Guns. Lots of Guns.

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by pylon

I do not think an intelligent or rational conversation could be had here as the voices on the left of this site, tend to be very loud, righteous and demeaning

Shots fired!

[pylon]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

Shots fired!

LOL.

I don't besmirch anyone for having a differing view. I get how guns can be terrifying to certain people. I've had a frame shatter on a .44 Magnum revolver, it's even scared the hell out of me before. It's not a hobby for everyone.

I just find that as a gun owner, there are a lot of people that think I am some sort of deranged lunatic, and you have to sit through unending lectures of why I myself, am single handedly destroying society by exercising a privilege the government has allowed those who qualify, to have. And those lectures have always come from people that lean extreme left.

The irony is, my views have definitely swayed over the years, and although I now consider myself in the center, my take on most issues, usually side with a more liberal mindset. Just not on gun ownership.

[btimbit]

I'm basically just exhausted of the conversation, and I don't see why we continue to try and solve America's gun problems in Canada.

[Bill Bumface]

I have no interest in gun ownership, and am not overly convinced that we need provisions in place to facilitate the hobby of owning and shooting handguns, but I think this law does nothing to solve any actual problems.

Maybe worse, it will get a bunch of people's backs up and take away the ability to cooperate and further progress on more meaningful fronts to tackle gun violence and accidental firearm deaths and injuries.

[TKB]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I have no interest in gun ownership, and am not overly convinced that we need provisions in place to facilitate the hobby of owning and shooting handguns, but I think this law does nothing to solve any actual problems.

Maybe worse, it will get a bunch of people's backs up and take away the ability to cooperate and further progress on more meaningful fronts to tackle gun violence and accidental firearm deaths and injuries.

The easiest way to tackle gun violence is to tackle all illegal guns pouring in from across the border. Maybe instead of wasting tax payers money on taking guns away from law abiding licensed firearms owners they should use those resources on what is truly the problem. News flash, licensed firearm owners aren’t the ones going around shooting each other in our cities, maybe try and tackle the gang violence and illegal guns first.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by TKB

The easiest way to tackle gun violence is to tackle all illegal guns pouring in from across the border. Maybe instead of wasting tax payers money on taking guns away from law abiding licensed firearms owners they should use those resources on what is truly the problem. News flash, licensed firearm owners aren’t the ones going around shooting each other in our cities, maybe try and tackle the gang violence and illegal guns first.

This has never been about reducing crime, it's just disdain for guns and gun owners

[ah123]

Originally Posted by btimbit

This has never been about reducing crime, it's just disdain for guns and gun owners

Not a gun owner, but I would argue that this law is more about optics than impact. Optics being the ability to say: “we are taking action on reducing crime”. Tackling root causes of crime (mental health, poverty related causes, broken homes, etc.) does not make for a nice slogan (and it takes a lot longer to see outcomes). Just my $0.02

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by pylon

However I do not think an intelligent or rational conversation could be had here as the voices on the left of this site, tend to be very loud, righteous and demeaning to anyone that may have any sort of Conservative views, let alone collect firearms.

I don't see this as being a left/right issue. There are extremists on both sides and their arguments are equally ridiculous. If we can get by the political/ideological BS and focus in on the motivation/use of these tools (guns are tools), get educated about these tools, then we can have reasonable discussion about how we better manage and control such products.

I would actually buy into a full on handgun ban and hand my restricted stuff back in, if the US outright banned handgun sales and ownership.

Wait a gosh darn minute! You can't take away my hand guns you pinko commie fascist!!! You can take them from my cold and dying hands!

[Envitro]

This whole issue is such a non-issue (when it comes to legally owned/posessed) handguns and firearms overall.

The stats are clear. A PAL/RPAL holder is 3-4 times safer and less likely to commit any crime than the average everyday Canadian. Taking away their sporting equipment is literally a solution in search of a problem.

If you want to solve the problem of daily shootings in the GTA or GVA, then work on gang supression, social programs to divert at-risk youth, tackle the opiod/addiction crisis, and fix our revolving door legal system for repeat offenders, especially ones with firearms prohibition orders (which is a massive joke to begin with).

Talk to police officers, they'll tell you what needs to be fixed. Oh hell, the police chiefs and police association reps are giving testimony on bill C-21 in committee and are all saying the same thing (i.e. this won't fix anything, and you're going after the wrong people). BUT, as usual, this government doesn't care if they fix the issue, as long as they plant a political landmine at their opponents feet.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by ah123

Not a gun owner, but I would argue that this law is more about optics than impact. Optics being the ability to say: “we are taking action on reducing crime”. Tackling root causes of crime (mental health, poverty related causes, broken homes, etc.) does not make for a nice slogan (and it takes a lot longer to see outcomes). Just my $0.02

The most generous interpretation for me is that with this and banning dangerous-looking long guns they are trying to stamp out US-style gun culture before it takes hold. Like with smoking and cigarettes - make it uncool, don’t allow flashy packages, etc. Don’t let overblown self-protection notions take root. Take the glamour out of anyone’s blaze of glory fantasies.

I don’t think this is a reasonable concern given the restrictions we have, the general level-headedness of Canadians, and the lack of a motivating principle like the 2nd amendment, but perhaps they are looking down the road at the increasing polarization and radicalization of society and taking what they think are prudent measures.

I think this argument is more relevant to the long gun issue though, and more likely these are mainly symbolic acts.

[Scornfire]

Originally Posted by pylon

As an PAL/RPAL holder and gun owner, I've considered weighing in on it. However I do not think an intelligent or rational conversation could be had here as the voices on the left of this site, tend to be very loud, righteous and demeaning to anyone that may have any sort of Conservative views, let alone collect firearms.

All I will add is this. Personally, I feel that this will do exactly nothing to help this issue. RPAL holders in this country, for the better part, are some of the most upstanding, least threatening people in the Country. And every single one of us, undergoes a daily, electronic criminal records check. And it is assumed it is voluntary if you purchase a restricted firearm.

That being said, I think they need to tighten further, who can have access to handguns, and tighten storage requirements. Unless you've lived a spotless life, with spotless credit, and the ability to store your weapons in a dedicated room/vault, I believe you should only qualify for long guns, not restricted weapons or handguns. It would take someone hours to get at mine should someone attempt to steal mine. If they could even find the door to my vault.

The discussion in 10 years is going to be the thousands of 3D printed ghost guns. At least with a registry, even in the completely rare case of a registered weapon is used in the commission of a crime, you can at least figure out some sort of trail as to where the gun came from. Which is better than nothing.

I would actually buy into a full on handgun ban and hand my restricted stuff back in, if the US outright banned handgun sales and ownership. They are neat, fun to shoot and all, but yes the world would be a better place if they all vanished. But we are so far down the rabbit hole, it will never happen. As long as we share the worlds longest unprotected border with the gun haven of the world, criminals will get their guns no matter what. And there's not a thing this legislation does to stop it.

Honestly, I'm comfortable with the system as it was. I had a friend who I was very concerned with owning a firearm apply for his PAL and he didn't even make it far enough for me to be contacted as a reference

[Envitro]

Originally Posted by edslunch

The most generous interpretation for me is that with this and banning dangerous-looking long guns they are trying to stamp out US-style gun culture before it takes hold. Like with smoking and cigarettes - make it uncool, don’t allow flashy packages, etc. Don’t let overblown self-protection notions take root. Take the glamour out of anyone’s blaze of glory fantasies.

I don’t think this is a reasonable concern given the restrictions we have, the general level-headedness of Canadians, and the lack of a motivating principle like the 2nd amendment, but perhaps they are looking down the road at the increasing polarization and radicalization of society and taking what they think are prudent measures.

I think this argument is more relevant to the long gun issue though, and more likely these are mainly symbolic acts.

I appreciate where you're coming from, but I'll just say that we can't carry handguns like they can in the U.S., even if we're licensed to own them. And they must be double-locked anytime they leave the house, and when stored must be in a safe.

There was never any risk of "gun culture" permeating here, whatever gun culture actually means. If you ever attend a sanctioned competitive shooting event in Canada then you'd have an understanding of what our "gun culture" actually is.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Envitro

I appreciate where you're coming from, but I'll just say that we can't carry handguns like they can in the U.S., even if we're licensed to own them. And they must be double-locked anytime they leave the house, and when stored must be in a safe.

There was never any risk of "gun culture" permeating here, whatever gun culture actually means. If you ever attend a sanctioned competitive shooting event in Canada then you'd have an understanding of what our "gun culture" actually is.

If you spend any amount of time in the USA outside of a big city, you'll know what "gun culture" means.

For many people, guns are their singular identity there.

[Envitro]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

If you spend any amount of time in the USA outside of a big city, you'll know what "gun culture" means.

For many people, guns are their singular identity there.

I've spent a lot of time in a lot of "red states", both rural and urban settings, over the last 25 years.

Not once have I observed what you might call gun culture. Nobody talks about it, nobody flaunts it, and I think that the perception that this is what people are all about is false, in my opinion. In fact, most Americans that I've met and interacted with don't own a gun.

And I work in the industry, so my level of exposure to firearms is probably 10,000 fold over a regular American civilian.

Sure, I've seen like a total of 5 guys open carry in a few places like Texas or Montana in my 25 years of travelling in the U.S., but that's about it.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Scornfire

Honestly, I'm comfortable with the system as it was. I had a friend who I was very concerned with owning a firearm apply for his PAL and he didn't even make it far enough for me to be contacted as a reference

Other than some arbitrary bans, I really liked our gun laws prior to all these changes the last few years. I really don't understand why the Government decides to start changing them all of a sudden

[CroFlames]

That's interesting. I've lived in the USA and traveled to almost all states and I have found the opposite. It's amazing you haven't seen it, not even ONCE in 25 years.

Guys with all sorts of pro-gun slogans on their shirts.

Guys with printouts in flag format of the 2A on their homes.

Guys with trucks covered in pro-gun stickers and anti-government rhetoric.

Guys who literally never shut up about their guns.

Guys literally open carrying to go to 7-11.

[Envitro]

So now we're expanding the definition of what gun culture is to stickers, t-shirts, trucks, and not liking the government.

Cue Monster energy drink consumers as well.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Envitro

This whole issue is such a non-issue (when it comes to legally owned/posessed) handguns and firearms overall.

You're not recognizing that almost all guns are born legal then become illegal at a later date. A legal gun can become an illegal firearm at a later date regardless of the behaviors of the manufacturer/owner between purchase and activity that makes it illegal.

The stats are clear. A PAL/RPAL holder is 3-4 times safer and less likely to commit any crime than the average everyday Canadian. Taking away their sporting equipment is literally a solution in search of a problem.

This is a stat is specious because most weapon owners are from rural locations and rural areas traditionally have dramatically lower crime rates. The existence of a gun really is irrelevant because those rural residents already have extremely low crime rates.

If you want to solve the problem of daily shootings in the GTA or GVA, then work on gang supression, social programs to divert at-risk youth, tackle the opiod/addiction crisis, and fix our revolving door legal system for repeat offenders, especially ones with firearms prohibition orders (which is a massive joke to begin with).

It's both. You can do this by these social programs, but that then blends into the philosophy of defund the police. You can also do this by enforcing stronger security requirements on gun owners so it limits the outcomes of activities that happen where a weapon then becomes illegal. There's a mix there. This is a complex problem and it requires complex solutions.

Talk to police officers, they'll tell you what needs to be fixed. Oh hell, the police chiefs and police association reps are giving testimony on bill C-21 in committee and are all saying the same thing (i.e. this won't fix anything, and you're going after the wrong people). BUT, as usual, this government doesn't care if they fix the issue, as long as they plant a political landmine at their opponents feet.

I would have the police in the discussion, but I would not reference the as an authority in any shape or form. All due respect to you and the brotherhood Envitro, but police officers are all over the roadmap on this issue and it varies from what is happening in their specific community. Cops are traditionally some of the most conservative people in the land and will gravitate to the side of more guns. They stay there until there is an officer involved shooting where a cop dies, then they scream about getting the weapons out of the hands of the criminals, not differentiating that many of the criminals are not criminals until they commit their first crime, like shooting a cop. Cops are reactive and emotional for the most part, with a proclivity to authoritarianism. So maybe not the best source of authority for gun related matters.

Ironically, Chiefs of Police lean more left on this issue. They are more often to support greater controls on guns, but they rarely agree on where and how those controls should be implemented. Of course the top cops are more political in their commentary and where they land, so it could be they just like to head toward the middle for greater community support.

If we want to address this matter we need to bring constituents from all walks of life to the table and try to find common sense approaches to identifying weapons for sale, the purchase process which should include extensive background checks, and then rigid requirements for securing weapons. We can best prevent legal weapons from becoming illegal weapons by imposing proper security and handing requirements.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

That's interesting. I've lived in the USA and traveled to almost all states and I have found the opposite. It's amazing you haven't seen it, not even ONCE in 25 years.

Guys with all sorts of pro-gun slogans on their shirts.

Guys with printouts in flag format of the 2A on their homes.

Guys with trucks covered in pro-gun stickers and anti-government rhetoric.

Guys who literally never shut up about their guns.

Guys literally open carrying to go to 7-11.

America's ####ed, nobody wants that here. But... was that ever going to happen with the laws we already had anyway? Most of the gun people I know the closest they'd get is talking about how much they love a certain gun for hunting

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by btimbit

America's ####ed, nobody wants that here. But... was that ever going to happen with the laws we already had anyway? Most of the gun people I know the closest they'd get is talking about how much they love a certain gun for hunting

Certainly not. I think your views and mine are aligned on this subject.

I just forgot that the other poster becomes deliberately obtuse when it comes to gun discussion.