Author Topic: Danforth Shooting  (Read 1917 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8947
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #210 on: August 13, 2018, 11:43:44 am »
The argument is so obvious, itís probably 4th grade math....   if you ban something and availability goes down, then it will be harder to get.    So your simplistic contention that banning handguns wouldnít work is complete nonsense.

For whatever reason this is the 3rd or 4th time you've strawman'd me with an argument I never made.  You're reading what I say and then for some reason transforming it and me into some stereotype you want to win an argument against.

I've said numerous time that banning or putting more restrictions on handguns would make a difference, and yes something should be done there, it just wouldn't get rid of the problem.  If you think banning handguns will eliminate criminals/gangs acquiring handguns, that's nonsense.  People who want meth get it, people who wanted alcohol during prohibition got it, it was just more difficult.

I'm saying do something about gun access, but also do something about the reasons for the existence of gangs and the need to shoot a gun in the first place.  The root problem is also what compels somebody to fire a trigger at another human being in the 1st place.  So yes guns kill people and yes people kill people.

Mental health access in Toronto is in crisis.  I have a friend with mental health issues living in Toronto.  She went to her GP about it, she told her the wait to see a psychotherapist covered by OHIP is typically 4-6 months.  After that, wait time to get into a basic program to help her was another 4+ months, and it's a group session not 1-on-1 because the demand is outrageous.  Did the Toronto/Ontario mental health system fail the Danforth shooter?  We'll never know.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2018, 09:04:57 pm by Coonlight Graham »
I queef, therefore I am.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4842
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #211 on: September 06, 2018, 11:44:28 am »
A tourist driving in Alberta west of Calgary was shot in the head by someone who didnít seem to like the manís driving....   

I think it may be a watershed moment when we, as a country, do something fairly drastic about handguns.  It may be time for them to go.  If you need a shotgun and or rifle for hunting, then fine.   But your handgun hobby is too dangerous to remain legal.

I donít know if this was a handgun, but I would be surprised if he used a rifle while driving a car. 

Hopefully they catch this prick soon.

And it turns out that the attempted murder was committed by a 16 year old aboriginal from the Stoney Nahoda First Nation near Calgary.  This is no doubt an extremely disappointing development for gun-grabber types across the country.

No doubt this young man will face an extra-tough time at the healing-circle.


 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #212 on: September 06, 2018, 11:59:36 am »
Ah no, it provides further reason as to why we need to be vigilant about controlling who gets to carry guns.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4842
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #213 on: September 06, 2018, 12:02:56 pm »
So remember when Toronto police chief Mark Saunders said that 50% of guns used in crimes come from legal owners in Canada?

Some guy filed an FOI with the Toronto Police to obtain their statistics on the situation.

https://dennisryoung.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Toronto-Police-FOIP-Crime-Gun-Stats-2007-2017-Aug-24-2018.pdf

It turns out that their own statistics say that in 2017,  of 726 crime guns seized by police, 148 were identified as "domestically sourced".  That's 20%, not 50%.

Also, while Saunders claimed that this is on the rise, it's actually the opposite.   In 2016, 124 of 516 (24%) of crime guns were identified as domestically sourced. In 2015, it was 152 of 566 (26%) that were domestically sourced.

My question is, was Mark Saunders deliberately lying for political reasons, or is Mark Saunders just too dumb to read his own department's statistics properly?


 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4842
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #214 on: September 06, 2018, 12:12:01 pm »
Ah no, it provides further reason as to why we need to be vigilant about controlling who gets to carry guns.

The fact that "possession of a prohibited firearm" is among the charges against him indicates that the weapon he used is illegal for *anyone* to own in this country. 

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #215 on: September 06, 2018, 12:17:19 pm »
The fact that "possession of a prohibited firearm" is among the charges against him indicates that the weapon he used is illegal for *anyone* to own in this country. 

 -k

So is that what you might refer to as a "gun grabber" law then?
Funny Funny x 1 View List

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4842
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #216 on: September 06, 2018, 12:26:12 pm »
Some yes, some no. There's a clear and obvious reason for making automatic weapons prohibited.

There's arguably good reason for making sawed-off rifles and shotguns prohibited, and arguably short-barrel pistols as well.

There's no rational reason for making .25 and .32 calibre pistols prohibited.


Regardless, whichever type of weapon it was, it's clear that this wasn't a cry for new and more comprehensive bans, because the would-be murderer used an already-banned weapon that he didn't obtain legally in the first place.    It makes an argument for enforcing existing laws.

And since this incident almost certainly involved gang-connected individuals, as does most of the gun violence in Toronto and Surrey... maybe they should be addressing the real root of the problem.

By the way, do you think Mark Saunders was lying his face off, or is just to darned dumb to read properly?

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4842
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #217 on: September 06, 2018, 03:24:13 pm »
Global article citing the data obtained by Mr Young:


Quote
In short, there is no surge in crime guns that can be traced back to licensed Canadian gun owners. None. Itís just not there. The Toronto Police Serviceís own statistics show no such surge. For instance, see this chart below. It tracks the number of ďcrime gunsĒ that can be sourced either to Canada or the United States. The CP article asserts that thereís been a surge of Canadian-sourced guns since 2012. But these numbers go back as far as 2007. Look for yourself. Whereís the surge?

https://globalnews.ca/news/4428617/matt-gurney-toronto-gun-crime-statistics/

Quote
Both the Canadian Press and the Toronto Police were contacted about these matters before this column ran. In an email, an editor at the Canadian Press said they were looking into the matter but had no further comment at that time. An officer with the communications department of the Toronto Police said that my request to speak with Det. di Danieli would be passed along; but as of 24 hours later, there has been no reply beyond confirming receipt of my messages. This is unfortunate. Without comment, I canít begin to explain how the public narrative that was established was so wildly off what the statistics actually show. I choose not to speculate. But an explanation would certainly come in handy. If any arrives, I will update you.

In the meantime, the debate will continue, of course. Thereís no doubt about that. But it has to be an informed debate. Iíve said it before, and I have a grim feeling Iíll say it again, but gun control is an important public policy issue, and Canadians were woefully ignorant of it, in large part because these issues are not effectively reported on. This CP articleís central claim has been at the centre of our gun control debate this summer, and has been cited as a secondary source Ö I donít even know how many times.

But the articleís central claim, of a surge in domestic crime guns, is bad. Inaccurate. Wrong. And that bad, inaccurate and wrong information is now at the core of an important and contentious public policy debate.

Mark Saunders and the Toronto PD have been caught red-handed spreading misinformation for the purpose of advancing a political agenda. FAKE NEWS.


 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #218 on: September 06, 2018, 04:19:25 pm »
By the way, do you think Mark Saunders was lying his face off, or is just to darned dumb to read properly?

 -k

Saunders was basing his claim on a one-time statement about one operation to seize guns, but it was immediately seized upon by the media and all the 'gun grabbers' and used as a 'fact' that a huge number of illegal firearms used by gangs were domestically sourced. In fact, even the Vancouver inspector didn't say that. Just because a certain number of seized firearms were stolen or domestically sourced doesn't mean the hand guns  have the same percentage. There are far fewer of them available to steal, and they're rarely left laying out in the open for people to take. You can keep a rifle or shotgun propped up in the closet or in the trunk of your car. You have to lock a hand gun in a safe or gun box, and few people fail to hide those.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2018, 04:31:14 pm by SirJohn »
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4842
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #219 on: September 06, 2018, 08:15:48 pm »
I gather people aren't terribly about Mark "Sarah Huckabee" Saunders getting up on the podium and spreading false information to advance a political agenda.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8947
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #220 on: September 06, 2018, 09:01:27 pm »
My question is, was Mark Saunders deliberately lying for political reasons, or is Mark Saunders just too dumb to read his own department's statistics properly?

Mark Saunders is in a position where he's as close to a politician as you can get without actually officially being one.  Let's consider him mayor John Tory's Secretary of Defense, like an appointed politician in the US.

Why wouldn't he lie?  It's much better for police if more handguns are banned, makes their jobs a bit safer, and also the less guns in the hands of citizens the more powerful the armed police become.

re: your stats, what are the 2017 stats?  Also, as I said when the Danforth shooting happened, guns are only half the problem, one of the roots of this matter is what's going on in these people's brains and what kind of horrible, horrible job are these young men's parent(s) doing to raise these fools?
I queef, therefore I am.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #221 on: September 06, 2018, 09:09:48 pm »
Mark Saunders is in a position where he's as close to a politician as you can get without actually officially being one.  Let's consider him mayor John Tory's Secretary of Defense, like an appointed politician in the US.

Why wouldn't he lie?  It's much better for police if more handguns are banned, makes their jobs a bit safer, and also the less guns in the hands of citizens the more powerful the armed police become.

re: your stats, what are the 2017 stats?  Also, as I said when the Danforth shooting happened, guns are only half the problem, one of the roots of this matter is what's going on in these people's brains and what kind of horrible, horrible job are these young men's parent(s) doing to raise these fools?

Ha ha, do I detect a Wayne La Pierre NRA type paranoia comment here with the suggestion that controlling access to guns is leading to a police state? If you need or want to own a gun, prove that you are worthy of that right, or else stay the **** out of my neighborhood.

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8947
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #222 on: September 06, 2018, 09:33:14 pm »
My question is, was Mark Saunders deliberately lying for political reasons, or is Mark Saunders just too dumb to read his own department's statistics properly?

Kimmy, maybe Saunders was referring to this? This graph is from the globalnews article you posted:

I queef, therefore I am.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4842
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #223 on: September 06, 2018, 09:45:09 pm »
That graph is derived from the FOI PDF I linked to earlier, as the article explains. And as the article explains, it shows the exact opposite of what Mark Huckabee-Saunders claims is happening. The Toronto PD's own figures disprove their claim of a 'surge'.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8947
Re: Danforth Shooting
« Reply #224 on: September 06, 2018, 09:48:16 pm »
Ha ha, do I detect a Wayne La Pierre NRA type paranoia comment here with the suggestion that controlling access to guns is leading to a police state?

I'm not familiar with that guy.  If you were a police officer, would you want more or less people with legal access to guns?

Quote
If you need or want to own a gun, prove that you are worthy of that right, or else stay the **** out of my neighborhood.

I agree totally.  Guns should be highly regulated.  There's not many good reasons anyways why someone should have a gun unless they hunt or live rurally, so i'm not even against an urban ban on handguns or a full ban except in particular circumstances, it's just not going to solve the problem (would help it).
I queef, therefore I am.