The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Haggis]

Tell that to the 100's of Americans shot dead each year by cops at routine traffic stops, for listening to and abiding by commands.

I call bullcrap.  Since 2015 US police have shot 3309 people.  Only 7% (231) were unarmed.

US police have to, by virtue of the Second Amendment, assume that every traffic stop will result in the presence of a firearm other than the officer's.  Not everybody acutely obeys the officer.  Some think they are trying to help by being proactive during a traffic stop (jumping out of the car with a wallet in their hands, for example).  Others are genuinely obstructive (refusing to take their hands out of pockets) before eventually complying, sometimes too late.

No LEO I know (American or Canadian) wants to shoot somebody.  All LEOs I know want to go home alive at the end of their shifts, though.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I thought as much. I could have wrote your post for you, having dealt with these same, comical fantasy comments all the time as a gun owner. Does sentryman even know what an assault rifle is? I'm sure he's trying to speak to what is referred to in law enforcement as Patrol Carbines. These still don't meet definition, but that is ignored by anti gun people. Doesn't fit their fantasy objectives. I'm starting to agree with Jarn. We've had this type here before. The only right answer is the predisposed one they brought here.

I'm not repeating our documented responses, to these open ended, hyperbolic hypothesis. sentryman has no documentation to prove his argument, which are all made up and not based on any kind of truths he can prove. Running on disjointed emotional hate of gun owners. 100's shot in traffic stops yearly by US LE? That is the over the top, emotional, and false info he's bringing to the table and resting his argument on.

Things have been explained, technically and without emotion by members here. Responded to by more of the same.

I refuse to waste time on those that are just looking for an argument based on emotion. I'm not responding anymore to the ignorant emotional drama brought here by those with a torch.

 

[garb811]

You said a lot of words.....I decided to only read half of them due to time constraints.

I also like teal

SentryMAn:

If your sole intent is to troll the thread, it isn't going to be tolerated. If you wish to actually engage in a reasonable and facts based debate with the remainder of the posters in this thread, bring your contributions up to that level.

Fair Warning

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[Jarnhamar]

CCFRs response to the handful of Canadian doctors calling for a complete firearms ban.

Doctors didn't like having their ethics and appropriateness questioned and reacted by painting themselves as big victims of bully gun owners.

https://youtu.be/_T41KfeBPrw

There were 13,168 deaths from firearms between 2000 and 2016 in Canada (9919 of which were suicides).

There's an estimated 70,000 Canadians harmed by medical errors per year.  The University Health Network estimates medical errors killed more than 30,000 Canadians in 2014 alone.
Statistically speaking there's one death from medical error per 3 doctors in Canada.

I think I'd feel a little safer knocking those medical mistake numbers down first.

 

[Lumber]

Not trying to force an issue, but I don't think I've seen anyone here voice that extreme an opinion. Maybe I'm wrong. Can you point me to a post where the user that said they preferred no gun laws whatsoever and give things over to the 1800's Old West? That would be akin to saying they want criminals to have the same status as law abiding owners.  :dunno:

On the face, that seems a rather, over the top, hyperbolic statement.

FJ, I can see how my statement would seem hyperbolic but I promise it's not. I tried looking for the original conversation in v1.0, but couldn't find it.

I've had a poster on here call me a "grabber" just for supporting any form of gun control, and it may have been the same person who, when asked, admitted that they believe we should have no regulation what so ever.

Wish I could provide the source, but that statement (and the "grabber" accusation) both seem to have been removed from the v1.0 thread.

Cheers.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Thanks for the effort. 8)

 

[suffolkowner]

two articles by Matt Guerney

https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/new-zealand-is-not-showing-canada-the-way-on-gun-control/

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-the-globe-and-mails-little-and-big-gun-control-screwups

pissing in the wind no doubt.

I thought the NZ ban encompassed all semis other than those limited to 5 rd magazines sort of like the M1 with its 8 rd?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Senator McPhedran to move Bill C-71 amendment to “prohibit” handguns in Canada


For immediate release
Ottawa, April 8, 2019 – Today at the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence’s
(SECD) clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-71, An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in
relation to firearms, Senator Marilou McPhedran, an independent Senator for Manitoba, will move to
amend clause 16 that already proposes to amend subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code – exactly the
subsection that could also be amended to add handguns to the “prohibited firearm” list in the Code.
“Looking at how swiftly the New Zealand government is moving to prohibit the weapons used in the
mass killings of Muslims in their places of worship, and looking realistically at the Canadian
parliamentary agenda, the Government of Canada has run out of time unless the bill currently before
the Senate is used for a new initiative to deal more effectively with the proliferation of handguns in
Canada.” – Hon. Marilou McPhedran, Independent Senator for Manitoba
During their appearance at SECD on February 18th, 2019, Doctors for Protection from Guns advised
that: “A now abundant and international body of medical evidence shows that reducing access to
guns through regulations saves lives and decreases the burden of injury.” The Coalition for Gun
Control expanded on the link between access to firearms and death, submitting that: “About one in
five (21%) firearm-related deaths in Canada is the result of a criminal offence, while the majority
(79%) are the result of suicide, accident, or legal intervention.” Making it harder to access killing
weapons can reduce occurrence and lethality.
A handgun killed Colton Boushie of the Red Pheasant First Nation in Saskatchewan. In Toronto, Police
Chief Saunders reported that 514 handguns were seized in 2018 - 222 more than in 2017 and 172 more
than in 2016. This amendment is being introduced in light of extensive testimony with factually
accurate evidence heard by the SECD committee from groups such as Doctors for Protection from
Guns, the Coalition for Gun Control, and the Centre culturel islamique de Québec that illustrate the
need for decisive action in combating firearm violence against women, children, and Canadians at
large.
“Prohibition of handguns would strengthen Canada’s leadership internationally, including Canada’s
commitment to the 2030 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with SDG 16 on significant
reductions in homicides and SDG 5 on reducing violence against women and girls,” notes Senator
Marilou McPhedran.

 

[Cloud Cover]

"A handgun killed Colton Boushie of the Red Pheasant First Nation in Saskatchewan."

Can't deny that,  never mind all the other facts and evidence in the case, FFS.

 

[Haggis]

Thankfully, Sen McPhedran's motion was defeated.  There will not be a handgun ban in C-71.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Every single person or group cited is anti gun and their use of half truths and omissions of fact belies the deceit they are employing to get their way by lying to the public.

Firearms owners will never get their side told honestly. Nor will a party, liberal or ndp, ever agree to a proper panel where all sides are given equal weight and experts are vetted for their knowledge of the subject, before being considered experts.

This has nothing to do with firearms safety and classification. It is about incremental confiscation and they won't let facts, feeling or finances get in the way of their social engineering of the Canadian populace.

 

[Lumber]

This has nothing to do with firearms safety and classification. It is about incremental confiscation and they won't let facts, feeling or finances get in the way of their social engineering of the Canadian populace.

I don't think it's nefarious like that at all. I think people are just genuinely ignorant. The mayor of Cambridge Ontario isn't trying to "socially engineer" Canadians, he just holds an honest, but insanely ignorant, belief that having a fully regulated gun store near a liquor store and 2km from a school is somehow dangerous. He believes that banning all guns is necessary and would solve our gun problems. He's not lying and ignoring facts or the opinions of the pro-gun side, he's just stupid.  :nod:

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I'm not talking mayors or city councillors.

I'm talking about the current federal government.

All gun laws are federal. No one else can do anything about it except them. Every nuance is dictated by the Feds

I don't care about Tory, the Mayor of Cambridge, or anyone else like them, they are just sideshows and only have an opinion. Ignorant or otherwise. They are no different than opinions here.

 

[Furniture]

I don't think it's nefarious like that at all. I think people are just genuinely ignorant. The mayor of Cambridge Ontario isn't trying to "socially engineer" Canadians, he just holds an honest, but insanely ignorant, belief that having a fully regulated gun store near a liquor store and 2km from a school is somehow dangerous. He believes that banning all guns is necessary and would solve our gun problems. He's not lying and ignoring facts or the opinions of the pro-gun side, he's just stupid.  :nod:

This is the true issue facing firearms owners in Canada, the ignorance of the population.

Most Canadian's don't know what our laws are, and the media is not interested in letting them know. There are far more views/clicks to be had for the media(advertisers) by dragging crying families, half a dozen doctors, or masacre survivors on screen to have them yell about how all guns are evil. (A shooting is what happens on the range when you shoot targets, when you kill people it's a murder, or masacre)

Firearms owners also have a public image problem, because far too often the "from my cold dead hands" crowd is who the media wants to show. They aren't interested in lawyers, doctors, mechanics, store owners,  etc. that advocate for firearms, they want the crazies. Crazies make for more entertaining viewing, and more views works out to more advertising dollars.

 

[Lumber]

I'm not talking mayors or city councillors.

I'm talking about the current federal government.

All gun laws are federal. No one else can do anything about it except them. Every nuance is dictated by the Feds

I don't care about Tory, the Mayor of Cambridge, or anyone else like them, they are just sideshows and only have an opinion. Ignorant or otherwise. They are no different than opinions here.

I apologize; that was merely a recent and poignant (IMO) example.

I will make the same claim about the federal governement. Some know better but see it as an opportunity to win over voters, but for the most part I believe the politicians are just as ignorant (sometimes willfully so) and are not running some backroom scheme to try and "socially engineer" the population. They just don't like guns, don't understand guns, don't understand why anyone would want to own a gun, and want to see guns gone. That's it.

It's frustrating, I know. I just think we need to look any deeper than that.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Lumber]not running some backroom scheme to try and "socially engineer" the population. [/quote]

[quote author=Lumber]They just don't like guns, don't understand guns, don't understand why anyone would want to own a gun, and want to see guns gone. That's it.

[/quote]
Isn't that social engineering?

the use of centralized planning in an attempt to manage social change and regulate the future development and behavior of a society.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Isn't that social engineering?

Which is also interesting because you could also argue it is cultural genocide. Whether people like it or not, firearms have always been a large part of Canadian culture. Early Canada especially was gun crazy, we even helped found the NRA (though the aims of the organization then was to train marksmenship, it wasn't really political at that point).

'Cultural genocide is a term used to describe the deliberate destruction of the cultural heritage of a people or nation for political, military, religious, ideological, ethnical, or racial reasons'

 

[Fishbone Jones]

'Cultural genocide is a term used to describe the deliberate destruction of the cultural heritage of a people or nation for political, military, religious, ideological, ethnical, or racial reasons'

FTFY 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Trudeau government will consider handgun ban if re-elected

https://tnc.news/2019/04/12/trudeau-government-will-consider-handgun-ban-if-re-elected/?fbclid=IwAR3WWRw4s1LMEEqaidiRwO5SQxRQ6avNzuRzQL2xxHUuqbS1A2_-SmEZlxA

It’s too late to consider a handgun ban before the 2019 federal election this fall, but the Trudeau government will explore it if re-elected.

Bill Blair, Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction Minister, refused to tell the Senate Committee on National Security and Defence if a government-initiated report on the effects of a handgun ban would be finished by the time of the election.

“Canadians expect us to take the time to do it right and I’ve been doing my very best to take that time,” Blair said.

He also inferred that further discussion on a handgun ban may have to wait until after the election this fall.

The committee was discussing the proposed Bill C-71, which amends several of the firearms rules in Canada. Some on the committee wanted to see the report before C-71 becomes law.

One senator, Liberal-appointee Marilou McPhedran, questioned Blair on waiting until after the election to deal with the report on the assumption that the Liberals will win.

“It’s not an assumption, it’s an intent,” he answered.

Bill C-71 proposes a number of changes new restrictions to the purchase of firearms and makes changes to the enforcement of current firearms laws and regulations — but comes short of any form of firearm ban.

Blair had promised a report on the effects of a handgun ban, and public consultations, by the end of 2018. Four months into 2019 the report has yet to be completed.

The Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, still discussing C-71, struck down a proposal Monday to put a handgun ban into to the bill.

McPhedran attempted to amend Bill C-71 to include a handgun ban, but that amendment failed 2-6 with three abstentions.

A spokesperson for Bill Blair said that his office plans on releasing the Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction report in “early 2019.”

Well, we can quit worrying for a little while longer.
Blair is also examining central storage.

 

[Haggis]

Blair is also examining central storage.

Since no club I know of can afford to implement central storage, the government will likely step in to provide, fund or subsidize the facilities.  IMO central storage of firearms in government owned or controlled facilities is covert confiscation.