Yes, in an attempt to avoid further mass shootings drastic measures should be taken.
How many mass shootings are we actually talking about?
We hade the Quebec city mosque shooting. We had the Dawson College mass shooting. We had Ecole Polytechnique. That's 3, over a span of 31 years, with a death toll of 21. Less than one person per year on average, starting with and including Ecole Polytechnique. Mass shootings in Canada are barely a statistical rounding error.
Was the Nova Scotia rampage a mass shooting? They haven't given us the details yet, but I don't think it's actually a mass shooting. Based on the information they've provided, it sounds like a series of single-murder events at numerous crime scenes over a short span of time. I don't know that any of the crime scenes actually qualifies as a mass shooting. Given it was committed with illegally obtained weapons, it's not a good argument for gun bans regardless.
You’re making stupid arguments again Wilber. We can save many lives with sensible gun control and deal with deaths from other sources as well.
We're already saving many lives with sensible gun control measures.
You're suggesting that we should try to save a minimal number of additional lives by moving to irrational gun control measures.
ETA:
This is also a bad argument when looking at the risk/reward or costs to society. What’s it going to cost society to ban all cars vs ban guns (although, you still ignore the fact that virtually no one, and not this new gun control measure, bans all guns. Not even close).
Now you're talking sense.
The government says they expect last week's gun ban to cost $600 million. To prevent a minimal number of homicides.
The Squid-Style ban suggests we ban and buy-back the vast majority of Canadian firearms to prevent an even more tiny number of homicides. The current ban/buyback plan is for 90,000 or so formerly Restricted long-guns (mostly AR-15 variants) plus an unknown additional number of Non-Restricted firearms (Ruger Mini-14 variants, M1a variants, Cx4, etc). To expand that ban/buy-back to include every firearm that isn't a single-shot, you're talking about expanding it from a number that's in the range of possibly a few hundred thousand to a number that's well into the millions. You're proposing a course of action that increases the cost from the government's estimate of $600 million by a factor of probably 20 or more.
Before you say "you can't put a price on a human life!" consider how many lives could be saved if that money was put to some more sensible use.
$600 million could buy an awful lot of Naloxone, for example. Just to name one possibility that in itself would save more Canadians than will die from mass shootings in our lifetimes.
-k