In the 60's Lyndon Johnson started the Great Society program. Part of this was directed toward stomping out poverty. I think 40+ years latter its safe to say it lead to several generations of people dependent on the government rather than having a positive effect on poverty. On a UN PC note, our inner cities are just like Canada's northern Indian reserves. That is to say that throwing money at the problem is like pouring money in a black hole and nothing ever improves. "I am a victim" psychology is a tough nut to crack. BTW the rural are we live in is armed to the teeth. Many people have concealed weapons permits, almost every household has at least one gun and deer season is a payed holiday at my work. We also have almost zero violent crime. Breaking and entering is also very very rare....:icon_biggrin:
BTW Brewster, I think your comment on pot is spot on and agree with you in regards to discussing a heated issue like this while remaining civil and respectful. I will share a drink of fine Canadian Whiskey with you when I see you in April. Ben
Thanks Ben. Looking forward to it. Lets wash it down with a Bud and a tequila chaser..lol. Couldn't agree more that hand outs aren't the answer. Your observation regarding the native population on Canada is well taken. With the money that we pour into "Indian Affairs" (The government agency is still called that) Canadian natives should all be millionaires. Clearly that isn't the case and there is a lot of corruption going on. We are a long way from the Great Depression times when a man was ashamed to take a hand out. He would offer to do anything to earn what he received. Paint your shed, fix your fence, etc. I don't think that someone in need should feel ashamed of receiving help but they shouldn't feel entitled to it. There is way too much entitlement these days on both sides of the border. Sounds like you guys are a little more "armed" than our rural hunting families. I'll be more careful where I go cow tipping....lol
Not seeing any of the 'pro guns in university' lobby posting in response to the brawl video above. I'd love to know how they think wider gun carrying among students would have affected that particular situation ??
well steve one shot would have stopped it all obviously! kids and guns, some things just should not go together!
Steve, during college we had more than a few drunken brawls out our place. Despite everyone having multiple guns in the house one was never drawn in anger.
That situation was pretty wild though, if only one of the people drew a gun it could have been a lot worse.
You can only assume there were no weapons present. I will bet money one of those kids had a weapon of some sort in that crowd. I still do not think you understand the simple concept some of us are trying to make. The laws like this are useless and impossible to enforce. The ones that obey these laws are not the ones that will fire the first shot but may be able to defend themselves. However, What it will do is take away the safety blanket the criminals have knowing they are the only ones armed.(do some research on this) My police officer brother had a saying - when guns are outlawed - only outlaws will have guns. That is what is happening in the US. I have owned guns all my life but never pulled one in anger. Please don't get me wrong, I don't think assault rifles, extra large clips, etc. should be readily available but I still think I have a right to own and transport a gun without fear of being arrested. I carry a leatherman micro pocket tool and worry I may get arrested if I walk into the wrong building in this state. Let me be clear on this - the way they write laws in this country does nothing to deter true criminals but it waste a hell of a lot of money/manpower, etc. just to impede law abiding citizens such as myself. FYI - on a personal note - I am currently a college student at the ripe young age of 44 and not worried about the ones that may start carrying a gun if the law is changed. They have a very low risk of using it except in self defense.:deadhorse::deadhorse:
