Maybe she and her siblings played with a toy gun.
Given her age, I doubt she would understand the difference.
Also, got any information to back up your claims? It's just heresay at the moment.
Shawn
Maybe she and her siblings played with a toy gun.
Given her age, I doubt she would understand the difference.
Also, got any information to back up your claims? It's just heresay at the moment.
Shawn
DoctorBlade wrote: I still won't live in such a hypersensitive culture.
If it really happened like it says in the paper (does anybody here really believe the media?) I consider it to be a total abuse of power, and think some people should be reprimanded.
Nonetheless, I did hear about The Arkansas mom facing jail for making her son walk to school
Zomby woof wrote:DoctorBlade wrote: I still won't live in such a hypersensitive culture.If it really happened like it says in the paper (does anybody here really believe the media?) I consider it to be a total abuse of power, and think some people should be reprimanded.
if one lives in a culture that does not consider the arming of the individual against hostilities of the world to be a basic component of society, and the law of the land reflects as much, how is it an abuse of power? Its just a fact of that particular culture.
Its the same in many places in the world where any firearm or even rifle ownership is prohibited. Japan for example.
We as Americans can take the position that it is an abuse of power because we see self-armament as a basic component of our society, but thats not really the whole truth of the matter when other societies do not share that sense of individual empowerment.
madmallard wrote:Zomby woof wrote:if one lives in a culture that does not consider the arming of the individual against hostilities of the world to be a basic component of society, and the law of the land reflects as much, how is it an abuse of power? Its just a fact of that particular culture. Its the same in many places in the world where any firearm or even rifle ownership is prohibited. Japan for example. We as Americans can take the position that it is an abuse of power because we see self-armament as a basic component of our society, but thats not really the whole truth of the matter when other societies do not share that sense of individual empowerment.DoctorBlade wrote: I still won't live in such a hypersensitive culture.If it really happened like it says in the paper (does anybody here really believe the media?) I consider it to be a total abuse of power, and think some people should be reprimanded.
But owning a fire arm isn't illegal in Canukastan, just highly regulated.
I get that, but thats not the same as viewing it as a fundamental right.
There is no fundamental right to posses such a weapon in Canada; even the relevant Firearms Act which was established to provide law to register all weapons reads: "licences, registration certificates and authorizations under which persons may possess firearms in circumstances that would otherwise constitute an offence "
and inspection under the law reads : " ... for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Act and the regulations, an inspector may at any reasonable time enter and inspect any place where the inspector believes on reasonable grounds a business is being carried on ... any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a gun collection or a record in relation to a gun collection or any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a prohibited firearm or there are more than 10 firearms..."
This is within the powers of their law, and expectation of their culture. Little girl says something that can be interpreted that daddy has a gun, authorities investigate accordingly. 
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11.6/
DoctorBlade wrote:Wayslow wrote: I don't usually weigh in on these threads but I happen to have a little inside knowledge of this one. The story I'm getting is the picture caused the teacher to ask some questions. The little girl described a handgun that she and her siblings played with in the house. The police were contacted and reacted to an unsafe condition in the home. The police may have already had dealings with the father.None of that's in the newspaper. "may" have had dealings? "Unsafe" conditions? They didn't find anything. I still won't live in such a hypersensitive culture.
yeah, that's lame. the story came from a 4-year old who also said her dad uses it to shoot monsters.
young kids are perceptive, and they want approval from adults, so they sometimes answer questions dishonestly in an honest attemp to please the adult asking the question.
berkeleying canadians. 
We're all like that. Every one of us.
In reply to Zomby woof:
ninja edited evil smiley. i was typing too fast earlier. so i'd like to apologize to all canadians who were offended by my smiley-less post.
What happened to just reporting news? Most articles these days seem to be written mainly to really piss off the (liberals, conservatives, christians, atheists, etc.) And people eat this E36 M3 up. Whatever the article is, they read it and decide it is definitive proof that the (Catholics, tea partiers, soccer lovers, Nascar fans, whoever) are just horrible people that deserve to die.
I don't even bother to do this anymore, but just about any story like this can be easily shown to be misleading after about three minutes googling the event in question.
Pissing somebody off in the "news" sells..
In reply to madmallard:
That doesn't even come CLOSE to covering what went on.
madmallard wrote: Little girl says something that can be interpreted that daddy has a gun, authorities investigate accordingly.
She also thinks that Cookie Monster is a real person.
The O.P.P. need to give their heads a shake.
As do the teacher, and principal. These are supposed to be highly educated people. I'm glad my kids are out of school.
Honestly who cares? This happened in Canada. Might as well be Chicago or NY/NJ. Just a bunch of bodies moving around thinking they're important.
Cool story, bro.
J308 wrote: Honestly who cares? This happened in Canada. Might as well be Chicago or NY/NJ. Just a bunch of bodies moving around thinking they're important. Cool story, bro.
Because obviously important stuff only happens in the good old U.S. of A (and certainly not anywhere those damn Yankees live!) I think you've just won this week's most numb-tarded comment on the board award, and hey, it's only Tuesday! Good job.
Zomby woof wrote: As do the teacher, and principal. These are supposed to be highly educated people. I'm glad my kids are out of school.
Look up the stats, at least in America, the avg is that public teachers are the lowest in grad and undergrad test scores. I realize there are exceptions, but on avg.
And they continue to get more and more money "For the children" but the results continue to get worse.
My God..... I hope she didn't draw a silencer or a FA switch. Her whole school could have been in danger.
In reply to mguar:
there are already laws regarding 17 year olds buying guns, they're not allowed to, not even long guns (have to be 18 to buy a long gun, 21 to buy handgun).
and no, "just anybody" can't just walk into a gun show and walk out with a gun. to buy from a dealer at a gun show you have to pass the same background check as if you were buying from a store or pawn shop. if you buy from an individual in a person-to-person transaction you don't have to pass a background check, same as if you put an ad on CL or buy/sell to your neighbor. gun shows aren't the magical places where gun laws don't exist like some people would have you believe.
everyone knows the mexican cartels are getting their guns from president Obama himself anyways
FYI teachers and principals are very well paid here.
< Please don't let any reason enter into things here.. A lie sells better than the truth.. That's why here in America if it bleeds it leads. One whacked out druggie shooting another? Hey it's his right to own a gun! Interfering with his rights is a violation of the constitution..
Some dementia crazed old lady shoots her nephew and it better be reported that a little old lady shot an intruder..
Some kid hauls a gun to class and kills kids and the NRA will be right there protecting gun rights..
Thank you Canada for being a cell of reason in a storm of irrationality..
Show me. Show me one instance where any gun rights organization defends a school shooter or where a domestic violence shooting is backpedaled into a defensive home invasion shooting. Cuz what happens is almost invariably the opposite and you know it. But it's like you say. A lie sells better than the truth.
z31maniac wrote:Zomby woof wrote: As do the teacher, and principal. These are supposed to be highly educated people. I'm glad my kids are out of school.Look up the stats, at least in America, the avg is that public teachers are the lowest in grad and undergrad test scores. I realize there are exceptions, but on avg. And they continue to get more and more money "For the children" but the results continue to get worse.
It takes a rocket scientist to be a rocket scientist. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to be a k-12 teacher. They're compensated accordingly. Heh.
mguar wrote:AngryCorvair wrote:A KID KILLED AND 4 WOUNDED IN SCHOOL JUST YESTERDAY AND YOU THINK GUN RIGHTS ARE IMPORTANT? If that was your kid who died yesterday would you feel that gee everybody in school should have guns? let's arm everybody and then nobody will get killed.. There needs to be reason.. I don't oppose reasonable people owning a Gun. Even hand guns.. I object to groups like the NRA trying to sell guns to those who shouldn't own them.. They try to sell them by scaring reasonable people.. Insisting that anybody walking into a "Gun Show" can walk out with a gun.. (It's how the Mexican drug cartel is arming itself)DoctorBlade wrote:yeah, that's lame. the story came from a 4-year old who also said her dad uses it to shoot monsters. young kids are perceptive, and they want approval from adults, so they sometimes answer questions dishonestly in an honest attemp to please the adult asking the question. berkeleying canadians.Wayslow wrote: I don't usually weigh in on these threads but I happen to have a little inside knowledge of this one. The story I'm getting is the picture caused the teacher to ask some questions. The little girl described a handgun that she and her siblings played with in the house. The police were contacted and reacted to an unsafe condition in the home. The police may have already had dealings with the father.None of that's in the newspaper. "may" have had dealings? "Unsafe" conditions? They didn't find anything. I still won't live in such a hypersensitive culture.
not sure why you chose to equate "young kids are perceptive, and they want approval from adults, so they sometimes answer questions dishonestly in an honest attemp to please the adult asking the question" with "i support school shootings", but you're definitely berkeleying up right there.
mguar wrote:AngryCorvair wrote:A KID KILLED AND 4 WOUNDED IN SCHOOL JUST YESTERDAY AND YOU THINK GUN RIGHTS ARE IMPORTANT? If that was your kid who died yesterday would you feel that gee everybody in school should have guns? let's arm everybody and then nobody will get killed.. There needs to be reason.. I don't oppose reasonable people owning a Gun. Even hand guns.. I object to groups like the NRA trying to sell guns to those who shouldn't own them.. They try to sell them by scaring reasonable people.. Insisting that anybody walking into a "Gun Show" can walk out with a gun.. (It's how the Mexican drug cartel is arming itself)DoctorBlade wrote:yeah, that's lame. the story came from a 4-year old who also said her dad uses it to shoot monsters. young kids are perceptive, and they want approval from adults, so they sometimes answer questions dishonestly in an honest attemp to please the adult asking the question. berkeleying canadians.Wayslow wrote: I don't usually weigh in on these threads but I happen to have a little inside knowledge of this one. The story I'm getting is the picture caused the teacher to ask some questions. The little girl described a handgun that she and her siblings played with in the house. The police were contacted and reacted to an unsafe condition in the home. The police may have already had dealings with the father.None of that's in the newspaper. "may" have had dealings? "Unsafe" conditions? They didn't find anything. I still won't live in such a hypersensitive culture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacies
In reply to Racerfink:
In reply to Trans_Maro:
I get your sentiment, but because of how different the law works in Canada, just because something happened distastefully to us doesn't mean it was an abuse of power or authority.
In Canada, the firearms laws grant HUGE and sweeping power to the state to investigate and regulate, prosecute and monitor everything to do with firearms ownership without warrant or judicial review. They were acting completely within the powers they have been granted by their government and conceivably could still be totally fine if the circumstances were even more extraneous than they were now.
mguar wrote:Please don't let any reason enter into things here.. A lie sells better than the truth.. That's why here in America if it bleeds it leads. One whacked out druggie shooting another? Hey it's his right to own a gun! Interfering with his rights is a violation of the constitution.. Some dementia crazed old lady shoots her nephew and it better be reported that a little old lady shot an intruder.. Some kid hauls a gun to class and kills kids and the NRA will be right there protecting gun rights.. Thank you Canada for being a cell of reason in a storm of irrationality..
I'm not entirely sure where you're going or what you were referencing.
But if you have a problem with the Constitution, yes thats one key difference in Canadian governing. Yes, they have a constitution of their own, but it is not at all like the USA's in that it is not an over-seeing government authority guideline. In fact, the USA is rather unique in that most other countries' constitutions don't outline as much government authority and are alot more ceremonial in language and function; like a combination of the Declaration of Independance.
There are no civil rights in Canada backed by a constitution, Canada is more of a "Democracy," whereas the USA is a "Republic" of Laws. Meaning: the concept of Civil Rights in Canada is a provision of the powers of the Canadian Parliament, and the parliament has almost no checks on its power. If the parliament says its not a civil right, they're the final word in Canada essentially, their court system doesn't have the same power-check that say, the Supreme Court does on Congress of the USA.
The concept of civil rights in the USA, by comparison, is backstopped by The Constitution and not by any people or elected officials.
You'll need to log in to post.
