Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[evman150]

Guns should not be normal.

Those who aim to perpetuate their normalcy are part of the problem. Look in the mirror.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Who is normal?

There are a lot of preconceived notions about gun owners being bandied about here, all of which would be out the window if any of you bothered to show up to a match one weekend and see it for yourself.

Normal? Is your doctor normal? What about your accountant? What about your mechanic, or your architect, or the head of IT for a major energy company? What about that international consultant for Big4 firms? Or that entrepreneur that owns five businesses and hustles all day long?

Yep, all sound like pretty normal people to me.

Sure - they are all normal. And they don't need semi-automatic rifles or handguns.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by timun

I think the overarching point Ben_in_Canada, Envitro and others are trying to make is that the government is blanket banning certain models based on 'looks' and reputation than actual physical characteristics and capabilities. The AR-15 gets a lot of airtime for being the prototypical "assault rifle", but in reality there are many rifles that are capable of doing the exact same thing. This...



... is a Ruger 10/22. It is capable of doing everything an AR-15 is capable of.

Okay, fine. That one can be banned too.

Having said that, I do think the appearance of a gun affects its likelihood of being used in a crime, particularly when we're talking about gang shooting and even more so, about young males slaughtering innocents. I would wager that gun crimes would go down if all guns were pink, even though it has nothing to do with functionality.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by SebC

Okay, fine. That one can be banned too.

Having said that, I do think the appearance of a gun affects its likelihood of being used in a crime, particularly when we're talking about gang shooting and even more so, about young males slaughtering innocents. I would wager that gun crimes would go down if all guns were pink, even though it has nothing to do with functionality.

Now your talking!

Let’s make all cars pink too. Collisions will hit near zero in no time!

Perhaps if the hockey stick was pink there would be no high sticking.

Drop what your doing and got work for the government!

JT needs more people like you.

I am joking of course.

[Azure]

A lot of dumb arguments being made now.

Always amazes me when the discussion around guns turns into 'ohhh it looks dangerous we should ban it', and not around what the actual issue is we are trying to solve.

Gun smuggling. Leading to increasing levels of gun crime.

Most gun crimes are committed with handguns, and most of those handguns are illegally obtained.

Tell me again how a 'ban' will solve anything.

[Northendzone]

it cracks me up how if you look at twitter, it seems many folks believe that this new gun ban will seemingly have an impact.

logically, one would ahve to think that very few crimes are committed with handguns that are obtained legally. I'd also think that even handguns that are stolen from legal owners are involved in a small % of handgun related crimes.

also as i recall, the liberals were pushing a bill before the election that was seemingly going to reduce jail sentences on gun related crimes.

oh well, i guess most of the job of the government is to appear like they are doing something.

[The Fonz]

Another .50% rate hike out of the BOC yesterday, and it's expected that they'll raise another .50% on July 13th (some believe after yesterday's statements, it's possible we see a .75% increase).

Looking like we'll have a Prime rate of nearly 5% by Q4 2022.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

it cracks me up how if you look at twitter, it seems many folks believe that this new gun ban will seemingly have an impact.

logically, one would ahve to think that very few crimes are committed with handguns that are obtained legally. I'd also think that even handguns that are stolen from legal owners are involved in a small % of handgun related crimes.

also as i recall, the liberals were pushing a bill before the election that was seemingly going to reduce jail sentences on gun related crimes.

oh well, i guess most of the job of the government is to appear like they are doing something.

I was looking for stats non-registered vs registered guns in crimes, but they don't seem to exist. Seems like something that shouldn't be hard to collect, and would be very important to know.

[Jason14h]

Everyone should go to the shooting range at least once in their life - And I would argue around 16 years old would be ideal.

It teaches you the actual power a gun has and the safety around them, and that they are not a toy.

Range shooting is super fun (to me) and I have zero issues with it. I have taken IT teams on teambuilders to the range - Not your typical "Alpha Male Dominated demographic" - And they all loved it. 50 year old ladies shooting a gun for their first time!

Also received a lot of comments around "Wow they are loud, powerful, nothing like the movies"

These are normal people who enjoyed a completely safe experience.

Will taking people to the range stop illegal gun crimes ? I doubt it has any effect, but it may stop someone from picking up a gun like a toy at some point.

But banning these types of experiences also won't have any effect on gun crimes.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I was looking for stats non-registered vs registered guns in crimes, but they don't seem to exist. Seems like something that shouldn't be hard to collect, and would be very important to know.

Seems like they are just starting/have started collecting? (Article from 2 years ago)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...arch-1.5579971

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

it cracks me up how if you look at twitter, it seems many folks believe that this new gun ban will seemingly have an impact.

logically, one would ahve to think that very few crimes are committed with handguns that are obtained legally. I'd also think that even handguns that are stolen from legal owners are involved in a small % of handgun related crimes.

also as i recall, the liberals were pushing a bill before the election that was seemingly going to reduce jail sentences on gun related crimes.

oh well, i guess most of the job of the government is to appear like they are doing something.

Its pretty much pure public relations excercize and nothing more.



Loudly shout out that they'll ban handgun purchases and sales. Then mumble, that they'll do something about smuggling and gun violence in the court systems.


Its just like Trudeau talking about banning weapons that were designed for Military use (which realistically the AR-15 isn't really) or throwing out the term Assault style weapons. Which is a scary buzzword but they don't really know what it means but it sounds good.


Look, I'm an anti-gun guy, for the most part. Most people that legally own guns and think they can use it for home defense are about one second away from tragedy. But we have limits on magazine sizes already and the actual designed for military use weapons were banned about 40 yeas ago. So now the Libs are just fixating on appearance. The AR 15 looks scary and military so it must be.


If you want to impress me with gun control, and the desire to cut out gun violence in our streets. Then give me a costed plan on how your dealing with smugglers, how your dealing with gangs, and increase the penalties for gun violence and the use for illegal firearms. That would impress the crap out of me. But we need to get by this whole government playing people like the rubes at a circus with one trick pony buzzwordy talking points that don't address the issue but are made to be headlines in newspapers.


The American's have their major problems with gun violence, accessability to fire arms, gang violence issues etc that they are unwilling to deal with. But Canada is the furthest thing from American's when it comes to this. No its not coming here no matter who gets into power because Public Sentiment would doom the party that eases fire arm restrictions.



We know the problem, we see a lot of gun violence with illegal weapons. We see gangs and criminals shooting it out on the street. We see the ease of accessability to illegal guns, and it feels like its growing. We just saw a violent criminal get released from prison and within days he having a running gun battle with someone else that killed a mother of 5.


We're not doing much if anything about those problems. But we have time to make up imaginary terms, and bouncing the rubble on things that are going to do nothing, and or make no difference.


And yeah, sorry, but if we're going after smuggled guns its going to create wait times and its going to create inconvience, but I think if people walk around talking about "Oh I'm ok with paying more taxes to support social programs". Then that same group should say "I'm willing to wait an extra hour at border crossings, or I'm willing to wait an extra day or two form my amazon sex toy delivery to arrive in the name of proper public safety".

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Azure

A lot of dumb arguments being made now.

Always amazes me when the discussion around guns turns into 'ohhh it looks dangerous we should ban it', and not around what the actual issue is we are trying to solve.

Gun smuggling. Leading to increasing levels of gun crime.

Most gun crimes are committed with handguns, and most of those handguns are illegally obtained.

Tell me again how a 'ban' will solve anything.

Still waiting for what you want done to solve smuggling.

And as stated before - just because something causes 2% of the crime (or 0.2% or whatever) - you don't just ignore it. Distracted driving, speeding and impaired driving cause most accidents - we don't just ignore every other driving rule until we solve those 3.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Its pretty much pure public relations excercize and nothing more.



Loudly shout out that they'll ban handgun purchases and sales. Then mumble, that they'll do something about smuggling and gun violence in the court systems.


Its just like Trudeau talking about banning weapons that were designed for Military use (which realistically the AR-15 isn't really) or throwing out the term Assault style weapons. Which is a scary buzzword but they don't really know what it means but it sounds good.


Look, I'm an anti-gun guy, for the most part. Most people that legally own guns and think they can use it for home defense are about one second away from tragedy. But we have limits on magazine sizes already and the actual designed for military use weapons were banned about 40 yeas ago. So now the Libs are just fixating on appearance. The AR 15 looks scary and military so it must be.


If you want to impress me with gun control, and the desire to cut out gun violence in our streets. Then give me a costed plan on how your dealing with smugglers, how your dealing with gangs, and increase the penalties for gun violence and the use for illegal firearms. That would impress the crap out of me. But we need to get by this whole government playing people like the rubes at a circus with one trick pony buzzwordy talking points that don't address the issue but are made to be headlines in newspapers.


The American's have their major problems with gun violence, accessability to fire arms, gang violence issues etc that they are unwilling to deal with. But Canada is the furthest thing from American's when it comes to this. No its not coming here no matter who gets into power because Public Sentiment would doom the party that eases fire arm restrictions.



We know the problem, we see a lot of gun violence with illegal weapons. We see gangs and criminals shooting it out on the street. We see the ease of accessability to illegal guns, and it feels like its growing. We just saw a violent criminal get released from prison and within days he having a running gun battle with someone else that killed a mother of 5.


We're not doing much if anything about those problems. But we have time to make up imaginary terms, and bouncing the rubble on things that are going to do nothing, and or make no difference.


And yeah, sorry, but if we're going after smuggled guns its going to create wait times and its going to create inconvience, but I think if people walk around talking about "Oh I'm ok with paying more taxes to support social programs". Then that same group should say "I'm willing to wait an extra hour at border crossings, or I'm willing to wait an extra day or two form my amazon sex toy delivery to arrive in the name of proper public safety".

You know they did/do a lot of what you ask for but the post media papers and their ilk are only focusing on the hand gun stuff to get you to buy that this is all a hand waving exercise right?

[BlackArcher101]

Man this pisses me off. I was scheduled for my RPAL course on July 9, so I could start shooting a handgun at a range in the city. But nope, there's almost no point in doing that now, as there are ZERO guns for sale. Literally can't find any as everyone in the last 2 days have bought them all. And I likely won't get my license in time to allow a transfer to me anyways.

FFS, this does nothing to prevent the crime we see today in Canada. Just absurd.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Man this pisses me off. I was scheduled for my RPAL course on July 9, so I could start shooting a handgun at a range in the city. But nope, there's almost no point in doing that now, as there are ZERO guns for sale. Literally can't find any as everyone in the last 2 days have bought them all. And I likely won't get my license in time to allow a transfer to me anyways.

FFS, this does nothing to prevent the crime we see today in Canada. Just absurd.

I hear a lot of this, but what is backing up that statement? Are experts in the field(researchers and law enforcement, not gun club owners) echoing that, or is it just frustrated gun users?

[Ben_in_Canada]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I hear a lot of this, but what is backing up that statement? Are experts in the field(researchers and law enforcement, not gun club owners) echoing that, or is it just frustrated gun users?

There have been a lot of articles on the Police Chiefs and the Police Unions opposition to the bans.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...-ban-1.5247387

https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/trudeau-...icer-1.5863241

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana...omatic-rifles/

[PepsiFree]

I respect people who hunt for food. Outside of those hunters, gun owners seem to be comprised entirely of whiney nerds and criminals so I’m fine with taking the guns away from them.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I respect people who hunt for food. Outside of those hunters, gun owners seem to be comprised entirely of whiney nerds and criminals so I’m fine with taking the guns away from them.

It's not about who they are, it's about hearing a compelling argument. And I don't find "sport" all that compelling.

[GoinAllTheWay]

If Trudeau is serious about reducing gun crime, why is he then reducing/removing minimum sentencing for gun related crimes?

Mandatory minimum sentences are being removed for a long list of offences including:

– Use of firearm in commission of offence

– Possession of restricted or prohibited weapon knowing possession is unauthorized

– Possession of loaded handgun

– Possession of weapon obtained through crime

– Weapons trafficking

– Unauthorized import/export of firearm

– Illegal discharge of a firearm with intent

– Robbery with firearm

– Extortion with firearm

[Mr.Coffee]

Because Trudeau exclusively operates based on what is best for himself politically, and has since he became Prime Minister?

Literally nothing else matters to Trudeau. Such a great leader.