Guns. Lots of Guns.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

If the restriction is ineffective, then it isn't doing it's job. Unless a suitable restriction can be found, then it makes sense to ban them. Unless you want to argue that we should in fact have large capacity magazines be legal. But I suspect that is an uphill battle, becuase there is no justification for them, hunting or otherwise.

Kind of. Not sure I'd phrase it like that, it's less that I want to argue that we should have them, it's more that I fail to see why we shouldn't have them. If automatic weapons were legal here then, sure that restriction makes sense. But they aren't, so that whole part of it has always been kind of whatever to me. You ask what's the justification for them being legal, I ask what's the justification for them being illegal. That's not a hill I'd die on, just one of the quirks of the system that's always made me roll my eyes a bit

[pylon]

Originally Posted by jayswin

But statistically people are at a higher risk of completing suicide attempts when guns are owned. So despite the unnessecary, over the top way they presented it to you "Huh, HUH!" the premise is not wrong.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazin.../guns-suicide/

I don't doubt any of that. However, I can only speak for myself. I have no suicidal ideations, and have endured challenges and tragedies in my life that would and have pushed many people over the edge. I truly believe this is more a background check issue. I've been a reference for a few people, and I have outright told someone else, I wouldn't vouch for them as I remembered a situation where they threatened to kill themselves over a breakup. Thankfully, they never made it through the process. However unfortunately it cost a friendship.... but I'm not going to lie to the RCMP and compromise my integrity and potentially victimize someone else as a favour.

Purely speculative, as it would never cross my mind to do. But if some situation in life drove me to actually end it all. The last thing I'd reach for is a gun. It's bad enough you are victimizing those that love you by ending your life, but having them find a gory mess like that, would just make it that much worse. There are a ton of way cleaner, more peaceful options I would opt for, if for any other reason, to lessen the blow on my loved ones. The only possible situation that I WOULD consider ending it all, we have medically assisted options for now, which are peaceful and humane. I've been privy to 2 MAID situations now, and it truly is as humane as you could imagine. I just fear it's getting pushed too far into grey areas as opposed to people suffering in pain with no viable outcome but near term death.... however that's another argument entirely.

That brings me to this. I truly believe that any applicant should, on their own dime, have to be subjected to a full psychologic evaluation, on their own dime, by an RCMP appointed specialist. And I think the US should follow suit. Again, if that was a new requirement, and all existing applicants were required to get one retroactively, I'd gladly volunteer. And if I failed, I'd comply with whatever restrictions were required.

I am in total agreeance that there are a huge portion of gun owners, that should not be, and I am a staunch advocate of brutally hard to pass background checks. They need to get way tougher in my opinion.

[TKB]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Yeah that's like the other argument you see thrown out too, where someone will go "Well ban vehicles, they kill more people than guns!"

That's not a discussion, that's an attempt at deflection. That's silly.

No it’s not, with the amount of stabbings that occur all the time it’s completely fair. We just had a mass murder spree in northern Saskatchewan, you hear about people being stabbed constantly.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by jayswin

But statistically people are at a higher risk of completing suicide attempts when guns are owned. So despite the unnessecary, over the top way they presented it to you "Huh, HUH!" the premise is not wrong.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazin.../guns-suicide/

This is an American study. To, I think btimbit's, point, Canadians are really guilty of transposing American issues into our country. Death by firearm in Canada is significantly lower than the US;

https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ths-by-country

But, why should be benchmark against the US. They suck. If we want to benchmark, we should look at the UK since there death rate per firearm is 1/10 of Canada's. And, Wikipedia says most handguns were banned there in 1997.

I will say this, when I started this blurb, my main goal was to bitch about the American comparisons and suggest our current laws are just fine. But, when you look at the raw numbers between us and the UK in parallel with their respective gun laws, the handgun ban crowd may have a point.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

This is an American study. To, I think btimbit's, point, Canadians are really guilty of transposing American issues into our country. Death by firearm in Canada is significantly lower than the US;

https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ths-by-country

But, why should be benchmark against the US. They suck. If we want to benchmark, we should look at the UK since there death rate per firearm is 1/10 of Canada's. And, Wikipedia says most handguns were banned there in 1997.

I will say this, when I started this blurb, my main goal was to bitch about the American comparisons and suggest our current laws are just fine. But, when you look at the raw numbers between us and the UK in parallel with their respective gun laws, the handgun ban crowd may have a point.

The problem with your comparison is that the UK doesn't share an 8 million mile long border with the gun Mecca, the US of A. Banning handguns is not going to help the illegal import.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

The problem with your comparison is that the UK doesn't share an 8 million mile long border with the gun Mecca, the US of A. Banning handguns is not going to help the illegal import.

Or illegal manufacturing and distribution via printing like Pylon pointed out. Good points. I'm generally not in favour of banning anything. Especially items which have been available for generations. I don't believe it's effective. I was just quite surprised when I found, in my 10 minutes of digging, how low the firearm death rate was in the UK. Russia is lower than Canada as well which is equally as surprising. Handguns there can be owned, but only stored at a shooting range (Wikipedia info so take it as you like).

I've only played with handguns once (shooting range in the States). Quite a lot of fun so I cannot disparage anyone who takes it up as a sport/hobby.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by TKB

No it’s not, with the amount of stabbings that occur all the time it’s completely fair. We just had a mass murder spree in northern Saskatchewan, you hear about people being stabbed constantly.

Sure, I agree with that, but I just don't see the relevance to a gun discussion other than deflection, like I suggested

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

This is an American study. To, I think btimbit's, point, Canadians are really guilty of transposing American issues into our country. Death by firearm in Canada is significantly lower than the US;

https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ths-by-country

But, why should be benchmark against the US. They suck. If we want to benchmark, we should look at the UK since there death rate per firearm is 1/10 of Canada's. And, Wikipedia says most handguns were banned there in 1997.

I will say this, when I started this blurb, my main goal was to bitch about the American comparisons and suggest our current laws are just fine. But, when you look at the raw numbers between us and the UK in parallel with their respective gun laws, the handgun ban crowd may have a point.

I'm a little confused by your response. I was speaking to pylons annoyance at someone saying that he would shoot himself if he was suicidal, to which I posted the study showing that successful suicides, specifically with guns go waaaay up in places that have higher gun ownership.

The point being that someone isn't wrong to suggest gun ownership leads to a quicker decision that is mostly fatal when someone becomes suicidal if a gun is in the house. Trust me, I'm on your side in general as I hate when Canadians get caught up in American politics to the point where they transpose it all as if it's us here in Canada.

But this was not an example of that. I was simply pointing out that gun suicides and therefore suicides go up significantly in places with more guns. That doesn't require a Canadian study. And the point you made about Canada having less death by firearm doesn't disprove my point, as it's a very specific point. If anything it helps prove it.

I'm think maybe you just saw a Canadian gun debate in a thread, with an American study in a post and it set you off on the tangent?

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I'm a little confused by your response. I was speaking to pylons annoyance at someone saying that he would shoot himself if he was suicidal, to which I posted the study showing that successful suicides, specifically with guns go waaaay up in places that have higher gun ownership.

The point being that someone isn't wrong to suggest gun ownership leads to a quicker decision that is mostly fatal when someone becomes suicidal if a gun is in the house. Trust me, I'm on your side in general as I hate when Canadians get caught up in American politics to the point where they transpose it all as if it's us here in Canada.

But this was not an example of that. I was simply pointing out that gun suicides and therefore suicides go up significantly in places with more guns. That doesn't require a Canadian study. And the point you made about Canada having less death by firearm doesn't disprove my point, as it's a very specific point. If anything it helps prove it.

I'm think maybe you just saw a Canadian gun debate in a thread, with an American study in a post and it set you off on the tangent?

Haha, yah, that sounds right. Skimmed the post, failed on comprehension, went on a tangent, into a rabbit hole, and I completed the circle by completely missing the target on any kind of point I was originally trying to make. Apologies for the confusion.