Multiple Victims Shot in Toronto's Greektown

[icecube]

I have a younger brother with schizophrenia. At the lake we go to during the summer, another young man with schizophrenia murdered his own father with a butcher knife. My brother has never had to deal with people treating him any differently after that horrible incident. I know that people with mental illness deal with stigma and poor treatment. But its different than what happens to POC after a mass shooting incident.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by icecube

I have a younger brother with schizophrenia. At the lake we go to during the summer, another young man with schizophrenia murdered his own father with a butcher knife. My brother has never had to deal with people treating him any differently after that horrible incident. I know that people with mental illness deal with stigma and poor treatment. But its different than what happens to POC after a mass shooting incident.

Yeah I got brown friends too.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by icecube

I have a younger brother with schizophrenia. At the lake we go to during the summer, another young man with schizophrenia murdered his own father with a butcher knife. My brother has never had to deal with people treating him any differently after that horrible incident. I know that people with mental illness deal with stigma and poor treatment. But its different than what happens to POC after a mass shooting incident.

Yah, that's not what was happening after the Vince Li incident.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by icecube

I have a younger brother with schizophrenia. At the lake we go to during the summer, another young man with schizophrenia murdered his own father with a butcher knife. My brother has never had to deal with people treating him any differently after that horrible incident. I know that people with mental illness deal with stigma and poor treatment. But its different than what happens to POC after a mass shooting incident.

I tend to appreciate how vocal you are about racism on this board and I agree with a lot of what you say, but I do disagree with you on your assertion that those with mental illness are not treated horribly by society at large. Things are getting better, but by and large, those with mental illness are still cast off by the majority and have tremendous challenges every day because of their disease.

[icecube]

I've never asserted that people with mental illness are treated well by the public at large. They are treated horribly. No disagreement there.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by icecube

I've never asserted that people with mental illness are treated well by the public at large. They are treated horribly. No disagreement there.

I re-read your posts and I apologize. I guess I'm in disagreement in general that we should even be debating the degree to which those with mental illness are chastised, compared to Muslims. Doing that, just in my opinion, leads to a comparison of two things which are horrible and seems a little pointless.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by SebC

And yet the firearms lobby is telling us that bill C-71 is useless.

It is. And would have ZERO affect on a crime like this. What is imposing more rules and regs on someone like me going to do to prevent someone from committing acts that are already illegal? There's already a restricted firearm registry which pistols fall under, so every legal pistol is tracked and accounted for, and no restricted is allowed to be transported without an authorization to transport (which is direct to approved site, and direct home only), which by law states double locked (in a case, plus trigger lock), separate from ammunition. But hey, some quack additional registry/sales ledger would have prevented this crime

Originally Posted by curves2000

It's also quite possible that he may have either borrowed or stolen it from a friend who owned it legally.

No legal firearms owner is going to "lend" a pistol to a friend, especially one who isn't licensed. We are well versed in the laws surrounding ownership. Heck, you're not even allowed to have someone house sit with firearms in your residence without a valid PAL (as they are then in control of them). Stolen? Sure, maybe. But again, you'd have to know where the keys are, what the trigger lock combo or where the keys are on top of that. And this "friend" would have to be pretty dense to not know he's got firearms missing.

Originally Posted by SebC

Did you read the article Nyah posted?

Canadians are buying guns legally, then re-selling them. Better tracking makes it harder for them to do that, and increases the risk to those who will ignore the rules.

This is pretty far fetched. Legal firearms owners know the scrutiny they're under constantly. No legal firearms owner is buying firearms legally, under their name, and reselling them to bangers. That's some sensationalist media right there. Its clear what side you stand on in the Firearms debate. I encourage you to at least become educated on the current rules, regulations and restrictions before you come spreading more nonsense.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Aleks

No legal firearms owner is going to "lend" a pistol to a friend, especially one who isn't licensed. We are well versed in the laws surrounding ownership. Heck, you're not even allowed to have someone house sit with firearms in your residence without a valid PAL (as they are then in control of them). Stolen? Sure, maybe. But again, you'd have to know where the keys are, what the trigger lock combo or where the keys are on top of that. And this "friend" would have to be pretty dense to not know he's got firearms missing.

Both of these are allowed under the law though. Restricted and non-restricted firearms can be lent to other people who hold the appropriate license. Having firearms properly stored in a house does not automatically create a situation of possession or control when an un-licensed person is in the residence. If that was the case, then every member of a household would need to be licensed and people could not live with another person who has a prohibition.

Originally Posted by Aleks

This is pretty far fetched. Legal firearms owners know the scrutiny they're under constantly. No legal firearms owner is buying firearms legally, under their name, and reselling them to bangers. That's some sensationalist media right there. Its clear what side you stand on in the Firearms debate. I encourage you to at least become educated on the current rules, regulations and restrictions before you come spreading more nonsense.

To be fair, straw purchases DO happen. There are cases where people will fraudulently obtain a PAL/RPAL in order to "legally" purchase firearms and ammunition with the sole intent to divert them to other criminals. I put legally in quotation marks because everything about that scenario is already a crime.

I do agree with you that C-71 won't really do anything in terms of preventing or solving crimes

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Both of these are allowed under the law. though Restricted and non-restricted firearms can be lent to other people who hold the appropriate license. Having firearms properly stored in a house does not automatically create a situation of possession or control when an un-licensed person is in the residence. If that was the case, then every member of a household would need to be licensed and people could not live with another person who has a prohibition.

You are correct, so long as you're in control of access to it as the PAL holder. I was incorrect.

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

To be fair, straw purchases DO happen. There are cases where people will fraudulently obtain a PAL/RPAL in order to "legally" purchase firearms and ammunition with the sole intent to divert them to other criminals. I put legally in quotation marks because everything about that scenario is already a crime.

Ok, but that's not a legal purchase, as you state. Nor is it a properly acquired PAL/RPAL. So in effect that is no different than buying a firearm on the street.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Aleks

Ok, but that's not a legal purchase, as you state. Nor is it a properly acquired PAL/RPAL. So in effect that is no different than buying a firearm on the street.

Agreed. And this is probably the one area, along with smuggling, that the government should be focusing their attention in order to see real results.

The bulk of C-71 sound absolutely fabulous to people who have no understanding of firearms laws in Canada though and with all the talk of the lack of American firearms laws, there is a huge amount of the voting public that can't tell the difference. A situation that the government seems content to cash in on.

[Envitro]

The amount of regulation and laws that I have to follow just to take my pistol to the range tonight for a competition is ridiculous, but I'm ok with following those rules so that I can enjoy my hobby.

Imposing more regulations on me, who's basically a "certified paralegal" (to quote Chris Rock) when it comes to firearms laws in Canada, is ludicrous and won't do anything to prevent these shootings in Toronto or Vancouver. Go to the root cause of the issue, solve the gangs and drugs problem. Those are hard and take time, it's easier to go after me and my friends. It's the sad truth....

I, and every firearms owner in Canada, has to know the law inside and out and follow it to the letter, and leave zero room for an uninformed RCMP or police officer from "interpreting" something incorrectly and throwing us in jail, and confiscating our property.

Legal and Licensed Firearms owners represent 1-2% of violent crime in Canada every year, and that figure includes suicide. That's well below the rate of crime of the general population in Canada.

So, imposing more regulations on us will do nothing to prevent crime.

Imposing harsher sentences on gun runners, trafficers, and gang members will.

[longsuffering]

I read the some posts in threads like this and I'm always confused by why it seems so important to a small number of posters to label this attack as an act of islamic terrorisism.

Why is there any need to rush to judgement?

Why does it really matter if this was an attack by a muslim with mental health issues vs a christian with mental health issues?

Why is there any need to think that there is a conspiracy to cover it up IF it was indeed an ISIS inspired attack? Do people honestly believe the police or government would hide this to .... what? Protect muslims?

llwhiteoutll - you rushed to judgement at the time of the Toronto van attack, suggesting at the time you could predict the religion of the driver before any facts were in. Didn't you learn your lesson then?
My apologies to llwhitoutoutll - I identified the wrong 'white out' poster

Is it THAT important to be able to blame an identifiable group?

[longsuffering]

Gun owners:

Honestly, what is the big deal about registering your weapons in a new federal database?

What additional 'burden' is really being imposed on you? You have to fill out more paperwork? Oh, the horror!

If a centralized gun registry would prevent one murder or help identify the source of weapons used to commit crimes, in my view the minor inconvenience to gun owners is insignificant.

The greater good and all that.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

I read the some posts in threads like this and I'm always confused by why it seems so important to a small number of posters to label this attack as an act of islamic terrorisism.

Why is there any need to rush to judgement?

Why does it really matter if this was an attack by a muslim with mental health issues vs a christian with mental health issues?

Why is there any need to think that there is a conspiracy to cover it up IF it was indeed an ISIS inspired attack? Do people honestly believe the police or government would hide this to .... what? Protect muslims?

llwhiteoutll - you rushed to judgement at the time of the Toronto van attack, suggesting at the time you could predict the religion of the driver before any facts were in. Didn't you learn your lesson then?

Is it THAT important to be able to blame an identifiable group?

That's kind of the opposite of what happened though. It was quickly and very carefully portrayed by a third party and then promoted by the media as a mental health issue...case closed. In no uncertain terms Ralph Goodale said it's not terrorism. In the interest of knowing the truth i would suggest further investigation since this is exactly how conspiracy theories begin. And more importantly knowing reality is much safer than believing a story for the sake of being nice.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

Gun owners:

Honestly, what is the big deal about registering your weapons in a new federal database?

What additional 'burden' is really being imposed on you? You have to fill out more paperwork? Oh, the horror!

If a centralized gun registry would prevent one murder or help identify the source of weapons used to commit crimes, in my view the minor inconvenience to gun owners is insignificant.

The greater good and all that.

Yeah and for the low low cost of two billion dollars we've solved about three crimes. Just thinking there might be a better way to go about it.

You also give up some vaguely important privacy when you sign on to a registry. It's not just some paper work.

[llwhiteoutll]

Cleared up.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

No it's not at all. You're completely wrong. On one hand you've got Toronto police saying there may be a connection to ISIS and on the other, 30 seconds after it happened, you've got Ralph Goodale saying this attack is in no way connected to terrorism...period. That distortion of the truth is what causes mob justice and conspiracies. You need truth not a neatly wrapped box.

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Which of my 5 posts (now 6) in this thread are me "rushing to judgment"? Four of those posts are discussing the gun laws and one is discussing things reported by the media and the potential appearance of those things. Pretty sure I haven't blamed any single group, whether it be Muslims/gun owners/men/whatever.



That's my quote, if it's offensive, I'll remove it.

I corrected my post above.

I confused a post by WhiteOut403 in the Toronto van attack thread as being posted by you.

Failing memory. I should have double checked.

My sincere apologies.

[llwhiteoutll]

All good, took my mini-rant down

[Tacopuck]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

Gun owners:

Honestly, what is the big deal about registering your weapons in a new federal database?

What additional 'burden' is really being imposed on you? You have to fill out more paperwork? Oh, the horror!

If a centralized gun registry would prevent one murder or help identify the source of weapons used to commit crimes, in my view the minor inconvenience to gun owners is insignificant.

The greater good and all that.

Cost and privacy issues aside, If the government ever gets corrupted by true evil, they'll have all the addresses and armaments of the citizens that would be their biggest opposition. Its less about what the government now will do, but what future evil governments should they ever exist can do with this information.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Tacopuck

Cost and privacy issues aside, If the government ever gets corrupted by true evil, they'll have all the addresses and armaments of the citizens that would be their biggest opposition. Its less about what the government now will do, but what future evil governments should they ever exist can do with this information.

i dunno... is it just me, or this veering towards InfoWars/3%/Promise Keepers territory...?

Are there actual facts to base such assertions?