Thursday, May 27, 2010

G8/G20

Two months ago, the Tory government told Canadians that security costs for the two summits would be less than $200-million. In just eight weeks, those projections have nearly quintupled. The Harper government should be shame faced over either the sudden escalation of costs or their initial less-than-forthcoming estimates. And they might want to think twice before criticizing cost overruns by the previous Liberal government, such as the $1-billion gun registry. The registry is intrusive and ineffective, but at least when spending on it was finished, there was something tangible to show for it.

http://tinyurl.com/33eua7l

27 comments:

wilson said...

Jaw dropping cost, for sure.

''..but at least when spending on it was finished, there was something tangible to show for it''... (yes, an intrusive and ineffective registry!)

Well, Toronto police get ear piercing crowd control machines, and likely miles of super duper crowd control fencing, and portapots and garbage cans for future use.
Think of the hot dog stands springing up everywhere, and I'm not be silly.

Toronto get hundreds of jobs, and hundreds of millions dropped into their coffers for the accomodation costs of hundreds of visitors,
and thousands of protestors have to eat and sleep and be cleaned up after too.

So maybe Kevin Page should tell us what the 'net' costs are,
after asset purchases, jobs and economic gains are shown.

Anonymous said...

Expensive? Yes.

I would like to hear from just one Liberal what they would cut out of the security budget. It would be nice to hear it from Iggy himself but it just won't happen. You know it;I know it.

Comrade Okie said...

In the world of Canadian politicians, and the detached reality that encompasses, the field of broken dreams is now even.

Billion dollar Boondoggle for Billion dollar Boondoggle.

May their self righteous indignation forever rest in peace.

Mine, however...will continue.

Paul Raposo said...

Harper et al are spending a BILLION dollars on the G8/G20, and they get nothing but riots and international scorn.

The TO Pride parade did not get $400,00, even though it brings in tens of millions in tourist dollars, visitors from all over the country and the world; and world wide recognition. And it doesn't need crowd control, riot gear, or snipers on roof tops.

Clearly Harper's priorities are wholly mixed up and the man needs a long rest--in opposition.

Paul Raposo said...

Comrade Okie

Billion dollar Boondoggle for Billion dollar Boondoggle.

The gun registry saves lives. the G8/G20 will cost lives.

I'm fairly certain if you ask the average constable on the street which they would rather have in Canada, I'll hazard a guess that the "Summit" would be last on their list and the registry would be in the top three.

KC said...

Expensive? Yes.

I would like to hear from just one Liberal what they would cut out of the security budget.


I'm not a Liberal but if you want to "cut... the security budget" don't have the damn thing in Toronto! This is by far the most expensive gathering of international leaders so don't give me this crap about these being necessarily incurred expenses. This is a monumental failure of judgment on the part of the Conservatives.

Comrade Okie said...

Rapuso, you are what's wrong with the uber left wing of the Liberal Party. You have no understanding of reality, and the attitudes of people like you simply drag the big tent party into the arena of scorn.

The country is in a recession, and it can't afford to pay for every special interest groups fave past times. By all accounts the Toronto Gay Pride will survive on it's own merits, rather than dependancy on government handouts.

Set your people free, have the courage to sever the umbilical cord.

Paul Raposo said...

Comrade Okie

Rapuso,

Unsurprisingly childish.

you are what's wrong with the uber left wing of the Liberal Party.

And you are what is wrong with Canada, in general.

You have no understanding of reality,

Coming from a member of the CPC that's a spurious statement.

and the attitudes of people like you simply drag the big tent party into the arena of scorn.

If a tent gets too big, it collapses in the middle.

The country is in a recession,

Put there by Harper--the man you voted for three times.

and it can't afford to pay for every special interest groups fave past times.

But tax payers can pay 0NE BILLION DOLLARS for Harper to get his picture taken with Obama at a Tim Hortons.

By all accounts the Toronto Gay Pride will survive on it's own merits,

As well could the Calgary Stampede, but that won't stop them from receiving millions in tax dollars.

rather than dependancy on government handouts.

Too bad we couldn't say the same for friends of Harper--and Tony Clement.

Set your people free, have the courage to sever the umbilical cord.

As soon as the CPC and it's supports have their mouths surgically removed from the tax payer teat.

Paul Raposo said...

Comrade Okie

The country is in a recession, and it can't afford to pay for every special interest groups fave past times. By all accounts the Toronto Gay Pride will survive on it's own merits, rather than dependancy on government handouts.

Now that I have out you in your place, please explain how the G8/G20 at ONE BILLION DOLLARS, is a better use of my tax dollars, and a better investment in Canada, than $400,000 for the Toronto pride parade.

Skinny Dipper said...

$1,000,000,000: we could have had 2500 Toronto Pride Parades. We could have had 12,520 Lethbridge Whoop-up Days!

Anonymous said...

Thats a lot of pepper spray!

James C Morton said...

folks -- this is a quotation from the National Post -- not known as uber leftist!

Comrade Okie said...

Rapuso, your emotional diatribe and lengthy cut and pastes is indicative of the point I was making in my earlier post directed to you. If you had been able to read past your initial juvenile and emotional reaction to my post, you would have picked up on the not so subtle critcism of the billion dollar expenses for the upcoming summit meetings. Then perhaps you could have reflected on the Liberal party's waste of a billion dollars on an unnecessary and unproductive long gun registry. My original post was largely tongue in cheek. You are familiar with the concept, aren't you?

As to your pitching for Pride funding, compare the regional outlays already committed from that tourism fund before whining about the Calgary Stampede. Toronto, and southern Ontario have done very nicely so far thank you very much. As has Montreal and PQ. My little Province on the other hand has been allocated a mere $141,000 to date.

Again I suggest you set yourself and your people free from handout mentality, and I don't see how one has to be member of the CPC in order to offer advice geared toward fiscal responsibility. Is that a quality not encompassed in your view of what is necessary to be a Liberal?

Stephen Downes said...

I would like to hear from just one Liberal what they would cut out of the security budget.

It's unlikely that we'll ever know what was in the security budget. I can't imagine the Tories releasing this information.

Paul Raposo said...

Comrade Okie

Rapuso,

Still unsurprisingly childish.

your emotional diatribe and lengthy cut and pastes

Actually, there were no "cut and pastes" in my reply. That would imply that I had lifted information from another website, and then posted that information here as my own.

What I have done, and am doing now, is parsing your absurd comments and reducing them to the drivel that they are.

is indicative of the point I was making in my earlier post directed to you.

And your use of phrases and words, which you clearly do not know the meaning of, are indicative of a conservative not use to thinking on their own, nor being confronted with individual, rational thought.

If you had been able to read past your initial juvenile and emotional reaction to my post,

Clearly, Okie, there is only one poster acting childish, here. To call you juvenile, would indicate that you had reached some level of maturity, past the obvious "terrible twos" you are currently suffering.

you would have picked up on the not so subtle critcism of the billion dollar expenses for the upcoming summit meetings.

I, and I'm certain others, saw no such thing. What I read was a conbot popping off about a gun registry that works, and comparing that with a ONE BILLION DOLLAR photo-op for Harper.

Then perhaps you could have reflected on the Liberal party's waste of a billion dollars on an unnecessary and unproductive long gun registry.

Again, the people who matter--law enforcement--would;d disagree with you assessment. Perhaps if you weren't so wrapped up in your hatred of all things Liberal, you would see that the registry works, and it is yet another tool in the arsenal of law enforcement.

That you would take away one of those tools, shows that like most Conservatives, you don't give a damn about Canada's police forces, nor their safety.

My original post was largely tongue in cheek. You are familiar with the concept, aren't you?

Your original post was an example of the banality that taints the CPC and most of it's acolytes.

As to your pitching for Pride funding, compare the regional outlays already committed from that tourism fund before whining about the Calgary Stampede.

The Calgary Stampede receiving close to 1.5 MILLION dollars is absurd, when compared to the much more popular Toronto Pride Parade receiving nothing.

When you have the guts to address the simple fact that the Pride Parade was not funded because it is a pride parade, your opinion on this subject will matter.

Toronto, and southern Ontario have done very nicely so far thank you very much.

Provide examples to back up your claims.

As has Montreal and PQ.

Again, provide examples.

My little Province on the other hand has been allocated a mere $141,000 to date.

For what?

Again I suggest you set yourself and your people free from handout mentality,

And again, I suggest you rail against a ONE BILLION DOLLAR photo-op for Harper, and stop belly-aching about a gun registry that saves lives.

and I don't see how one has to be member of the CPC in order to offer advice geared toward fiscal responsibility.

When you demonstrate a belief that fiscal responsibility should extend to all parties, not just the one you voted for, your thoughts on this will be taken seriously.

Is that a quality not encompassed in your view of what is necessary to be a Liberal?

The Liberal party created a 13 billion dollar surplus, after Mulroney drove Canada into debt. Along comes Harper and the CPC, and we're in SIXTY BILLION DOLLARS of debt. Clearly there is only one party capable of keeping Canada in the black, and it ain't your boy, Okie.

Okie said...

Rapuso, I am long past the stage of feeling compelled to debate with an understudy of the university debating team such as yourself.

Your cut and paste style holds little interest to me, but I will say this to you in response to your obvious lack of initiative to do your own research. Typical of your mentally lazy, everyone owes you generation who are long on posturing, but short on voting.

Under that tourism program, which you didn't bother to research, Ontario received approx. $12 million, PQ received $15 mil, and B.C. recieved $4.2 mil. The ROC got $5.8 mil. From which my province has $141,000 allocated to it so far. It is a $100 million program supposedly, so I expect there will be others who qualify as time passes. Just a couple of events in the TO area garnered approx $3 mil each, and yet you begrudge the Stampede $1.5?? You want it all for yourselves?

The $400,000 that the Pride org was denied, which seems to be sticking in your craw, was by their own words required only for enhancements from previous events, which brings me back to my earlier point. During a recession the country cannot afford every special interest groups fave past times.

As to your fetish with the long gun registry, did you know that opponents have used internet polls and ones that ask questions that do not represent the issue in order to dishonestly support their cause? You won't have to look any further than this aggregate for proof of that. I could go into a much longer discussion on the long gun registry, but I expect you would prefer head bobbing with the BS'ers on that issue. Instead I will simply say this, Rex Murphy summed up the situation quite well on a commentary on CBC. Video link is available. Plus the problem seems to be in urban environments, so I say let them set their own rules and leave the rest of us alone.

We got along without you before we met you, gonna get along without you now. That's a paraphrase of a verse from an old song. I know, I might as well be speaking Swahili to you.

Okie said...

Just so you understand Rapuso, that's opponents of the current bill to scrap the long gun registry. Or proponents of retaining the long gun registry. Just so you don't feel emboldened to hold that out as significant.

Paul Raposo said...

Comrade Okie

Rapuso,

I'd question whether you realize that the simple childish act of misspelling a name aptly demonstrates your lack of character, but the simple act of purposefully misspelling a person's name shows you wouldn't understand that. So it's a moot point.

I am long past the stage of feeling compelled to debate with an understudy of the university debating team such as yourself.

How can you be expected to be taken seriously?

Your cut and paste style holds little interest to me,

Sorry. From now on all my replies will be in the form of "Bazooka Joe" comics.

but I will say this to you in response to your obvious lack of initiative to do your own research.

When presenting an argument, it is you who should present facts to back up your claims. Your readers should not be expected to your legwork for you, cupcake.

As you will see, I provide links to back up my statements. You merely rely on creative BS, and your own self-important opinion.

Typical of your mentally lazy, everyone owes you generation who are long on posturing, but short on voting.

In other words, you haven't access to anything that will remotely prove your points, so you retreat to childish name calling and inane posturing. Typical of the conbot incapable of independent thought.

Under that tourism program, which you didn't bother to research,

You made the point, sunshine, it is your responsibility to provide links to back up your facts.

Ontario received approx. $12 million,

And where did that money go?

Since we are talking about the TO pride parade, did that money go to any LGBTQ organizations? How was that money dispersed, that it's dispersement backs up your argument?

Your argument was that since Ontario received, what you claim is a generous portion of tourism federal monies, that the TO pride parade was duly ignored, and not slighted in being refused $400,000.

PQ received $15 mil, and B.C. recieved $4.2 mil. The ROC got $5.8 mil.

And again, Okie, what does any of that money have to do with the TO pride parade being turned down, for simply being a LGBTQ event?

From which my province has $141,000 allocated to it so far.

Again, for what?

It is a $100 million program supposedly, so I expect there will be others who qualify as time passes.

Funny. Harper can't afford $400,000 for an event attended by visitors from all over the world, and which brings in millions in tourist dollars, yet he can afford ONE BILLION DOLLARS for some face time with politicians, that tax-paying Canadians will never get to meet.

And what's funnier still, is you seems to justify this, while decrying the gun registry, which benefits all Canadians.

Paul Raposo said...

Con't

Just a couple of events in the TO area garnered approx $3 mil each, and yet you begrudge the Stampede $1.5?? You want it all for yourselves?

I was wrong--it was only 1 million. On top of the 27 MILLION DOLLARS they have received since 2007:

http://tinyurl.com/362rq3l

What say you now, Okie?

The $400,000 that the Pride org was denied, which seems to be sticking in your craw, was by their own words required only for enhancements from previous events,

Oh! As opposed to the 25 MILLION the Stampede received to fix up their fairgrounds?

which brings me back to my earlier point. During a recession the country cannot afford every special interest groups fave past times.

27 MILLION

As to your fetish with the long gun registry,

How does my fetish differ from yours, Okie?

did you know that opponents have used internet polls and ones that ask questions that do not represent the issue in order to dishonestly support their cause?

Oh! Like this poll used by the CSSA:

Lobbyist Tony Bernardo releasing the results of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association's biased anti-cop web poll was his first highlight.

http://tinyurl.com/33axr2b

I could go into a much longer discussion on the long gun registry, but I expect you would prefer head bobbing with the BS'ers on that issue.

Oh, I'm sure you have time to sit out there in NB and blast at anything that moves, Okie, but you don't have time to debate your hatred of legal authority, proof of which is available right here on Jim's blog. I can even provide a link to your comments, in case you've forgotten the things you written about the police.

Plus the problem seems to be in urban environments, so I say let them set their own rules and leave the rest of us alone.

Yeah, god forbid you can't brandish your firearm as you have been for 25 years.

The fact of the matter is, police services from ALL OVER CANADA support the registry. They do not seem to feel it is an urban issue. Frankly, I will take their opini0n, over that of some whiny malcontent, who holds some bizarre attachment to his "boom stick".

We got along without you before we met you, gonna get along without you now.

Oh, I'm sure you had fun not having your absurd comments challenged. But I've been here before, long before you, and I will continue to post when I see fit. As long as James will allow me.

That's a paraphrase of a verse from an old song. I know, I might as well be speaking Swahili to you.

Now, are you talking about the Skeeter Davis version, the She & Him version? I prefer the She & Him version myself. You?

Paul Raposo said...

And just so you understand, Okie, I know you were referring to gun owners getting along without the gun registry, with your choice of song lyric. I just couldn't resist a parting shot--so to speak.

Just so you don't feel emboldened to hold that out as significant.

Okie said...

Raspuso, or Rasputin as you claim to have understood what I was implying with the song lyrics, why did you feel the need to ramble on about something entirely unrelated?

I did find your choice of the word "brandishing" rather amusing. Do you always just make sh*t up or do you reserve that for special rants? You can post whatever you want from over at "Jims" place, I don't care. Anything I have written would be true, unlike your offerings. Back to your claim to understand my use of the song lyric, no you didn't understand, nor did I expect you to. Too much myopia on your part to grasp a more complicated thought process I would say. Actually I find your comprehension abilities similar to your debating abilities. Grossly inadequate.

Taking that thought back to your original mistake of misinterpreting my comment comparing billion dollar boondoggles. You flame far too quickly to absorb more complicated thought and as such are basically a waste of time to interact with.

Oh, and what's a bazooka joe comic? Is that something you stock your library with?

You know Ras, when a person can't formulate a few paragraphs without copying and pasting in order to remember whether they did or did not address some earth altering point, well it's time to lay off the Ghanji. How do you expect to be taken seriously?

I'm glad you didn't further embarass yourself by arguing the validity of my statement about the dishonesty of polls being offered as support by the pro long gun registry forces. Did you look up Rex Murphy's video or were you too lazy to do that too? Have you checked recent figures on crimes and murders committed with knives? Did you know that 34% of the 611 homicides in Canada last year were committed with knives? Better get busy on a registry for that too Ras. Further, 34% were committed with guns which would be approx 200. Long guns were involved in approx one third of those or approx 65.

Actually if you really wanted to make a difference in how many people die by unnatural causes each year, you wouldn't waste your time pontificating about long guns, you would advocate for motor vehicles to be equipped with governors. That would aid greatly in keeping all those non malcontent types who break the law ongoing by racing up and down the highways from killing and maiming themselves and others. There are close to 3,000 deaths on the highways each year.

If you want further details on the tourism program, go look it up. I nearly drew you a map ya lazy bugger. Your sniveling about the 400k is just pathetic really and a clear indication of who is whiny. Like a teenie not getting their way. They got money last year, but not this year. Just because they got it once doesn't mean they are entitled to it for life. It's not like working for the Civil Service you know, and naturally you didn't address my point about them wanting it merely for enhancements. That doesn't fit within your illogical wild eyed approach does it? About the 27 million you claim the Stampede received, how long has it been around? A tad longer than your pet parade I expect.Your jealousy and self centred outlook is astonishing.

So Ras, your highly emotional uber leftist ranting, accompanied by your intellectually dishonest approach accomplished nothing more than making it clear that you fit the term Uber Liberal to a tee. Before taking your last shot next time Ras, I suggest some significant time at the range to improve your aim. Don't forget to stroke the barrel lovingly first. wuka wuka...

Paul Raposo said...

Okie

Raspuso, or Rasputin as you claim to have understood what I was implying with the song lyrics, why did you feel the need to ramble on about something entirely unrelated?

I just couldn't resist a parting shot. And Rasputin was a great disco hit by Boney M.

I did find your choice of the word "brandishing" rather amusing.

You appear rather unhinged, and I believe that was the best choice when describing you, and your particular fetish.

Do you always just make sh*t up or do you reserve that for special rants?

Easy, cupcake. Don't get yourself all riled up now.

You can post whatever you want from over at "Jims" place, I don't care.

Yes you do.

Anything I have written would be true, unlike your offerings.

Truth, as you see it, Okie.

Back to your claim to understand my use of the song lyric, no you didn't understand, nor did I expect you to. Too much myopia on your part to grasp a more complicated thought process I would say.

I think you're upset that there are more than one version of the song, and you needed me to inform you of that salient fact. You need to get out more, Okie.

Actually I find your comprehension abilities similar to your debating abilities. Grossly inadequate.

Coming from an ignorant person such as yourself, Okie, that opinion doesn't mean much.

Taking that thought back to your original mistake of misinterpreting my comment comparing billion dollar boondoggles.

If you feel the need to explain it further, Okie, clearly your analogy was off.

You compared Harper's ONE BILLION DOLLAR photo-op, to a gun registry used by police forces around Canada to protect citizens. That you don't see the disingenuousness of that, speaks volumes about you.

You flame far too quickly to absorb more complicated thought and as such are basically a waste of time to interact with.

If you had presented a salient argument that properly compared a wasteful ONE BILLION DOLLAR event for Harper, with a gun registry that works and protects not only Canadians, but also the police, your comment might have made sense.

Oh, and what's a bazooka joe comic? Is that something you stock your library with?

It's the story of your life, Okie. Inane meanderings of an imbecile.

You know Ras, when a person can't formulate a few paragraphs without copying and pasting in order to remember whether they did or did not address some earth altering point, well it's time to lay off the Ghanji.

Considering you rarely make any points in your replies, Okie, you should consider parsing comments.

How do you expect to be taken seriously?

By thoroughly destroying your absurd arguments and leaving you frothing at the mouth, in a desperate attempt to respond.

I'm glad you didn't further embarass yourself by arguing the validity of my statement about the dishonesty of polls being offered as support by the pro long gun registry forces.

And I'm glad you embarrassed yourself by not following that link and seeing what that poll was about, Okie.

The more your respond, the further you present evidence of your ignorance.

Did you look up Rex Murphy's video or were you too lazy to do that too?

Did you read the links I provided, or are you too ignorant to do that?

Paul Raposo said...

Con't

Did you know that 34% of the 611 homicides in Canada last year were committed with knives?

There are already laws covering offenses with weapons such as knives, Okie.

Further, 34% were committed with guns which would be approx 200. Long guns were involved in approx one third of those or approx 65.

So your feel that 65 people being killed with long guns is a paltry number, Okie? Do you feel that those deaths were somehow less important because they were long guns, Okie?

Does the fact that, as you seem to feel, only 34% of deaths were from guns, that we should scrap a registry that aids Canadian police in protecting Canadians?

...you would advocate for motor vehicles to be equipped with governors...There are close to 3,000 deaths on the highways each year.

So, would you see that cars are no longer registered, Okie? Drivers would no longer need licenses, Okie?

What you don't seem to understand, Okie, is that a cars primary purpose is transportation. A guns primary purpose is projecting chunks of metal to impact on bodies. That you would compare accidental deaths by careless drivers, with wanton murder by gun owners, shows your complete disconnect from reality.

If you want further details on the tourism program, go look it up.

You made the point, Okie, it's your responsibility to present facts to back up your argument, cupcake.

I nearly drew you a map ya lazy bugger.

You posted numbers without links to back up your numbers, Okie. That's lazy presentation of an argument, and shows how foolish you are.

Your sniveling about the 400k is just pathetic really and a clear indication of who is whiny.

Oh, Okie. You really sound like you got your wittle feelings hurt. All you're doing here, is showing me that you are a child, in a man's world. Please do grow up.

Like a teenie not getting their way.

While you're merely a petulant child throwing a temper tantrum. You are in need of a long time out, boy.

They got money last year, but not this year.

Because Tony Clement droped a load of bricks in his pants, because money went to a gay pride parade.

When will you admit that they were declined for being a gay org, Okie?

Paul Raposo said...

Con't

Just because they got it once doesn't mean they are entitled to it for life.

They didn't get it because they are a gay org, and not located in Calgary. Unless Harper can pander to his hard right base, he will not give any Canadian organization our own money back.

It's not like working for the Civil Service you know, and naturally you didn't address my point about them wanting it merely for enhancements.

How does that make their claim any less important, than the Stampede's, who received 1 MILLION? If work needs to be done for an event that fosters tourism, money should be given out to improve the event.

About the 27 million you claim the Stampede received,

If you weren't so lazy, you would have read the link I provided. I can see that you never allow facts to cloud your judgment, Okie.

how long has it been around? A tad longer than your pet parade I expect.

So because the Stampede is older, it deserves more tax dollars? Is that the best argument you've got, moron? God you're ignorance is boundless!

The TO parade has been around since the early seventies, cupcake. And it is an international event watched, and visited around the world.

Your jealousy and self centred outlook is astonishing.

And your reasoning is sad and pathetic, Okie.

So Ras, your highly emotional uber leftist ranting, accompanied by your intellectually dishonest approach accomplished nothing more than making it clear that you fit the term Uber Liberal to a tee.Before taking your last shot next time Ras, I suggest some significant time at the range to improve your aim. Don't forget to stroke the barrel lovingly first. wuka wuka...

Considering your obsession with "long" guns, Okie, clearly there is only one person stroking a barrel around here. Men with big guns are usually compensating for their shortcomings elsewhere.

Okie said...

Ras,

As with the original Rasputin, societies are at times influenced by those whose inputs are similar. Like the weird pipers that persons such as yourself attach their thinking to.

When a person takes up as much space as you do to deliver a load of total horse sh*t, you know you have flown over the cuckoo nest and made a hard landing. You need to leave politics and greater considerations to grown ups. Offering up some extraordinarly twisted logic to try to skirt past nearly 3,000 deaths so you can focus on the 65, is demented. You can't even correlate the rising numbers of deaths and injuries via use of knives.

Your rantings continue to confirm my orignal post directed to you. You and your ilk of Uber leftist faux liberals are what keeps the Liberal party languishing in the 25% range. Your myopic and obsessive compulsive personalities result in the party being ridiculed and held out to scorn by a significant number of the other 75%.

As for your obsession with being denied the monies for "enhancements" of your pet parade, get over it. The country isn't obliged to provide funds for you and those like minded to indulge in your personal fetishes . You are just one of the all too many who suffer from hand out mentality.

Some last thoughts as I'm not going to waste anymore time with you on this thread. The large majority of people I have known who own long guns, are not obsessed with them. Largely they don't give them a great deal of thought until the issues of the small minded, self righteous little control freaks such as yourself enters the picture demanding compliance with their designs, or that the guns be taken away altogether. There is plenty of evidence to support the thinking that this is what the long gun registry was intended to accomplish over time. If you look at the website that provides your favorite mental gruel on this subject you will find that they proudly announced 87,893 long guns have been seized since the begining of the registry. Yet they hold out that it is not their intention to seize peoples firearms. Right. Often the same type of people who made the decision to taser Robert Dziekanski within 25 seconds of their arrival at the Vancouver airport are the ones seizing long guns on the premise of public safety. That point along with a number of other spurious claims they make. They try to make their case in the exact same manner you do, via lies and deceit.

I will be sure to correct any future lies and misinformation you may post that I come accross, in the meantime, happy trails and don't cinch your chaps up too tight...

Paul Raposo said...

Okie

Like the weird pipers that persons such as yourself attach their thinking to.

Oh my, Okie, you're really going off on a tangent! You should stick to stroking your long gun, and leave the philosophical postulations to those who actually have the intellect to tackle such subjects.

When a person takes up as much space as you do to deliver a load of total horse sh*t, you know you have flown over the cuckoo nest and made a hard landing.

Right next to you, no doubt. You are to character judgments, what Bazooka Joe is to comics.

You need to leave politics and greater considerations to grown ups.

Which is why I left you playing with yourself in your sandbox, Okie.

Offering up some extraordinarly twisted logic to try to skirt past nearly 3,000 deaths so you can focus on the 65, is demented.

And dismmissing those 65 deaths, as being inconsequential to defend your lust of firearms, demonstrates the sort of disaesed thinking that permeates the minds of those who denounce the gun registry.

Face it, Okei, a guns sole purpose to wound, maim, or kill. A car is get people from point A to B. Comparing deaths from those two items, shows your total lack of understanding in how the world works.

When someone gets behind the wheel of a car, they don't intend to kill someone. When a gun owner pulls the trigger, they intend to kill.

You can't even correlate the rising numbers of deaths and injuries via use of knives.

And you dismiss 200 gun related deaths as trivial. I know you hate cops, but I didn't think you hated all Canadians.

You and your ilk of Uber leftist faux liberals

I'd rather be an uber left liberal, than a cop hating, gun fetishist, who trivializes gun deaths, based on what type of gun kills a person.

are what keeps the Liberal party languishing in the 25% range.

And wacko right-wingers like you are what keeps Harper from getting a majority. Thank you, Okie! Just keep writing, and Harper will soon be out of a job.

Your myopic and obsessive compulsive personalities result in the party being ridiculed and held out to scorn by a significant number of the other 75%.

Sixty-six percent of Canada doesn't like Harper--or you, Okie. Learn to live with it, boy.

As for your obsession with being denied the monies for "enhancements" of your pet parade, get over it.

And as far as NB getting "only" $141,000, get over it. That's about $140,500 more than your province deserves, considering what you add to Canada.

The country isn't obliged to provide funds for you and those like minded to indulge in your personal fetishes.

And the country isn't obliged to kill the gun registry, just so those of you with your gun fetish can continue to wave your armaments around, and play cowboys. Face it, you're just boys.

You are just one of the all too many who suffer from hand out mentality.

And you are of the many who contribute nothing to society, and chafe at those of us who do. Get a life and maybe your opinion will matter, Okie.

Some last thoughts as I'm not going to waste anymore time with you on this thread.

You continually reply, Okie, because you are a pathetic nobody, who for the first time in your life, actually has someone paying attention to you.

Like the petulant child you are, you don't care if you get good attention, or negative attention--you just want to be noticed.

I pity you, so I converse with you. I feel sorry for you and your total lack of usefulness to society, so I try to make you feel good, by acknowledging your replies.

You're welcome.

Paul Raposo said...

Con't

The large majority of people I have known who own long guns, are not obsessed with them.

Yes you are. You buy magazines about them; build racks for your guns, as if they're trophy's, to take the place of the trophy you never earned in life; you whine about the cops "taking" your precious guns. You're like addicts in need of a fix. Pathetic.

Largely they don't give them a great deal of thought

Take away your guns, and you're nothing.

until the issues of the small minded, self righteous little control freaks such as yourself

I'm sorry that Canadians want a registry to protect cops, when they have to go into a dangerous situation. God knows guns owners never go crazy and kill cops with their guns. No, that never happens.

enters the picture demanding compliance with their designs, or that the guns be taken away altogether.

Considering you think 200 deaths from guns are nothing important, and even less so if the death was by a long gun, your opinion doesn't really matter, Okie.

There is plenty of evidence to support the thinking that this is what the long gun registry was intended to accomplish over time.

Whose full of shit now, Okie? Please proved evidence that cops want to take away the guns of law abiding citizens, who register them and use them only for lawful purposes.

Your mind is poisoned with an American mentality that guns matter more than people, and you're trying to bring that kind of diseased thinking into Canada. We don't want it. So either learn to accept it, of move away.

87,893 long guns have been seized since the begining of the registry.

Since 2009, 111,533 firearms were in police custody for community safety reasons.

Yet they hold out that it is not their intention to seize peoples firearms.

In your world, any nut would be permitted to brandish his weapon freely, and without restraint against any law abiding citizen.

Often the same type of people who made the decision to taser Robert Dziekanski

Your straw man has blown away in the wind, Okie.

What exactly does one have to do with the other, Okie? For your analogy to make sense, the police would have to seize the guns, and then use them on the people they took them from. You're really grasping to try and defend your belief that any abnormal person should be permitted to own weapons.

And the fact that you are painting all cops as the same, by using the Robert Dziekanski case, shows your hatred of police. Are you proud of that, Okie?

They try to make their case in the exact same manner you do, via lies and deceit.

What you call lies, are in fact their effort to protect Canadian citizens from murder. What you call deceit, are facts.

I will be sure to correct any future lies and misinformation you may post that I come accross,

Then you won't be responding, because I provide facts, while you provide opinion.

You have provided nothing here to back up your ridiculous claims--just your sad opinion, which doesn't really matter.

in the meantime, happy trails and don't cinch your chaps up too tight...

And remember a gun blast is not an orgasm, Okie. Just because you gave your gun a girl's name, doesn't make it a woman.