Jump to content

political spray


G-spotter

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 19
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, actually, that stuff about Canadians not being allowed to own guns is a myth. We can own guns but most of us simply choose not to. And we're allowed to decide that for ourselves, unlike some areas of the US where governments have chosen to impose mandatory gun-ownership requirements if you want to exercise your right to vote.

 

 

Ultimately all spray is political, and all politics is spray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a number of communities around the US with such ordinances (pun intended). There was one in the news a few years back somewhere in upstate New York, and in the course of reporting on that particular story it was pointed out that it wasn't an unusual regulation. It's not what I would describe as common or widespread, but it seems it's not unheard of, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a number of communities around the US with such ordinances (pun intended). There was one in the news a few years back somewhere in upstate New York, and in the course of reporting on that particular story it was pointed out that it wasn't an unusual regulation. It's not what I would describe as common or widespread, but it seems it's not unheard of, either.

 

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: Specifics would be nice this time, Murray. This isn't the first time you've been grossly "mistaken" about us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Specifics would be nice this time, Murray. This isn't the first time you've been grossly "mistaken" about us.

 

Kennesaw, GA and Virgin, UT. A proposal in Aumsville, OR failed. That's from a 2001 article ( source ) so there might be a few more now too. Greenleaf, ID is a 2007 addition to the roster. Hardly a vast trend, more of a legal oddity similar to places with laws against spitting on the sidewalk, but three is a number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Grossly mistaken"?

AUMSVILLE, Oregon - The right to bear arms would become a requirement in this south Marion County city, if a former Aumsville city councilor and parks director gets his way.

 

Tim Dunn, a ponytailed grandfather who has lived in Aumsville for more than five years, is proposing an ordinance that would require the head of every household to keep a firearm in the house and to use it for protection.

 

Dunn points to the success of more than two dozen similar laws around the country in reducing crime. He said the ordinance would be akin to a "Beware of Dog" sign for criminals.

 

"This is not about guns," he said. "It's about the right to self-defense in lieu of not being able to have 24-hour police protection."

 

The Aumsville City Council will consider the proposed ordinance tonight at its regular meeting.

 

If passed, up to 1,024 households - the number of residential units within city limits, according to Census 2000 figures - would be expected to have at least one firearm in the house. There are 3,045 residents currently living in 961 housing units.

 

See also Kennesaw Georgia, and apparently some "two dozen other" communities around the country. The town in upstate New York that prompted the news story had tied gun ownership to the franchise - no gun in the house, no ballot. That's why the news story - connecting it to the right to vote made it controversial. That was a few years ago now, so maybe they've repealed it, or watered it down. Maybe it got thrown out by one of those "activists" judges that have taken over your judiciary. Maybe it still stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Grossly mistaken"?

AUMSVILLE, Oregon - The right to bear arms would become a requirement in this south Marion County city, if a former Aumsville city councilor and parks director gets his way.

 

Tim Dunn, a ponytailed grandfather who has lived in Aumsville for more than five years, is proposing an ordinance that would require the head of every household to keep a firearm in the house and to use it for protection.

 

Dunn points to the success of more than two dozen similar laws around the country in reducing crime. He said the ordinance would be akin to a "Beware of Dog" sign for criminals.

 

"This is not about guns," he said. "It's about the right to self-defense in lieu of not being able to have 24-hour police protection."

 

The Aumsville City Council will consider the proposed ordinance tonight at its regular meeting.

 

If passed, up to 1,024 households - the number of residential units within city limits, according to Census 2000 figures - would be expected to have at least one firearm in the house. There are 3,045 residents currently living in 961 housing units.

 

See also Kennesaw Georgia, and apparently some "two dozen other" communities around the country. The town in upstate New York that prompted the news story had tied gun ownership to the franchise - no gun in the house, no ballot. That's why the news story - connecting it to the right to vote made it controversial. That was a few years ago now, so maybe they've repealed it, or watered it down. Maybe it got thrown out by one of those "activists" judges that have taken over your judiciary. Maybe it still stands.

You haven't' shown where any of these "laws" are tied to the right to vote. You haven't even given the name of the town where this supposedly was enacted. Regardless, your supposition that Canadians have more freedom of choice regarding firearms and somehow linking that to an ultra-obscure voting rights case is ridiculous.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...