XPost: calgary.general, can.politics, edm.general 
 XPost: hfx.general, tor.general, van.general 
 XPost: wpg.general 
 From: someone@ms.com 
  
 "pcourterelle"  wrote in message 
 news:VZnxf.78554$OU5.5208@clgrps13... 
 > 
 > "Ladies Choice"  wrote in message 
 > news:vRqwf.72293$OU5.60167@clgrps13... 
 >> In article <1Dnwf.46705$km.23470@edtnps89>, someone@ms.com says... 
 >>> 
 >>> 
 >>>Thanks for the geography lesson. I'll return the favour, Toronto is IN 
 >>>Canada, not Canada as a whole as I specifically requested. I asked for 
 >>>national data to back up the need to change a national policy. 
 >> 
 >> In other words you still don't understand how meaningless that 'request' 
 >> is, 
 >> even after my demonstration? 
 >> 
 >> I can see this is going to be as much fun as pulling teeth... 
 >> 
 >> Alright then, I ask for national data to back up the need to not change a 
 >> national policy. 
 >> 
 >> 
 >>>I have no use for handguns, collectibles or otherwise.If it can be 
 >>>clearly 
 >>>demonstrate that there is a natioinal need to ban handgun ownership from 
 >>>private citizens (who already must go through significant legal and 
 >>>administrative hoops) based on rates of gun crimes committed with 
 >>>handguns 
 >>>that were stolen from private owners, then I'll agree the change is 
 >>>justified. Until then this is unwarrented meddling by the federal 
 >>>government 
 >>>in provincial affairs. 
 >>> 
 >> 
 >> I'll ask again.  What would the figure of rates of crimes commited with 
 >> guns 
 >> that were stolen from private owners have to be in order to 'clearly 
 >> demonstrate that there is a national need to ban handgun ownership from 
 >> private 
 >> citizens, etc, etc'?  If you cannot provide such a figure, you are making 
 >> a 
 >> completely fallacious argument.  But since you have the audacity to use 
 >> the 
 >> word 'clearly' in this obfuscation, I suspect you are already aware that 
 >> your 
 >> argument has a severe deficit of cogency. 
 > 
 > 
 > Aside from ad hominen arguments and fallacioius logic you have nothing. 
 > Let me rephrase the question for you. 
 > 
 > How many homicides per 100 were committed in Canada with a stolen handgun? 
 > 
 > Cite a scholarly reference. 
 > 
 > pc 
  
 Your silence on this question speaks volumes. You use insults when you have 
 no facts, no logic, no arguments. Lame. 
  
 pc 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)