What about in the 30s? What about now?” asks the author. “The question isn’t really what they wear now. Instead, we should be thinking carefully about just what the future is bringing.”
By Mark D. Smith
This article was originally published at BizPac Review.
You don’t have to be Bill C-13 aficionado, and definitely not a gun rights activist, to be an opponent of the legislation. There are plenty of ways to express disapproval of the bill that many gun rights activists have come around to. To this end, the Canadian Firearms Association has taken a new approach.
“We’re going to call ’em ‘kill guns’ instead of ‘assault weapons,'” said Ian Milward, senior vice-president of communications, in a recent conference call with investors. “If you’re going to call them ‘assault weapons,’ well fine, that’s your own opinion. Maybe we should call them that instead.”
You’re absolutely free to call them what you wish. I’m not suggesting that gun control advocates stop using the words, but that you might also consider the word’s connotations. For example, the phrase was popularized by the NRA to describe the AK-47, which is widely regarded as an assault gun. However, many critics use it to signify any semi-automatic rifle capable of firing a large number of rounds with no stoppage or malfunctions—an “automatic firearm.” For others, using such terms is just downright silly.
If you use the term “assault weapon,” then why the hell do so many people call them those things?
But what’s really the issue, then? If you’re a proponent of the gun control movement, then it is your responsibility to explain why you believe the gun control bills in the bill are not “stifling” the right to keep and bear arms. And, if you’re a gun rights activist, then you must explain your case as to why you believe that certain legislation like Bill C-13 is necessary. These are the same organizations that, in the 1980s, were involved in campaigns to get a ban on handguns introduced in the Canadian legislature. So, given that these are the same people who fought for the creation of the current firearms laws in Canada, how exactly it would be reasonable “stifling” of the right to bear arms is difficult to fathom?
And why did the National Rifle Association (NRA) and its allies use such a loaded phrase? Well, their
patterns for roaring 20’s flapper dresses, flapper style dress plus size uk, flapper dress accessories cream, 20’s flapper dresses for plus size, party city flapper dress