Related: Anti-Gun Advocates Heckle Woman Wanting to Defend Her Children During Gun Violence Hearing
50 Replies to “Owning David Frum”
But remember, David Frum is a reasoned ‘wise man’ conservative. One of the last of his kind. Truly like the son of a lost line of kings in Middle Earth. At least I am sure that’s how Brooks and Frum see themselves.
Can America and Canada just agree to carve out a really really tiny country between them and exile David Frum there? It can be his own little kingdom for a little man.
David Frum is an A*&hole,and his kind allowed the worshipers of a murdering padephile to get here.Hypocrit does not even begin to describe this (j)urnilist).
Piers Morgan was accused of “standing on the graves of dead children”. He tried to deny it but then later admitted he was doing it, if it would help “the cause”. http://twitchy.com/2013/01/15/piers-morgan-yes-im-standing-on-graves-of-dead-children-deal-with-it/
I’m curious how long it will take for the anti-gun and pro-gun control fascists to admit they are in fact “pissing on the graves of dead children” to advance their agenda. Anything is fair game as long as it pushes your cause forward, eh lefties? Why not though?, pedophiles get a break when it comes to art. Hell! Chavez, Stalin, Mao, ect., all get a pass by the left.
It would be foolish to believe that the left are compassionate people when they praise murderers of millions of people.
I guess it’s a nice little niche market he’s carved out for himself. A leftist pretending to be a conservative so he can appear on TV panels as the token right-winger and not actually disagree with anybody. Leftists who want to seem open-minded can say “look, I’m not saying they’re all crazy. I read some conservative thinkers. David Frum, for example”.
He’s basically a slightly smarter Meghan McCain.
BTW, he only floated the “axis of” part. Someone else decided to go with “evil”. Frum wanted to call it “axis of undesirables” or something.
This is the same thinking behind Sheehan, the woman who lost a son in Iraq, and thus was granted absolute authority forever to opine on all future world conflicts. The media fiercely guarded this right and vilified anyone who dared to disagree. David Frum = Charles Johnson, one trick pony conservative for 15 minutes.
Black Mamba “A leftist pretending to be a conservative so he can appear on TV panels as the token right-winger and not actually disagree with anybody.”
Barbara Frum used to specialize in bogus debate. She would put an eloquent speaking commie against a knuckle dragging conservative selected only for his ability to lose a debate. She did this for years.
A better analogy would have been, if a 9/11 bereaved relative had turned to the audience and said “Can anyone tell me why we need airplanes that seat more than 10 people? Can anyone answer that?”
After all, it’s only the big ones that can cause that kind of destruction.
Frum’s career reached its epoch when he wrote a few speeches for a conservative progressive in the White House. He now vies for the same political niche and prestige as Joe Clark, another Red Tory loser.
Speaking of dancing on graves, when the Gun-Nazis exploit their “talking” mascot Gabriel Gifford who was pretty close to being brain dead before the psychopath attempted to finish the job, I don’t think they are getting the desired result. There is simply no reason why all legal gun owners should bear any guilt or complicity whatsoever for the evil actions of the botched and bungled and yet they will ultimately be the exclusive victims of any legislation contemplated.
He and Coyne are cut from the same cloth, it seems to me.
The frumlet tries desperately to make up for whatever conservative tendencies he had once upon a time. I swear it’s got something to do with making his mom happy. Here’s a triumvirate for you: Dalton Camp, Joe Clark and Frum. Perhaps they could one day be carved into a Mount Rushmore made of a certain odoriferous brown substance.
(On an unrelated note – I’ve been misspelling and mispronouncing “odoriferous” for my whole life until this moment. Progress. Slow but steady.)
Put the man on suicide watch.
Frum makes Joe Clark look like a conservative.
Another liberal twit who took up journalism because there was too much math in finger painting.
This really bugs me: the important issue here isn’t even the nasty lie that the grieving father was “heckled” by heartless gun nuts when that never happened. That’s just more evidence that Frum and Morgan and such are sleazebags, which is entertaining but not really a big thing. We already knew who they were. This use of “human shields”*** is what gets me.
If the father of the murdered child is understandably in such a state of grief that he cannot participate in a public debate, then don’t shove him into a public debate. I mean, honestly, how slimy is this? “I want to destroy the Second Amendment, and if you argue with me you’re spitting in the face of this heartbroken father here.” Isn’t that really what it comes down to?
***Some people might object to that analogy, reasonably enough. It’s a war of words, after all, not a war of bullets, even if it is a war of words over guns and bullets. But “human shields” is always how I think of it.
I’m with Klaus Flauten.
Black Mamba – “human shields” – I agree with you 100%
Your comments seem to, nearly every time, hit it out of the park.
Gosh I’d like to sit down and have a drink with you and solve all the world’s problems!
Greg, Sheehan has been just as critical of Obama as she was of Bush. Just nobody bothered giving her airtime once it no longer suited the narrative. Obama used her to get elected and then spit on her (figuratively). Google “Cindy Sheehan Obama”
Whaddayamean, “nearly every time”!? 🙂
Frum is pathologically incapable of honesty with even himself and he’s conceited and ignorant. He’s the opposite of Coyne.
Shania Twain and Wayne Gretzky do not make up for Neil Young, Justin Bieber and David Frum. Canada, you owe us another good one!
David Frum is actually a sane republican and conservative.
(except when he talks about Israel).
Okay,MarkD. Will you take Justin Trudeau,the Shiny Pony? He will screw you guys over even faster then the Chimp in Chief is doing already!
Quebecois NDP separatiste “David Frum is actually a sane republican and conservative.
(except when he talks about Israel).”
It must piss off a racist, Jew hating, Nazi, separatist, Quebecois that the Quebec Jews choose to live in the English culture rather than that of la langue morte.
It’s enlightened of course to carry on these witty debates about conservatism of David Frum, while the only important question is whether we are completely doomed as Western civilization, or not yet, while the kinds of Jonathan Kay, Barbara Kay, Matt Gurney and David Frum are manning the only ‘conservative’ newspaper in the country.
They are laughing at you in every red party central committee meeting.
I swear they wear little red books near their hearts.
Tob shebe goyim harog?
??? You ignore William Shatner???
At least in his PREEMINENT role South of the Border…
Frum and Morgan stand on the graves of children?
You’re the death-cult sick creeps who put the children in their grave in the first place.
Which is worse?
Que?
Who put them in their graves, Joe?
You – what’s few massacres compared to the millions the right-wing gets from the NRA?
Ken(kulak) please to not feed the troll
Huh?
Manitoba’s failed Progressive Conservative Hugh McFadyen leader LOVES some David Frum. I love having a new leader, not coincidentally.
Just what I was thinking.
Especially in the USA, lifestyles can be maintained or enhanced by airbrushing the harder edges of partisan viewpoints. (Kirsten Powers and Tamara Holder are adept at that tactic.)
I konjecture he’s konfused you with Kursk.
Re: anti gun hecklers – why are we shocked at Lefty’s uncivil behavior. When lefty is not being an empty headed braying ass, he’s busy being a treacherous vandal.
Bitch slapping was invented to properly respond to much of what lefty says.
Maybe working 30+ hours straight is causing some cognitive dysfunction, but no matter how I parsed the twitter exchange, it made absolutely no sense. I have a strong feeling that the contraction of English text into smaller and smaller chunks with the questionable purpose of attaining increased meaning through brevity (albeit completely idiosyncratic) will be just as memorable in 20 years as APL which, in some ways, was the computer science analog of twittering.
Frum is a moron although I suspect that snippet of knowledge is part of the common intellectual heritage of SDA adherents. Why the NP allows a statist apologist to write for the paper is just another one of those questions without meaningful answers.
Anti-gun forces need to be met head on and in the US one can smash them repeatedly over the head with the 2nd amendment. The NRA is pushing a take no prisoners policy and the emails I’m getting from the NRA are the most defiant that I’ve ever seen from that organization. Fortunately they’re now open to taking money from Canadians in support of their political initiatives and I would suggest that any individual concerned with the protection of individual freedoms in the last bastion of constitutionally guaranteed firearms rights in the world give generously.
The best defense is a good offense and that means taking the fight to the enemy proactively. The example that john g posted is an example. Get all the mileage one can out of pointing out that convicted rapists are for unarmed women. Perhaps a TV ad could be made of a small, but martial arts trained, woman being attacked by an average male twice her weight. One wouldn’t have to likely do more than a single take of the ad to get video of the male easily overpowering the woman. A woman who can successfully take on a fit man twice her weight needs to be very very good – good enough that the average male has no fear of an unarmed woman. Then, one can show the other option of a woman pulling out her .45 and pumping 4 rounds into the attacking male. Simunition would be used, but the sting of simunition would likely make the scene more realistic.
A woman alone with her children is defenseless without a gun. If she chose the “evil looking” AR15 as her home defense weapon, the psychologic effect of pointing it at an intruder (given the MSM hype about “assault rifles”) would likely have an effect similar to the one of the sound made chambering a round in a pump action shotgun. Now admittedly the recoil of an AR15 is considerably less than that of a pistol grip 12 gauge, but at close range the shotgun is far more effective at making a single shot stop and has less unwanted penetration of walls than the .223 round. Still, the deficits of an underpowered .223 round can be compensated for with a 20 round magazine.
What we need to do in Canada is to bring back our right to keep loaded firearms in our houses for the purposes of dealing with the unwelcome intrusions of two legged vermin. Once we get that right back, then it’s on to concealed carry. Likely to get that right would mean firing all police below a threshold age and hiring new ones who haven’t been brainwashed into believing that the right to keep and bear arms is a police prerogative.
What we need to do in Canada is to bring back our right to keep loaded firearms in our houses for the purposes of dealing with the unwelcome intrusions of two legged vermin.
How is it illegal to have a loaded firearm in your house as long as you’re there and it’s nearby? You can even legally wear a concealed loaded handgun around the property it’s licensed to be at.
@ North_of_60:
Nope. You cannot wear a restricted firearm on your property, only in the dwelling place it is registered to. As well you cannot load a firearm anywhere unless it is a place safe to discharge a firearm.
Both those laws are found directly in the Firearms Act.
Of course self defence has trumped these laws many times. But still.
In the 28 years I’ve lived at my present residence, on two occaisions, I’ve had LOADED firearms available, easily within reach, to deal with, let call them unsavoury characters. At 5-6 am.
They weren’t idle but they were both aboriginal. And police took a long time to get there. Over half an hour both times.
Just stating facts.
@ Loki: good points.
The Ar-15 which discharges .223 or 5.56 calibre actually penetrates walls less than a shotgun discharging buck shot. If you go to youtube you can see several demonstrations of this.
Since citizens can load an AR with soft tip rounds designed for hunting coyotes or deer, these make excellent stoppers of men as well with less potential for through and through and more potential for damage… as well as less wall penetration.
While I do agree with you about the shotgun placing 8 or 9 pellots in a person at once, is a great benefit. Moreover if one becomes proficient with shotgun speedloaders, one can load it as fast as any other firearm reasonably.
However to each their own.
Well, I’m prepared to give Frum his due: he’s a smart man and a good writer.
But he suffers from the same malady that afflicts far too many large C Conservatives: he comes across as a sneering elitist, who would be much more comfortable sitting at a table with moneyed, power-broking Liberals than enjoying the fellowship and homey insights of us simple folks.
Anyone telling a woman to grab 12ga pump instead of an AR is a jerk.
Ever compared recoil and muzzle blast of 12ga with 223? A-ha!
The fat bastard could be fine with 12ga shotgun, but it can simply fly from the hands of a slim young girl.
What’s the word? IN-CON-SI-DE-RA-TE
Wife shoots 12GA no problems. She’s 120 pounds. It’s called training.
If you want to use an AR for self defence by all means. Training with any gun is most important if you are planning on relying on one for self defence. Lots of things that can go wrong with an AR especially of you’re nervous.
Oh, boy… Thanks for an anti-gun argument, Forest. With friends like you…
You guys don’t really get what a rhetorical question is, do you? Because it’s very clear that this is what that was. And further more, comments from the peanut gallery were very clearly not appropriate.
And just so we’re clear, that ‘answer’ wasn’t a real answer. It’s just bs parroting. Seriously, why not nukes? Why can Americans not own nukes? The 2nd Amendment says “arms”, which at the time meant muskets, swords and cannons. So if we can interpret that to mean assault weapons, why not nukes?
Never in their wildest dreams would the founders of the US have imagined that some drunk with a day’s pay could wander down to ye old gun shoppe and purchase a weapon that to us would seem like a Star Trek phaser.
Anti gun 454?
You need to read what I said again.
John,
We have no idea what the founders would have thought about machine guns or semi automatic weapons- though at the end of their lives some early versions had come out. So please do not try and speak for them.
We do know that they were well familiar with weapons of mass destruction as gunpowder plots had rocked European countries due to civil unrest. As well they were familiar with massacres. They did not appear to be that concerned about it.
They did well intend that the United States would have preserved the right to keep and bear arms as well familiar to all English people as this was founded on ideas from the Age of Enlightenment and entrenched in the English Bill of Rights.
My guess is that they would view the protection against tyranny as utmost important.
As to nuclear weapons, you cannot protect yourself or defend against tyranny from within with a nuke. Nukes cannot be compared to firearms in these terms. The Supreme Court makes it clear that the intent of the 2A was to mean weapons commonly available to the military as in use by a common soldier.
454guy, how well a woman does with a shotgun compared to an AR15 all depends on practice. I’ve been outshot by women half my weight when the weapon was a shotgun. Then, I’ve done far better shooting a 30-06 lightweight rifle than a woman who couldn’t handle the recoil.
In a home defense situation, the best weapon to use is one that one is experienced in handling and comfortable with. I happen to like a shotgun for this scenario as the psychologic effect of confronting an individual with a shotgun makes it far more likely one won’t have to use it and create a mess in ones house. Forest, point taken about penetration of .223 rounds compared to buckshot. The pistol that I’m most accurate with is my Ruger .22 and an eye shot with this pistol is something that would be very easy to do. The nice thing about a .22 round once it gets inside the skull is that it riccocets back and forth destroying brain tissue in its path while not exiting the skull. This is also a pistol I’ve found that women can very easily shoot with.
As far as having a loaded pistol in ones home in BC, my ATT has the following wording: Firearms may only be loaded and/or carried on your person while you are actively engaged in target practice or a target shooting competition
So, unless you’re prepared to go up against a judge with your own defintions of the terms of “target practice” and “target shooting competition” I’d advise using a shotgun rather than a pistol to deal with 2 legged vermin enterming ones home. In Canada, an AR15 is considered to be a “restricted weapon” and thus the prohibition against having a loaded AR15 in ones home holds in Canada at present. I consider impromptu target practice involving 2 legged vermin in ones home to be valid, but I’m not about to test my theory in court.
@ Loki. Agree completely. The best gun for self defence is the gun you are most familiar with. Muscle memory.
I prefer a shotgun because I know the wounds it can do to a human body. If I have to be in that situation, I want it to end quickly. Most people die by bleeding out, not by some magical movie one shot thing everyone sees in a hollywood movie. I’ve seen more than my share of people shot several times still walking around longer than they should be.
As for the AR-15 there are a lot of semi auto unrestricted rifles in that category, which use the same STANAG or PMAG magazines if one wants an unrestricted one so they don’t have to deal with the BS. It burns my hide that the AR-15 is restricted for BS reasons but when it comes to gun laws, nothing much makes any sense.
But remember, David Frum is a reasoned ‘wise man’ conservative. One of the last of his kind. Truly like the son of a lost line of kings in Middle Earth. At least I am sure that’s how Brooks and Frum see themselves.
Can America and Canada just agree to carve out a really really tiny country between them and exile David Frum there? It can be his own little kingdom for a little man.
So Frum is still pushing the ‘heckling’ hoax after admitting it was, er, a hoax but hey look! Squirrel! (Michelle Malkin!!)
http://www.fivefeetoffury.com/2013/01/30/david-frum-admits-heckling-didnt-occur-then-slams-michelle-malkin-as-sociopath/
He was for heckling before he was against it. Now for it again!
David Frum is an A*&hole,and his kind allowed the worshipers of a murdering padephile to get here.Hypocrit does not even begin to describe this (j)urnilist).
Related to your “related”…
Anti-Gun rally uses convicted rapist as spokesperson. Gee, can anyone think of why a convicted rapist would want women to be gun free?
http://twitchy.com/2013/01/30/dana-loesch-calls-out-ohio-tv-station-for-interviewing-convicted-rapist-at-anti-gun-rally/
Piers Morgan was accused of “standing on the graves of dead children”. He tried to deny it but then later admitted he was doing it, if it would help “the cause”. http://twitchy.com/2013/01/15/piers-morgan-yes-im-standing-on-graves-of-dead-children-deal-with-it/
I’m curious how long it will take for the anti-gun and pro-gun control fascists to admit they are in fact “pissing on the graves of dead children” to advance their agenda. Anything is fair game as long as it pushes your cause forward, eh lefties? Why not though?, pedophiles get a break when it comes to art. Hell! Chavez, Stalin, Mao, ect., all get a pass by the left.
It would be foolish to believe that the left are compassionate people when they praise murderers of millions of people.
I guess it’s a nice little niche market he’s carved out for himself. A leftist pretending to be a conservative so he can appear on TV panels as the token right-winger and not actually disagree with anybody. Leftists who want to seem open-minded can say “look, I’m not saying they’re all crazy. I read some conservative thinkers. David Frum, for example”.
He’s basically a slightly smarter Meghan McCain.
BTW, he only floated the “axis of” part. Someone else decided to go with “evil”. Frum wanted to call it “axis of undesirables” or something.
This is the same thinking behind Sheehan, the woman who lost a son in Iraq, and thus was granted absolute authority forever to opine on all future world conflicts. The media fiercely guarded this right and vilified anyone who dared to disagree. David Frum = Charles Johnson, one trick pony conservative for 15 minutes.
Black Mamba “A leftist pretending to be a conservative so he can appear on TV panels as the token right-winger and not actually disagree with anybody.”
Barbara Frum used to specialize in bogus debate. She would put an eloquent speaking commie against a knuckle dragging conservative selected only for his ability to lose a debate. She did this for years.
A better analogy would have been, if a 9/11 bereaved relative had turned to the audience and said “Can anyone tell me why we need airplanes that seat more than 10 people? Can anyone answer that?”
After all, it’s only the big ones that can cause that kind of destruction.
Frum’s career reached its epoch when he wrote a few speeches for a conservative progressive in the White House. He now vies for the same political niche and prestige as Joe Clark, another Red Tory loser.
Speaking of dancing on graves, when the Gun-Nazis exploit their “talking” mascot Gabriel Gifford who was pretty close to being brain dead before the psychopath attempted to finish the job, I don’t think they are getting the desired result. There is simply no reason why all legal gun owners should bear any guilt or complicity whatsoever for the evil actions of the botched and bungled and yet they will ultimately be the exclusive victims of any legislation contemplated.
He and Coyne are cut from the same cloth, it seems to me.
The frumlet tries desperately to make up for whatever conservative tendencies he had once upon a time. I swear it’s got something to do with making his mom happy. Here’s a triumvirate for you: Dalton Camp, Joe Clark and Frum. Perhaps they could one day be carved into a Mount Rushmore made of a certain odoriferous brown substance.
(On an unrelated note – I’ve been misspelling and mispronouncing “odoriferous” for my whole life until this moment. Progress. Slow but steady.)
Put the man on suicide watch.
Frum makes Joe Clark look like a conservative.
Another liberal twit who took up journalism because there was too much math in finger painting.
This really bugs me: the important issue here isn’t even the nasty lie that the grieving father was “heckled” by heartless gun nuts when that never happened. That’s just more evidence that Frum and Morgan and such are sleazebags, which is entertaining but not really a big thing. We already knew who they were. This use of “human shields”*** is what gets me.
If the father of the murdered child is understandably in such a state of grief that he cannot participate in a public debate, then don’t shove him into a public debate. I mean, honestly, how slimy is this? “I want to destroy the Second Amendment, and if you argue with me you’re spitting in the face of this heartbroken father here.” Isn’t that really what it comes down to?
***Some people might object to that analogy, reasonably enough. It’s a war of words, after all, not a war of bullets, even if it is a war of words over guns and bullets. But “human shields” is always how I think of it.
I’m with Klaus Flauten.
Black Mamba – “human shields” – I agree with you 100%
Your comments seem to, nearly every time, hit it out of the park.
Gosh I’d like to sit down and have a drink with you and solve all the world’s problems!
Greg, Sheehan has been just as critical of Obama as she was of Bush. Just nobody bothered giving her airtime once it no longer suited the narrative. Obama used her to get elected and then spit on her (figuratively). Google “Cindy Sheehan Obama”
Whaddayamean, “nearly every time”!? 🙂
Frum is pathologically incapable of honesty with even himself and he’s conceited and ignorant. He’s the opposite of Coyne.
Shania Twain and Wayne Gretzky do not make up for Neil Young, Justin Bieber and David Frum. Canada, you owe us another good one!
David Frum is actually a sane republican and conservative.
(except when he talks about Israel).
Okay,MarkD. Will you take Justin Trudeau,the Shiny Pony? He will screw you guys over even faster then the Chimp in Chief is doing already!
Quebecois NDP separatiste “David Frum is actually a sane republican and conservative.
(except when he talks about Israel).”
It must piss off a racist, Jew hating, Nazi, separatist, Quebecois that the Quebec Jews choose to live in the English culture rather than that of la langue morte.
It’s enlightened of course to carry on these witty debates about conservatism of David Frum, while the only important question is whether we are completely doomed as Western civilization, or not yet, while the kinds of Jonathan Kay, Barbara Kay, Matt Gurney and David Frum are manning the only ‘conservative’ newspaper in the country.
They are laughing at you in every red party central committee meeting.
I swear they wear little red books near their hearts.
Tob shebe goyim harog?
??? You ignore William Shatner???
At least in his PREEMINENT role South of the Border…
Frum and Morgan stand on the graves of children?
You’re the death-cult sick creeps who put the children in their grave in the first place.
Which is worse?
Que?
Who put them in their graves, Joe?
You – what’s few massacres compared to the millions the right-wing gets from the NRA?
Ken(kulak) please to not feed the troll
Huh?
Manitoba’s failed Progressive Conservative Hugh McFadyen leader LOVES some David Frum. I love having a new leader, not coincidentally.
Just what I was thinking.
Especially in the USA, lifestyles can be maintained or enhanced by airbrushing the harder edges of partisan viewpoints. (Kirsten Powers and Tamara Holder are adept at that tactic.)
I konjecture he’s konfused you with Kursk.
Re: anti gun hecklers – why are we shocked at Lefty’s uncivil behavior. When lefty is not being an empty headed braying ass, he’s busy being a treacherous vandal.
Bitch slapping was invented to properly respond to much of what lefty says.
Maybe working 30+ hours straight is causing some cognitive dysfunction, but no matter how I parsed the twitter exchange, it made absolutely no sense. I have a strong feeling that the contraction of English text into smaller and smaller chunks with the questionable purpose of attaining increased meaning through brevity (albeit completely idiosyncratic) will be just as memorable in 20 years as APL which, in some ways, was the computer science analog of twittering.
Frum is a moron although I suspect that snippet of knowledge is part of the common intellectual heritage of SDA adherents. Why the NP allows a statist apologist to write for the paper is just another one of those questions without meaningful answers.
Anti-gun forces need to be met head on and in the US one can smash them repeatedly over the head with the 2nd amendment. The NRA is pushing a take no prisoners policy and the emails I’m getting from the NRA are the most defiant that I’ve ever seen from that organization. Fortunately they’re now open to taking money from Canadians in support of their political initiatives and I would suggest that any individual concerned with the protection of individual freedoms in the last bastion of constitutionally guaranteed firearms rights in the world give generously.
The best defense is a good offense and that means taking the fight to the enemy proactively. The example that john g posted is an example. Get all the mileage one can out of pointing out that convicted rapists are for unarmed women. Perhaps a TV ad could be made of a small, but martial arts trained, woman being attacked by an average male twice her weight. One wouldn’t have to likely do more than a single take of the ad to get video of the male easily overpowering the woman. A woman who can successfully take on a fit man twice her weight needs to be very very good – good enough that the average male has no fear of an unarmed woman. Then, one can show the other option of a woman pulling out her .45 and pumping 4 rounds into the attacking male. Simunition would be used, but the sting of simunition would likely make the scene more realistic.
A woman alone with her children is defenseless without a gun. If she chose the “evil looking” AR15 as her home defense weapon, the psychologic effect of pointing it at an intruder (given the MSM hype about “assault rifles”) would likely have an effect similar to the one of the sound made chambering a round in a pump action shotgun. Now admittedly the recoil of an AR15 is considerably less than that of a pistol grip 12 gauge, but at close range the shotgun is far more effective at making a single shot stop and has less unwanted penetration of walls than the .223 round. Still, the deficits of an underpowered .223 round can be compensated for with a 20 round magazine.
What we need to do in Canada is to bring back our right to keep loaded firearms in our houses for the purposes of dealing with the unwelcome intrusions of two legged vermin. Once we get that right back, then it’s on to concealed carry. Likely to get that right would mean firing all police below a threshold age and hiring new ones who haven’t been brainwashed into believing that the right to keep and bear arms is a police prerogative.
What we need to do in Canada is to bring back our right to keep loaded firearms in our houses for the purposes of dealing with the unwelcome intrusions of two legged vermin.
How is it illegal to have a loaded firearm in your house as long as you’re there and it’s nearby? You can even legally wear a concealed loaded handgun around the property it’s licensed to be at.
@ North_of_60:
Nope. You cannot wear a restricted firearm on your property, only in the dwelling place it is registered to. As well you cannot load a firearm anywhere unless it is a place safe to discharge a firearm.
Both those laws are found directly in the Firearms Act.
Of course self defence has trumped these laws many times. But still.
In the 28 years I’ve lived at my present residence, on two occaisions, I’ve had LOADED firearms available, easily within reach, to deal with, let call them unsavoury characters. At 5-6 am.
They weren’t idle but they were both aboriginal. And police took a long time to get there. Over half an hour both times.
Just stating facts.
@ Loki: good points.
The Ar-15 which discharges .223 or 5.56 calibre actually penetrates walls less than a shotgun discharging buck shot. If you go to youtube you can see several demonstrations of this.
Since citizens can load an AR with soft tip rounds designed for hunting coyotes or deer, these make excellent stoppers of men as well with less potential for through and through and more potential for damage… as well as less wall penetration.
While I do agree with you about the shotgun placing 8 or 9 pellots in a person at once, is a great benefit. Moreover if one becomes proficient with shotgun speedloaders, one can load it as fast as any other firearm reasonably.
However to each their own.
Well, I’m prepared to give Frum his due: he’s a smart man and a good writer.
But he suffers from the same malady that afflicts far too many large C Conservatives: he comes across as a sneering elitist, who would be much more comfortable sitting at a table with moneyed, power-broking Liberals than enjoying the fellowship and homey insights of us simple folks.
Anyone telling a woman to grab 12ga pump instead of an AR is a jerk.
Ever compared recoil and muzzle blast of 12ga with 223? A-ha!
The fat bastard could be fine with 12ga shotgun, but it can simply fly from the hands of a slim young girl.
What’s the word? IN-CON-SI-DE-RA-TE
Wife shoots 12GA no problems. She’s 120 pounds. It’s called training.
If you want to use an AR for self defence by all means. Training with any gun is most important if you are planning on relying on one for self defence. Lots of things that can go wrong with an AR especially of you’re nervous.
Oh, boy… Thanks for an anti-gun argument, Forest. With friends like you…
You guys don’t really get what a rhetorical question is, do you? Because it’s very clear that this is what that was. And further more, comments from the peanut gallery were very clearly not appropriate.
And just so we’re clear, that ‘answer’ wasn’t a real answer. It’s just bs parroting. Seriously, why not nukes? Why can Americans not own nukes? The 2nd Amendment says “arms”, which at the time meant muskets, swords and cannons. So if we can interpret that to mean assault weapons, why not nukes?
Never in their wildest dreams would the founders of the US have imagined that some drunk with a day’s pay could wander down to ye old gun shoppe and purchase a weapon that to us would seem like a Star Trek phaser.
Anti gun 454?
You need to read what I said again.
John,
We have no idea what the founders would have thought about machine guns or semi automatic weapons- though at the end of their lives some early versions had come out. So please do not try and speak for them.
We do know that they were well familiar with weapons of mass destruction as gunpowder plots had rocked European countries due to civil unrest. As well they were familiar with massacres. They did not appear to be that concerned about it.
They did well intend that the United States would have preserved the right to keep and bear arms as well familiar to all English people as this was founded on ideas from the Age of Enlightenment and entrenched in the English Bill of Rights.
My guess is that they would view the protection against tyranny as utmost important.
As to nuclear weapons, you cannot protect yourself or defend against tyranny from within with a nuke. Nukes cannot be compared to firearms in these terms. The Supreme Court makes it clear that the intent of the 2A was to mean weapons commonly available to the military as in use by a common soldier.
454guy, how well a woman does with a shotgun compared to an AR15 all depends on practice. I’ve been outshot by women half my weight when the weapon was a shotgun. Then, I’ve done far better shooting a 30-06 lightweight rifle than a woman who couldn’t handle the recoil.
In a home defense situation, the best weapon to use is one that one is experienced in handling and comfortable with. I happen to like a shotgun for this scenario as the psychologic effect of confronting an individual with a shotgun makes it far more likely one won’t have to use it and create a mess in ones house. Forest, point taken about penetration of .223 rounds compared to buckshot. The pistol that I’m most accurate with is my Ruger .22 and an eye shot with this pistol is something that would be very easy to do. The nice thing about a .22 round once it gets inside the skull is that it riccocets back and forth destroying brain tissue in its path while not exiting the skull. This is also a pistol I’ve found that women can very easily shoot with.
As far as having a loaded pistol in ones home in BC, my ATT has the following wording:
Firearms may only be loaded and/or carried on your person while you are actively engaged in target practice or a target shooting competition
So, unless you’re prepared to go up against a judge with your own defintions of the terms of “target practice” and “target shooting competition” I’d advise using a shotgun rather than a pistol to deal with 2 legged vermin enterming ones home. In Canada, an AR15 is considered to be a “restricted weapon” and thus the prohibition against having a loaded AR15 in ones home holds in Canada at present. I consider impromptu target practice involving 2 legged vermin in ones home to be valid, but I’m not about to test my theory in court.
@ Loki. Agree completely. The best gun for self defence is the gun you are most familiar with. Muscle memory.
I prefer a shotgun because I know the wounds it can do to a human body. If I have to be in that situation, I want it to end quickly. Most people die by bleeding out, not by some magical movie one shot thing everyone sees in a hollywood movie. I’ve seen more than my share of people shot several times still walking around longer than they should be.
As for the AR-15 there are a lot of semi auto unrestricted rifles in that category, which use the same STANAG or PMAG magazines if one wants an unrestricted one so they don’t have to deal with the BS. It burns my hide that the AR-15 is restricted for BS reasons but when it comes to gun laws, nothing much makes any sense.