Tnarg said: "Oh yes! I know what you mean you poor law-abiding shooter! I'm a law-abiding driver and I have to register ALL MY CARS!!! I too feel treated like a special class of criminal.
Fight the auto registry today!!!"
First of all, in a 3:2 decision the Supreme court said the LGR was constitutional for 2 reasons: 1) It was under the federal jurisdiction because it was criminal law. 2) It was acceptably classified under the purview of criminal law because it was a law to protect from imminent threat of harm. So conversely, if the law fails to protect, it can't be under criminal law.
If it fails to protect, then its only value is as a registry of property. Property is a provincial matter. That is why you register your car--under provincial law, your house, your dog, whatever property you have is under that umbrella
Such "protection" is an illusion. You think the registration of the Nanny state affords any protection at all? It isn't the registry that protects Canadians from guns, its common human decency that does so.
So you want to apply vehicle registration to the debate? How many vehicle registrations stop vehicular homicides? Take a look at your logic.
Vehicle registration has zero to do with safety.
There are far far more people killed by drunk drivers each year than long guns in a decade. Did a registry stop them? Vehicle registrations are about theft and insurance neither of which factor into the LGR debate. Because that is supposed to be about safety.
Do you honestly think that my registered rifle stops me from parking outside a school yard and committing mass murder moreso than my unregistered one? Does that make you able to sleep at night?
Step back and examine a few instances. Try the tragic fact individuals in China penetrated schools and murdered kindergarten students. They used unregistered knives and cleavers. Tragic. Is it logical to think that murder happens because of the instrument used, or instead rather **the sicko behind it**?
No comments:
Post a Comment