Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 06-01-2022, 01:51 PM   #61
Envitro
First Line Centre
 
Envitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Saddledome, Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Is their not technology these days to transition the sport aspect into using non-lethal tools? Lasers or something? Why does it need to be capable of killing to be used in the sport? Maybe time to innovate a bit if you want it to survive.
That's a fine idea, but that would confine Canadians to only be able to compete in Canada and not against the rest of the world.

If a global change occurred where everyone went into some sort of CO2 powered (simulated recoil, since felt recoil and recoil control is a big part of the sport) and laser actuated target scoring system, then sure.

But that's not going to happen, since the rest of the world is relatively sane and still allows handguns and semi-auto sporting rifles (yes, I'm looking at you EU countries like France, etc.) for sport shooting purposes.

Canada, even well before these two sets of measures in 2020 and 2022, had some of the strictest gun control measures in the world.
Envitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 01:51 PM   #62
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Also, I'm still waiting on this great country of ours, and our amazing government who is so concerned about the safety of our citizens, especially when it comes to gun-crime, actually be truthful about the shooting in Nova Scotia that left 22 people dead.

But no, instead lets close the ranks and protect our own.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Azure For This Useful Post:
Old 06-01-2022, 02:00 PM   #63
Bring_Back_Shantz
Franchise Player
 
Bring_Back_Shantz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
And to be clear, accidental discharges, theft, etc.....can all be addressed via better training & education around firearms.

Why is not mandatory to train gun safety in school?

I had that conversation with an anti-gun friend lately, and he thought I was crazy. I think all kids should know how to safety and properly use the commonly available firearms, including how they should be stored.

But hey, that would be breeding more pro-gun sentiment, right? And we can't have that.
I say this as a gun owner/user (I would wager on a # of guns basis, I'm near the top for CP users), but that is not a reasonable idea.

There are a huge number of hobbies that require special safety instruction (motorcycles, anything to do with outdoors/bears, water safety), why single out guns to spend a whole bunch of money on?

It's our hobby, we should be the ones bearing the cost of passing it along, and reducing it's impact on society.

The fact of the matter is, if we do our part to safely/properly store our guns, people that shouldn't be coming into contact with them (children for example) shouldn't ever come into contact with them. When I go shooting with someone for the first time, I treat them like a child that has never held a gun before. I take responsibility for making sure, I, and they are safe.

No one that enters my house needs to be versed in gun safety, because they aren't ever going to get to the guns unless I'm the one opening the safe.

If we want to make a compelling argument about why we should be able to own something, we need to do better ourselves, and provide a solution that demonstrates our own responsibility, not say things like "The government should take responsibility for our inability to use these things safely."
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Bring_Back_Shantz is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
Old 06-01-2022, 02:28 PM   #64
Envitro
First Line Centre
 
Envitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Saddledome, Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz View Post
I say this as a gun owner/user (I would wager on a # of guns basis, I'm near the top for CP users), but that is not a reasonable idea.

There are a huge number of hobbies that require special safety instruction (motorcycles, anything to do with outdoors/bears, water safety), why single out guns to spend a whole bunch of money on?

It's our hobby, we should be the ones bearing the cost of passing it along, and reducing it's impact on society.

The fact of the matter is, if we do our part to safely/properly store our guns, people that shouldn't be coming into contact with them (children for example) shouldn't ever come into contact with them. When I go shooting with someone for the first time, I treat them like a child that has never held a gun before. I take responsibility for making sure, I, and they are safe.

No one that enters my house needs to be versed in gun safety, because they aren't ever going to get to the guns unless I'm the one opening the safe.

If we want to make a compelling argument about why we should be able to own something, we need to do better ourselves, and provide a solution that demonstrates our own responsibility, not say things like "The government should take responsibility for our inability to use these things safely."
I agree with pretty much everything you said. Hit the nail on the head. Anyone that comes into my house has no idea that I own firearms. So that's a good thing, both from a safety and op-sec perspective.

Here's a bit of a thought exercise, though, with everything going on in the world.

The only thing that I think would be useful for this country, is for every citizen to maybe take some more responsibility for our national defense. So I would really just advocate for a "territorial defense" type of component in grade 12 where everyone learned to safely operate, disassemble/clean/maintain and reassemble firearms, as well as basic safety and marksmanship skills. Now you can add whatever other component onto that like survival skills etc., but that would be a bonus.

Honestly, this country relies way too much on our cousins down south to come to our aid if SHTF. The Russian war on Ukraine really spells this out in clear terms. You have to have a population that's willing, knowledgable and brave enough to stand up to an invader. Not saying it has to be big bad Russia, but Canada is generally inept when it comes to anything to do with National Defense. And no, let's not lean on the fact that we're in NATO to save our ass if things ever go that way.

It would inevitably fall on the 2.2 million firearms owners to be the second line of defense for this country. Wouldn't it be better to have a population that knows how to be useful in this scenario, however unlikely it is??
Envitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 02:32 PM   #65
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Envitro View Post
Yeah, I figured you'd do that...

First one was an RCMP incident at their Academy, doesn't count. Most cops don't get their PAL/RPAL anyway, so it's kind of a moot point. IE They're not licensed.

The second one is a public range where it's not clear if the incident was due to a licensed individual or an "unlicensed" renter. Either way, it was an accident.

Third one was during a competition, and it's the only incident of it's type in the living memory of anyone that I've ever competed with. More or less summarized, in the heat of competition, this particular individual broke a well established safety rule, a rule that's there to prevent incidents like this, and he unfortunately paid the ultimate price for his mistake.

So to my point, 1 incident at a competition, more or less ever, doesn't prove or disprove your point. It merely illustrates that 1 accident happened at a shooting competition (which is what I was trying to say to begin with), contrasted with the fact that a competition event at pretty much every single weekend for 9 months of the year in every gun club in the country (1,245 to be exact) makes this number so infinitesimally small that it wouldn't statistically register as a number.
Well you said "without incident". A very quick google searched showed there are incidents. I'm sure there are more if I look, and others not reported. Point is, you are painting a picture that isn't true.
Fuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 02:33 PM   #66
PeteMoss
Franchise Player
 
PeteMoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
https://torontosun.com/opinion/colum...rget-gun-crime

As usual, a whole bunch of political smoke and mirrors, but little in actual real word substance to fight the actual problem.

Banning the sale of hand guns is just feeding the 'oh rah rah we so tough on guns' sentiment, which of course is perfectly time to take advantage of a terrible tragedy, and its sad that people are actually falling for it.

The Trudeau Liberals have a history of gun legislation that has actually done nothing to reduce the smuggling.

And to be clear, legal firearm owners selling their handguns are not the problem here. Gun smuggling is, but somehow the legal firearm owners are again the target here, and the gun smuggling is getting a big ol' fat slap on the wrist.

Classic Trudeau Liberal stupidity. Amazing that we still have this clown in power.
You are giving no details in what you want done. Just ranting.

Explain what you want to stop smuggling of guns beyond what they did - harsher penalties and more money for enforcement.
PeteMoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 02:44 PM   #67
Bring_Back_Shantz
Franchise Player
 
Bring_Back_Shantz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Envitro View Post
I agree with pretty much everything you said. Hit the nail on the head. Anyone that comes into my house has no idea that I own firearms. So that's a good thing, both from a safety and op-sec perspective.

Here's a bit of a thought exercise, though, with everything going on in the world.

The only thing that I think would be useful for this country, is for every citizen to maybe take some more responsibility for our national defense. So I would really just advocate for a "territorial defense" type of component in grade 12 where everyone learned to safely operate, disassemble/clean/maintain and reassemble firearms, as well as basic safety and marksmanship skills. Now you can add whatever other component onto that like survival skills etc., but that would be a bonus.

Honestly, this country relies way too much on our cousins down south to come to our aid if SHTF. The Russian war on Ukraine really spells this out in clear terms. You have to have a population that's willing, knowledgable and brave enough to stand up to an invader. Not saying it has to be big bad Russia, but Canada is generally inept when it comes to anything to do with National Defense. And no, let's not lean on the fact that we're in NATO to save our ass if things ever go that way.

It would inevitably fall on the 2.2 million firearms owners to be the second line of defense for this country. Wouldn't it be better to have a population that knows how to be useful in this scenario, however unlikely it is??
If you really want a population that takes an active part in national defense, then what you're really talking about there is mandatory military service.

"Here's how you clean a hunting rifle, and here's how you make sure you don't accidentally shoot someone" isn't going to do anything when it comes to national defense, unless you're worried about a land war/invasion spearheaded by a bunch of guys with as much training as a grade 12 student with basic firearms training.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Bring_Back_Shantz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 02:52 PM   #68
Jason14h
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Well you said "without incident". A very quick google searched showed there are incidents. I'm sure there are more if I look, and others not reported. Point is, you are painting a picture that isn't true.
"Without incident" and "Statistically rounding close to zero" are effectively the same thing

24 people die a year being hit with champagne corks (according the google) but I would still accept someone claiming "people open champagne every year without incident" as an accurate statement.

Pedantic is apparently the theme of the day
Jason14h is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jason14h For This Useful Post:
Old 06-01-2022, 02:53 PM   #69
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

https://globalnews.ca/news/8884692/h...ner_persistant


Press conference on now
Fuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 04:09 PM   #70
Envitro
First Line Centre
 
Envitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Saddledome, Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz View Post
If you really want a population that takes an active part in national defense, then what you're really talking about there is mandatory military service.

"Here's how you clean a hunting rifle, and here's how you make sure you don't accidentally shoot someone" isn't going to do anything when it comes to national defense, unless you're worried about a land war/invasion spearheaded by a bunch of guys with as much training as a grade 12 student with basic firearms training.
So Russia in the first phase of the Ukraine war

I know, I don't disagree, but like I said, it's an interesting thought exercise.
Enough wars have been fought and won by farmers with AK's (i.e. Vietnam, both Afghan wars), so maybe starting at a bit of a baseline up from "farmer with pitchfork" might be of use in a pinch.
Envitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 04:25 PM   #71
Bring_Back_Shantz
Franchise Player
 
Bring_Back_Shantz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Envitro View Post
So Russia in the first phase of the Ukraine war

I know, I don't disagree, but like I said, it's an interesting thought exercise.
Enough wars have been fought and won by farmers with AK's (i.e. Vietnam, both Afghan wars), so maybe starting at a bit of a baseline up from "farmer with pitchfork" might be of use in a pinch.
Sure, and as soon as we share a land border with Russia it might be relevant.
Until then, the list of countries that could launch a land invasion into Canada is pretty short, and the list of countries that we would have a chance against in that scenario, is approximately one shorter.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Bring_Back_Shantz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 05:48 PM   #72
Envitro
First Line Centre
 
Envitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Saddledome, Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz View Post
Sure, and as soon as we share a land border with Russia it might be relevant.
Until then, the list of countries that could launch a land invasion into Canada is pretty short, and the list of countries that we would have a chance against in that scenario, is approximately one shorter.
Sorry, I thought you mean land-invasion like a beach-head, not literal border land invasion.
Envitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 06:29 PM   #73
OptimalTates
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben_in_Canada View Post
When the Prime Minister makes statements like you don't need an AR15 to take down a deer, the masses are going to think people are hunting in Canada with AR15s which is simply not true.
Donít have much skin in the game with this discussion, but I disagree here. When they say that, people arenít thinking thereís a bunch of hunters using AR15s to kill deer. The point, I take away at least, is saying exactly what you agree with - these guns arenít being used for hunting or other practical purposes. They are for killing.

If the bans imposed are to general and include ďusefulĒ weapons that arenít just designed for mass killing, then I think thatís a fair argument , and one I donít know enough to say anything about, but Iím pretty sure thatís the point when he says things like that.
OptimalTates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 06:45 PM   #74
timun
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

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.
timun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 07:28 PM   #75
TorqueDog
Franchise Player
 
TorqueDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
Exp:
Default

If you ignore the inherent control advantage the pistol grip provides on an AR-15 that a Ruger 10/22 lacks, sure.
__________________
-James
GO
FLAMES GO.

How to immensely improve the CalgaryPuck experience, click below:

TorqueDog is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
Old 06-01-2022, 08:52 PM   #76
Ben_in_Canada
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Ben_in_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Where ever I'm told to be
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OptimalTates View Post
Donít have much skin in the game with this discussion, but I disagree here. When they say that, people arenít thinking thereís a bunch of hunters using AR15s to kill deer. The point, I take away at least, is saying exactly what you agree with - these guns arenít being used for hunting or other practical purposes. They are for killing.

If the bans imposed are to general and include ďusefulĒ weapons that arenít just designed for mass killing, then I think thatís a fair argument , and one I donít know enough to say anything about, but Iím pretty sure thatís the point when he says things like that.
It was a statement designed to mislead the greatest amount of people in the shortest amount of time.
For 2 years now, while my rifles have sat dormant in the safe, missing a dozen or more matches, I've been reading comments on various outlets about how nobody needs automatics, or 30 round magazines to hunt. They talk about high capacity magazines as if they were common place. Making their announcements, Trudeau and Blair were very disingenuous, they made up the term assault style weapon (which is not defined in the firearms act). They never mentioned automatics have been banned for 40 years. The never mentioned centerfire rifles (AR15) have 5 round magazine restrictions. When the Prime Minister makes statements like
Quote:
These measures will remove dangerous firearms designed for military use from our communities, and help ensure that Canadian families and communities no longer suffer from gun violence.
with no mention of criminals or illegal use (shooting people is against the law) he is painting the owners of these firearms as being violent and dangerous and responsible for for the communities suffering from gun violence. You illustrate this perfectly by twice stating they're made for killing. (Bonus points for Mass killing).
Ben_in_Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 09:08 PM   #77
evman150
#1 Goaltender
 
evman150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Richmond, BC
Exp:
Default

Guns are lame. People who own them for uses other than productive purposes (protecting livestock, etc.) are lame.

Come up with a hobby that doesn't kill people.
__________________
"For thousands of years humans were oppressed - as some of us still are - by the notion that the universe is a marionette whose strings are pulled by a god or gods, unseen and inscrutable." - Carl Sagan
Freedom consonant with responsibility.

evman150 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to evman150 For This Useful Post:
Old 06-01-2022, 09:20 PM   #78
PeteMoss
Franchise Player
 
PeteMoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

No one thinks normal gun owners as violent or dangerous. Whining about that is just a pathetic persecution complex.

They just don't think normal people need handguns or semi-automatic rifles.
PeteMoss is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
Old 06-01-2022, 09:22 PM   #79
Envitro
First Line Centre
 
Envitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Saddledome, Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by evman150 View Post
Guns are lame. People who own them for uses other than productive purposes (protecting livestock, etc.) are lame.

Come up with a hobby that doesn't kill people.
You can't possibly be this ignorant making this statement.

Our hobby/sport doesn't kill people. Wow...
Envitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2022, 09:25 PM   #80
Envitro
First Line Centre
 
Envitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Saddledome, Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
No one thinks normal gun owners as violent or dangerous. Whining about that is just a pathetic persecution complex.

They just don't think normal people need handguns or semi-automatic rifles.
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.
Envitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 PM.

Calgary Flames
2022-23




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021