Britain Is Bleeding

Once again you are misrepresenting what has been said.
He clearly stated that his plan is to enforce existing laws and issue tougher sentences for robbers and murderers.
He also said he stated that crime stats have been falling and he's good with that.
Every time you twist the words of others, it's very transparent.

 

Have I not clearly stated my plan over and over Chuck? I notice you never seem to point that out to him. Have I provided scientific evidence (has he?). You seem to hate when words are twisted....except when they are mine

 

Your quote at the top is untrue and you misrepresented his words.

Your plan gives you no right to make false statements in an effort to disparage TD.

 

You are such a seeker of truth and honesty....until someone from your side starts lying. Your opinion is dismissed

 

Giving an opinion about what someone says is great debate.
Giving an opinion about what someone never said is not great debate.
I don't believe I've ever told you that your opinion is dismissed.

 

Attack dishonesty FROM ALL POSTERS is honest debate. Ignoring it from someone on your "side" is not

 

you seem to think your schemes to harass gun owners are legitimate because we don't believe in passing laws that are designed to harass gun owners. That's an incredibly specious argument and its not truthful. I am a big fan of tougher sentences on armed violent criminals and I want more and more citizens to be able to shoot and kill their violent criminal attackers

 

I just want evidence that this plan has worked in some state or country. Any will do. I can point to lots of states and countries with gun control that have low gun deaths. Can you show the opposite

Oh and its nice to see you here....and other places. LOL

 

you cannot prove registration has decreased crimes

you cannot prove UBGCs decrease crime

we can prove they harass gun owners

 

It is not my goal to only decrease crime. I want to save lives but apparently you do not care about that unless it is related to crime. That is just sad. But I have TONS of evidence it decreases homicides and suicides

 

no you don't have TONS of evidence. at best your plans harass honest people and are inconclusive whether they make us safer/ We reject a sure bit of harassment as trade for speculative poorly supported claims it will make things better. The fact that your laws only impact the legal environment of lawful gun owners is proof enough what your real goals are

 

You also do not have TONS of evidence. In fact you have none. And everytime you are asked for it you demand evidence from other people. It is laughable. We reject the status quo. We reject the current bloodbath. We WILL fight to save lives

 

I don't need any evidence. the burden is on you to PROVE that your clear violations of our constitutional rights will substantively and objectively decrease crime. You don't have any proof that comes anywhere near that level. you pretend there is a blood bath because you want to agitate the sheeple into supporting your real goal-harassment of honest gun owners. If your REAL goal was decreasing innocent deaths you wouldn't be attacking lawful gun owners

 

What country has freedom for all lawful citizens to own firearms like our 2A allows, but only practices gun control as you have laid out?

 

No the burden is on you to prove your plan will reduce innocent deaths. We have 25 times the gun death rate of any other first world country. It is a bloodbath and you have NO EVIDENCE at all that what you want will reduce it. I think it would double the blood bath

 

Canada has a lot of what I would want and lots of people own guns there

 

wrong. you assume facts not in evidence and you are constantly rejecting the entire premise of innocent until proven guilty. You pretend that because you have a plan that is designed to harass honest citizens, your silly plan is worthwhile because you dishonestly claim we don't have a plan (to harass honest citizens) .

 

You continue to fail to provide any evidence for your plan that so far in this country has only led us to have the most gun deaths of any first world nation by far. More of the same is insanity'

Its time for real gun control

 

our gun deaths are going down--your crocodile tears over gun deaths are patently obvious as a facade to cover your real goal-to harass gun owners

 

We have the most gun deaths of any first world nation BY A MILE. Your lack of compassion for the bloodbath going on in this country has been noted over and over again. Its not harassment...Its just a form

 

Canada has tons of restriction over and above what you have advocated for. Example: Handguns are considered a restricted class and compact self defense handguns are prohibited.

My point is unless you are willing to implement the same extreme restrictions that other countries have, you can't expect similar results in the US.

 

Canada would be fine....maybe some changes to reflect the US. They are not extreme....we are the extreme

 

you pretend to care and your use of the blood of innocent victims to drown to drown out our rights is really pretty pathetic. You pretend that if we don't jump on your gun banning bandwagon, we don't care about gun deaths. that is both specious and dishonest. Its you who doesn't care about gun deaths because you want to waste law enforcement time on stupid laws that has nothing to do with stopping real criminals

 

and he constantly whines about being called a GUN BANNER when he supports laws like the Canadian GUN BANS

 

So now you are ready to support even more restrictions. Where do you draw the line. As I've said many times. Gun restrictionists will always push for more restrictions.

You cannot have a handgun outside the home for self defense. You would have to repeal the 2A to bring these restrictions or restrictions from other countries to the US. This is way more "gun control" than you have ever advocated for.

In Canada:

To purchase a handgun or other restricted firearm, a person must have a restricted possession and acquisition licence (RPAL) for restricted firearms.

Canada's federal laws severely restrict the ability of civilians to transport restricted or prohibited (grandfathered) firearms in public. Section 17 of the Firearms Act makes it an offence to possess prohibited or restricted firearms other than at a dwelling-house or authorized location, but there are two exceptions to this prohibition found in sections 19 and 20 of the act. Section 19 allows for persons to be issued an authorization to transport, or ATT, authorizing the transport of a firearm outside the home for certain purposes, such as for its transfer to a new owner, going to and from a range, a training course, repair shop or gun show, or when the owner wishes to change the address where the firearm is stored. Such firearms must be transported unloaded, equipped with a trigger lock and stored in secure, locked containers. In rarer cases, section 20 of the act allows individuals to receive an authorization to carry, or ATC, granting permission to carry loaded restricted firearms or (section 12(6)) prohibited handguns on their persons for certain reasons specified in the act. These reasons are as follows: if the person is a licensed trapper and carries the firearm while trapping, if the person is in a remote wilderness area and needs the firearm for protection against wildlife, if the person's work involves guarding or handling money or other items of substantial value, or if the person's life is in danger and police protection is inadequate to protect him or her. It should be noted that the authorities almost never issue an ATC for the last reason, that is to say, because a person's life is threatened and police protection is inadequate. The vast majority of ATC's issued are to employees of armoured car companies to allow carry of a company owned firearm only while working.