NEED YOUR HELP: Ban on handguns and assault weapons in Canada

[sestoppelman]

Done!

 

[BRICKBURN]

Brickburn, this is a "joke" isn't it??? Has their ever been a cross check on gun crimes in Canada to determine the percentage of crimes committed with legally owned guns vs "illicit" guns? If not it needs to be done. The result will show where the "emphasis" needs to be placed. A number of years ago I traveled from lower Michigan to a friend's house near Sudbury Canada. As I recall, in order for him to keep guns in his home the safe where they were required to be kept had to be inspected / verified and approved by the RCMP. Am I mistaken about that?? I'm confident that the legal gunowners in Canada are no more a "party" to crime than their American counterparts. It appears that the term "looney" applies to more than your $1.00 coin.

No joke. Not fake news.

On the “this a joke side”:
Two big cities in the east have had incidents recently. So, the pandering starts. It is sad, unfortunate, disgraceful ( choose your adjective) that some people were killed by a nutter. So, a survey starts on Bans.

Do you think the crooks can’t get anything they want from the USA?

We are already restricted on magazine sizes for everything. The gift from the shooting years ago.

No inspections required, but everything had better be secured. Most certainly handguns of any sort. There are no permits to carry here at all. ( skip the two really weird cases you could count ).
I can take my handgun from the safe and go directly to the range (I have to belong to. ) That’s it.

Sadly, we get every shooting in the US broadcast ad nausium. Wonder if that helps.

 

[Laniarius]

Brickburn, this is a "joke" isn't it??? Has their ever been a cross check on gun crimes in Canada to determine the percentage of crimes committed with legally owned guns vs "illicit" guns? If not it needs to be done. The result will show where the "emphasis" needs to be placed. A number of years ago I traveled from lower Michigan to a friend's house near Sudbury Canada. As I recall, in order for him to keep guns in his home the safe where they were required to be kept had to be inspected / verified and approved by the RCMP. Am I mistaken about that?? I'm confident that the legal gunowners in Canada are no more a "party" to crime than their American counterparts. It appears that the term "looney" applies to more than your $1.00 coin.

That's not a requirement in Canada, but I think you have to get a police inspection in the UK. You don't legally need a safe here. Basically, "non-restricted" guns (most long guns) just need to be trigger locked or in a cabinet, and "restricted" guns (handguns and some semi-auto rifles that are arbitrarily considered more dangerous) have to be trigger locked and in a locked case.

 

[Von S.]

Maybe its because pot is now legalized.

 

[CAustin]

Completed no issues

 

[BRICKBURN]

Maybe its because pot is now legalized.

Perhaps MP's were testing the product before the launch date.

 

[thi9elsp]

Done. And, yes, I'm still shaking my head.

 

[KSWildcat]

Done, happy to "help".

Thanks for keeping my blood pressure up tonight, I was in danger of relaxing too much and passing out. Now I won't be able to sleep thinking about how illogical these people are. Also how little the general public really knows about firearms or ownership. We law abiding gun owners are the only ones who really know the laws and restrictions. We are the only ones who know what is practical for our hunting, competition, or just range blasting. And we are the only ones directly affected by the control laws that are passed.

Yet the general public really doesn't care about our opinion, they certainly don't come to us to be educated about what they don't know about the issues, and they want to treat the symptom instead of the disease at our expense.

 

[Hillbilly Marine]

For what it may be worth, done on my end. Semper Fi

 

[cagkt3]

Done, hope it helps.

 

[Pheroze]

Done

Those questions are disgraceful. I wonder if an interest group could attack it as unfair. Even if they lost in court they would generate publicity on the problem.

 

[YancyW]

Done, I am truly sorry you have to deal with such absurd regulations.

 

[GuttormG]

Did my bit.
Really strange that gender-question. Weird..

 

[Bruce]

The following is what I put under comments.
Here’s a history of what happens after governments have disarmed their citizens:
1911 – Turkey disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1915 – 1917 they murdered 1.5 million Armenians.
1929 – Russia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1929 – 1953 they murdered 20 million Russians.
1935 – China disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1948 – 1952 they murdered 20 million Chinese.
1938 – Germany disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1939 – 1945 they murdered 16 million Jews.
1956 – Cambodia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1975 – 1977 they murdered 1 million Educated people.
1964 – Guatamala disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1964 – 1981 they murdered 100,000 Mayan Indians.
1970 – Uganda disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1971 – 1979 they murdered 300,000 Christians.

Australia has disarmed it’s citizens, and a year later the homicide rate in the largest province is up 300%. The burglaries of seniors is “dramatically” up.
I guess the criminals did not turn their weapons in. Only the innocent law abiding citizens turned in weapons.
In US cities with the highest crime rates, taking guns away from the citizens has not lowered the homicide rate. All it has done is to make it easier for criminals to operate.

Feel free to use all or part, I think that this sums it up quite well

It's the same logic in South Africa.. the criminals " own" illicit firearms and use them at will!
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE.... PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!!!

 

[sgt_zim]

You guys have to understand the thought process (such as it is) of these people.

These squishy types are absolutely convinced on the idea of determinism. They are psychologically and philosophically wed to the idea, are totally in love with the idea. Their idea on crime is that "if those poor boys had just had decent upbringing, they wouldn't be criminals." Since the criminals themselves are "clearly" not to blame, and dealing with them in a rational manner (like locking them away for a very long time) would just demonstrate they've been patently wrong on this all along; and since they cannot admit to that mistake, they will simply double down by blanking out on their error and insist on other deterministic "solutions." Since they are determinists, it's quite an easy step for them to say that inanimate objects cause crime.

Without determinism, literally everything they stand for falls apart. They may not be acutely aware of this, but at the edge of what passes for their minds, they know it. It's why they react so hysterically when they are challenged on those ideas.

We have only the ballot box to deal with this, and we must ensure we show up in greater numbers than they do.

 

[Eric Anderson]

I now identify as a 18 year old girl that lives in the city in Quebec

 

[Aaron N]

Apparently you can do the survey as many times as you'd like

 

[BRICKBURN]

Apparently you can do the survey as many times as you'd like

F$%^&K me. I await the results being published and presented as a new research study.

 

[ve7poi]

Unfortunatly it no joke this is the same bunch that put long gun registration in place a billion dollar farce we finally got rid of now this.

 

[Velo Dog]

According to history, those who would trade freedom for security, soon thereafter do not have neither one.