Gun Control is Completely Useless.

bluebyrd35

Council Member
Aug 9, 2008
2,373
0
36
Ormstown.Chat.Valley
Child drownings dramatically increase with lifeguards blaming parents’ obsession with smartphones
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7028718/germany-increase-children-drowning-lifeguards-blame-parents/

Gotta ban pools and phones and parents.



Doesn’t matter cuz it makes the progs feel good.
Well the drownings of children in Canadian pools is very, low. The average age of the drownings in Canada is, I believe 44 and those are mostly in other bodies of water NOT swimming pools.

How is this going to stop one bullet?
Dumb It is about controlling tracking the stolen guns and finding ways of keeping them out of the hands of the criminal elements
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
Well the drownings of children in Canadian pools is very, low. The average age of the drownings in Canada is, I believe 44 and those are mostly in other bodies of water NOT

Did you just make that up?


It is 570 children in 10 years, and 34% happen in private pools or family cottage. the next largest location is 15%.

All totally preventable.
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
It is about controlling tracking the stolen guns and finding ways of keeping them out of the hands of the criminal elements

  • a serial number in a database doesn't control anything

    a registration system is a snap shot of information, it is not a real time tracking system and will not be able to track stolen guns

    I'm all for finding ways to keep firearms out of the hands of criminal elements, but it is not good enough. If all we do is go after the guns then we become another london. In case you are unaware, London has a higher murder rate than New York, gun laws aren't working there.

.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
  • a serial number in a database doesn't control anything

    a registration system is a snap shot of information, it is not a real time tracking system and will not be able to track stolen guns

    I'm all for finding ways to keep firearms out of the hands of criminal elements, but it is not good enough. If all we do is go after the guns then we become another london. In case you are unaware, London has a higher murder rate than New York, gun laws aren't working there.

.
Registered Serial numbers are only good for proving you are the rightfull owner of an article or property wether it is a bicycle a car or a firearm.... period.
Anything more is an infrigement on privacy rights!
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
Registered Serial numbers are only good for proving you are the rightfull owner of an article or property wether it is a bicycle a car or a firearm.... period.
Anything more is an infrigement on privacy rights!

Just like many other things that I own, registration is not a necessary means of showing ownership.

I already have a receipt showing that I bought it, but even if I didn't - posession is 9/10ths of the law and the firearm is not listed as stolen so clearly it is mine.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
How about a 'low voltage taser' with a hand crank , barrel about the size of a flare-gun and a range of 25ft. (8M). Replace lead with chalk and you can empty a clip and the bruises. A derringer powered by rounds for a starting pistol and the chalk projectile that gets loaded like a musket. Designer colors so you can identify the attacker after shooting them in the face at close range.

That is a vital part of the 'desire to quit' part of being shot by the victim.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
Last edited:

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
Handgun ban would have 'no impact,' police union head warns

compulsory firearm registration probably would though. It might not end all crimes, but would at least make it more difficult to procure a firearm not registered under their name. Just the fact that it would make it more difficult would at least reduce the occurrence of such crimes, which would already be a great benefit. Unfortunately, we're too quick to dismiss any policy that's not absolutely perfect, no matter how effective it might be. Based on that argument, we should decriminalize murder too since obviously our present murder laws aren't perfect anyway, right?
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
So we shoud only have gun contol in urban areas but predominately rural areas you can own whatever gun you choose to?
So only rich people should own guns but poor immigrants should not be allowed to own guns?
Is you life in so much danger you feel you need to own a handgun?
Do you feel there is a chance that our goverment may turn into a totalitarian system and that we need to bear arms to ensure a free democracy?
Have you tried to get a motorcycle license and seen the hops you have to jump through (actually pylons you gotta drive around)?
Bureaucratic bumbling and cost overuns are a fact of life in Canadian politics. Is the idea of a gun registry so abhorrent to you?
Picking and choosing what states to quote for stats is, In my opinion, incorrect. A simple look at the US and divide by 10 (population ratios) works for me. The 3 provinces and state you picked do not have large urban areas like Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal. 3 cities have a huge proportion of the Canadian population. St. Johns NB is a peaceful backwater local in comparison. Not all of us live in idealic small towns. I grew up in a small town that had not had a murder in 50 years.




==========================================================================================================================================================================================================================================

The same LIE-berals who give us numbers on spousal abuse to make it look like an epidemic are also at work to make gun ownership look utterly shameful!!

In her book "Who Stole Feminism", Yankee writer Christina Hoff- Sumers quotes feminazis as saying that 40 percent on women in hospitals are there for medical aid after suffering spousal abuse!

Hoff- Summers reveals the LIES!!!!!!!!!!!

Firstly- that 40 percent number ONLY APPLIES to women living in the most violent and vicious Yankee ghettos- it IS NOT related to anything that happens in middle class families!!!!!!!!

Secondly- LIARS OMIT the awkward fact that 38 percent of men seeking medical aid in those extreme ghetto hospitals are ALSO THERE DUE TO SPOUSAL ABUSE!!!!!!!!

Drunken goof slaps wife when he gets home..........and she WAITS .......till he is asleep and then slaps HIM with a frying pan!!!!!!!!!!!!

To suggest- as LIE-berals and their radical supporters do- that middle class people live like that AND DISRESPECT EACH OTHER THAT BADLY is a colossal lie!

And LIE-berals ARE PREPARED TO lie JUST AS THOROUGHLY about crime and gun control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LIE-berals are so desperate to buy votes at any price they are prepared to MANGLE the truth- just so long as their supply of Gravy is SAFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
6
36
Remember this LIE-beral shopper?

"He can either stand with us or with the child pornographers." - Vic Teows
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
compulsory firearm registration probably would though. It might not end all crimes, but would at least make it more difficult to procure a firearm not registered under their name. Just the fact that it would make it more difficult would at least reduce the occurrence of such crimes, which would already be a great benefit. Unfortunately, we're too quick to dismiss any policy that's not absolutely perfect, no matter how effective it might be. Based on that argument, we should decriminalize murder too since obviously our present murder laws aren't perfect anyway, right?

how well is this working in London? I hear their gun free utopia has a higher murder rate than New York. Canada is better off not to copy London.
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,301
5,727
113
Twin Moose Creek
compulsory firearm registration probably would though. It might not end all crimes, but would at least make it more difficult to procure a firearm not registered under their name. Just the fact that it would make it more difficult would at least reduce the occurrence of such crimes, which would already be a great benefit. Unfortunately, we're too quick to dismiss any policy that's not absolutely perfect, no matter how effective it might be. Based on that argument, we should decriminalize murder too since obviously our present murder laws aren't perfect anyway, right?


So how do you force register firearms where owners of the firearm don't want anybody to know they have one? If they figured out who owns illegal firearms wouldn't you think they would confiscate it rather than register it?
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
So how do you force register firearms where owners of the firearm don't want anybody to know they have one? If they figured out who owns illegal firearms wouldn't you think they would confiscate it rather than register it?

Again, we're going back to this idea that the law must be perfect or bust. Supposing we had a grandfather clause, meaning that any firearm that is manufactured more than one year after the new law is passed must register the buyer and any buyer must likewise register the new owner when he sells it and on down the line.

Of course criminals would then just buy the older guns to get around this, and a well-made gun could probably be used for a century or more before wear and tear puts an end to it. A savvy criminal could probably build his own gun. But at least as time goes buy, through attrition, it would become at least somewhat more difficult to acquire an unregistered gun over time. Again, just like our murder and theft laws, it wouldn't be perfect, and just like our murder laws, its imperfection is not in itself a reason to dump it.
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
3
36
So how do you force register firearms where owners of the firearm don't want anybody to know they have one? If they figured out who owns illegal firearms wouldn't you think they would confiscate it rather than register it?
this is the very reason that the same police union wanted to keep the long gun registry.
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,301
5,727
113
Twin Moose Creek
Again, we're going back to this idea that the law must be perfect or bust. Supposing we had a grandfather clause, meaning that any firearm that is manufactured more than one year after the new law is passed must register the buyer and any buyer must likewise register the new owner when he sells it and on down the line.
Of course criminals would then just buy the older guns to get around this, and a well-made gun could probably be used for a century or more before wear and tear puts an end to it. A savvy criminal could probably build his own gun. But at least as time goes buy, through attrition, it would become at least somewhat more difficult to acquire an unregistered gun over time. Again, just like our murder and theft laws, it wouldn't be perfect, and just like our murder laws, its imperfection is not in itself a reason to dump it.


By law a used firearm cannot be passed on to somebody without a PAL registered or not.
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
Again, we're going back to this idea that the law must be perfect or bust. Supposing we had a grandfather clause, meaning that any firearm that is manufactured more than one year after the new law is passed must register the buyer and any buyer must likewise register the new owner when he sells it and on down the line.
Of course criminals would then just buy the older guns to get around this, and a well-made gun could probably be used for a century or more before wear and tear puts an end to it. A savvy criminal could probably build his own gun. .

that is a completely misguided view of our canadian rights and freedoms. You should educate yourself on the Oakes test.
The test interprets section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that rights are guaranteed, “subject only to such reasonable limits . . . as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”[2] This means that the government must establish that the benefits of a law outweigh its negative impact—that is, its violation of a Charter right.There are principles of proportionality in play here. You can't burn down the apple orchard becuase someone eats a rotten apple.