Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I really think it's important to correct the Thread title.. It's NOT 12 Dead in Mass Shooting but almost twice that!! However, many of those deaths was due to by Fires, when remains found @ some of the "Death Scenes"!!
We don't know for sure about their causes of death yet since the coroner's reports about the COD of the people in the burned buildings have not been issued yet and won't be until the investigation is completed.
I suspect that the bodies of the people found inside the burned structures were shot and killed first and then their houses were set on fire afterwards. To not kill them first and then leave it to chance that anyone might or might not have a bolt-hole that allowed them to escape and survive the fires is not organized and thorough. And one thing that we know can be said for sure about the killer is that he was very organized and thorough to the finest detail and had planned it all out well in advance. Somebody that thorough about details would have shot them first then set the fires.
.
I'm asking you as an individual, not a country or a corporation, if you believe it is right for an involuntary third party to set the parameters of an agreement between two consensual parties?
I can't get an answer to this question. I've asked it over and over again.
You won't get an answer from anyone because your question is not applicable or relevant to the thread topic. It has nothing to do with Canadians wanting to have certain types of firearms banned from their own country.
You won't get an answer from anyone because your question is not applicable or relevant to the thread topic. It has nothing to do with Canadians wanting to have certain types of firearms banned from their own country.
We've already established that you're perfectly fine having a fictional violent entity (a State) carry out your wishes.
I just thought some folks, who still believe they are individuals and not a collective, would want to chime in.
Translation; while I demand answers to strawman questions, I do not have a cogent and relevant answer to the question posed so will go with the merely weak, infantile and dismissive instead.
Sounds like this would have been stopped earlier if more of the homeowners owned guns?....?
Good luck trying this in texas. (Both the shooting and the banning)
Translation; while I demand answers to strawman questions, I do not have a cogent and relevant answer to the question posed so will go with the merely weak, infantile and dismissive instead.
That's the problem: I'm framing the question based on principle. You folks base all questions and answers on what's best for your team.
Sorry if I can't handle the cognitive dissonance you folks love to live in the middle of.
What in all the gods' names do you not understand about the fact that this ban is what Canadians wanted and have been demanding for ages? If people ask for something and are given it how can that be a denial of their natural rights? It's not even a denial of the natural rights of the people who don't want the ban because those guns are not a needful thing and were never a right for them to have. They still have all their other guns that are not being banned.
Please stop being ridiculous and referring to yourself as a moral person when the very thing you are promoting is the most immoral thing in the world. What you are promoting is insane and disgusting.
.
Canadians have been wanting?
I'll bet people in alberta are furious. The level of anger towards the government there has been rising and this may be the straw that broke the camels back.
Not a Trumper and not an Obama guy either. Do you know why so many people around the world dislike Americans? Contrary to what some might suggest, it isn't jealousy. It's because American's refuse to mind our own business even when it is a non-issue. It's also why we own 37% of money spent on the Military in the world. 195 countries and we own 37% of the spending on weapons. That's America and our need to play world cop.
We shouldn't be in Yemen, shouldn't have went into Syria or Libya, and we should mind our own business in regard to Canada.
Our military only turned the tide in WW1 and WW2.
Mind you I'm against pointless middleast conflicts (though if Iran was getting close to a nuke I wouldn't consider that pointless).
I support the have the strongest, best funded, and most advanced military but only using it when absolutely neccesary doctrine.
Canadians have been wanting?
I'll bet people in alberta are furious. The level of anger towards the government there has been rising and this may be the straw that broke the camels back.
According to that poster when 51% says something is morally right, it is morally right.
Goes for property rights, slavery, murder, rape, whatever.
Americans insulted by Canadian policy -- lololol.....SNL on steroids...thanks for the laugh kids
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
