Conceal & Carry: The Right To Bear Arms

[Charles J. White]

Perhaps it is time that this so-called "conservative",(yes, I use that term very very loosely in this case) government should bring this forward in the house of commons so that the Robert's Rules of Order crowd can debate something legitimate for a change?

[ShadowCat]

What is legitimate to debate?
Right or wrong there is no such provision or guarantee in our charter-
Bruce Montague was shown that-

[ccurrie]

What is legitimate to debate?
Right or wrong there is no such provision or guarantee in our charter-
Bruce Montague was shown that-

Nor is there anything preventing Parliament from re-establishing what was a customary right from the time of Magna Carta, through the Petition of Right, and on up until 1934 when the Firearms Act was passed.

[dave]

I would enjoy seeing it debated, there is no reason why regular Canucks who are of worthy character can't carry. The fact that ordinary citizens "could" be carrying would be a deterrent in itself. The criminal element already do so what is wrong with law abiding citizens having the right to defend themselves?

[Charles J. White]

We need a government with some balls to govern like conservatives - Harper's crew are to the left of Chretien.

Conceal & Carry should be the future, not the past

[Red Green]

I think first you should try to establish a legal right to defend your home with deadly force. Seems to me a country that would prosecute a homeowner for defending his property is a long way from allowing a man to defend himself on public property.

[dave]

I think first you should try to establish a legal right to defend your home with deadly force. Seems to me a country that would prosecute a homeowner for defending his property is a long way from allowing a man to defend himself on public property.

You do have a valid point there.........

[Edward Kennedy]

I think first you should try to establish a legal right to defend your home with deadly force. Seems to me a country that would prosecute a homeowner for defending his property is a long way from allowing a man to defend himself on public property.

I will defend my home with deadly force whenever it is under attack, that is my right and I will exercise it...if the law says no, piss on it, nobody has the right to deny me my RIGHTS!!!

[Lee Enfield]

I think first you should try to establish a legal right to defend your home with deadly force. Seems to me a country that would prosecute a homeowner for defending his property is a long way from allowing a man to defend himself on public property.

It is even legally dangerous to drive a young punk to the police station to be questioned. That is what recent events in winnipeg tell me.