Ongoing US Mass Shooting Thread

[Robbob]

did some digging and you can bring in hand guns with approval from the airline (have a bunch conditions). Found on Westjet website, but I figure those rules would be standard.

http://www.onlinedg.org/wjpassengers/

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

A US resident can bring a restricted firearm into Canada.

You need RCMP form 5589 and an ATT

If they can show they have a reason for needing the gun in Canada (example a target shooting event), they can't just bring it because they feel like it. I doubt this would be the case in this situation.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

If they can show they have a reason for needing the gun in Canada (example a target shooting event), they can't just bring it because they feel like it. I doubt this would be the case in this situation.

It's a moot point that doesn't apply to this case since it didn't come on Air Canada. But a competition isn't the only reason; recreational shooting, hunting (non-restricted) etc.. are also valid reasons.

Originally Posted by Robbob

did some digging and you can bring in hand guns with approval from the airline (have a bunch conditions). Found on Westjet website, but I figure those rules would be standard.

http://www.onlinedg.org/wjpassengers/

The standard rule is unloaded, secure locking device and locked in a hard case. You sign a declaration stating that it is unloaded and it goes through the oversize luggage station (maybe not handguns). You are allowed 11lbs of commercial ammunition as part of your checked luggage, has to be in the original packaging.

Rules for having them checked are exactly the same for non-restricted and restricted.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

It's a moot point since it didn't come on Air Canada.



The standard rule is unloaded, secure locking device and locked in a hard case. You sign a declaration stating that it is unloaded and it goes through the oversize luggage station (maybe not handguns). You are allowed 11lbs of commercial ammunition as part of your checked luggage, has to be in the original packaging.

Rules for having them checked are exactly the same for non-restricted and restricted.

I suppose, but I never said it was impossible to bring a hand gun into Canada. I said there were very few reasons it would be allowed and I doubt any would apply to this guy.

Edit to your edit: I know it's not only a competition that would allow it, but if it isn't a valid reason it won't be let across (hand guns). It's much easier to bring a rifle or shot gun over for hunting, but that isn't what we are talking about. I doubt if you showed up at the border with your hand gun properly stored and with the correct paper work that you would be allowed to bring it with the reason that you want to hit up a gun range while you're here.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

You can legally bring a gun into Canada from the US. Certain types are prohibited based on our ridiculous laws, but you can do it.

I like our ridiculous laws thank you. I actually wish they they were stricter

[jayswin]

Yeah, I always like how Canadian gun owners speak to our gun laws as if they're antiquated, unnecessarily restrictive, out of touch laws that aren't needed. Well, I got bad news for you, that's a great thing, signed most of the country.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

I like our ridiculous laws thank you. I actually wish they they were stricter

Which would you like to see stricter?

Does restricting a firearm based solely on it's appearance or name make a safety difference?

If a firearm with a 4.1" barrel is restricted, what gain is safety is achieved when they prohibit the same firearm with a 3.99" barrel?

Sound attenuation and diminishing hearing damage as well as noise pollution is a good thing, why has the government prohibited suppressors? Especially when they are nothing like what is shown in movies and many non-US countries allow then for exactly these reasons.

Does requiring an additional stamped number and raising the price (UN Arms Marking rules coming into effect this year) on an imported firearm make it safer or less likely to be used in the commission of a crime? All firearms already have serial numbers that are recorded and it's already a crime to alter/remove it.

Lots of the laws we have do make a difference, but there are still a lot that make no sense and have no actual impact on safety.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Yeah, I always like how Canadian gun owners speak to our gun laws as if they're antiquated, unnecessarily restrictive, out of touch laws that aren't needed. Well, I got bad news for you, that's a great thing, signed most of the country.

Many of them are though. If you listen to rational gun owners, they will tell you that banning guns that are based on appearance isn't a good thing, when another gun which is perfectly legal and fires with the exact same mechanism is legal. Many of the restrictions are arbitrary (barrel length, etc).

Most people don't want open carry or cc in public like they have in many states, but to say that there aren't problems with Canadian gun laws is just as silly as saying we should abolish them all.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Which would you like to see stricter?

Does restricting a firearm based solely on it's appearance or name make a safety difference?

If a firearm with a 4.1" barrel is restricted, what gain is safety is achieved when they prohibit the same firearm with a 3.99" barrel?

Sound attenuation and diminishing hearing damage as well as noise pollution is a good thing, why has the government prohibited suppressors? Especially when they are nothing like what is shown in movies and many non-US countries allow then for exactly these reasons.

Does requiring an additional stamped number and raising the price (UN Arms Marking rules coming into effect this year) on an imported firearm make it safer or less likely to be used in the commission of a crime? All firearms already have serial numbers that are recorded and it's already a crime to alter/remove it.

Lots of the laws we have do make a difference, but there are still a lot that make no sense and have no actual impact on safety.

Like with most restrictions, you to pick an arbitrary point to enforce. Why is 109 km/hr allowed on a highway, but 111km/hr is not?

Silencers can also be used for murder, which is why they're restricted.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by blankall

Like with most restrictions, you to pick an arbitrary point to enforce. Why is 109 km/hr allowed on a highway, but 111km/hr is not?

Silencers can also be used for murder, which is why they're restricted.

If we use your car analogy, let's imagine that 95% of the cars made will travel at 111km/h. Now when the govt passes a new transportation bill, they state that no car shall be available for the public if it goes 111km/h, it must only reach 109km/h.

The point isn't that 2 km/h makes a difference, the point is that you limit 95% of the choices in the consumer market.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by blankall

Like with most restrictions, you to pick an arbitrary point to enforce. Why is 109 km/hr allowed on a highway, but 111km/hr is not?

Silencers can also be used for murder, which is why they're restricted.

Should certain types of car also be prohibited because they look different than other cars? Or because they appear similar to something the military might use?

Suppressors are prohibited, not restricted. Big difference. If they were restricted they would be governed the same way as a restricted firearm or the US tax stamp system.

What is the noise reduction from a suppressor? Does it completely muffle the gunshot making it close to the point of being unheard?

Do the EU countries that allow/require them have large scale problems with suppressors being used in murders?

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

If we use your car analogy, let's imagine that 95% of the cars made will travel at 111km/h. Now when the govt passes a new transportation bill, they state that no car shall be available for the public if it goes 111km/h, it must only reach 109km/h.

The point isn't that 2 km/h makes a difference, the point is that you limit 95% of the choices in the consumer market.

I think this would be a fantastic outcome if we switch back to the gun analogy.

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Should certain types of car also be prohibited because they look different than other cars? Or because they appear similar to something the military might use?

Similar to the above, anything that lowers quantity is a fantastic outcome in my books. So ya, if that analogy were applied back to the gun world, prohibiting certain types based on appearance sounds like a great idea. Let's start with the black ones.

[Wormius]

Under what conditions does a civilian warrant a selection of more than 2 or 3 types of guns max?

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Under what conditions does a civilian warrant a selection of more than 2 or 3 types of guns max?

The conditions of freedom.

[jammies]

The more arbitrary gun law is, the less attractive gun ownership is. If anything, make it more convoluted and byzantine.

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

The conditions of freedom.

Freedom used to sound like a fantastic word.

Nowadays considering the context with which the word is now used, i.e. ridiculous U.S. Constitutional amendments, the passing of laws restricting freedom to protect our 'freedom' and fries, the word has lost its lustre.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Should certain types of car also be prohibited because they look different than other cars? Or because they appear similar to something the military might use?

Suppressors are prohibited, not restricted. Big difference. If they were restricted they would be governed the same way as a restricted firearm or the US tax stamp system.

What is the noise reduction from a suppressor? Does it completely muffle the gunshot making it close to the point of being unheard?

Do the EU countries that allow/require them have large scale problems with suppressors being used in murders?

The restrictions in Canada are largely put in place to decrease the users ability to use them to kill other people.

The kind of things you're talking about, silencers, shorter barrel lengths, etc.. Add nothing to a guns utility, unless your goal is to use them on people.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

The conditions of freedom.

So all narcotics should be freely and legally available too? Cause "freedom"?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

The conditions of freedom.

Aren't you supposed to shout 'Wolverines!!!' after this?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blankall

The restrictions in Canada are largely put in place to decrease the users ability to use them to kill other people.

The kind of things you're talking about, silencers, shorter barrel lengths, etc.. Add nothing to a guns utility, unless your goal is to use them on people.

You've never used a silencer to assassinate a young white tail before?