Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« WS Radio: Boris Dingin audio | Main | If David Emerson becomes permanent Foreign Minister, then a leadership challenge is in order (UPDATED) »

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

David Miller is a buffoon

From the Toronto Star:

Mayor David Miller wants to close recreational shooting ranges in Toronto, along with giving the city power to block gun manufacturers and wholesalers from opening new plants or warehouses.

"Nobody can deny that hobby directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of our city," Miller said of sport shooting yesterday.

...

"After John O'Keefe's tragic killing, I don't think there's any defence for sports shooters any more," Miller said, referring to the man shot in January by a stray bullet. The gun was legally owned by the man charged in the killing.

"It's a hobby that creates danger to others. Guns are stolen routinely from so-called legal owners. It's time that we got those guns out of Toronto," he said.

...

City staff released a report calling for a bylaw that would allow the city to restrict or prohibit the making and wholesaling of firearms in Toronto.

Only police and the military should be allowed to operate firing ranges, the report says, calling for an end to the gun club leases.

The Star quotes Canadian Olympic pistol shooter Avianna Chao, who trains in Toronto. She claims, plausibly enough, that Miller's proposed ban would drastically affect her ability to prepare for the upcoming Beijing Olympics, without improving public safety.

According to Chao, "this is the politicians just trying to say they did something, even though it will have no impact on actual gun violence."

Couldn't have said it better myself. David Miller is and probably always will be a buffoon.

Posted by Terrence Watson on May 27, 2008 in Canadian Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e5528566858833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference David Miller is a buffoon:

Comments

I am sure Avianna Chao is just itching to get out there and shoot a few unarmed citizens with her target pistol. Good thing we have David Miller to protect us against such nasty killers.

Posted by: Tom | 2008-05-28 8:50:57 PM


I am sure Avianna Chao is just itching to get out there and shoot a few unarmed citizens with her target pistol. Good thing we have David Miller to protect us against such nasty killers.

Posted by: Tom | 2008-05-28 8:50:58 PM


"Negro" is a perfectly legitimate term and is certainly handier than the six-legged donkey "African-American"

Or how about "person of colour"... I have been called white, caucasion, honky and I think I would prefer any of those to "European American" or some such term.

I don't think it is so much a problem of race as it is a problem of culture. When you allow large numbers of immigrants from cultures that practice and accept violence into your country, you can expect problems, no matter what colour their skin is. I am not sure I would have a preference between Russian mafia and Jamaican drug thugs.

Posted by: Gary | 2008-05-28 9:06:56 PM


If I'm an innocent bystander, I'd prefer Russians shooting at each other. They probably have firearms training, and are less likely to hit an unintended target. The Jamaicans are more likely to just spray everything in site. If I'm the intended target I wouldn't want the Russians gunning for me.

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-28 9:13:48 PM


"Of course you realize that Markham is not the entire city of Toronto and that “white” describes anyone of Caucasian extraction from Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East, including most Egyptians, Libyans, Iraqis, Iranians, Afghanis, Turks, Arabians, Lebanese, Israelis, and Palestinians. One need not be a Protestant Swede or Irish Catholic to be white."

Stats Canada says you're wrong, Shane.

Visible Minority

Detailed classification:

Visible minority
Chinese
South Asian (e.g., East Indian, Pakistani, Punjabi, Sri Lankan)
Black (e.g., African, Haitian, Jamaican, Somali)
Arab/West Asian (e.g., Armenian, Egyptian, Iranian, Lebanese, Moroccan)
Filipino
South East Asian (e.g., Cambodian, Indonesian, Laotian, Vietnamese)
Latin American
Japanese
Korean
Other

Non visible minority
Aboriginal
White

Posted by: DJ | 2008-05-28 9:30:46 PM


"a ghetto is an area, usually within a city, in which members of a particular cultural, ethnic, religious or national group live in high concentration, whether by choice or by force; "ghettoization" refers to the process of making an area into a ghetto"

Richmond is a Chinese ghetto by choice.

Posted by: DJ | 2008-05-28 9:58:36 PM


"Heck, they're so bad that non-whites are now segegrating themselves from whites."

Why not make it legal? Whites and vismins in separate neighbouhoods. Zeb for PM.

Posted by: DJ | 2008-05-28 10:02:33 PM


DJ wrote: "Stats Canada says you're wrong, Shane. [info]"

Those are the criteria Stats Canada use for their own purposes. It doesn't make those criteria anthropologically correct. For instance, U.S. Census Status commonly use the term "Hispanic," which is misleading because it is a linguistic/cultural classification, not a race classification (Hispanics can be of any colour, including Spanish descent (white); African descent (black), or Amerindian (red).

Stats Canada can say what it likes. Its criteria are based on ethnicity, not race.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-05-28 10:43:01 PM


DJ wrote: "A ghetto is an area, usually within a city, in which members of a particular cultural, ethnic, religious or national group live in high concentration, whether by choice or by force; "ghettoization" refers to the process of making an area into a ghetto. Richmond is a Chinese ghetto by choice."

Who wrote that definition? And what is the definition of "high concentration"? Did you even think before you regurgitated this shlock?

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-05-28 10:44:34 PM


US Census? Last time I checked Toronto was still in Canada, much to your chagrin. When Stats Can is talking 'white' Torontonians, the reference is to Europeans.

"And what is the definition of "high concentration"?"

The Chinese in Richmond B.C.

Posted by: DJ | 2008-05-29 12:06:26 AM


DJ wrote: "US Census? Last time I checked Toronto was still in Canada, much to your chagrin. When Stats Can is talking 'white' Torontonians, the reference is to Europeans."

The point was that the demographic delineations employed by statistics agencies do not necessarily correlate with accepted divisions of race. In most cases they are interested in a man's ethnology, which is a different thing than his race. This is so they can keep tabs on immigration and its effects.

DJ wrote [in response to: "And what is the definition of "high concentration"?"]: "The Chinese in Richmond B.C."

You're an imbecile.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-05-29 7:18:24 AM


I've been to Richmond Shane. The term "high concentration" definitely comes to mind. Great restaurants. It only took about an hour for my girlfriend to recognize someone she'd gone to school with in Canton Province 20 years ago.

The same thing happened in Seattle, and I'm sure it would happen in San Francisco, and probably Toronto. Call me biased, call me selective, but I don't have much problem with Chinese immigrants. Aside from a few gangs, they've had a positive effect on the continent.

Call me selective again, because I don't have the same opinion of all immigrants. Some of the recent hordes seem to be coming here looking for trouble. I just don't know how we can make intelligent choices on immigration as long as we follow the present all-inclusive, multicultural, politically correct attitude of government policies.

In my opinion, the reason Chinese immigrants aren't causing trouble is they've lived in an environment where all religion was "dicouraged". They learned to keep their religious beliefs to themselves. You have to really pry to even find out which faith they adhere to. It doesn't mean they're athiest, just careful not to attract attention. I've never heard of a Chinese immigrant complaining because someone said merry Christmas. Last year a Medicine Hat businessman was attacked with a shovel for doing just that. Can anyone guess the religion of his attacker?

Posted by: dp | 2008-05-29 9:33:40 AM


A few years ago, I struck up a conversation with a couple of N.Y. cops on the beat in Greewich Village: When I mentioned I was in Toronto, they smirked and asked, "How are things in Toronto?"

When I said, God-awful and nothing's been done about it, they were impressed that I agreed. They said Toronto's a mess and that most Canadians think that Canadian cities are better and "more compassionate" than American cities.

They didn't agree.

I felt safer in New York than I do in my Toronto neighbourhood--and I live nowhere near Jane and Finch.

Posted by: batb | 2008-05-29 8:49:15 PM


Toronto the Bad: BOYCOTT TORONTO

http://www.torontothebad.com/

For the last three years, the Mayor of Toronto, David Miller, has been blaming trustworthy, legal firearms owners for the drug related gun crime taking place in his city. Dozens of people have died in gang related violence (some of them innocents) because of the "So-Called" Mayor's lack of courage and ability to act against the crime that is sweeping Toronto. At first it was thought that the Mayor was simply uninformed about the real facts pertaining to lawful firearms ownership in Canada. But despite the huge efforts of groups such as the Canadian Shooting Sports Association and the Canadian Institute for Legislative Action, the mayor continues to spew his anti-gun rhetoric while ignoring the city's real problem of drugs and gangs.
Mayor Miller has targeted the two million legal owners of firearms in Canada and his statements cast aspersion upon the 80 million lawful firearms owners of our closest friend and ally, the United States of America. He has completely misrepresented the truth about firearms ownership, stating that half of the firearms used in crime are stolen from Canadian owners and the other half are smuggled in from the U.S. because of lax gun laws and careless owners. That's a LIE!

Mayor Miller says he has the support of the Atlantic Mayors. Hah! Another LIE. Click here

Mayor Miller also says "there are no economic consequences" to his hate campaign against firearms owners. But he is WRONG!

The Mayor has drawn his battle lines. He can work against lawful gun owners if he chooses but the millions of safe, legal, responsible people who happen to own firearms have a choice too.... But we can vote with our wallets.

Let Mayor Miller know...: We clearly understand that lawful firearms owners are not welcome in his city. Let him know that we, our loved ones, our friends and anyone else we care to influence will stand by us and will choose another place to spend our money. Click Here

Here is what the Mayor says about Canadian and American firearms owners.
Read an Interview with Mayor Miller about banning guns and our American friends.

Mayor Miller talks about banning guns on YouTube

Here's what federal Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day has to say about Mayor Miller's idiotic political agenda

For the TRUTH about handguns in Toronto, CLICK HERE (this was sent to all members of Toronto's City Council...THEY KNOW !!!)


Please join us in a BOYCOTT of the City of Toronto. Click here to send. Click HERE to send your message to Mayor Miller and the Executive Council!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See also:

CSSA Canadian Shooting Sports Assoc.

http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/

I have also written to the NRA and other American friends asking them to support this boycott and promote it with their members. Mayor Miller has said their would be no economic down turn with a firearms ban. Perhaps when Toronto loses a few conventions and tourism drops Torontonians will see how they have been lied to!

Zeister................

Posted by: Zeister | 2008-05-29 11:00:44 PM


Toronto people re-elected Miller in the last election. They have no one to blame but themselves for his incompetence. I hope they suffer horribly.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-29 11:43:46 PM


And while you're boycotting Toronto and giving Torontonians Hell (with just cause), please remember us poor, beleaguered right-thinkers who DIDN'T AND NEVER WOULD vote for Moron Miller or Duh-lton McGuilty but live here because of family obligations. (You wouldn't want me to abandon my 80-year-old mother, would you?)

Posted by: batb | 2008-05-30 5:35:38 AM


It's the re-election of a proven moron/jackass/liar that reflects on the electorate.

People knew exactly how incompetent Miller was when they either voted for him or stayed away and let the brain dead Socialists return the bum to office.

Same applies to liar McGuinty. Toronto and environs rewarded the boob head for lying with another four year term. He remains a Dud. of course the Liberal banner is all one needs to get elected in the brain free voting zone in and around Toronto.

Sorry about that, batb, I have family in Toronto who did not and would not vote for stupidity either but there just aren't enough of you.

Anyone else notice both McGuinty and Miller actually LOOK stunned?

Posted by: Liz J | 2008-05-30 6:38:56 AM


>"Nobody can deny that hobby directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of our city," Miller said of sport shooting yesterday.

I DENY that sport shooting directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of Toronto.

Gee, David Miller was right!

Posted by: NOBODY | 2008-05-30 6:46:11 AM


Batb wrote: "You wouldn't want me to abandon my 80-year-old mother, would you?"

That depends...how did she vote???

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-05-30 7:10:48 AM


Those who voted for Miller ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Those who didn't vote for Miller ought to also be ashamed of themselves for failing to stop those who did.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-05-30 11:33:54 AM



The comments to this entry are closed.