Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : DC Sniper - Theories? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Moneysmith who wrote (1622)	10/22/2002 6:28:14 PM
From: mistermj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2746

re:gun control They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety. Benjamin Franklin <<<His journalism, in short, on the subject of Canada and Canadians, is nothing short of shoddy, manipulative and untrue. The same can be said for his journalism on his own country, and indeed on the terrible and complicated issue he purports to adjudicate. At the theatre in Bethesda, Md., where I saw Bowling for Columbine, there was a rare scattering of applause when the credits were rolling. I've no doubt many Canadians will adore both the documentary and its premise. The truth of America is that it is a place open, ludicrously free, in every regard, not merely in the ability to get and own a firearm. The truth of Americans is that they are in the main good, God-fearing and forgiving people. They are no more responsible for creatures like this sniper than they were for 9/11, or as Mr. Heston is for that dead child whose picture was held before him by Mr. Moore, quivering with righteous rage.>>> canada.com{A18E45C2-1BBA-4692-ABF6-3A7455BD1987}

To: Moneysmith who wrote (1622)	10/22/2002 7:03:07 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Respond to of 2746

Some of us have avoided the "gun control" argument here. I know it's tempting to take all the guns away from those who didn't do it, just like in grade school where you all got punished for one kid's indiscretion. Fortunately..... The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major com- mentator and court in the first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner. geocities.com Those who don't, get punished. Fair enough!

To: Moneysmith who wrote (1622)	10/22/2002 7:55:43 PM
From: Yogizuna	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2746

Historically, governments have killed many more people than a few gun nuts ever will.... When you have the only ones with weapons being the various branches of government, you are asking for trouble and abuse of power somewhere on down the road. But if we really want to stop the killing of innocents, banning motor vehicles or lowering the speed limits with stict enforcement would save many thousands of lives each and every year....

To: Moneysmith who wrote (1622)	10/22/2002 9:40:45 PM
From: Edscharp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2746

moneysmith, Be honest. In spite of all the fantastic gun control laws you have in Canada, how difficult do you really believe it would be for a psycho to enter into Canada with a rifle and do exactly what he is doing here. I am curious, however. Do Canadian laws also ban all hunting as well? For all practical purposes there is no difference between a hunting rifle and a sniper rifle. Your strict gun laws do not protect you against individuals who are bent on doing violence.

To: Moneysmith who wrote (1622)	10/22/2002 10:36:49 PM
From: Victor Lazlo	Respond to of 2746

That is not true. You have a lot to learn about the US. We glorify youth, not guns! ha ha!

To: Moneysmith who wrote (1622)	10/23/2002 12:36:38 AM
From: average joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2746

and the NRA talks about the constitutional right to bear arms It ain't just talk, the right to bear arms is entrenched in the constitution. Here is a copy for your perusal, get down on you knees while you absorb and thank God for it. Amendment II "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." law.cornell.edu The Canadian military cannot contain one militant glue sniffing Indian band. What would they do with one sniper like this guy? In a country where the Senate and all judges are appointed I can see why the government is afraid of the populace owning weapons. If you still don't get it read this... "Did you really think we want those laws observed? said Dr. Ferris. We WANT them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against.... We're after power and we mean it .... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one MAKES them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers-- and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." --