Let's Adore Jesus-Eucharist! | Home >> Politics
Ms. Geneviève Guilbault.
Quebec City, Monday October 29th, 2018.
Good day Madam Minister Geneviève Guilbault,
I've divided my Letter in four parts:
1) The anti-democratic perversity of Bill 9
2) Gun control: first totalitarian step?
3) Castration of males
4) A good firearms law?
Anecdote: A while ago, I went to my local shooting club to do my "Bill 9" (i.e. that law stipulates that owners of "restricted" firearms must go shooting at least once a year). The person in charge of the firing range asked me: "With or without a target?" I did not understand, so he explained that the law only says that one must shoot, so several members would come, shoot without aiming, and go home; bingo! Bill 9 satisfied! In other words, Bill 9 is pure hogwash.
Historically, Bill 9 was adopted purely as a marketing maneuver, to give ill-informed voters the impression that the Liberal Party of Quebec was doing something to ensure the safety of citizens, following the shooting at Dawson College. It's not really a law, but more of a legislative sleight of hand, with the sole purpose of re-electing Jean Charest [at the time the Premier of Quebec].
That's why I say it's an anti-democratic perversion. To treat our Parliament and our Laws as pure instruments to be exploited in order to stay in power is perverse. Moreover, if the Members of our Parliament are not able to see the difference between a true law, enacted for the Common Good, and a pseudo-law, our country is doomed.
Unmasking Bill 9 for what it really is, would be a wonderful opportunity for you to educate other MPs, and all voters. What an improvement for the future of Quebec!
In itself, a gun registry is conceptually a large sheet of paper with names, addresses, serial numbers of firearms, etc. Nothing particuliarly evil!
Except that historically, this kind of law is used mainly to repress the political opponents of the people in power. There are entire books that carefully document how Nazi Germany disarmed its own citizens, before becoming a totalitarian political regime. Think about it: If a government decides to become evil, it must begin by disarming people who could oppose its harmful intentions: its own citizens!
If you think I'm exaggerating, look at my case. My "PAL" (Possession and Aquisition License) has been mysteriously "disactivated". Why? I don't know. (I just made a request to the Access to Information Commission, so maybe we'll find out soon.)
Here's what I currently suspect:
A few years ago, I was in the National Assembly for a parliamentary committee. The group that testified was the "MAC" (Muslim Association of Canada), and the lady in hijab said, "As you read in our brief, we would like Quebec to change its laws to allow child marriage". The parliamentarians who were present pretended not to hear anything. (Only Agnès Maltais of the Parti Québécois had the courage to have a tone of voice that meant: "Here, we're not barbarians, so we don't put words like "child" and "marriage" in the same sentence." On the other hand, despite her indignant tone of voice, the words that came out of her mouth were completely neutral and politically correct.) All the debates of this parliamentary committee were recorded, everything is documented. But nothing appeared in the Media. I was there, in our Parliament! The parliamentarians who govern us were there too! And no reaction...
Frustrated by this event, I wrote up a flyer on some official teachings of Islam, which I then sent for approval to the Minister of Justice of Quebec, that of Canada, Mayor Régis Labaume, my federal Member of Parliament, all the mosques in Canada, my bishop Cardinal Lacroix, etc.
Since no one opposed these flyers, even after giving them several months to respond, I distributed over 4000 of these flyers in the Provincial Capital. No problem! This massive distribution did not cause any feedback from the Media, no feedback from the mosques (including that of Sainte-Foy where the horrible massacre took place). Nothing!
But one day, a police officer from Quebec City tried to intimidate me. I recorded our conversation, but I did nothing with it. I continued to have no problems! But about a month later, I put this recording on the Internet. BANG! A few days later, my PAL was mysteriously disactivated!
Both events followed one another quickly, but that does not prove anything. On the other
hand, it's very suspicious.
[Update: about one year later it was confirmed that both events were related.]
Our society is an effeminate society. It's very politically incorrect to say so, but everybody can see it. Whether it's guys with "man-buns" and jewels, or "gay marriage," or the scarcity of males who "have the balls" to promise a woman they'll be faithful for life and will dedicate themselves to the procreation and the education of their children, it's clear Quebec males are not exactly dripping with testosterone.
To me, another indication of this castration of males is the insistence of talking about guns only in the context of hunting and sport shooting. Yes, we can hunt deer with a rifle. Yes, we can make small holes in paper targets with a pistol. But firearms are also used for defense: Defense of the family and defense of the Homeland.
Police can't do everything. Too often, when seconds count, the Police is unfortunately a few minutes away.
The Army isn't magic either. If we look at all of Planet Earth right now, many armies are mostly there to oppress their own Country. Just like it's healthy to divide power into legislative, executive and judicial, it is good not to give all guns to the Army. Another way to see it is to consider the equation:
The Government = The People
If the Government really is The People, and the Government has guns, then The People also should have guns. Otherwise the equation becomes false, and the Country ceases to be democratic.
If we continue castrating our young males by repeating that self-defense and guns are inherently bad, our enemies will be able to invade us, armed only with plastic spoons!
I repeat to anyone who will listen that our current gun laws are very deficient. I myself got my license while lying on my bed, in my hotel room in New York, and repeating "No" to all the questions that the lady of the Quebec Provincial Police asked me. (The questions were very convoluted, but they boiled down to: are you a terrorist, are you a criminal, are you unable to control your emotions, etc.)
For myself, if tomorrow morning I had to find a better mechanism to reduce the likelihood of violence with firearms, I would add this to our laws:
- No Atheists.
I can already hear the weeping and the gnashing teeth of Political Correctness! Except that it's easy to show that certain religions officially advocate violence, and that strictly speaking, Atheism eliminates any rational basis for Ethics (how can good and evil exist, if we are only heaps of molecules temporarily assembled by a pureposeless evolution?).
The third change I would add is the surprise meal with three retired nurses. There are many retired nurses in Quebec, women who have worked hard for a long time, and for a small salary. I would offer them an overpaid "sideline", requiring little effort, and tax free: invite yourself at the last minute to go eat in the home of guys who have applied for a firearms license!
A retired nurse has seen quite a boatload of people! She has a long experience of humanity; she's seen people on their death beds, people with small ailments, patients surrounded by a beautiful caring and loving family, patients surrounded by a dysfunctional family, rich patients, poor patients, violent patients, patients as gentle as lambs, crazy patients, sane patients, etc.
A nurse is not trained to treat mental illnesses, but she has probably developed a keen "sense of smell", she has the experience to "sniff out" mental illnesses.
Moreover, in my experience, many "certified crazy" people I've come across might have been considered almost normal outside, on the street, but as soon as I'd walk into their apartment, the sedimentary layers of their madness were apparent in their material environment.
If you arrive unexpectedly at someone's house, you will see in their lodgings whether they are building bombs or something like that. In addition, if you tell them to invite some friends to come and eat a meal with three retired nurses, you'll see if this person has a "social fabric". A madman loner will not be able to pick up his phone and invite friends for an impromptu get-together, because he has no friends! Also, if you have a meal with someone, you'll have to chit-chat. So if this person starts ranting about aliens who have kidnapped him, or his suicidal thoughts, etc., you'll detect it.
Yes, I know, this system would not be perfect, but go and study gun-related massacres in both Canada and the US for the last ten years, and you'll see this system would have prevented many more killings than the stupid "Bill 9", or some shabby gun registry!
It's even more interesting to compare this seemingly bizarre system with the Second Amendment of the US Constitution:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Unlike what's currently done in the USA, the act of owning a firearm was originally supposed to be a social act. It was necessary to be a member of a militia, or in more sociological terms, you had to be part of a "social fabric" that could detect if you developed mental health problems. Except that, instead of being three retired nurses who checked you out once, before getting your license, it was a recurring verification as long as you had firearms in your possession.
There. Those are my four additions to Mr. Boucher's letter to you, concerning the ridiculous Quebec Long Gun Registry.
[Usual contact information]
Let's Adore Jesus-Eucharist! | Home >> Politics