lucky_nucker

Members
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 Neutral

About lucky_nucker

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,888 profile views
  1. Hey, guys agree to disagree I guess. I just can't rationalize the $600M to punish law abiding citizens is all.
  2. A great many things can be deemed unnecessary, should they all be banned too? Inherently dangerous? Many things can be deemed dangerous. Do we really want to go down the path of banning everything? Eventually, we will come to something that you like and then it will be a problem for you. If the evidence supported banning AR15s in this country and that problem could be addressed by this ban, then yeah it might make sense. But that is not the case here, this is just a case of ignorant, short sighted people trying to impose their will on others for political gains. It is sad, and something that all Canadians should be against. Again, why do so many people enjoy the reductions of their freedoms?
  3. I guess the idea would be along the lines of maximizing peoples freedom. As long as that freedom does not harm others, why obstruct it? In the case of banning "assualt weapons" or AR15s there does not seem to be evidence to support doing this in Canada, it simply comes off as a draconian law to punish legal gun owners.
  4. Regardless of it being a right in this country, it is still law abiding citizens having their private property taken from them. In this case, there is not even strong evidence as to why that is a reasonable measure. Why are people so eager to get behind these reductions in freedom? If this ban goes through it will do little to reduce gun violence in urban centers, with criminals using guns obtained on the black market. "Nor do they have any reason for owning an assault weapon." Hmm, are you the one who gets to decide what is reasonable for what people own?
  5. Why do you want to see your fellow law abiding Canadians punished? These laws do not have the evidence or stats to back up their implementation as reasonable. They simply just go after the law abiding gun owners that already have proved their "right" to own these firearms.