Hmmmm...who's confusing gun ownership and sex?

cornered rat

Moderator
Saw this when I followed a backlink to my site:
<blockquote>
C-68 - a gay rights issue?

C-68 requires prospective firearm permit applicants to list all sexual partners with whom they have "cohabited" during the past two years. When filling out that form, remember that you can be imprisoned for up to five years for making
any false statement. This permit is not a one-time requirement - it must be renewed yearly and thus the firearm control bureacrats will learn your cohabitating sexual partners on an ongoing basis. Not only is this requirement offensive
to many monogamous heterosexuals, it could be catastrophic for any gay or bisexual people who have chosen not to publicly disclose their sexual preference. The firearm control bureacracy wants to know your sexual preference - and
your partner(s) name(s). Why? Why should our government agencies need to know the most intimate details of your life before you are allowed to keep your lawfully purchased firearm? This level of government intrusiveness, which should be bothersome to everyone regardless of sexual orientation, permeates bill C-68 and is one of the main reasons to oppose this flawed legislation. Canada's first openly gay mayor, Winnipeg Mayor Glen Murray, is failing his more private gay or bisexual constituents by supporting C-68.
</blockquote>
Obviously, this would be an issue for everyone else, too. Your ex-spouse gets in trouble, the cops visit your abode as well. Lovely.
 
Just another wedge... they know that most gun owners (I said *most*, folks) are conservative and disapprove of homosexuality. I don't care about it either way, but it's another divisive issue.

------------------
You can't get something for nothing,
You can't have freedom for free.
--Neil Peart
 
I don't know much about Canadian law, but I can take a guess. I assume they have a perspective similar to the U.S. where domestic 'violence', whether a misdemeanor or felony, disqualifies a citizen for firearms ownership, permits, etc.

So, they gather info on anyone you've, well ... hung around with, and they could theoretically ask them if you've ever been a bad boy or girl. This would at least have a morsel of logic, but still be a bizarre and intrusive disclosure.
 
As a rehabilitated TV addict, there are three basic things which is in demand on TV:

1) Sex and Violence;
2) Sexy violence, and;
3) Violent Sex.

Naturally, it is unfair to protray the use of firearms in acts of violence but who ever said that the media was fair?

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
 
They're confusing, or rather equating, both guns and sex with violence. They have been watching too much American 'entertainment', our largest export commodity.

-boing
 
OMG!

Is this for real?
I would find out who supported this law and list their sisters and daughters on my list!

Actually, it would be even funnier to list them and their sons :)

Sorry folks, this may not be a PC post, but Maaaaaan!

------------------
Same Shot, Different Day
 
Listing relatives of politicos or politicos themselves is exactly what the author of the page suggested. Rememeber, folks, five years in prison for false info!

Add to this "up to 14 years" for a slingshot in Australia, and you have a pretty picture...

CR
 
SameShot...

:D

You have a flair, my friend...
I like your idea!

Reminds me of the Joke:
"Got any naked pictures of your wife?"
"No."
"Wanna see some?"

Or if you get hit with that joke say:
"No, but I got some of yours."

------------------
Every man Dies.
Not Every Man Truely Lives...

FREEDOM!

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
 
Back
Top