A copy of an entry that may or may not make it into public scrutiny.
The following is a response to the ludicrous entry concerning soldiers, having guns, are enabled to commit rape and violence because they have those guns.
The man-hating whether wearing a uniform or not is getting pretty thick.
“…Shelley Saywell does have a UNESCO Gandhi Silver Medal for Promoting the Culture of Peace. Yes. But she has something else less auspicious; a total lack of intuitiveness for the pulse of this nation regarding gun laws targeting only law abiding citizens. In her words:
“If you own a firearm legally, then you should appreciate and support the necessity of having strict controls.”
Excuse me for asking Shelley, but WHY should we appreciate and support strict controls?
I have already lived through the vision of many such gun control organizations and do NOT appreciate them one bit. My property was seized. My privacy was invaded. And not one crime was solved on account of those invasions. On grander scale, it is a matter of court record that the registry actually contributed to the deaths of police officers in the RCMP murders at Mayerthorpe and the slaying of two SQ detectives in the controversial Basil Parasiris case.
Perhaps you would like to interview me on this topic?
I may not be a headlining political organization like the CAPC, but like many others I have my own uniquely tantalizing Canadian stories to tell the public about the gun registry. Oh yes I do. And the moral of that story is that it pretty much the opposite of good return on investment for the Canadian public.
I’m writing as though readers here already know me. Let me back up a bit and introduce myself a bit more generically. I am Greg Popik. I am part of WE.
As in WE, the Canadian people.
Let me explain a bit more about who WE are for the benefit of foreign participants. WE elected a government that ran on a platform contradicting EXACTLY that sentiment regarding abolishing the long gun registry.
It is important to note the operative word abolish, not kill.
Kill is a favorite liberal media buzz word used to foster additional division of the Canadian people through misandry and negative images in the attempt to sell more print. I know from some of your video blogs that you’re big on use of the term “harmony.” I’m not sure that we share the same definition, so I’ll reserve noting about this derision until bit further on.
To be fair, our government is a minority government. But to be even more fair, WE elected that same minority government enough times in these few short years that NO ONE wants to ride that idiotic roller-coaster again for at least another 12 months; even despite witty commentary from the usual suspect journalists writing such scathing things about Mr Harper as his fake looking hair.
So lets not kid ourselves about who WE are.
But enough about me though. How about you Elizabeth? I cannot help but notice that you are NOT part of WE. You are of the American people. And while I cannot only speculate why you are not selling your ideology to the American public, I can only presume that it is because:
1) the American public does not buy your ideological wares either; or,
2) you’re grasping for an ideologically empathetic grass-roots audience.
Did you hear that Canada is more inviting to those with a radical liberal outlook? Perhaps it is. WE are nothing, if not a tolerant nation of people.
But I think you might be surprised about that the boundaries on that particular experience. I am saying that because I see you taking greater and greater latitudes with your viewpoint and painting with a fairly large brush.
As for Saywell, she is a Canadian living in Canada.
Her statements form what I consider an argumentative derision of my American cousins, but that does not surprise me:
“I never understand the attitudes – especially of Americans with their Second Amendment rights – who believe binding gun laws and international treaties will somehow impinge on their rights.”
Saywell’s comments, while I strongly object to them, aren’t among the most offensive of its breed. Irrespective of scale, there is nothing in this matter requiring Saywell’s understanding. She is a Canadian speaking on American matters, and few Americans really care what some Canadian has to say on the matter anyway.
WE have tolerated a strongly anti-american segment in Canadian media and government for enough years to have been nationally embarrassed by it at least once. And we will certainly survive any embarrassment generated by the next one.
This tolerance for free speech is based off our inherent love of freedom. We suffer much in the interests of protect it. And we defend Saywell’s right to speak as much as we stand for our right to our firearms. Rights that empower a journalist to print their opinion are the direct counterparts of the rights that empower us to keep and bear arms.
I don’t know about you. But I do not want to see my guns taken because some a**hole in Mumbai shoots 150 christians. Certainly not any more or less than Saywell wants to see her journalistic freedom restricted because some a**hole in Alabama shoots Klan hate literature to Americans and we need to protect our society”.
Be careful before you begin splitting hairs about “reasonable” restrictions on rights Elizabeth.
You have been playing fairly fast and loose with courtesy. Your attribution of violence to men in this latest article is careless, and your defense of its use borders on cavalier.
It is not a long stretch to look upon some of this dialogue as the promotion of hatred against men. For someone who talks about harmony in her video blogs, I find your references absolutely disturbing.More importantly, they show that you have absolutely no IDEA what it means to be Canadian.
I think you are going to find that you’d be well advised to check fire on that nonsense while visiting our country.
Even amongst our most Liberally minded countrymen with the staunchest objections to gun ownership, we have NO tolerance for hate. You’ll be looking long and hard to find allies if you continue this behavior.
By nonsense, I specifically mean this:
“Statistically, men make up the majority of perpetrators in cases of domestic abuse”
When I replace “men” with “negros” and “domestic abuse” for “crime” it becomes immediately clear to me that you are simply the latest bigot on the block with chic liberal clothes.
In the international theater of the Internet, that might not mean much. But you are living on OUR block. And you’re not family.
You’re just visiting.
Elizabeth? I can’t beat Greg’s words. I won’t even dare. His sentiments are mine and rest assured they are shared amongst our SISTERS and BROTHERS.