fight, before everyone cooled off. Guns and anger are a deadly combination

 

[Flash]

[

Again, gun culture. We have it; most of the world does not. And with the immature rants of little boys who never grew out of playing GI Joe running around that won't change any time soon.

Everybody has criminals.

I don't know what you mean by "gun culture".

I have over 50 firearms and I use them all in a legal manner. Some Obama voting shithead in ghetto Chicago probably only has one stolen cheap handgun and he uses it for a crime.

It a culture of crime, not a gun culture.

"Gun culture" means a value system where never-grew-up GI Joe boys run around posting threads about the "right to bear arms" as if it's a baby's pacifier. "Gun culture" means the hairtrigger society where any argument can be settled by brute force. "Gun culture" means an environment where you can't flip through a TV channel lineup without seeing 18 people shot in two minutes. "Gun culture" means the idea of firearms being marketed to children as soon as they can walk, and some of them never grow up. "Gun culture" means an endless diarrhea of video games (successor to comic books) based on hunting down a human subspecies and blowing them away in fantasy. "Gun culture" means school students, moviegoers, church congregations, anyone anywhere, put at risk of a sniper acting out that fantasy, after which we note it's nothing unusual.

"Gun culture" is a value system. One where blowing things away is more important than Life. And it's by definition fucked up.

When your value system is blowing things away, then that value will be shared among criminals and cops. There's no way it can't be.

I shoot guns for recreational reasons. Legal and no threat to anybody. You being a Liberal don't understand the concept of freedom, don't understand the Bill of Rights and you haven't learned to mind your own business.

The question that you failed to answer is why should I have constitutionally protected firearms taken away from me because some shithead ghetto asshole in Chicago uses a cheap stolen handgun to shoot someone else over a bad crack deal?

 

[SwimExpert]

What the **** do you think the function of a gun is? To play music? To make an ice cream sandwich?

The function of a gun is to save the life of the user.....and in the United States that typically means that in 54% of times a gun is used to stop or prevent a violent criminal attack and save lives, the gun isn't even fired....

Again, that's absolute bullshit. A gun fires a projectile at high speed. It's function is to penetrate. Penetration has nothing to do with "defense" -- it's offense. Defense involves reaction to something already present. You're entitled to your opinion but not to your own dictionary.

And again, undocumented ipse dixit stats for the sake of composition fallacies make absolutely no point.

The purpose of a gun is to save the life of the user...how it functions is irrelevant to the fact that it's purpose is to save a life.......and in many cases it doesn't even need to be fired to fulfill that purpose....

Jesus Christ, enough with the propaganda bullshit, will ya? You're a ******* idiot. Every time you talk, you are saying less than nothing. Your words are like negative numbers....they create a positive in the opposite direction. Those of us who are fiercely supportive of gun rights do not need your stupidity to argue our case. Because you're such a ******* retard, you're really just making their case easier.

A firearm is a tool, much like a match. The purpose of a match is to start fires. Sure, the reason the owner might want to start a fire might be to get a campfire roaring and cook the evening's dinner. The purpose of a gun is to destroy things. The owner's interest in destruction might be self defense. But the purpose of the gun is destruction.

Saying that the purpose of a gun is to save the owner's life is like saying that a match is a nutritional aide.

Well, ******* moron.....since you just come on here to attack me and not actually debate the anti gunners **** you again....stupid ****....how about doing some leg work in these debates instead of being like most clueless assholes and not adding to the debate...but simply criticizing me.....moron, twit and **** head....

Have a nice day...

Shutting down your stupid bullshit is the single most worthy contribution anyone could make to this thread at this point.

 

[2aguy]

A guns purpose is to preserve the life of the user....how it achieves that is secondary to it's actual purpose....and in the context of actual self defense, it can achieve that purpose often without firing a shot........

In fact.....guns on the hips of police preserve order even though 99% of them will never leave their holsters.......dittos the U.S. military.........of all the service members, a gun does not need to be fired to achieve the preservation of the life of it's user........

When I went to visit Ireland I noticed the police do not carry guns. During that trip I read an article in a Limerick paper noting with alarm that a murder had been committed, and it was already the 34th murder that year.

For the entire country. And this was in August. Some of our cities, let alone the entire country, can hit that mark in a month.

Again, cultural contrast. Ireland is no stranger to violence but it isn't swimming in gun fetishism.

Again....criminal culture....very different in Ireland vs. detroit, chicago, New York.......

Again, gun culture. We have it; most of the world does not. And with the immature rants of little boys who never grew out of playing GI Joe running around that won't change any time soon.


Everybody has criminals.

and yet the two cities you post about are only 1 mile apart.... if the Canadians criminals wanted to use guns they would get guns very easily....you also know that there is a strong gun culture all over the U.S., not just in democrat controlled killing fields....and in those places with "gun culture" you don't have gun owners shooting each other....

There are over 320 million guns in private hands, and some put gun owners, lawful gun owners at over 90 million.and for sure there are over 11.1 million people who carry guns legally for protection....

and in all that gun culture......only 8-9,000 criminals use guns to murder people.....

so again, it isn't guns, and it isn't gun culture, it is the criminal culture in very specific places in the United States.....most of the deadliest run by democrats...who spend tax money on everything but enough police officers to keep all the people safe, rather than just the rich democrat parts of their cities..

 

[2aguy]

The function of a gun is to save the life of the user.....and in the United States that typically means that in 54% of times a gun is used to stop or prevent a violent criminal attack and save lives, the gun isn't even fired....

Again, that's absolute bullshit. A gun fires a projectile at high speed. It's function is to penetrate. Penetration has nothing to do with "defense" -- it's offense. Defense involves reaction to something already present. You're entitled to your opinion but not to your own dictionary.

And again, undocumented ipse dixit stats for the sake of composition fallacies make absolutely no point.

The purpose of a gun is to save the life of the user...how it functions is irrelevant to the fact that it's purpose is to save a life.......and in many cases it doesn't even need to be fired to fulfill that purpose....

Jesus Christ, enough with the propaganda bullshit, will ya? You're a ******* idiot. Every time you talk, you are saying less than nothing. Your words are like negative numbers....they create a positive in the opposite direction. Those of us who are fiercely supportive of gun rights do not need your stupidity to argue our case. Because you're such a ******* retard, you're really just making their case easier.

A firearm is a tool, much like a match. The purpose of a match is to start fires. Sure, the reason the owner might want to start a fire might be to get a campfire roaring and cook the evening's dinner. The purpose of a gun is to destroy things. The owner's interest in destruction might be self defense. But the purpose of the gun is destruction.

Saying that the purpose of a gun is to save the owner's life is like saying that a match is a nutritional aide.

Well, ******* moron.....since you just come on here to attack me and not actually debate the anti gunners **** you again....stupid ****....how about doing some leg work in these debates instead of being like most clueless assholes and not adding to the debate...but simply criticizing me.....moron, twit and **** head....

Have a nice day...

Shutting down your stupid bullshit is the single most worthy contribution anyone could make to this thread at this point.

Oh..you are back.....**** you asshole...with all due respect.....if you don't want to productively contribute to the debate go **** yourself.......

 

[2aguy]

[

Again, gun culture. We have it; most of the world does not. And with the immature rants of little boys who never grew out of playing GI Joe running around that won't change any time soon.

Everybody has criminals.

I don't know what you mean by "gun culture".

I have over 50 firearms and I use them all in a legal manner. Some Obama voting shithead in ghetto Chicago probably only has one stolen cheap handgun and he uses it for a crime.

It a culture of crime, not a gun culture.

"Gun culture" means a value system where never-grew-up GI Joe boys run around posting threads about the "right to bear arms" as if it's a baby's pacifier. "Gun culture" means the hairtrigger society where any argument can be settled by brute force. "Gun culture" means an environment where you can't flip through a TV channel lineup without seeing 18 people shot in two minutes. "Gun culture" means the idea of firearms being marketed to children as soon as they can walk, and some of them never grow up. "Gun culture" means an endless diarrhea of video games (successor to comic books) based on hunting down a human subspecies and blowing them away in fantasy. "Gun culture" means school students, moviegoers, church congregations, anyone anywhere, put at risk of a sniper acting out that fantasy, after which we note it's nothing unusual.

"Gun culture" is a value system. One where blowing things away is more important than Life. And it's by definition fucked up.

When your value system is blowing things away, then that value will be shared among criminals and cops. There's no way it can't be.

You just described the culture created by democrats in the inner cities they control......

 

[2aguy]

There's nothing "Democrat" about that post

There is the "democrat" thing that Detroit has been run by democrats for decades......

More abject horseshit. ALL cities are run by Democrats, and guess what -- they don't get to expound on political philosophies in City Hall. They get to decide which day the trash is picked up and when the snowplows run. Your desperate deflection attempt is absurd.

You are a moron......democrats demonize business owners and hate them and see them as just sources of money...so they tax them, fine them and assess fees to the point where only large companies can exist in their cities, meaning fewer jobs......the democrats don't care about educating children...especially minority children because of they did then education rates in these inner cities would be greater than 50 % and the children who graduated could actually read and do math...instead, the democrats support their allies in the education wing of the democrat party...the teachers unions....who fight every educational reform there is....but contribute vast sums of money to their allies in the political wing of the democrat party.....

then you have the police...hated by the democrats trapped in democrat controlled inner cities...why....because the police are not there to help keep them safe, but to keep their generational poverty and crime from spilling over into the rich democrat areas of these cities....and the rich democrats....don't care about those poor people...except for Election Day.....so instead of providing enough police to keep them safe..they spend tax money on every thing except for the police...as Chicago and Milwaukee have done...and then they under staff the police, under fund the police, and finally undermine the police....thank you mayor deblasio...

and the democrat policies revealed here create the soldiers for gangs and drug cartels, and all the independent, violent criminals who will then use guns for crime and murder....

So yes you stupid fool.....democrat governing policies do effect a city....moron...

 

[2aguy]

If there wasn't a gun there odds are it would have resulted in only a fist fight, before everyone cooled off. Guns and anger are a deadly combination

Cars and alcohol are worse....

Car accidents each year...over 3 million..

Gun accidents...17,000

Car deaths...over 33,000

Accidental gun deaths....6-700

 

[Pogo]

There's nothing "Democrat" about that post

There is the "democrat" thing that Detroit has been run by democrats for decades......

More abject horseshit. ALL cities are run by Democrats, and guess what -- they don't get to expound on political philosophies in City Hall. They get to decide which day the trash is picked up and when the snowplows run. Your desperate deflection attempt is absurd.

You are a moron......democrats demonize business owners and hate them and see them as just sources of money...so they tax them, fine them and assess fees to the point where only large companies can exist in their cities, meaning fewer jobs......the democrats don't care about educating children...especially minority children because of they did then education rates in these inner cities would be greater than 50 % and the children who graduated could actually read and do math...instead, the democrats support their allies in the education wing of the democrat party...the teachers unions....who fight every educational reform there is....but contribute vast sums of money to their allies in the political wing of the democrat party.....

then you have the police...hated by the democrats trapped in democrat controlled inner cities...why....because the police are not there to help keep them safe, but to keep their generational poverty and crime from spilling over into the rich democrat areas of these cities....and the rich democrats....don't care about those poor people...except for Election Day.....so instead of providing enough police to keep them safe..they spend tax money on every thing except for the police...as Chicago and Milwaukee have done...and then they under staff the police, under fund the police, and finally undermine the police....thank you mayor deblasio...

and the democrat policies revealed here create the soldiers for gangs and drug cartels, and all the independent, violent criminals who will then use guns for crime and murder....

So yes you stupid fool.....democrat governing policies do effect a city....moron...

Complete crock of horseshit. Political philosophies are simply irrelevant at a local level. Your desperate fantasy scenaria, all undocumented ipse dixit, is just more pathetic lunging to put points up on a political scoreboard in the juvenile Eliminationism football game you think all of this is. The simple fact is all cities see more crime and more violence. It's the price of squeezing too many people into too small a space. That has nothing to do with ******* "Democrats", ******* "Republicans", ******* "Whigs", ******* "Tories" or ******* "Know Nothings". It has to do with social structures.

And on a national level, part of that social structure, to bring this errant bullshit back to topic, is the firearm fetish. We get it from our history. Canada, having a different history, does not. That's the difference between two cities a mile apart, with two different histories. Ain't got nothing to do with how Windsor rolled out the snowplows one day and Detroit didn't because "yow! There are Democrats!". Grow the **** up.

 

[BullKurtz]

Canuckistan was founded by cowards running from the American revolution..the tory losers have always been content to be ruled by royalty....hell, they can't even control the frogs in Quebec. But the secret to the canucks low crime rate and attendant lower need for firearms is their lack of lawless blacks rampaging through their society. America before integration was the same way....nobody locked their doors or cars. Kids played unattended until dark, folks could walk the streets and parks at night without fear. Canuckistan saw what happened to the US and wants no part of it.

 

[Pogo]

Canuckistan was founded by cowards running from the American revolution..the torie losers have always been content to be ruled by royalty....hell, they can't even control the frogs in Quebec. But the secret to the canucks low crime rate and attendant lower need for firearms is their lack of lawless blacks rampaging through their society. American before integration was the same way....nobody locked their doors or cars. Kids played unattended until dark, folks could walk the streets and parks at night without fear. Canuckistan saw what happened to the US and wants no part of it.

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". I don't believe Harris and Klebold, Charles Whitman, Adam Lanza, Wade Michael Page, Jim David Adkisson, James vonBrunn, James Holmes, Seung Hui-Cho, Craig Hicks, George Hennard, James Huberty, Michael McLendon, Robert Hawkins, Scott Evans Dekraai, Terry Ratzman, Eliot Rodger, Jared Loughner, George Sodini, Jerad and Amanda Miller or Charles Roberts were black but yanno what --- James Pough was. So you run with that.

Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

 

[BullKurtz]

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

Another moronic attempt at diversion....who do you think "founded" them, moron? Britain retained control of them as a colony.....the queen is still on their currency. They have the same philosophy as Brits about firearms....which means unlike you prog creeps, is for hunting game, not murdering intruders.

 

[Flash]

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

If they don't have a gun culture then why did the people of Canada tell the stupid government to shove it where the sun don't shine when the government tried to impose registration of firearms? That was one of the best examples of mass civil disobedience in history.

 

[Pogo]

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

If they don't have a gun culture then why did the people of Canada tell the stupid government to shove it where the sun don't shine when the government tried to impose registration of firearms? That was one of the best examples of mass civil disobedience in history.

What the **** does that have to do with gun culture?
That's a privacy issue. Canada's going through some PATRIOT Act - like controversy right now, and privacy versus government power is a front and center issue. That ain't a gun fetish.

And btw it was not "the people" who put down the effort (which was in Québec, not the entire country) but the Canadian Supreme Court. And it wasn't "imposing registration of firearms" -- the issue was whether or not the province could destroy its records that it already had. Nice try but way the **** off in terms of accuracy.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If there wasn't a gun there odds are it would have resulted in only a fist fight, before everyone cooled off. Guns and anger are a deadly combination

And so we need to restrict the rights of the people in general because sommeone might get angry?

 

[Pogo]

If there wasn't a gun there odds are it would have resulted in only a fist fight, before everyone cooled off. Guns and anger are a deadly combination

And so we need to restrict the rights of the people in general because sommeone might get angry?

Where does the post say that?
Do you work in the circus? Because that's quite a leap.

Or maybe you're just too narrowminded to think outside the box to which you've confined yourself.

 

[Flash]

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

If they don't have a gun culture then why did the people of Canada tell the stupid government to shove it where the sun don't shine when the government tried to impose registration of firearms? That was one of the best examples of mass civil disobedience in history.

What the **** does that have to do with gun culture?
That's a privacy issue. Canada's going through some PATRIOT Act - like controversy right now, and privacy versus government power is a front and center issue. That ain't a gun fetish.

And btw it was not "the people" who put down the effort (which was in Québec, not the entire country) but the Canadian Supreme Court. And it wasn't "imposing registration of firearms" -- the issue was whether or not the province could destroy its records that it already had. Nice try but way the **** off in terms of accuracy.

You are confused. The portion of the Canadian Firearms Act that required registration was passed in 1993, long before 911 and the Patriot Act in the US. Don't make things up. It only makes you look like a fool when you post.

Firearm confiscation/registration etc is always presented as being for public safety someway or another. Thank goodness the Canadians didn't let their filthy ass government take away their firearms under the bogus guise of anti terrorism or anything else.

The stupid government passed the law but the Canadians said "hell no we ain't gonna do it". They didn't want their government maintaining a register on gun owners. Good for them.

If the Canadians didn't have a gun culture similar to the US then they wouldn't have given a crap about registering their firearms. Europeans don't care. Americans, New Zealanders and Canadians, among a few others, do. It was never a privacy issue. It was a right to keep and bear arms issue.

 

[Pogo]

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

If they don't have a gun culture then why did the people of Canada tell the stupid government to shove it where the sun don't shine when the government tried to impose registration of firearms? That was one of the best examples of mass civil disobedience in history.

What the **** does that have to do with gun culture?
That's a privacy issue. Canada's going through some PATRIOT Act - like controversy right now, and privacy versus government power is a front and center issue. That ain't a gun fetish.

And btw it was not "the people" who put down the effort (which was in Québec, not the entire country) but the Canadian Supreme Court. And it wasn't "imposing registration of firearms" -- the issue was whether or not the province could destroy its records that it already had. Nice try but way the **** off in terms of accuracy.

You are confused. The portion of the Canadian Firearms Act that required registration was passed in 1993, long before 911 and the Patriot Act in the US. Don't make things up. It only makes you look like a fool when you post.

Firearm confiscation/registration etc is always presented as being for public safety someway or another. Thank goodness the Canadians didn't let their filthy ass government take away their firearms under the bogus guise of anti terrorism or anything else.

The stupid government passed the law but the Canadians said "hell no we ain't gonna do it". They didn't want their government maintaining a register on gun owners. Good for them.

If the Canadians didn't have a gun culture similar to the US then they wouldn't have given a crap about registering their firearms. Europeans don't care. Americans, New Zealanders and Canadians, among a few others, do. It was never a privacy issue. It was a right to keep and bear arms issue.

Look dood, I get news from Canada literally every day. This is the controversy I refer to. It's got nothing to do with 9/11. And it IS in the public discourse right now.

Further, here's the Québec story:
Supreme Court rules against Quebec and allows end to gun-registry data

MONTREAL—The country’s top court awarded a huge victory for Prime Minister Stephen Harper over the province of Quebec with its decision allowing it to scrap the remnants of the long-disputed gun registry. [which was created in 1998]

... The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision ruled Quebec has no legal right to the information on long-gun owners that was collected and maintained by Ottawa and that it was within the federal government’s right to unilaterally destroy the information.
​

THAT is what it's about.

Don't sit here and try to bullshit me. I already told you I know better.

 

[Flash]

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

If they don't have a gun culture then why did the people of Canada tell the stupid government to shove it where the sun don't shine when the government tried to impose registration of firearms? That was one of the best examples of mass civil disobedience in history.

What the **** does that have to do with gun culture?
That's a privacy issue. Canada's going through some PATRIOT Act - like controversy right now, and privacy versus government power is a front and center issue. That ain't a gun fetish.

And btw it was not "the people" who put down the effort (which was in Québec, not the entire country) but the Canadian Supreme Court. And it wasn't "imposing registration of firearms" -- the issue was whether or not the province could destroy its records that it already had. Nice try but way the **** off in terms of accuracy.

You are confused. The portion of the Canadian Firearms Act that required registration was passed in 1993, long before 911 and the Patriot Act in the US. Don't make things up. It only makes you look like a fool when you post.

Firearm confiscation/registration etc is always presented as being for public safety someway or another. Thank goodness the Canadians didn't let their filthy ass government take away their firearms under the bogus guise of anti terrorism or anything else.

The stupid government passed the law but the Canadians said "hell no we ain't gonna do it". They didn't want their government maintaining a register on gun owners. Good for them.

If the Canadians didn't have a gun culture similar to the US then they wouldn't have given a crap about registering their firearms. Europeans don't care. Americans, New Zealanders and Canadians, among a few others, do. It was never a privacy issue. It was a right to keep and bear arms issue.

Look dood, I get news from Canada literally every day. This is the controversy I refer to. It's got nothing to do with 9/11. And it IS in the public discourse right now.

Further, here's the Québec story:
Supreme Court rules against Quebec and allows end to gun-registry data

MONTREAL—The country’s top court awarded a huge victory for Prime Minister Stephen Harper over the province of Quebec with its decision allowing it to scrap the remnants of the long-disputed gun registry. [which was created in 1998]

... The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision ruled Quebec has no legal right to the information on long-gun owners that was collected and maintained by Ottawa and that it was within the federal government’s right to unilaterally destroy the information.
​

THAT is what it's about.

Don't sit here and try to bullshit me. I already told you I know better.

The Canadians resisted the filthy ass government keeping a registry on their firearms. It was mass civil disobedience. The same kind of disobedience that you would see in the US if the filthy ass government tried to do the same. That is a gun culture. You can deny it all you want but that is what happen.

The Court ruling was good but had nothing to do with the fact that Canadians simply did not register the weapons like the filthy government told them to do.

 

[Pogo]

Ummm... Canada was founded in 1867. I think that's a bit after the Revolution.
And no, it's got nothing to do with "blacks". Canada has crime like anywhere else. What it does not have is a gun fetish culture.

If they don't have a gun culture then why did the people of Canada tell the stupid government to shove it where the sun don't shine when the government tried to impose registration of firearms? That was one of the best examples of mass civil disobedience in history.

What the **** does that have to do with gun culture?
That's a privacy issue. Canada's going through some PATRIOT Act - like controversy right now, and privacy versus government power is a front and center issue. That ain't a gun fetish.

And btw it was not "the people" who put down the effort (which was in Québec, not the entire country) but the Canadian Supreme Court. And it wasn't "imposing registration of firearms" -- the issue was whether or not the province could destroy its records that it already had. Nice try but way the **** off in terms of accuracy.

You are confused. The portion of the Canadian Firearms Act that required registration was passed in 1993, long before 911 and the Patriot Act in the US. Don't make things up. It only makes you look like a fool when you post.

Firearm confiscation/registration etc is always presented as being for public safety someway or another. Thank goodness the Canadians didn't let their filthy ass government take away their firearms under the bogus guise of anti terrorism or anything else.

The stupid government passed the law but the Canadians said "hell no we ain't gonna do it". They didn't want their government maintaining a register on gun owners. Good for them.

If the Canadians didn't have a gun culture similar to the US then they wouldn't have given a crap about registering their firearms. Europeans don't care. Americans, New Zealanders and Canadians, among a few others, do. It was never a privacy issue. It was a right to keep and bear arms issue.

Look dood, I get news from Canada literally every day. This is the controversy I refer to. It's got nothing to do with 9/11. And it IS in the public discourse right now.

Further, here's the Québec story:
Supreme Court rules against Quebec and allows end to gun-registry data

MONTREAL—The country’s top court awarded a huge victory for Prime Minister Stephen Harper over the province of Quebec with its decision allowing it to scrap the remnants of the long-disputed gun registry. [which was created in 1998]

... The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision ruled Quebec has no legal right to the information on long-gun owners that was collected and maintained by Ottawa and that it was within the federal government’s right to unilaterally destroy the information.
​

THAT is what it's about.

Don't sit here and try to bullshit me. I already told you I know better.

The Canadians resisted the filthy ass government keeping a registry on their firearms. It was mass civil disobedience. The same kind of disobedience that you would see in the US if the filthy ass government tried to do the same. That is a gun culture. You can deny it all you want but that is what happen.

The Court ruling was good but had nothing to do with the fact that Canadians simply did not register the weapons like the filthy government told them to do.

I didn't have to "deny" it -- I documented it. Unlike, say, all of your posts.

But while we're here, tell us --- if guns are this paradise panacea god to be worshiped and genuflected before, holy holy alleluia, how come you don't want anybody to know you have them?