Still not done with your bit darb, but am interested in seeing some of those stats when you get them.
Superned, do try and keep up. The previous posts in this thread clearly show my differentiation and opposition to guns vs. knives and other multi-purpose items. Though, I guess brass knucks would go in the fire too.
TLDR - knives, gas, rope, and most other things people say "Guess we'll have to get rid of too" are multi-purpose, they prepare food, fix things, act as fuel for our vehicles. Guns kill, that's it.
Mark
Mark, not to quibble, but I have more than a couple knives which, by design, are meant to be as lethal as any firearm, though one needs to be much closer to the victim to make that happen. We are going to agree to disagree, I guess, because prohibition simply does not work. If it did, booze would be a thing of the past, as would recreational drugs. And, even if you were to get EVERY nation on earth to ban the civilian ownership of firearms, you would still have weapons in the hands of the criminal element, AND YOU KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE. You start to sound more and more like Adam Vaughan on this issue . . . at least his excuse is that he wants to be Mayor of Toronto and, like all politicians, will sell his soul cheaply to get what what he wants. What's your excuse?
Mark, not to quibble, but I have more than a couple knives which, by design, are meant to be as lethal as any firearm, though one needs to be much closer to the victim to make that happen. We are going to agree to disagree, I guess, because prohibition simply does not work. If it did, booze would be a thing of the past, as would recreational drugs. And, even if you were to get EVERY nation on earth to ban the civilian ownership of firearms, you would still have weapons in the hands of the criminal element, AND YOU KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE. You start to sound more and more like Adam Vaughan on this issue . . . at least his excuse is that he wants to be Mayor of Toronto and, like all politicians, will sell his soul cheaply to get what what he wants. What's your excuse?
And I say this with as much tact as I can muster. When it comes to most of the things you've mentioned here, hell, when almost anyone mentions anything, I usually want the documentation to back it up. You, in particular, will need to show me something because sometimes I have a tremendous difficulty following your lines of thought.
Mark
I admittedly cannot find it. I don't know how to do parliament stuff, the liberals ( think they were the 'opposition') have the info, maybe someone here is a liberal fan or knows someone who can provide it.
But we can take this a different direction, show the proof where harsher sentences reduce the violence. Aren't we just basing everything on the assumption if we abolished laws everything would go to hell, therefore making more laws must make things better.
Aren't we just basing everything on the assumption if we abolished laws everything would go to hell, therefore making more laws must make things better.
pretty sure there are also stats that there's less crime in countries that chop off hands if you're caught stealing.
remember there is a difference between less crime and less violent peoples.
also in country like that the sample is tainted because the government is somewhat openly religious, and they have different education system controlled by the same religious government.
Edit: also many of these countries create extremely violent cultures. But I don't want to be to stereo typing here. But honor killing etc.
To show that mm's reduce violence in Canada you would need to study countries similar to Canada in as many aspects as possible including religious views, government control, and education, and hopefully get a sample set where there were no mm's and then at one point they were introduced.
I could somewhat agree but it wouldn't matter we still need to discuss where that medium lies. You think we aren't at it, I think we are well beyond it. I think it is goverment control, that humans allow and do to themselves that stop us as a human race from together looking inwardly and asking what is truly wrong here.
But you had better be sure that laws are the cure, because if laws create immoral people than its a very sad thing that we continue to extend their reach
pretty sure there are also stats that there's less crime in countries that chop off hands if you're caught stealing.
There's always going to be stealing there's always going to be crime, and there's always going to be death and murder - accidental or purposeful. Guns are responsible for homicides in the range of 151 - 207 people per year for the last 15 years. I did the math, average of 185 lives, per year. 185 people are dead - by gun - every year. This is all in Canada:
Your example is barbaric - nobody on here who is being serious would say otherwise. The most common "pro gun" I get is the following:
Hunting - Dumb argument. Animal control reasons I can understand, but as a "sport"? Climb back into your Ford F150 truck, likely with the brass testicles on the back, and a pithy decal on the window of Calvin peeing on something, and stop embarrassing yourself.
Target shooting - Great, I can see the allure. All equipment kept secured in regulated shooting ranges, which as a business can offer better security and containment.
Protection - Stats say otherwise. We're all poker players here, we live and die by math. Everyone has a fav hand, of course it should be AA, but we don't, but we all know we're kidding ourselves. Apply this to guns. Statistics show you're more likely to hurt yourself or your family / neighbour / random stranger with a gun you own than any chance a gun protects you from robbery / assault / muggings.
Mark, not to quibble, but I have more than a couple knives which, by design, are meant to be as lethal as any firearm, though one needs to be much closer to the victim to make that happen. We are going to agree to disagree, I guess, because prohibition simply does not work. If it did, booze would be a thing of the past, as would recreational drugs. And, even if you were to get EVERY nation on earth to ban the civilian ownership of firearms, you would still have weapons in the hands of the criminal element, AND YOU KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE. You start to sound more and more like Adam Vaughan on this issue . . . at least his excuse is that he wants to be Mayor of Toronto and, like all politicians, will sell his soul cheaply to get what what he wants. What's your excuse?
Milo
I'd disallow those knives too FWIW. I'm not so naive to think everyone's going to give up their guns, but just recognize it's a bad idea to own them, they shouldn't be allowed.
A person must be 18 yrs old to acquire a Possession and Acquisition Licence. There is a Minor's Licence but lets leave that aside for now.
Applicants for a PAL, are screened through the CFIS, and National Police database, as well as put through an extensive interview and training process. As an example, your spouse or common-law partner MUST sign your application. Failure to do so will bring a much more intense scrutiny of your application. This process will allow a PAL holder to purchase non-restricted firearms legally in Canada.
There are three types of firearms under the Act: Non-restricted, Restricted, and Prohibited.
Non-restricted firearms are generally your sporting rifles, shotguns, etc.
Restricted firearms are generally handguns, as well as certain rifles, and those generally described as "restricted".
Prohibited firearms fall into the category of fully automatic, too small, cut down, or generally prescribed as prohibited.
It is possible to acquire and RPAL which will enable you to legally purchase hanguns in Canada. however, RPALs are restricted to collectors, target shooters, and applicants who can demonstrate a need for personal protection.
I have a friend who owns several non restricted firearms, and inherited a couple of "questionable" handguns from his father. He already had his PAL, when he acquired the handguns, but needed to upgrade his licence to account for the new firearms. Without telling the authorities about his inheritance, he was initially denied the upgrade. On his second attempt a few years later, when renewing his license on his own, he succeeded in acquiring his RPAL, so his Father's firearms are now legal. But the legal acquisition of firearms in this country is not an easy thing, and has not been since 1939. So, the tragic events of last night, and the Eaton Centre, and so many others are not the result of someone heading down to Bass Pro Shop because they are pissed off, buying a gun, and putting a cap in somebody. They are the result of criminal activity . . . PERIOD.
Final fact: More people are killed in Canada every year through blunt force trauma incidents, than are killed by firearms. But no one seems to be crying out to ban Louisville Sluggers.
I'd disallow those knives too FWIW. I'm not so naive to think everyone's going to give up their guns, but just recognize it's a bad idea to own them, they shouldn't be allowed.
Mark
Who says it's a bad idea? You? On what basis? Legally owned and stored firearms are NOT the threat. Go after the criminals, Mark . . . not the law abiding citizen enjoying his hobby. The only difference between guns and any other collectible item is their POTENTIAL lethality if handled improperly. A properly handled firearm is no more dangerous than a power drill.
Also, your "protection" stats are moot as, by legal definition, firearms and their ammunition MUST be stored separately. No one I know who owns firearms will EVER say they have them for personal protection, because they all recognize that Canadian law makes that an impossibility.
Your "fatalities" argument is specious too, or you would be screaming to ban alcohol, personal ownership of automobiles, and a host of other implements that are responsible for more annual deaths in this country than firearms. And, if you were to eliminate the illegal firearms from that stat, how many would be left? Just curious?
Again, target the criminals, please, not law abiding citizens. Freedom is a wonderful thing, why do you hate it so?
Final fact: More people are killed in Canada every year through blunt force trauma incidents, than are killed by firearms. But no one seems to be crying out to ban Louisville Sluggers.
But...but...but....Louisville Sluggers have a purpose in baseball...guns are only for killing
Go after the criminals, Mark . . . not the law abiding citizen enjoying his hobby.
It should say go after the immoral people though, because criminals is a debatable classification depending on who's making the laws.
I see the conservatives always talking about catching criminals, but making laws creates criminals (ex. if brown eyes became illegal, now there are brown eyed criminals everywhere), they should be saying catching bad people. Its a very scary difference to me.
Darb, wait until I tell Mark they should legalize drugs and stop spending so much money trying to prosecute pot smokers, et al . . . he might actually go Scanners for real.
Darb, wait until I tell Mark they should legalize drugs and stop spending so much money trying to prosecute pot smokers, et al . . . he might actually go Scanners for real.
really these are the same issue tho because the gangs run these drugs with guns for profit, and if we try to deal with it using Canadian laws we create more violence and crime via Mexican Cartel and international gangs in and associated with Canada
You all forgot the important variable of "the people in power don't care about this stuff"
Sorry to say you can debate guns this and guns that till the cows come home but until the crimes in governments and large corporations stop, you are never going to see a society change.
The haves will continue to strive and the have nots will continue to faulter. This is part of the evolution system and I am sad to say it will continue this way until the have nots evolve enough to realize solving problems with brute force or stupid random shootings is no good.
You can educate people till their eyes pop out of their sockets, you can put people in jail for eons but you aren't going to solve the problem in society overall because the people running society are always protected, always have and will continue to reap rewards.
Notice change and promises only come about during election times etc? Come on, don't you think if they wanted stricter sentencing for guns and crimes, the govts would have made their decisions already. Its pretty obvious if you look outside the window you see bad people all the time.
Governments want things to sort themselves out without people having to make decisions and being the "bad guy"
I mean look at the people in power now, look at your local politican. How did they get in, popularity contest. Just like high school. The cool kids move on, while the smart kids who could actually make a change move to bigger and better things eventually abusing the system the cool kids create.
They smart kids create private schools, private healthcare, suck money out of everyone's pocket and because the cool kids are only in office because of popularity they aren't smart enough to make any relevant decisions and just hope by lying and making promises to the right people they will continue to live their cushy lives segregated from the rest of the people they supposedly are in power to represent.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is naïve or is enjoying the perks.
Sorry to say you can debate guns this and guns that till the cows come home but until the crimes in governments and large corporations stop, you are never going to see a society change.
Agreed except i think government/corporations and criminals (well immorality) go hand in hand
You can educate people till their eyes pop out of their sockets,
Now this is false conditioning we get from living in our society. We caneducate these things away, the problem with our schools is they are set up and run by the same corrupt government processes.
I mean look at the people in power now, look at your local politican. How did they get in, popularity contest. Just like high school.
Yes high school is setup up to teach us that democracy is the smartest and most natural way.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is naïve or is enjoying the perks.
Just saying if everyone were allow to carry a firearm, these punk ass little bastards would think twice about pulling out a gun thinking everyone else at that party had something to shoot back with. Its NOT THE answer, but it is an option.
And for the record...I agree 100% with everything Ted has said. Nothing is going to change until such a time as corruptions at ALL levels is dealt with, and the ONLY way to deal with that, is to remove the one thing everyone wants more than anything else. And that can't be done unless its done globally, so nothing is going to change.
Who says it's a bad idea? You? On what basis? Legally owned and stored firearms are NOT the threat. Go after the criminals, Mark . . . not the law abiding citizen enjoying his hobby. The only difference between guns and any other collectible item is their POTENTIAL lethality if handled improperly. A properly handled firearm is no more dangerous than a power drill.
Also, your "protection" stats are moot as, by legal definition, firearms and their ammunition MUST be stored separately. No one I know who owns firearms will EVER say they have them for personal protection, because they all recognize that Canadian law makes that an impossibility.
Your "fatalities" argument is specious too, or you would be screaming to ban alcohol, personal ownership of automobiles, and a host of other implements that are responsible for more annual deaths in this country than firearms. And, if you were to eliminate the illegal firearms from that stat, how many would be left? Just curious?
Again, target the criminals, please, not law abiding citizens. Freedom is a wonderful thing, why do you hate it so?
None of this makes sense if you read what I've typed - repeatedly.
I get it, criminals bad. But guns or the "hobby" of owning guns? Ridiculous. What is a hobby about the firearms that cannot be dealt with in the ways I have repeatedly, exhaustively, explained? And no more dangerous than a power drill? Now you're just ignoring straight up common sense because you like guns.
You don't think "legally stored" guns have a threat? You're wrong, and lying to yourself. How many times do you hear about someone cleaning a gun and it goes off? Human error? Sure! Guns don't load themselves, but if some fucking moron has a stamp collection it doesn't kill his neighbor when he creases one.
I don't know how else to explain this to everyone. Knives, bats, crowbars, fucking hammers and drills are TOOLS by nature. Nobody builds a fucking house with a pistol. Guns are weapons. Not tools, not a hobby, not art. They are weapons. Someone mentioned swords before - ya, and swords in Canada are dulled and unsharpenable - now just showpieces. You want to keep guns? Fine, neuter them so they can't fire. That's the only way you should have them in your house.
Final Fact: More people are killed by heart and stroke illness than cancer, so we should shush up all these cancer research advocates. Stupid fucking logic no?
While I understand some people would have the simplistic view that all guns should be melted down....I find it fascinating that they can't look any deeper than that superficial 'solution'.
Again, give anyone a metal lathe and they can create a simple firearm in a few hours. If 'legal' production of firearms ever ceased, illegal production would become the new norm and would thrive. And again, if a nut wants to kill a bunch of people, there are about a hundred ways to do it. Who knows...maybe someone can mix fertilizer and other legal compounds in a truck and pull it up to a building. Nah, never happen. As long as legal guns are outlawed....lol. Love tunnel vision....
You don't think "legally stored" guns have a threat? You're wrong, and lying to yourself. How many times do you hear about someone cleaning a gun and it goes off? Human error? Sure! Guns don't load themselves, but if some fucking moron has a stamp collection it doesn't kill his neighbor when he creases one.QUOTE]
LOL, you do realize when they say that the person has committed suicide right? Too funny.
Comments
Mark, not to quibble, but I have more than a couple knives which, by design, are meant to be as lethal as any firearm, though one needs to be much closer to the victim to make that happen. We are going to agree to disagree, I guess, because prohibition simply does not work. If it did, booze would be a thing of the past, as would recreational drugs. And, even if you were to get EVERY nation on earth to ban the civilian ownership of firearms, you would still have weapons in the hands of the criminal element, AND YOU KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE. You start to sound more and more like Adam Vaughan on this issue . . . at least his excuse is that he wants to be Mayor of Toronto and, like all politicians, will sell his soul cheaply to get what what he wants. What's your excuse?
do flamethrowers count as guns?
But we can take this a different direction, show the proof where harsher sentences reduce the violence. Aren't we just basing everything on the assumption if we abolished laws everything would go to hell, therefore making more laws must make things better.
no. either extreme is not good. happy medium.
also in country like that the sample is tainted because the government is somewhat openly religious, and they have different education system controlled by the same religious government.
Edit: also many of these countries create extremely violent cultures. But I don't want to be to stereo typing here. But honor killing etc.
To show that mm's reduce violence in Canada you would need to study countries similar to Canada in as many aspects as possible including religious views, government control, and education, and hopefully get a sample set where there were no mm's and then at one point they were introduced.
I could somewhat agree but it wouldn't matter we still need to discuss where that medium lies. You think we aren't at it, I think we are well beyond it. I think it is goverment control, that humans allow and do to themselves that stop us as a human race from together looking inwardly and asking what is truly wrong here.
But you had better be sure that laws are the cure, because if laws create immoral people than its a very sad thing that we continue to extend their reach
There's always going to be stealing there's always going to be crime, and there's always going to be death and murder - accidental or purposeful. Guns are responsible for homicides in the range of 151 - 207 people per year for the last 15 years. I did the math, average of 185 lives, per year. 185 people are dead - by gun - every year. This is all in Canada:
Guns in Canada: Facts, Figures and Firearm Law
Your example is barbaric - nobody on here who is being serious would say otherwise. The most common "pro gun" I get is the following:
Hunting - Dumb argument. Animal control reasons I can understand, but as a "sport"? Climb back into your Ford F150 truck, likely with the brass testicles on the back, and a pithy decal on the window of Calvin peeing on something, and stop embarrassing yourself.
Target shooting - Great, I can see the allure. All equipment kept secured in regulated shooting ranges, which as a business can offer better security and containment.
Protection - Stats say otherwise. We're all poker players here, we live and die by math. Everyone has a fav hand, of course it should be AA, but we don't, but we all know we're kidding ourselves. Apply this to guns. Statistics show you're more likely to hurt yourself or your family / neighbour / random stranger with a gun you own than any chance a gun protects you from robbery / assault / muggings.
Mark
Milo
I'd disallow those knives too FWIW. I'm not so naive to think everyone's going to give up their guns, but just recognize it's a bad idea to own them, they shouldn't be allowed.
Mark
Applicants for a PAL, are screened through the CFIS, and National Police database, as well as put through an extensive interview and training process. As an example, your spouse or common-law partner MUST sign your application. Failure to do so will bring a much more intense scrutiny of your application. This process will allow a PAL holder to purchase non-restricted firearms legally in Canada.
There are three types of firearms under the Act: Non-restricted, Restricted, and Prohibited.
Non-restricted firearms are generally your sporting rifles, shotguns, etc.
Restricted firearms are generally handguns, as well as certain rifles, and those generally described as "restricted".
Prohibited firearms fall into the category of fully automatic, too small, cut down, or generally prescribed as prohibited.
It is possible to acquire and RPAL which will enable you to legally purchase hanguns in Canada. however, RPALs are restricted to collectors, target shooters, and applicants who can demonstrate a need for personal protection.
I have a friend who owns several non restricted firearms, and inherited a couple of "questionable" handguns from his father. He already had his PAL, when he acquired the handguns, but needed to upgrade his licence to account for the new firearms. Without telling the authorities about his inheritance, he was initially denied the upgrade. On his second attempt a few years later, when renewing his license on his own, he succeeded in acquiring his RPAL, so his Father's firearms are now legal. But the legal acquisition of firearms in this country is not an easy thing, and has not been since 1939. So, the tragic events of last night, and the Eaton Centre, and so many others are not the result of someone heading down to Bass Pro Shop because they are pissed off, buying a gun, and putting a cap in somebody. They are the result of criminal activity . . . PERIOD.
Final fact: More people are killed in Canada every year through blunt force trauma incidents, than are killed by firearms. But no one seems to be crying out to ban Louisville Sluggers.
Who says it's a bad idea? You? On what basis? Legally owned and stored firearms are NOT the threat. Go after the criminals, Mark . . . not the law abiding citizen enjoying his hobby. The only difference between guns and any other collectible item is their POTENTIAL lethality if handled improperly. A properly handled firearm is no more dangerous than a power drill.
Also, your "protection" stats are moot as, by legal definition, firearms and their ammunition MUST be stored separately. No one I know who owns firearms will EVER say they have them for personal protection, because they all recognize that Canadian law makes that an impossibility.
Your "fatalities" argument is specious too, or you would be screaming to ban alcohol, personal ownership of automobiles, and a host of other implements that are responsible for more annual deaths in this country than firearms. And, if you were to eliminate the illegal firearms from that stat, how many would be left? Just curious?
Again, target the criminals, please, not law abiding citizens. Freedom is a wonderful thing, why do you hate it so?
But...but...but....Louisville Sluggers have a purpose in baseball...guns are only for killing
Nah, you can also kneecap people. Much more fun.
I see the conservatives always talking about catching criminals, but making laws creates criminals (ex. if brown eyes became illegal, now there are brown eyed criminals everywhere), they should be saying catching bad people. Its a very scary difference to me.
Lets see what the little bastards do now.
fuck no !!!
You're obviously not thinking this through.
wait a minute.
more guns = more crimes = more criminals with guns = more deaths = less criminals.
i think we're on to something here.
Not Quite the train of thought I was hoping for...but if it works...meh
Sorry to say you can debate guns this and guns that till the cows come home but until the crimes in governments and large corporations stop, you are never going to see a society change.
The haves will continue to strive and the have nots will continue to faulter. This is part of the evolution system and I am sad to say it will continue this way until the have nots evolve enough to realize solving problems with brute force or stupid random shootings is no good.
You can educate people till their eyes pop out of their sockets, you can put people in jail for eons but you aren't going to solve the problem in society overall because the people running society are always protected, always have and will continue to reap rewards.
Notice change and promises only come about during election times etc? Come on, don't you think if they wanted stricter sentencing for guns and crimes, the govts would have made their decisions already. Its pretty obvious if you look outside the window you see bad people all the time.
Governments want things to sort themselves out without people having to make decisions and being the "bad guy"
I mean look at the people in power now, look at your local politican. How did they get in, popularity contest. Just like high school. The cool kids move on, while the smart kids who could actually make a change move to bigger and better things eventually abusing the system the cool kids create.
They smart kids create private schools, private healthcare, suck money out of everyone's pocket and because the cool kids are only in office because of popularity they aren't smart enough to make any relevant decisions and just hope by lying and making promises to the right people they will continue to live their cushy lives segregated from the rest of the people they supposedly are in power to represent.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is naïve or is enjoying the perks.
You mean go to Texas?
No. I mean bring Texas HERE!!
Now this is false conditioning we get from living in our society. We can educate these things away, the problem with our schools is they are set up and run by the same corrupt government processes.
Yes high school is setup up to teach us that democracy is the smartest and most natural way.
ya
Daughter got a new boyfriend? It's ok AJ, we won't tell anyone where you bury the body...
And for the record...I agree 100% with everything Ted has said. Nothing is going to change until such a time as corruptions at ALL levels is dealt with, and the ONLY way to deal with that, is to remove the one thing everyone wants more than anything else. And that can't be done unless its done globally, so nothing is going to change.
None of this makes sense if you read what I've typed - repeatedly.
I get it, criminals bad. But guns or the "hobby" of owning guns? Ridiculous. What is a hobby about the firearms that cannot be dealt with in the ways I have repeatedly, exhaustively, explained? And no more dangerous than a power drill? Now you're just ignoring straight up common sense because you like guns.
You don't think "legally stored" guns have a threat? You're wrong, and lying to yourself. How many times do you hear about someone cleaning a gun and it goes off? Human error? Sure! Guns don't load themselves, but if some fucking moron has a stamp collection it doesn't kill his neighbor when he creases one.
I don't know how else to explain this to everyone. Knives, bats, crowbars, fucking hammers and drills are TOOLS by nature. Nobody builds a fucking house with a pistol. Guns are weapons. Not tools, not a hobby, not art. They are weapons. Someone mentioned swords before - ya, and swords in Canada are dulled and unsharpenable - now just showpieces. You want to keep guns? Fine, neuter them so they can't fire. That's the only way you should have them in your house.
Final Fact: More people are killed by heart and stroke illness than cancer, so we should shush up all these cancer research advocates. Stupid fucking logic no?
Again, give anyone a metal lathe and they can create a simple firearm in a few hours. If 'legal' production of firearms ever ceased, illegal production would become the new norm and would thrive. And again, if a nut wants to kill a bunch of people, there are about a hundred ways to do it. Who knows...maybe someone can mix fertilizer and other legal compounds in a truck and pull it up to a building. Nah, never happen. As long as legal guns are outlawed....lol. Love tunnel vision....