The Great Gun Control Debate

[Lumber]

.22cal is a gateway drug. Get a 10/22 to start.

I've always wanted one of these:

 

[Jarnhamar]

I've always wanted one of these:

You can pick up an SKS for $200 at Canadian tire and a Remington 700 similar to that for $765 +/-

[quote author=MCG]
http://ipolitics.ca/2015/12/08/what-canadas-lax-gun-laws-are-costing-us-in-blood/
[/quote]

It looks like the author is taking a real beating.  Most people seem to be calling him on his bullshit. Unsurprisingly the author hasn't seemed to engage anyone in counter-points like he suggested he would.

 

[George Wallace]

Did I misunderstand you, George? I am sure you must know that is the law in Ontario, "On many freeways with three or more lanes in each direction, large trucks cannot travel in the far left lane and must use the lane to the right for passing."
http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/driver/handbook/section2.9.2.shtml

Derailment:

The 401 East of GTA is, for the most part, four lanes with only a few additional passing lanes.  If you travel Eastern Ontario on the 401, you will constantly be held up by transport trucks attempting to pass other transports.  I might add, that many of them are not Ontario plated vehicles.  The 401 has been closed twice now, in the last two weeks, by accidents involving transport trucks East of Kingston.

Now back to guns.

 

[KevinB]

Just so we can each compare our thought processes - I envision the above items being used to store rifles, presumably underground.

Having lived in Canada during the 1990's era mag ban and restricting of the AR-15, I would suspect you are very close to the mark.

  However I will leave you with a comment from a man carrying a gun, IF you are digging a hole to hide your guns, it is often the time you should be using them.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I be in love with Dlask, 220m with bulk ammo

 

[Lumber]

  However I will leave you with a comment from a man carrying a gun, IF you are digging a hole to hide your guns, it is often the time you should be using them.

Let me just make sure I'm not reading this incorrectly.

According to the person you are quoting (and I am assuming you support this quote), if the Canadian government were to decide to ban guns, or ban some group of gun (say banning all hand-guns, or even something stupid like, banning all rifles that don't have wooden stocks), then it would be time to take up arms and use those guns against the government?

I could be reading that completely wrong, but I'm not sure what else you mean by "it is oftent he time you should be using them".

 

[Jed]

Let me just make sure I'm not reading this incorrectly.

According to the person you are quoting (and I am assuming you support this quote), if the Canadian government were to decide to ban guns, or ban some group of gun (say banning all hand-guns, or even something stupid like, banning all rifles that don't have wooden stocks), then it would be time to take up arms and use those guns against the government?

I could be reading that completely wrong, but I'm not sure what else you mean by "it is oftent he time you should be using them".

So Lumber, Are you just trying to rake up dirt? or merely just being obtuse? No one is suggesting anything illegal should be done. At the very least one may guess this may occur much the same as it has throughout history since whenever they started putting in senseless and ineffective controls since the 1920's after the first world war.

 

[Lumber]

So Lumber, Are you just trying to rake up dirt? or merely just being obtuse? No one is suggesting anything illegal should be done. At the very least one may guess this may occur much the same as it has throughout history since whenever they started putting in senseless and ineffective controls since the 1920's after the first world war.

I'm not being obtuse, I'm merely asking him to explain what KevinB meant by his quote:

IF you are digging a hole to hide your guns, it is often the time you should be using them.

Perhaps you could provide your interpretation?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Perhaps you could provide your interpretation?

He's using hyperbole just like you did in the thread about keyboard warriors on facebook; unless reading those comments really was going to make you physically cry.

 

[Lumber]

He's using hyperbole just like you did in the thread about keyboard warriors on facebook; unless reading those comments really was going to make you physically cry.

No, saying that me saying I was going to cry is hyperbole is hyperbole. Get it?  ;D

 

[KevinB]

Let me just make sure I'm not reading this incorrectly.

According to the person you are quoting (and I am assuming you support this quote), if the Canadian government were to decide to ban guns, or ban some group of gun (say banning all hand-guns, or even something stupid like, banning all rifles that don't have wooden stocks), then it would be time to take up arms and use those guns against the government?

I could be reading that completely wrong, but I'm not sure what else you mean by "it is oftent he time you should be using them".

Perhaps a better question is why bury guns?

If you are burying your guns to resist a tyrannical regime, then don't bury them use them. 
If you still have the power of law, then fight it in court.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Perhaps a better question is why bury guns?

If you are burying your guns to resist a tyrannical regime, then don't bury them use them. 
If you still have the power of law, then fight it in court.

I believe the "rule of thumb" for what to do with tyrannical regimes has been established:

" ... That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

 

[Colin Parkinson]

You bury some so you don't lose them all when the government suddenly decides that your hunting rifle is now a "Sniper assault weapon". Burying guns might be a nice "FU" to the government, but not joining a firearm organization, not writing letters and talking to MP's make it pointless.

 

[Zoomie]

Perhaps a better question is why bury guns?

The whole idea of burying guns came to me from my gun-toting friends in the US.  Texas as an example - great soil that resist ground penetrating RADAR - apparently this is where quite a few locals "store" their guns.

Personally - I keep my rifles in my gun safe and the gun closet.  I'm not worried about anyone taking them - since none are registered, no-one knows I have them.  I just recently bought a Tavor and the store didn't even write any of my PAL information down - just looked to make sure it was still valid.  This is where our gun laws are less restrictive in the US - you get a background check by the FBI every time you purchase from a store - there's a paper trail somewhere.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

The whole idea of burying guns came to me from my gun-toting friends in the US.  Texas as an example - great soil that resist ground penetrating RADAR - apparently this is where quite a few locals "store" their guns.

Personally - I keep my rifles in my gun safe and the gun closet.  I'm not worried about anyone taking them - since none are registered, no-one knows I have them.  I just recently bought a Tavor and the store didn't even write any of my PAL information down - just looked to make sure it was still valid.  This is where our gun laws are less restrictive in the US - you get a background check by the FBI every time you purchase from a store - there's a paper trail somewhere.

Whoa. I thought it was the complete opposite in some states.

My US Facebook friends must be in a different place than you are referring to.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

United States firearm discussion has been moved here: http://army.ca/forums/threads/121456.0.html

Please try keep this thread to Canadian firearms laws and discussion.

Tanks!

---Staff---

 

[Jarnhamar]

This is a video from France but it gives a great example of the power having a firearm and CCW-type permit and what it can prevent. In this case the man didn't even pull his pistol out but it looks like the armed gang, who appeared quite ready to assault people, backed off.

http://youtu.be/lHX5jsomq_U

If Canada starts seeing random gang attacks or, say, 1000 man strong sexual assaults maybe CCW-type permits will be more common.

I've also read the man is a police officer but for all intents and purposes you can easily substitute a civilian with a CCW in his position.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Perhaps you, and the American who posted the clip and gave it an English title, should learn to speak French first:

The armed Frenchman in the video, and his partner, are POLICE OFFICERS, and the video describes how they extricated themselves from the dangerous situation without escalation. This leaves two matters: First, being armed (to the knowledge of the thugs) doesn't seem to be a deterrent in favour of the police officers in France; and, second: How many people here think that American police officers would have been that  patient and restrained, instead of actually pulling their guns and shooting the people coming at them with baseball bats?

 

[Jed]

Perhaps you, and the American who posted the clip and gave it an English title, should learn to speak French first:

The armed Frenchman in the video, and his partner, are POLICE OFFICERS, and the video describes how they extricated themselves from the dangerous situation without escalation. This leaves two matters: First, being armed (to the knowledge of the thugs) doesn't seem to be a deterrent in favour of the police officers in France; and, second: How many people here think that American police officers would have been that  patient and restrained, instead of actually pulling their guns and shooting the people coming at them with baseball bats?

You are situating the estimate. You should at least be able to acknowledge that CCW is helpful in situations such as these.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Jed: What "situation such as these" do you think you are talking about?

As usual, context is damn useful. And here is a shocker: We are not talking about citizens suddenly finding themselves confronted by gang or mob here. A few months ago, I have seen the full television show on French TV that this is an extract from (here in Quebec, we have a channel called TV5 that has selected shows from all the French TV stations from around the world, including a lot from France of course).

It is a News show, in the Fifth Estate or W5 style, and in that 40 minutes episode, the reporters are following members of the French anti-gang "Police judiciaire" (Investigation unit) as it is investigating a murder that occurred in inter-gang warfare. The cops in this segment first come to the gang and identify themselves as cops and start asking questions. The situation you see develops after they start to zero in on a potential culprit and the other gang members move in to protect him. Had the reporter and camera crew not been there, it is quite possible that the situation would have ended up in a shoot-out, but then again it may have resolved itself without a confrontation. When TV crew are present, you never know how much of the various "actors" actions are their true reaction as opposed to actions taken for the purpose of using the camera crew for "propaganda" or furthering your own aims.

Needless to say, a few minutes after in the TV show, you see the investigators come back with proper Gendarme heavy back up and the potential culprit arrested and taken away without any trouble.