Canadian Political Events

Federal Politics => Canadian Politics => Topic started by: the_squid on March 12, 2018, 02:09:38 pm


Title: gun control
Post by: the_squid on March 12, 2018, 02:09:38 pm
Seems to be a fracture in the Liberal caucus about gun control.  Rural vs urban ridings.

Also, Trudeau is putting his foot down in caucus meetings?  PMO staff attending caucus meetings that are meant for elected MPs to speak openly?  Seems Harper-esque.

Hill Times has a very in depth article about these issues.

https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/03/12/upcoming-gun-legislation-scaring-hell-liberal-caucus-pm-trudeaus-vitriolic-response-grit-mp-harveys-concerns-put/137000
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: cybercoma on March 12, 2018, 02:13:56 pm
Also, Trudeau is putting his foot down in caucus meetings?  PMO staff attending caucus meetings that are meant for elected MPs to speak openly?  Seems Harper-esque.
I haven't read into it, but if how you've characterized it is true then I'm disgusted with Trudeau. One of the biggest issues in our country is the intrusion of the PMO onto the roles of MPs. The Prime Minister is not elected as an individual to lead the government. He leads by way of the confidence of the House. The backbencher MPs ought to have a measure of independence from Prime Minister, the least of which because they need to hold him accountable to the party's values. More importantly, they need to be independent in their representation of their constituents interests. If he presses the issue, the rural MPs from the Liberal party ought to resign from the party en masse and form a new party, effectively threatening his position as prime minister on the next confidence motion.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: SirJohn on March 13, 2018, 11:56:15 am
I haven't read into it, but if how you've characterized it is true then I'm disgusted with Trudeau. One of the biggest issues in our country is the intrusion of the PMO onto the roles of MPs. The Prime Minister is not elected as an individual to lead the government. He leads by way of the confidence of the House. The backbencher MPs ought to have a measure of independence from Prime Minister, the least of which because they need to hold him accountable to the party's values. More importantly, they need to be independent in their representation of their constituents interests. If he presses the issue, the rural MPs from the Liberal party ought to resign from the party en masse and form a new party, effectively threatening his position as prime minister on the next confidence motion.

Don't worry. This is the new open and transparent government that is going to empower individual MPs and parliament. They said so in their campaign and we know Liberals never lie.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: the_squid on August 07, 2018, 10:15:36 am
The country is probably ripe for further gun control measures, despite the rural-urban divide in the Liberal caucus.  The recent gun violence and the fact that Trudeau can attract 4000 people to a park in Penticton (how many would Scheer attract?  50 gun toting rednecks maybe?) Means the leader will be able to push gun control policies despite the divide. 
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: SirJohn on August 07, 2018, 11:28:01 am
The country is probably ripe for further gun control measures, despite the rural-urban divide in the Liberal caucus.  The recent gun violence and the fact that Trudeau can attract 4000 people to a park in Penticton (how many would Scheer attract?  50 gun toting rednecks maybe?) Means the leader will be able to push gun control policies despite the divide.

By this measure Donald Trump is the greatest leader the US has ever had, and should be able to push through any legislation he wants. He attract enthusiastic crowds wherever he goes, far, far more than any Democratic party leader would draw.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on August 07, 2018, 11:30:30 am
By this measure Donald Trump is the greatest leader the US has ever had, and should be able to push through any legislation he wants. He attract enthusiastic crowds wherever he goes, far, far more than any Democratic party leader would draw.

His so called "enthusiastic crowds" are often paid for.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on August 07, 2018, 11:35:15 am
The country is probably ripe for further gun control measures, despite the rural-urban divide in the Liberal caucus.  The recent gun violence and the fact that Trudeau can attract 4000 people to a park in Penticton (how many would Scheer attract?  50 gun toting rednecks maybe?) Means the leader will be able to push gun control policies despite the divide.

I think most Canadians are well aware of the increased safety level we have on our streets vis-a-vis the US, and that that is in large part due to tighter gun controls, and therefore will accept a further tightening if recent events indicate they are needed.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: SirJohn on August 07, 2018, 11:47:06 am
I think most Canadians are well aware of the increased safety level we have on our streets vis-a-vis the US, and that that is in large part due to tighter gun controls, and therefore will accept a further tightening if recent events indicate they are needed.

Switzerland has more guns than Canadians, including a lot of assault rifles. They have very few shootings.
Canada's lower rate of gun violence is related to its rate of violent crime and crime overall, and these are ALL much lower than in the US.

The source of most violent crime are the social factors and poverty within visible minority communities. That is true in the US, true in Canada, and true in the UK. It is mostly the criminal element within those communities, esp gangs, fighting it out with other gangs.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on August 07, 2018, 11:56:45 am
Switzerland has more guns than Canadians, including a lot of assault rifles. They have very few shootings.
Canada's lower rate of gun violence is related to its rate of violent crime and crime overall, and these are ALL much lower than in the US.

The source of most violent crime are the social factors and poverty within visible minority communities. That is true in the US, true in Canada, and true in the UK. It is mostly the criminal element within those communities, esp gangs, fighting it out with other gangs.

And thankfully our gangs aren't as likely to be fighting it out with guns.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: the_squid on August 07, 2018, 02:00:34 pm
By this measure Donald Trump is the greatest leader the US has ever had, and should be able to push through any legislation he wants. He attract enthusiastic crowds wherever he goes, far, far more than any Democratic party leader would draw.

This isn’t the USA and we aren’t talking about Trump.   Your comparison is nonsensical. 
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: SirJohn on August 07, 2018, 02:37:14 pm
This isn’t the USA and we aren’t talking about Trump.   Your comparison is nonsensical.

What the hell does it matter where we are? You spoke of the illustrious Justin as being a crowd pleaser, as if that gave him the bonafides to do whatever he wanted.
The comparison is perfect. There is no difference.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on August 07, 2018, 03:08:56 pm
What the hell does it matter where we are? You spoke of the illustrious Justin as being a crowd pleaser, as if that gave him the bonafides to do whatever he wanted.
The comparison is perfect. There is no difference.

The comparison craters as soon as Trump opens his mouth and out fly the endless lies. what's he up to now, 4000 or so?
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: wilber on August 07, 2018, 05:26:24 pm
Switzerland has more guns than Canadians, including a lot of assault rifles. They have very few shootings.
Canada's lower rate of gun violence is related to its rate of violent crime and crime overall, and these are ALL much lower than in the US.

The source of most violent crime are the social factors and poverty within visible minority communities. That is true in the US, true in Canada, and true in the UK. It is mostly the criminal element within those communities, esp gangs, fighting it out with other gangs.

They have a lot of guns but more or less, no one is quite sure. Figures disagree widely. Since 2008, all guns that change hands must be registered.

All Swiss males must undergo military service and they have the option of keeping their weapon when they are finished. Ammunition for their assault rifles is available at particular ranges and subsidized, but must be used onsite.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on August 07, 2018, 07:20:48 pm
I'm tired of the BS so I'm going to be blunt.  We don't have a gun problem, we have a "stupid people" problem. The root problem is that we have more and more people let into Canada from countries that already have very bad gun violence issues, & then it becomes our problem.  We're letting more and more people into Canada (who often settle in the GTA) who have poor family values and poor values & behaviours in general, so these women and men make stupid decisions which lead to unwanted pregnancies and children (Canadian born) outside wedlock.  Many of the fathers aren't even listed on the long-form birth certificate because it was a f**k-and-flee, and these children grow up without fathers.

My friend works in the gov, part of his job is issuing birth certificates.  He lives in an area with a lot of Jamaicans and South Asians.  He says it's alarming how many Jamaican children have no father listed on their birth certificates.  With people from cultures like India, that almost never ever happens, and they very rarely get divorced either.  Different values & cultures.

These single mothers aren't well-educated when they come here, and if they're trying to get educated they have to drop out to care for the baby.  So the young boy grows up in a poor neighbourhood and mom's working 3 jobs and smoking weed & crack just to cope so she's not emotionally available, and there's no male father figure to guide the young man.  So the kid's home life sucks, he's directionless, so as the academic research shows, he joins a gang so he can have some semblance of family social bond in his life, and even have guys older than him to have as male role models.  The mom is out to lunch so she has no time to help the kid in school plus she's from a culture that may not emphasize education much, and the school itself is full of other peers in similar situations, so the kid does poorly in school and sees the only way to get rich is to deal drugs, steal cars, sell guns, traffic sex etc. with a gang.  The gang offers money and a family and protection in a rough area, so he joins.  And if he's not in a gang, then he can be hanging out with shady friends/characters anyways.

So then sometimes bad stuff goes down - a bad drug deal, someone having sex with his girl etc. so the guns, acquired illegally or legally, get used.

The Danforth shooter had a shady brother (and acquaintances) who dealt drugs and had illegal firearms.  There's multiple problems here, and gun laws will hardly scratch the surface.  So what to do?

1. Don't let uneducated people with poor family values & broken homes who make poor life decisions into this country to procreate and spread their problems and their country's problems into this country.  Stop the problem at the source.  Provide resources to screen these migrants better.

2. Those that are here or need to be here (refugees etc) need to have better education support in those poor communities for their children, including a lot of sex education and access to birth control, and have male teachers and social workers in these schools so these young men have role models to teach them how to be responsible adults that make good decisions.  And teach the ladies to close their legs too for effs sake unless you're on birth control, and don't let the guy spew in you without a condom.  Also, after-class school programs to help with homework when parents don't have the time/energy/ability.

3.  More free after-school recreational programs for these kids so they have a safe & supportive place to go if mom's not home.  Even if they're just playing videogames or sports or skateboarding etc just give them a supervised recreational hangout.

3.  Increase in GOOD & BETTER-trained policing in their neighbourhoods, with as many people of their ethnic background as possible to provide good role models.

Yes, also make sure the guns laws are strong and the illegal gun smuggling is curtailed.  But there's only so much we can do too.  If you're going to bring in a sizeable segment of refugees/migrants from places like Somalia, Jamaica, El Salvador, Afghanistan etc. and not screen them properly to weed out the bad ones, expect to get results including gun violence rates like those countries do.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: SirJohn on August 07, 2018, 08:04:20 pm
The comparison craters as soon as Trump opens his mouth and out fly the endless lies. what's he up to now, 4000 or so?

Irrelevant.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on August 07, 2018, 08:10:40 pm
Irrelevant.

To you perhaps. I prefer a leader who can identify a problem and do something to correct as opposed to pretending it doesn't exist.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: the_squid on August 08, 2018, 03:34:30 pm
I'm tired of the BS so I'm going to be blunt.  We don't have a gun problem, we have a "stupid people" problem. The root problem is that we have more and more people let into Canada from countries

......

Your entire post is based on the premise that guns are used by immigrants and we never had a problem with guns until “those people” showed up.

This is utter nonsense.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on August 08, 2018, 07:38:10 pm
Your entire post is based on the premise that guns are used by immigrants and we never had a problem with guns until “those people” showed up.

This is utter nonsense.

I never said we never had a problem with guns until immigrants showed up, that's a strawman.  Your attempts to paint me as a xenophobe racist is ridiculous.  If you look at the stats, most gun crime in these big cities like Toronto are committed by young black men and men of colour from poor and often broken homes.  That goes for white people who deal drugs and gang bang too.  It's not a question of race, it's a question of behaviour.  Young men who are filled with p!ss and testosterone from poor homes with emotional issues are going to shoot each other & others, along with other really stupid choices in life.

The problem isn't "immigrants".  The problem is poorly educated young men from poor dysfunctional homes who make bad decisions.  I'm not saying ban immigrants, or black people, or people from certain countries, I'm saying ban the bad seeds who have backgrounds with poor likelihoods of success.  What I am saying is that people from certain cultures under certain conditions are statistically far more likely to commit gun violence.  Black people make up 14% of the USA population but are responsible for 52.5% of the gun homicides in the country.  If you can consider the vast majority of these are committed by males, that's only 7% of the population, and if you consider it's mostly poorly educated young black men coming from low incomes you narrow the population down even more.  It's no different throughout sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, or anywhere else, and they need to own it, not glorify it or always blame others which will solve nothing (though some of that can be true), and when you acknowledge the scope of the problem you can begin to fix it.

Gang violence is epidemic in Latin America, highest murder rates in the world, and most gang members in the USA are Hispanic.   Pull the PC wool from your eyes or go ahead and try to see if restricting more legal handguns in Canada will fix the murder problem (it may help it slightly).

We can't ban people born here, including white people, so the rest of my earlier suggestions to help people in these situations apply to them too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0dCvQdt5XI&feature=youtu.be&t=177
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: the_squid on August 08, 2018, 07:49:25 pm
I never said we never had a problem with guns until immigrants showed up, that's a strawman. 

...

You literally said that immigrants are the problem with gun violence....


Quote
The root problem is that we have more and more people let into Canada from countries that already have very bad gun violence issues, & then it becomes our problem.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: SirJohn on August 08, 2018, 08:19:42 pm
You literally said that immigrants are the problem with gun violence....

That's not exactly what he said.  I've gone into the history of urban gangs before, but summarizing.

We had little in the way of gang violence up through the early to mid seventies. Chief Vince Bevans, who was the Chief of police in Ottawa did a report in the nineties on this, and remarked on how gun violence was virtually unknown back then. But then we started bringing in these temporary foreign workers, mostly  Jamaican (Haitian in Quebec)  ladies to be housekeepers and babysitters for rich people, or at least, the upper middle class. The Liberals then decided to let them apply for citizenship. They did, and the first thing they did, of course, was apply to sponsor their kids. Their kids had not seen mom for years, except for rare visits, and had been raised by grannie. Suddenly they yanked up north to live with a woman they hardly know in a country they don't know, and where it's cold as **** and where their educational achievements were sub-par. Naturally a certain number of them resented this, and naturally, teenage boys hung around together, resentful and angry, and doing poorly at school - with mom still working full time and no father.

Jamaican street gangs were born (and Haitans in Montreal). Gang violence took on a whole new meaning because these teenagers had been brought up in lands where violence was endemic and brutal. The more that came over the more gang members. By the 1990s we already had a full throated street gang problem with shootouts and drive bys. It was a similar problem when we started bringing over piles of Somalians. Again, you had young people ripped from everything they knew into a cold environment where they were well below the curve in school, felt like outsiders (because they WERE) hung around together, and began to get into trouble. Thus was 'swarming' born. Out west it's a different matter, with kids from different asian countries doing different kinds of things. Then the natives started to get in on the act out west, forming their own version of the Crips and Bloods.

Now the gangs are formed, and infest certain low income neighborhoods. And they recruit among young minority men in those neighborhoods.

Most of the gun violence comes from these groups.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on August 08, 2018, 08:22:07 pm
You literally said that immigrants are the problem with gun violence....

Certain immigrants as I specifically defined, yes, absolutely.  But that's not what you said, again, a strawman.  You said:

Quote
Your entire post is based on the premise that guns are used by immigrants and we never had a problem with guns until “those people” showed up.

Wrong, i never ever said anything remotely like "we never had a problem with guns before X showed up".  However, a high % of the gun violence we're talking about in our cities is largely due to certain immigrants from certain social-economic backgrounds as I've very specifically already defined, and that is proven clearly in the statistics.  You're trying to label me a xenophobe racist and it's BS.  I'm not trying to discriminate against "immigrants", I'm trying to discriminate against specific immigrants from violent parts of the world who take part in bad things &/or make bad decisions that is probable to lead to more bad things and bad decisions.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: ?Impact on August 08, 2018, 08:32:31 pm
We had little in the way of gang violence up through the early to mid seventies.

Gun violence peaked in the mid 70's. We have had a recent uptick in the past few years but we are still below that level. Youth gangs are a huge problem in Saskatchewan, at about 5 times the national average (although not as bad as the US which is 10 times the Canadian average). The racial demographics are: African Canadian (25%), First Nations (21%), and Caucasian (18%).
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on August 08, 2018, 08:36:21 pm
Gun violence peaked in the mid 70's. We have had a recent uptick in the past few years but we are still below that level. Youth gangs are a huge problem in Saskatchewan, at about 5 times the national average (although not as bad as the US which is 10 times the Canadian average). The racial demographics are: African Canadian (25%), First Nations (21%), and Caucasian (18%).

argus seems to prefer assumptions over facts.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: SirJohn on August 08, 2018, 08:52:12 pm
Gun violence peaked in the mid 70's.

Where? Not in Ottawa

The history of street gangs in Ottawa is laid out in a 2004 city police report from then-chief Vince Bevan.
In the late 1960s and early ’70s, the two prominent gangs were the Squirrels and the Yohawks.
They appeared limited to minor property crime and assaults — a few owned knives, but seldom used them.

"The rules of engagement for disputes between rival groups were clear; fights were one-on-one, and when someone was down, the fight was over," the report reads.
By the 1990s, that had changed.


https://ottawasun.com/2015/10/30/the-evolution-of-ottawas-gang-scene/wcm/f565d76d-4eca-485b-8277-264067dfcaeb
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on August 08, 2018, 11:21:04 pm
A rating of "dumb" means "you win and i'm too lazy or incapable of responding with logic/evidence and not insults".

So i win this thread.  Woo hoo! 

Jk y'all, G.night folks!
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on August 08, 2018, 11:28:04 pm
A rating of "dumb" means "you win and i'm too lazy or incapable of responding with logic/evidence and not insults".

So i win this thread.  Woo hoo! 

Jk y'all, G.night folks!

It means exactly what it says. No more time to waste.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on August 09, 2018, 10:23:54 am
It means exactly what it says. No more time to waste.

It's childish and insulting and lazy and calling someone's opinion "dumb" has no place in debate.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: wilber on August 09, 2018, 10:45:28 am
Most of the current gang shootings in our community involve young South  Asian men who were born here and live in middle class suburban neighbourhoods. They aren’t poor and had the same education opportunities as other kids. I think it stems at least partly from a boys can do no wrong culture.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 20, 2020, 03:15:23 am
I don’t know what kind of gun(s) the shooter used in the killing spree from yesterday, but here’s my common sense gun control ideas.

Guns have a legitimate purpose for hunting and maybe animal control.
Handguns are out.  These are not for hunting.
Shotguns - limited to a single or double barrel with single or 2 shots.  No more pump action.
Rifles - Single shot rifles only.  No more clips. 

This will have the effect of limiting the amount of damage a shooter can do, while still preserving hunting in the country.

I am a firearms owner.  Pump action shotgun for ducks and bear defence, a .410 for birds, a Sako .223 for deer. 
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: eyeball on April 20, 2020, 12:26:30 pm
I don’t know what kind of gun(s) the shooter used in the killing spree from yesterday, but here’s my common sense gun control ideas.

Guns have a legitimate purpose for hunting and maybe animal control.
Handguns are out.  These are not for hunting.
Shotguns - limited to a single or double barrel with single or 2 shots.  No more pump action.
Rifles - Single shot rifles only.  No more clips. 

This will have the effect of limiting the amount of damage a shooter can do, while still preserving hunting in the country.

I am a firearms owner.  Pump action shotgun for ducks and bear defence, a .410 for birds, a Sako .223 for deer.
How about if hunters store their guns at armouries adjacent to hunting preserves? They check their guns out go hunting then return them to the armoury when they're finished?
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: MH on April 20, 2020, 12:28:07 pm
Or we ban hunting ?
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Omni on April 20, 2020, 12:33:59 pm
I don’t know what kind of gun(s) the shooter used in the killing spree from yesterday, but here’s my common sense gun control ideas.

Guns have a legitimate purpose for hunting and maybe animal control.
Handguns are out.  These are not for hunting.
Shotguns - limited to a single or double barrel with single or 2 shots.  No more pump action.
Rifles - Single shot rifles only.  No more clips. 

This will have the effect of limiting the amount of damage a shooter can do, while still preserving hunting in the country.

I am a firearms owner.  Pump action shotgun for ducks and bear defence, a .410 for birds, a Sako .223 for deer.

I agree, the types of guns appropriate to hunting especially if you live in, or like to go to the country at appropriate times to maybe get something to stock up the freezer for the winter etc. are OK by me. Having had military training on various weapons during my day I would say if you need an AR-15 to knock down a deer then you shouldn't be allowed any type of gun. There's a reason they call it an "Attack" rifle. Our southern neighbors flog this second amendment nonsense to a fare thee well. Look at the idiots currently stomping around with loaded guns bitching about of all things government attempts to keep them safe from this Covid thing. Sounds like a dangerous mix to me.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 20, 2020, 12:42:44 pm
How about if hunters store their guns at armouries adjacent to hunting preserves? They check their guns out go hunting then return them to the armoury when they're finished?

They'll never give them up.  The headache isn't worth the cost.  People aren't dying en masse by single-shot hunting rifles.
Title: Re: Liberal caucus and gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 20, 2020, 01:11:10 pm
How about if hunters store their guns at armouries adjacent to hunting preserves? They check their guns out go hunting then return them to the armoury when they're finished?

Most people hunt on Crown land or private property.  “Hunting preserves” are just not a thing. 

Although, having central storage at a secure gun range might not be a bad idea.   Cost might be prohibitive though.  Then there are all the logistical issues like going hunting in a different area for weeks at a time.  May as well not have a central ”armoury” if you can just take your guns out for months at a time.  It would defeat the purpose.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 20, 2020, 03:53:55 pm
Or we ban hunting ?

Sorry, that’s just not a realistic option.   Tell the Inuit or an indigenous person who helps feed the people on reserve that they can’t hunt.  For non-indigenous hunters, the issue is the same...  food and tradition.  It will be tough to convince someone that they shouldn’t be allowed to hunt.  But if you still allow them to hunt, there’s no excuse to be against this other than “BUT I LOVE MY GUNS”!!!

But we can make it so that the guns people have access to aren’t the kind that would be very effective in a mass shooting scenario.  Single shot rifle is going to give people a lot more time to get cover, for police to shoot the assailant, etc.

Currently, it’s too easy to have a semi-auto rifle that can discharge a lot of rounds in a short time and have a few spare clips in your pocket can make the person a killing machine. 

Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 20, 2020, 03:56:37 pm
Or we ban hunting ?

Because of all those people getting murdered in the woods?
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Omni on April 20, 2020, 04:23:22 pm
I'll be interested to hear what type of gun the Nova Scotia shooter used and where and how he got it if they'll ever know. I hear it's up to 18 or 19 victims now depending on what news article you read.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 20, 2020, 04:29:58 pm
Because of all those people getting murdered in the woods?

Access to guns.   ::)

And if you don’t think easy access to guns that can kill multiple people is an issue (‘only the bad guys will have guns...  durrr’), you’re dead wrong.

The evidence is clear;  the more access to guns, the more gun violence you get.

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ont-DCAwNwDmLQRdHlxOKfnxSII=/0x0:1916x1721/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:1916x1721):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12543393/GUN_SCATTER2.jpg). https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: bcsapper on April 20, 2020, 04:57:56 pm
Or we ban hunting ?

By anyone who does it for fun.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 20, 2020, 05:15:40 pm
By anyone who does it for fun.

I’m not sure MH was actually serious about banning hunting.  If he was, then it was a pretty lazy and not well thought out post.   Because banning hunting doesn’t necessarily ban any guns. 

Maybe he meant banning all guns, despite people wanting to hunt and not trying to accommodate hunters like I did in my common sense gun regulations that I posted....   but I don’t know what was in MH’s mind.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: bcsapper on April 20, 2020, 05:42:23 pm
I’m not sure MH was actually serious about banning hunting.  If he was, then it was a pretty lazy and not well thought out post.   Because banning hunting doesn’t necessarily ban any guns. 

Maybe he meant banning all guns, despite people wanting to hunt and not trying to accommodate hunters like I did in my common sense gun regulations that I posted....   but I don’t know what was in MH’s mind.

Banning guns doesn't necessarily ban guns either.  Still, notwithstanding MH's motivation, I was serious.  I realise it's not going to happen.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: eyeball on April 20, 2020, 07:42:50 pm
Access to guns.   ::)

And if you don’t think easy access to guns that can kill multiple people is an issue (‘only the bad guys will have guns...  durrr’), you’re dead wrong.

The evidence is clear;  the more access to guns, the more gun violence you get.

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ont-DCAwNwDmLQRdHlxOKfnxSII=/0x0:1916x1721/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:1916x1721):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12543393/GUN_SCATTER2.jpg). https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts
Looks like a COVID graph.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 20, 2020, 07:48:39 pm
Depends on the context more than the number. Countries such as those in Scandinavian and Switzerland have mandatory military service. Their militia keep their guns at home. Very different from the US where anyone can basically own as many of anything other than a fully automatic firearm. 
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Omni on April 20, 2020, 08:02:35 pm
Depends on the context more than the number. Countries such as those in Scandinavian and Switzerland have mandatory military service. Their militia keep their guns at home. Very different from the US where anyone can basically own as many of anything other than a fully automatic firearm.

And in the US you can still own a fully automatic weapon if you acquired it before 1986. And of course you can buy a semi automatic, install a bump stock and head downtown if you're pissed off about something.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 20, 2020, 10:37:26 pm
Banning guns doesn't necessarily ban guns either.  Still, notwithstanding MH's motivation, I was serious.  I realise it's not going to happen.

Well, how do you propose to weed out those who are doing it for “fun”, vs for food, or whatever other reason you deem acceptable?
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: bcsapper on April 20, 2020, 10:49:02 pm
Well, how do you propose to weed out those who are doing it for “fun”, vs for food, or whatever other reason you deem acceptable?

I don't have a proposal.  Do I need one?

If I did have one I would expect a Nobel at the very least.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 20, 2020, 11:03:36 pm
I don't have a proposal.  Do I need one?

If I did have one I would expect a Nobel at the very least.

If you don't have one, then your suggestion is nonsense, no?
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: bcsapper on April 21, 2020, 08:47:52 am
If you don't have one, then your suggestion is nonsense, no?

My mistake.  I didn't read your post correctly. 

I don't have a suggestion for weeding those out either.  I did say it wasn't going to happen.

However, one could ban all hunting of any kind, and then issue licences for those who show they need it for sustenance.  That's not going to happen either.  But it would if I was in charge.

Obviously, that's not worth a Nobel prize.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: JMT on April 21, 2020, 11:14:11 am
Firearms should be illegal - there, I said it.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 21, 2020, 12:10:01 pm
Firearms should be illegal - there, I said it.

Nothing wrong with that opinion!  Firearms are inherently dangerous. I think we can probably come to a realistic compromise between what we have now and your view.  I don’t think making gun ownership illegal is a realistic option. 

Title: Re: gun control
Post by: JMT on April 21, 2020, 01:15:42 pm
Nothing wrong with that opinion!  Firearms are inherently dangerous. I think we can probably come to a realistic compromise between what we have now and your view.  I don’t think making gun ownership illegal is a realistic option.

I came to this view today.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 21, 2020, 02:17:13 pm
I think firearms designed to kill humans should be illegal.  Handguns, automatic weapons, maybe even semi-automatic.  Single-shot hunting rifles and shotguns are typically designed for hunting and can't really be used for mass shootings.

Hunters will also never give up their guns, and it will be a disaster, like the long-gun registry.  They'll bury their guns before giving them up.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Omni on April 21, 2020, 02:29:41 pm
I think firearms designed to kill humans should be illegal.  Handguns, automatic weapons, maybe even semi-automatic.  Single-shot hunting rifles and shotguns are typically designed for hunting and can't really be used for mass shootings.

Hunters will also never give up their guns, and it will be a disaster, like the long-gun registry.  They'll bury their guns before giving them up.

Well burying them would be one effective way of curbing gun crimes.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: JMT on April 21, 2020, 03:24:04 pm
I think firearms designed to kill humans should be illegal.  Handguns, automatic weapons, maybe even semi-automatic.  Single-shot hunting rifles and shotguns are typically designed for hunting and can't really be used for mass shootings.

Hunters will also never give up their guns, and it will be a disaster, like the long-gun registry.  They'll bury their guns before giving them up.

Sure, but most of those are semi autos.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 21, 2020, 04:15:00 pm
There should be a buy-back paid for by taxes on ammunition and the guns that remain allowed to be bought and sold. 

It’s not going to be a popular thing to do, and look for the usual knuckledraggers in Alberta and Sask to get a hate-on even more, but it’s the right thing to do.

However, this government will be too chicken-****...  they’ll ban “assault” weapons, which is mostly an aesthetic.  Handguns won’t be touched, except to allow cities to ban them, but WTF is that going to do?  Nothing that I can see. 
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 21, 2020, 04:23:50 pm
"In regards to gun control, we took very serious commitments in the election campaign and have moved forward -- and are moving forward on them -- to ensure that we're strengthening gun control in this country," Trudeau told reporters, according to CTV.

While campaigning last year, Trudeau said he wanted to ban assault-style rifles and set up a buyback program for all military-grade weapons that had been legally purchased.
Authorities have not said what kind of weapons the gunman used in Nova Scotia.

"I can say that we were on the verge of introducing legislation to ban assault-style weapons across this country; it was interrupted when the pandemic caused Parliament to be suspended," Trudeau said.


https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/20/americas/nova-scotia-shooting-monday/index.html

Interested to know what gun(s) were used in this rampage.  Maybe we should also ban replica RCMP cruisers!
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Omni on April 21, 2020, 04:47:15 pm
"In regards to gun control, we took very serious commitments in the election campaign and have moved forward -- and are moving forward on them -- to ensure that we're strengthening gun control in this country," Trudeau told reporters, according to CTV.

While campaigning last year, Trudeau said he wanted to ban assault-style rifles and set up a buyback program for all military-grade weapons that had been legally purchased.
Authorities have not said what kind of weapons the gunman used in Nova Scotia.

"I can say that we were on the verge of introducing legislation to ban assault-style weapons across this country; it was interrupted when the pandemic caused Parliament to be suspended," Trudeau said.


https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/20/americas/nova-scotia-shooting-monday/index.html

Interested to know what gun(s) were used in this rampage.  Maybe we should also ban replica RCMP cruisers!

That replica RCMP cruiser can already get you 5 years in the hoosegow.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 21, 2020, 08:58:31 pm
Sure, but most of those are semi autos.

Most hunting rifles are bolt action repeaters, not semi autos.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 21, 2020, 10:53:10 pm
Gun culture is just as dangerous as gun access.  Even if we had the exact same laws as most US states Canadians wouldn't own and use guns the same way Americans do.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: JMT on April 22, 2020, 08:20:15 am
Most hunting rifles are bolt action repeaters, not semi autos.

That's certainly not the case with anyone that I know.  Everyone here has semi auto rifles and shotguns.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: waldo on April 22, 2020, 03:20:07 pm
https://i.imgur.com/w4ZoBLd.mp4
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 22, 2020, 04:53:57 pm
Most hunting rifles are bolt action repeaters, not semi autos.

On one hand, Oswalt used a bolt action repeater to kill JFK (allegedly).

On the other hand, at least you can't mow masses of people down with them.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 22, 2020, 04:55:45 pm
No point in talking about gun control until we know what weapon the NS shooter used.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 22, 2020, 05:20:20 pm
No point in talking about gun control until we know what weapon the NS shooter used.

They are saying he didn't have a PAL. If so, any guns he had were owned illegally anyway.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 22, 2020, 05:43:26 pm
On one hand, Oswalt used a bolt action repeater to kill JFK (allegedly).
On the other hand, at least you can't mow masses of people down with them.

These guys could.

Lee Enfield Mad Minute
The first and confirmed record for the most hits on target during a 'Mad Minute' was set by Sgt-Major Jesse Wallingford - 36 hits at 300 yards in 1 minute in 1908. However, this was allegedly bettered in 1914, by Sergeant-Instructor Alfred Snoxall with 38 hits within the 24 inch inner ring in 60 seconds.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: the_squid on April 22, 2020, 08:10:50 pm
They are saying he didn't have a PAL. If so, any guns he had were owned illegally anyway.

Doesn't matter...  making guns more difficult to get will affect illegal sales as well.  Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.  It will save some lives, even if it's not a perfect solution.


These guys could.

Lee Enfield Mad Minute
The first and confirmed record for the most hits on target during a 'Mad Minute' was set by Sgt-Major Jesse Wallingford - 36 hits at 300 yards in 1 minute in 1908. However, this was allegedly bettered in 1914, by Sergeant-Instructor Alfred Snoxall with 38 hits within the 24 inch inner ring in 60 seconds.

How many could they have hit with a semi-auto modern rifle with a 15 round clip and spares on their belt?  The average shooter can't do that.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 22, 2020, 08:45:26 pm
Doesn't matter...  making guns more difficult to get will affect illegal sales as well.  Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.  It will save some lives, even if it's not a perfect solution.




Well if he didn't have a PAL or FAC he couldn't have got them from a legal source so what is the point of more regulations?

Quote
How many could they have hit with a semi-auto modern rifle with a 15 round clip and spares on their belt?  The average shooter can't do that.

A lot but these guys were exceptional. At the beginning of WW1 the pre war British regulars were so well trained and their rate of fire was so high, the Germans thought they were up against machine guns at Mons.

The Lee Enfield was also one of the most successful infantry weapons in history, it was the standard British (and Canadian) infantry rifle from the late 1800's to the 1950's.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: JMT on April 22, 2020, 10:28:14 pm
Well if he didn't have a PAL or FAC he couldn't have got them from a legal source so what is the point of more regulations?

Almost all illegal long guns and 1/3 of illegal handguns start out being purchased legally by Canadians.  If you restrict access to guns further, you reduce gun crime.  Study after study shows it.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 22, 2020, 10:39:04 pm
Almost all illegal long guns and 1/3 of illegal handguns start out being purchased legally by Canadians.  If you restrict access to guns further, you reduce gun crime.  Study after study shows it.

Maybe we should find out where he got his guns before we jump to conclusions.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: JMT on April 22, 2020, 10:40:53 pm
Maybe we should find out where he got his guns before we jump to conclusions.

It's not so much about this tragedy in a vacuum, but all of them as a whole.  Access to guns is deadly.  There's no argument to be had.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 22, 2020, 10:53:34 pm
It's not so much about this tragedy in a vacuum, but all of them as a whole.  Access to guns is deadly.  There's no argument to be had.

The largest number of gun homicides are committed with illegally obtained hand guns which have been restricted weapons in Canada since the 1930's
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Omni on April 22, 2020, 11:05:07 pm
I was down in Dallas one time during my regular training visits to Flight Safety Intn'l and I went to a gun shop just for kicks one evening to see what I could get. I told the man I was interested in an AR 15 and a few 15 round clips. The only problem was that I didn't have a state drivers license but that I could drive my rental car a half mile down the road, present my BC DL, get a picture taken, pay $35 bucks, and come on back (not even a driving test required) and I could buy whatever I wanted. I left the shop shaking my head as to how easy that could have been to become so well armed with so little check as to who I was.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: JMT on April 22, 2020, 11:24:29 pm
The largest number of gun homicides are committed with illegally obtained hand guns which have been restricted weapons in Canada since the 1930's

That's not the only problems that access to guns cause.  Long guns are used in a lot of successful suicides.  I'm really not a gun fan - less all of the time.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 22, 2020, 11:30:24 pm
That's not the only problems that access to guns cause.  Long guns are used in a lot of successful suicides.  I'm really not a gun fan - less all of the time.

I'm not either. Don't own one.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 22, 2020, 11:40:36 pm
That's not the only problems that access to guns cause.  Long guns are used in a lot of successful suicides.  I'm really not a gun fan - less all of the time.

The gun is the worst invention in human history.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Omni on April 23, 2020, 12:11:23 am
The gun is the worst invention in human history.

Oh but what would we have done without all those wars?
I kid.
I agree to a large part with your comment.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 23, 2020, 09:15:43 am
Oh but what would we have done without all those wars?
I kid.
I agree to a large part with your comment.

Medieval warfare where people hacked each other to pieces was so much better. Guns aren’t going to be un invented regardless how how much we might like it and they are a means of survival for some and a necessary tool for others.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: wilber on April 23, 2020, 12:59:27 pm
A really serious question is why the RCMP didn't issue an emergency alert instead of using Twitter. We would never have known, we both carry phones but neither of us are on Twitter. There are lots more like us.
Title: Re: gun control
Post by: Gorgeous Graham on April 23, 2020, 01:01:34 pm
A really serious question is why the RCMP didn't issue an emergency alert instead of using Twitter. We would never have known, we both carry phones but neither of us are on Twitter. There are lots more like us.

Incompetence.  The rampage went on for like 13 hours is that right?

Nice to know see how many of our federal and international agencies are incompetent over the last few months.  I feel so safe and secure!

There can be lots of problems with the private sector profit motive, but the prospect of earning money & fear of losing money sure gets people off their a$$es to move.