Eaton Center shooting

Forum Sponsor
Some firearms were designed to be more effective at sport shooting and not as a practical "people-killing" tools. Others were designed to kill food animals. Rob, you're oversimplifying things and in a way that places a stigma on legitimate firearm owners. Remember that we live in a province overrun by misinformed neosocialists that watch a bit too much Hollywood fare and are glad to follow Windy Wendy on all of her witch hunts.

P.S. This message has been brought to you by an old-school pragmatic socialist :cool:
 
FiReSTaRT said:
Some firearms were designed to be more effective at sport shooting and not as a practical "people-killing" tools. Others were designed to kill food animals. Rob, you're oversimplifying things and in a way that places a stigma on legitimate firearm owners. Remember that we live in a province overrun by misinformed neosocialists that watch a bit too much Hollywood fare and are glad to follow Windy Wendy on all of her witch hunts.

P.S. This message has been brought to you by an old-school pragmatic socialist :cool:
Click to expand...

There's over simplification, and then there's breaking things down into the most simple terms. I believe that's what I did. Conflation by calling firearms "tools", rather than recognizing them as the weapons that they are, is foolish. I would think that a 'pragmatists' would look at both sides, who like to obfuscate in order to support their personal agendas, then say "screw it" and call a spade a shovel.

Brought to you by someone who isn't afraid that he's going to be run down, just for standing in the political middle of the road.
 
The development of firearms over time has generally been driven by the various militaries of the world. Yes, they can be used for sport, but their raison d'etre is for killing people.

You absolutely can not stop people from killing other people by restricting access to any one type of weapon, but your average handgun makes it very easy to do. Conversely owning a firearm does not make someone a killer, nor does it indicate any desire to be one.
 
you guys are hilarious, arguing whether a gun is a "tool" or a weapon. then bring up a baseball bat as a comparison. LOL.

here's an eye opener people, a baseball bat was designed for sport, a thug can still bash your head open with it then mug you. a gun was designed to kill, a historian can collect it. a hobbyist can use it to shoot clay pigeons.

who gives it damn what it is designed for and what it's actually being used for? rob you can stand in the political middle all you want. if a thug stabs you with a pencil, while you are down in pain going "wtf man a pencil is "designed" as a writing tool" the thug is already gone with your wallet.
 
SkyRider said:
you guys are hilarious, arguing whether a gun is a "tool" or a weapon. then bring up a baseball bat as a comparison. LOL.

here's an eye opener people, a baseball bat was designed for sport, a thug can still bash your head open with it then mug you. a gun was designed to kill, a historian can collect it. a hobbyist can use it to shoot clay pigeons.

who gives it damn what it is designed for and what it's actually being used for? rob you can stand in the political middle all you want. if a thug stabs you with a pencil, while you are down in pain going "wtf man a pencil is "designed" as a writing tool" the thug is already gone with your wallet.
Click to expand...

My point, which only one person seems to get so far, is that a gun is inherently a weapon and deserves extra respect because of it. A thug can beat you down with his hands. A thug is a thug is a thug. My point was peripheral to the discussion, not directly on point.
 
Something interesting in the news today

"Less than five weeks before the Eaton Centre shooting, accused murderer Christopher Husbands was in a Hamilton courtroom facing nine weapons charges and five counts of breaching bail.

Husbands, 23, who is facing two counts of first-degree murder and five counts of attempted murder, walked free in Hamilton after a prosecutor withdrew the nine weapons charges, which involved a loaded .40 calibre handgun.

At the time of the mall shooting on June 2, Husbands was out on $4,000 bail and under house arrest for an outstanding sexual assault charge from November, 2010.

Husbands has been detained for the Eaton Centre shootings pending his next court appearance Aug. 25.

On April 23, Husbands was in Hamilton court before Superior Court Justice James Ramsay on a 17-count indictment. He was facing nine weapon charges, two counts of obstructing a police officer, five counts of breaching his bail conditions and one count of possession of marijuana.

The weapons charges relate to a March 29, 2010, incident in Hamilton in which Husbands was found sleeping in a 2004 Nissan Maxima. Hidden in a vent of the vehicle was a Heckler and Koch .40-calibre handgun. The firearm magazine was capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

By the end of the hearing, prosecutor Carey Lee would withdraw the weapons charges and proceed on just five counts — two of obstructing a police officer, two of breaching a bail condition and a single count of possession of marijuana.
Husbands pleaded guilty to those five charges. He did not have a record, according to a court transcript.

Torstar News Service left numerous messages for Lee, 50, who is on a previously arranged, six-month sabbatical. A pair of letters left in the mailbox of his Hamilton home have gone unanswered."

Someone screwed up. This guy should have been behind bars. I am very curious how the charges got dropped.
 
When they trade in someone else a little further up the ladder things dissapear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom