Quote:
Originally Posted by Shayne
Comparing a gun to a drunk driver or a doctor is completely baseless.
.
|
Shayne, you're either willfully blind or deliberately being obtuse. Or perhaps you simply can't grasp my point. I wasn't comparing a gun to a drunk driver or doctor. I was highlighting the hypocrisy of the Antis when they insist that gun manufacturers be sued when their product is misused without applying the same standard to other industries. One must then ask why do the antis do this? The answer is obvious. They don't understand the complex relationship of the legal, social, cultural, and yes, hormonal milieu in which crime is fomented. It's too hard, and if they spend too much time thinking about it they'll miss Oprah. Along comes some Liberal politician who tells them that one more gun law is all we need to fix things et voila, Soma for the masses. The American Founding Fathers fortunately didn't have Oprah or Rosie O'Donnell to pollute their minds and crafted a pretty darn good constitution and made some important Amendments to boot. Have you ever read The Declaration of Independence? It brings tears to the eyes of any right thinking, freedom loving person. Compared to the U.S. Constitution, the Canadian Bill of Rights is a weak sop at best, allowing most of the onerous anti-gun legislation to be passed by Order-in-Council, with no debate allowed on the floor of the House of Commons. Some democracy! Anyway, I digress. Shayne, you're going to have to bone up a lot on the history of the gun control debate in Canada if you wish to engage me in debate. Your recycled Liberal pablum is nothing I haven't heard a thousand times before and frankly, it's boring.