Reply #42: well, like I said

[iverglas]

Decent, reasonable people from any camp in the firearms control debate could support measures that might be expected to prevent the need for the use of firearms in such situations in the first place.
I don't agree. The pro RKBA camp is generally in favor of unrestricted freedoms. That includes pet ownership.

Well, haha, I guess all I can say is res ipsa loquitur.

And don't be complaining about the crocodiles in my moat and the tiger by my side.

We don't generally banish an entire breed because a few owners have caused their dogs to be mean. That reasoning is akin to the worst racial and ethinc biases. "A purple person committed murder! Kill all purple people!"

Yes indeed. A requirement that a dog be sterilized and muzzled, and a prohibition on importing a dog, is exactly like a demand that human beings be killed.

When will someone give me a pair of those funny spectacles? I'm sure that apples really are orange, and oranges really are red; if only I had the right prescription, I'd be able to see the evidence in front of my eyes.

Oh. That's right. It's different. All animals of a given species have exactly the same temperament and tendencies, except humans.

Actually, if you have a little time, I can provide you with a dissertation on some of the rather more relevant differences between human beings and animals. We could start with the fact that human beings have what we all "mobility rights" under the Canadian Constitution:

6. (1) Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada.

(2) Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right

a) to move to and take up residence in any province; and
b) to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.

...

... and dogs don't.