I already dealt with the question as well as it can be dealt with in post 753......and others.....so he is either not reading the posts anyway, or is too......limited to debate the point, or he is trolling.
So why deal with him.
Gun Control is Completely Useless.
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
I already dealt with the question as well as it can be dealt with in post 753......and others.....so he is either not reading the posts anyway, or is too......limited to debate the point, or he is trolling.
So why deal with him.
I'm not saying I agree with him, just that you are usually not at a loss for words....
Ah, but that would make me part of a useless and polarized debate. However, I will say this. I own two firearms; a 1938 German P38 that my father acquired from a dead German in WW II; and an 1854 Adams percussion revolver. They are both heirloom pieces and I have bullets for neither and never intend to fire them.
We have fallen so far behind.
Report: American Schools Trail Behind World In Aptitude Of Child Soldiers | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
Report: American Schools Trail Behind World In Aptitude Of Child Soldiers | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
"I don't really think anyone ever convinces anyone on any subject on these forums......
Everybody just wants their say...."
I think a lot of people on here like to learn things, I know I do and one way of learning is by reading and LISTENING to people, but at the same time you don't learn much from people who aren't credible. My attitude is that everyone knows something that I don't.
Everybody just wants their say...."
I think a lot of people on here like to learn things, I know I do and one way of learning is by reading and LISTENING to people, but at the same time you don't learn much from people who aren't credible. My attitude is that everyone knows something that I don't.
I agree with you Colpy. Gun control in Canada has gone past the point of diminishing returns but anti-gun people won't be satisfied until its illegal for anyone to own a firearm. In the preceeding pages I have seen people unwilling to acknowledge the fact that murders will still happen even without firearms present. People will beat, bludgeon, poison, stab or strangle others. Killing someone with a firearm doesn't make them any more dead.
I'll say I'm not a fan of handguns. I don't see a reason for most people to have one. With the size, weight and concealment factor, I do see an inherent danger with them that exceeds that of long firearms. I have a 6 month old son and a 12 year old stepson, and in my opinion the risk of one of those kids (eventually) disregarding any instruction I give them and playing with a gun (and having an accidental discharge and shooting) exceeds the risk of someone invading my home and wanting to do damage that I cannot prevent through other means. My wife is a former soldier and former police officer and we are in agreement that we don't want a handgun anywhere in our house, even though she has had extensive training on their use, and where we live now (western Pennsylvania, just outside Pittsburgh) has few restrictions on their ownership.
I do think that firearms should be regulated to a degree, and I thought the old FAC system was a pretty good set up. There should be background screening done on prospective owners for both histories of mental illness and criminal behaviour. There should be a renewal process. There should be laws governing safe storage and transportation. There needs to also be some intelligence exercised from the courts: the guy in Quebec who appealed and had his hunting rifle returned to him, in spite of violent crime convictions (who then shot that young lady cop). Things like Alan Rock's registry (a redundant joke and an enormous waste of tax-payer funds) haven't proven any more effective in stopping the shooting sprees atr schools and I don't thing we ever will stop all of them.
I'll say I'm not a fan of handguns. I don't see a reason for most people to have one. With the size, weight and concealment factor, I do see an inherent danger with them that exceeds that of long firearms. I have a 6 month old son and a 12 year old stepson, and in my opinion the risk of one of those kids (eventually) disregarding any instruction I give them and playing with a gun (and having an accidental discharge and shooting) exceeds the risk of someone invading my home and wanting to do damage that I cannot prevent through other means. My wife is a former soldier and former police officer and we are in agreement that we don't want a handgun anywhere in our house, even though she has had extensive training on their use, and where we live now (western Pennsylvania, just outside Pittsburgh) has few restrictions on their ownership.
I do think that firearms should be regulated to a degree, and I thought the old FAC system was a pretty good set up. There should be background screening done on prospective owners for both histories of mental illness and criminal behaviour. There should be a renewal process. There should be laws governing safe storage and transportation. There needs to also be some intelligence exercised from the courts: the guy in Quebec who appealed and had his hunting rifle returned to him, in spite of violent crime convictions (who then shot that young lady cop). Things like Alan Rock's registry (a redundant joke and an enormous waste of tax-payer funds) haven't proven any more effective in stopping the shooting sprees atr schools and I don't thing we ever will stop all of them.
in Montreal a few years ago, a guy killed another on the subway with a hammer.
It wasn't registered.
off duty RCMP officer (J Hotte) in 2001 used his service pistol to spray a car with bullets on the highway in Montreal. Killed his ex-girlfriend, wounded three others., one parlysed. No gun law could have prevented that.
It wasn't registered.
off duty RCMP officer (J Hotte) in 2001 used his service pistol to spray a car with bullets on the highway in Montreal. Killed his ex-girlfriend, wounded three others., one parlysed. No gun law could have prevented that.
Along with automakers, knife makers, baseball bat makers, chemists, fast food companies, snowmobile makers, garden implement makers, rope makers, wire makers, etc. Their products can kill, too. Oh hey, and seeing as all Canadians own the bears, cougars, wolves, etc. in Canada, we should all be charged whenever someone gets killed by one.:roll::roll:
Last edited:
I thought you weren't going to say any more on this subject. lol
I've said stuff like that before, too. Sometimes a comment will just pull you right back in.
Our kids didn't even know we had handguns until they werelate teens. They both knew how to use long guns long before that, though. Now both know how to use hand guns but neither have a firearm at all because of lack of interest.
I think the few incidences of firearms abuse by has been blown to astronomical proportion. People read and hear about gangs, LaPines, etc. and by the time the newsmedia has gotten underway, they think anyone with a capgun is a homicidal maniac.
There is/are.
Yup. Sometimes the courts need a thump on the noggin with the butt end of one to wake them up. But even then, such people as in your example kill anyway. Allan Schoenborn, for example.
Exactly.
No use arguing with stupidity, Anna (not that we haven't had a lot of practice in this forum :lol::lol::lol
I don't know about gun control being useless, but here is someone who should not be allowed to own one.
YouTube - This is too funny! Guy who doesn't know how to hold gun!!!
YouTube - This is too funny! Guy who doesn't know how to hold gun!!!
Unless you educate those who want to shoot a gun in its proper use, all the gun laws in the world will not do anything to save lives. Statistics are also meaningless, to easy to fudge one way or another, all you can hope for is to reduce accidents and thus statistics thru firearm education.
That is the kicker isn't it? If all gun owners were like me firearms wouldn't be a problem. Unfortunately, some are like James Roszko.
Who had no trouble at all being in possession of several firearms, including an unregistered, prohibited H&K 91 with several prohibited 20 round magazines......despite the gun laws.
If our strict laws can not keep weapons out of the hands of guys like him.....then they are useless.
Long gun registry a very useful tool for law enforcement and since it is in place it must be kept in place.
http://www.firearmstraining.ca/classes.htm
Non-restricted firearms are ordinary hunting and sporting rifles, shotguns and airguns with an overall length of 660mm or greater. Many airguns fall into this class because they are capable of achieving a muzzle velocity of 500 feet per second. If it is a centrefire semi-automatic firearm, the barrel length must be at least 470mm to be non-restricted. These firearms must be stored, transported and displayed according to Federal regulations and you need a firearms licence to possess them. Provincial and municipal rules may further regulate these firearms (e.g., Ontario hunting regulations require that firearms being transported be encased at night). Certain firearms, although they meet the above criteria, have been classified as "restricted" or "prohibited" by order-in-council.
National long gun registry is that the key?
Rifles or long guns are the major cause of murders in rural Canada and they are considered a non-restricted firearm.
I found this in the 1995 Hansard Bill 68 fire arms act third reading.
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=35&Ses=1&DocId=2332474#FIREARMSACT
The National Long Gun Registry must be saved.
The decision of the Liberal leader to whip the vote is the right one since this bill really is a government bill disguised as a private member's bill.
http://www.firearmstraining.ca/classes.htm
Non-restricted firearms are ordinary hunting and sporting rifles, shotguns and airguns with an overall length of 660mm or greater. Many airguns fall into this class because they are capable of achieving a muzzle velocity of 500 feet per second. If it is a centrefire semi-automatic firearm, the barrel length must be at least 470mm to be non-restricted. These firearms must be stored, transported and displayed according to Federal regulations and you need a firearms licence to possess them. Provincial and municipal rules may further regulate these firearms (e.g., Ontario hunting regulations require that firearms being transported be encased at night). Certain firearms, although they meet the above criteria, have been classified as "restricted" or "prohibited" by order-in-council.
National long gun registry is that the key?
Rifles or long guns are the major cause of murders in rural Canada and they are considered a non-restricted firearm.
I found this in the 1995 Hansard Bill 68 fire arms act third reading.
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=35&Ses=1&DocId=2332474#FIREARMSACT
The National Long Gun Registry must be saved.
The decision of the Liberal leader to whip the vote is the right one since this bill really is a government bill disguised as a private member's bill.