Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[opendoor]

Well that, and that list isn't particularly accurate. Some of that doesn't even refer to guns (not all weapons are guns), and some of what is correct is incomplete/misleading (i.e. they removed some minimums for crimes involving unrestricted firearms, but retained them for anything involving restricted firearms). And of course, removing mandatory minimums doesn't mean the punishment is reduced in most cases, it just gives judges some discretion.

[Fuzz]

I don't really like mandatory minimums. We either have trust in our judicial system, or we require politicians to write laws with mandatory minimums because we don't trust the judicial system.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Sure, but anyone who has an idea where the "problem guns" are coming from know that they are entering illegally from the US and those sentences are being reduced.

I find that to be extremley counter intuitive.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

Sure, but anyone who has an idea where the "problem guns" are coming from know that they are entering illegally from the US and those sentences are being reduced.

I find that to be extremley counter intuitive.

That's thing thing though, we don't seem to really know. There doesn't seem to be stats of sources of "problem guns" but clearly it isn't just from the south, given the Coutts border seizure, since some of those were legally purchased. This is data we should have been collecting years ago.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

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

The official party line is that the MMPs disproportionately affect certain groups and that's why they're being repealed. But I think it's mostly because so many MMP cases regarding firearms have been successfully challenged so much that they need to get ahead of it and re-craft something or else it will continue.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

Sure, but anyone who has an idea where the "problem guns" are coming from know that they are entering illegally from the US and those sentences are being reduced.

I find that to be extremley counter intuitive.

No they're not. The removal of mandatory minimums for weapons trafficking only applies to non-firearms and ammo related offenses. The mandatory minimums for trafficking for guns and ammo are retained:

• Weapons trafficking (excluding firearms and ammunition)
  • Subsection 99(3): MMP of 1 year
• Possession for purpose of weapons trafficking (excluding firearms and ammunition)
  • Subsection 100(3): MMP of 1 year

NOTE: Consistent with the Government’s related commitment to address the trafficking and smuggling of firearms in Canada and gang-related violence, MMPs would be maintained in the Criminal Code for the following offences:

• Weapons trafficking
  • Subsection 99(2): MMP of 3 years (first offence) or 5 years (subsequent offences)
• Possession for the purpose of weapons trafficking
  • Subsection 100(2): MMP of 3 years (first offence) or 5 years (subsequent offences)

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

That's thing thing though, we don't seem to really know. There doesn't seem to be stats of sources of "problem guns" but clearly it isn't just from the south, given the Coutts border seizure, since some of those were legally purchased. This is data we should have been collecting years ago.

And I have a hard time believing that. Anyone who was purchased a restriced firearm (ie handguns) know that the serial numbers of those guns are noted in the purchase and the certificate issued by the CFO. Any handgun owner who has one stolen almost certainly reports that if for no other reason than to protect their asses. Yes, serial numbers can be removed but recovered guns should be examined against a list of reported stolen firearms. Wouldn't provided the complete picture but I'm sure they could come up with educated guesses as to where recovered gun possibly originated.

Most quotes from Police Chiefs indicated they too feel a majority are coming from the US.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

The official party line is that the MMPs disproportionately affect certain groups and that's why they're being repealed. But I think it's mostly because so many MMP cases regarding firearms have been successfully challenged so much that they need to get ahead of it and re-craft something or else it will continue.

Yeah, an Alberta court already found the mandatory minimum for robbery using a non-restricted firearm to be unconstitutional:

Put simply, the mandatory minimum sentence for armed robbery comes into conflict with the Court’s obligation in ss 718, 718.1, and 718.2 of the Criminal Code in several types of reasonably foreseeable hypothetical examples. The fulfillment of that obligation means that there are reasonably foreseeable offenders for whom the four year mandatory minimum sentence under s 344 (1)(a.1) of the Criminal Code would be grossly disproportionate.

Accordingly, I find that the four year mandatory minimum sentence for armed robbery in s 344(1)(a.1) is in breach of s 12 of the Charter. As there have been no submissions by the Crown on whether that provision is saved by s 1 of the Charter, I conclude that the mandatory minimum sentence prescribed by s 344(1)(a.1) is unconstitutional. It is not saved under s 1 of the Charter, and is therefore of no force or effect.

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/do...19abqb322.html

[GoinAllTheWay]

ya ok, that makes perfect sense
/green text

What groups are they referring to? I'm having a hard time understanding why the classification of the firearm makes any difference.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

And I have a hard time believing that. Anyone who was purchased a restriced firearm (ie handguns) know that the serial numbers of those guns are noted in the purchase and the certificate issued by the CFO. Any handgun owner who has one stolen almost certainly reports that if for no other reason than to protect their asses. Yes, serial numbers can be removed but recovered guns should be examined against a list of reported stolen firearms. Wouldn't provided the complete picture but I'm sure they could come up with educated guesses as to where recovered gun possibly originated.

Most quotes from Police Chiefs indicated they too feel a majority are coming from the US.

This article has some other points that show it isn't just cross border imports...

The majority of the illegal guns in Canada used to be smuggled across the border from the U.S., but that seems to be changing. According to police, a growing number of guns are bought legally in Canada and resold on the black market, or made here illegally.

However, Crowley points out that it's not only guns smuggled across the border that are a concern these days.

Last December, police in Ontario busted a firearm manufacturing ring and confiscated so-called "ghost guns," firearms assembled from parts obtained legally and without any serial numbers.

Another growing source of illegal guns in Canada, according to police, is firearms that were originally bought legitimately through retailers.

While the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police says it is working with Statistics Canada to compile national figures, Chief Saunders says what he's seen in Toronto is a growing concern.

"It's Toronto-specific that the crime guns, that the majority of them are domestic, predominately through straw purchasing," Saunders says.

Some of these guns were stolen from their legitimate owners and resold, others were bought legally by Canadians and then offered for sale illegally for a profit.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/national-gun...arms-1.5126228

This all lends support to the idea of the fewer legal guns in Canada, the less chance they end up in bad hands. It is also counter to the argument that legal purchases aren't a problem, they clearly are. So stopping sales of hand guns should have some effect.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

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.

Ummm, so you're saying we should ban alcohol? Because if you want to reduce the amount of road fatalities, and banning seemingly works like all Liberal supporters think it does, surely that should be a good solution, no?

As for what you're looking for, weird fixation on wanting me to provide a plan. Perhaps call your MP? Or can't you admit that almost a decade long issue of smuggling has never been properly addressed with all the 'ohhhh gun ban' laws that the Libs have brought in?

See, for those of us with a memory that isn't completely brainwashed with Liberal stupidity, we remember the last round of 'ohhh gun restrictions' that have since done nothing to solve the actual problem of gun smuggling. Just like this new round of restrictions will also do nothing.

Perhaps more funding for border services would help? But hey, we can't even process Nexus applicants in a proper amount of time.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

This article has some other points that show it isn't just cross border imports...



https://www.cbc.ca/news/national-gun...arms-1.5126228

This all lends support to the idea of the fewer legal guns in Canada, the less chance they end up in bad hands. It is also counter to the argument that legal purchases aren't a problem, they clearly are. So stopping sales of hand guns should have some effect.

No it doesn't.

If one method of obtaining firearms dries up, the criminals will just move to another method, i.e. smuggling them into the country.

I can understand that not all of them are coming in through the US, as I'd also imagine not all the drugs in Canada come over our southern border. Perhaps they are being smuggled in by the same people laundering billions of dollars worth of gang & crime related money through Canadian real estate? Surely our government would want to do something about that, right?

Smoke & mirrors.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

No it doesn't.

If one method of obtaining firearms dries up, the criminals will just move to another method, i.e. smuggling them into the country.

I can understand that not all of them are coming in through the US, as I'd also imagine not all the drugs in Canada come over our southern border. Perhaps they are being smuggled in by the same people laundering billions of dollars worth of gang & crime related money through Canadian real estate? Surely our government would want to do something about that, right?

Smoke & mirrors.

LOL, WTF is that method of governing? Can't win, don't try? Come on. We've got a multi-factored problem that needs to be tackled from several angles. Pretending once source isn't an issue is just sticking your head in the sand.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Azure

Ummm, so you're saying we should ban alcohol? Because if you want to reduce the amount of road fatalities, and banning seemingly works like all Liberal supporters think it does, surely that should be a good solution, no?

As for what you're looking for, weird fixation on wanting me to provide a plan. Perhaps call your MP? Or can't you admit that almost a decade long issue of smuggling has never been properly addressed with all the 'ohhhh gun ban' laws that the Libs have brought in?

See, for those of us with a memory that isn't completely brainwashed with Liberal stupidity, we remember the last round of 'ohhh gun restrictions' that have since done nothing to solve the actual problem of gun smuggling. Just like this new round of restrictions will also do nothing.

Perhaps more funding for border services would help? But hey, we can't even process Nexus applicants in a proper amount of time.

They've increased penalties for smuggling and added money to find smuggled guns. Its not an easy problem as the fact that drugs and other contraband manges to find its way in still after decades of trading to stop it. Its a problem of volume.


This is what they say they are doing on smuggling:

Fighting gun smuggling and trafficking by increasing criminal penalties, providing more tools for law enforcement to investigate firearms crimes, and strengthening border security measures.

which sounds like exactly what you say.

So just complain about the handgun thing - nothing wrong with that. Throwing out a red herring - BUT WHAT ABOUT SMUGGLING - is weak.

[Wormius]

Well obviously we would just solve gun smuggling by making all guns legal.

<insert thinking-guy meme here>

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Azure

Ummm, so you're saying we should ban alcohol? Because if you want to reduce the amount of road fatalities, and banning seemingly works like all Liberal supporters think it does, surely that should be a good solution, no?

As for what you're looking for, weird fixation on wanting me to provide a plan. Perhaps call your MP? Or can't you admit that almost a decade long issue of smuggling has never been properly addressed with all the 'ohhhh gun ban' laws that the Libs have brought in?

See, for those of us with a memory that isn't completely brainwashed with Liberal stupidity, we remember the last round of 'ohhh gun restrictions' that have since done nothing to solve the actual problem of gun smuggling. Just like this new round of restrictions will also do nothing.

Perhaps more funding for border services would help? But hey, we can't even process Nexus applicants in a proper amount of time.

No, we should ban cars.


Or...we could just consider the costs/benefits of each item and go from there...

[GGG]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

No, we should ban cars.


Or...we could just consider the costs/benefits of each item and go from there...

A true accounting of alcohols cost/benefit likely would see a cigarette approach of increased taxation and denormalization.

Probably save more people than the current fight over guns.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

No, we should ban cars.


Or...we could just consider the costs/benefits of each item and go from there...

Please go ahead and provide me the benefits of alcohol.....

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Well obviously we would just solve gun smuggling by making all guns legal.

<insert thinking-guy meme here>

If we made all guns legal and encouraged folks to buy guns, the percentage of guns that were smuggled into Canada along with the percentage of crime that was committed by smuggled guns would be reduced. If you want to drive down those metrics, pumping up the number of guns is a valid approach.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

Please go ahead and provide me the benefits of alcohol.....

Elaine: So, basically what you're saying is that ninety-five percent of the population is undateable?
Jerry: Undateable!
Elaine: Then how are all these people getting together?
Jerry: Alcohol.