Gun Control is Completely Useless.

Colpy

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
JamesBondo said:
you still don't get it. you should look up the oakes test.
Click to expand...

1. The "inspection" (read "unreasonable search") provisions in the Firearms Act.

2. The ridiculous classification system. The CSSA proposed a new, easy, sensible system..........full auto? Prohibited. Less than 660 mm in length? Restricted. All others? non-restricted. Simple. Anyone with a tape measure can tell what is forbidden and what is not.

3. The requirement you get your spouse's permission to get a PAL. (firearms license) Imagine for a moment this was a female dominated activity, but they required their husband's permission......

4. It should be easy to get a license to carry a handgun in the bush, included on your PAL after completing a safety course.

5. It should be possible to get a license to carry a handgun for those qualified in the same manner police are qualified.......training in law, shoot/don't shoot situations, and range qualification.

6. The magazine restrictions are ludicrous. They should be deleted.

That would be a real good start, and would make the system a little more sane.

Instead, our idiot PM is about to make things worse.
 
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
Hoid said:
i don't know anybody who takes a handgun into the bush
Click to expand...

I know several people that travel by horse in grizzly country. They have their rifle in a scabbard on the horse and a handgun in their jacket. They don't take it out and flash it around, and the fish and wildlife officer doesn't ask.

Colpy said:
1. The "inspection" (read "unreasonable search") provisions in the Firearms Act.

2. The ridiculous classification system. The CSSA proposed a new, easy, sensible system..........full auto? Prohibited. Less than 660 mm in length? Restricted. All others? non-restricted. Simple. Anyone with a tape measure can tell what is forbidden and what is not.

3. The requirement you get your spouse's permission to get a PAL. (firearms license) Imagine for a moment this was a female dominated activity, but they required their husband's permission......

4. It should be easy to get a license to carry a handgun in the bush, included on your PAL after completing a safety course.

5. It should be possible to get a license to carry a handgun for those qualified in the same manner police are qualified.......training in law, shoot/don't shoot situations, and range qualification.

6. The magazine restrictions are ludicrous. They should be deleted.

That would be a real good start, and would make the system a little more sane.

Instead, our idiot PM is about to make things worse.
Click to expand...

A .270 will pierce a vest and a 9mm won't. A .270 stored in my truck is pretty much legal. A 9mm stored in my truck is pretty much illegal.
 
taxslave

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Hoid said:
and yet you support gun control measures such as background checks and other common sense rules as does pretty much everyone. There are not all that many people who want to totally deregulate firearms.
Click to expand...

Basically true. But ligit gun owners are forced to follow onerous and ridiculous rules that criminals don' t bother with. And then there is the not insignificant fact that the government lied to us and stole private property. SImply put federal government cannot be trusted .

Hoid said:
i don't know anybody who takes a handgun into the bush
Click to expand...

That's because you live in a city. I know a dozen people that take handguns in the bush. Engineers and prospectors mostly. It is a tool for them. Or a safety item.
 
B

bluebyrd35

Council Member
Aug 9, 2008
2,373
0
36
Ormstown.Chat.Valley
Colpy said:
1. The "inspection" (read "unreasonable search") provisions in the Firearms Act.

2. The ridiculous classification system. The CSSA proposed a new, easy, sensible system..........full auto? Prohibited. Less than 660 mm in length? Restricted. All others? non-restricted. Simple. Anyone with a tape measure can tell what is forbidden and what is not.

3. The requirement you get your spouse's permission to get a PAL. (firearms license) Imagine for a moment this was a female dominated activity, but they required their husband's permission......

4. It should be easy to get a license to carry a handgun in the bush, included on your PAL after completing a safety course.

5. It should be possible to get a license to carry a handgun for those qualified in the same manner police are qualified.......training in law, shoot/don't shoot situations, and range qualification.

6. The magazine restrictions are ludicrous. They should be deleted.

That would be a real good start, and would make the system a little more sane.

Instead, our idiot PM is about to make things worse.
Click to expand...
Re: No, 3

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/07/homicides-women/534306/

Just imagine if women were as inclined to do away with their intimate others following an argument? Also imagine if those 55% of those women killed by gun in the US by their intimate others would have had that option? Since the gun lobby is one of the main cash cows of the government I do not see that provision coming into force down there in the near future.

Most women world over wouldn't mind men having the same option!!
 
Last edited:
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
bluebyrd35 said:
Re: No, 3

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/07/homicides-women/534306/

Just imagine if women were as inclined to do away with their intimate others following an argument? Also imagine if those 55% of those women killed by gun in the US by their intimate others would have had that option? Since the gun lobby is one of the main cash cows of the government I do not see that provision coming into force down there in the near future.

Most women world over wouldn't mind men having the same option!!
Click to expand...

yet again. there is no trending or evidence that it helps in Canada.
 
B

bluebyrd35

Council Member
Aug 9, 2008
2,373
0
36
Ormstown.Chat.Valley
JamesBondo said:
yet again. there is no trending or evidence that it helps in Canada.
Click to expand...
HuhII In Canada very few females are killed by guns in Canada. Here there is generally a chance most women survive an argument because the means of instantly settling an argument once and for all was unavailable. Here women are generally beaten, stabbed or choked to death and they often survive the first attack. After that, if they are smart they report the attack then run like hell.
 
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
bluebyrd35 said:
HuhII In Canada very few females are killed by guns in Canada. Here there is generally a chance most women survive an argument because the means of instantly settling an argument once and for all was unavailable. Here women are generally beaten, stabbed or choked to death and they often survive the first attack. After that, if they are smart they report the attack then run like hell.
Click to expand...

So over 35 years of Canadian data, you can't find just 1 case where this helped save a life.
 
C

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
JamesBondo said:
So over 35 years of Canadian data, you can't find just 1 case where this helped save a life.
Click to expand...

... and if you arm the whole populace ... show us how many women's lives have been saved in the USA alongside how may women's life's have been taken by firearms.
 
H

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
how many crimes are committed without having to bring the gun out? The point of all the thugs being armed is that everyone knows they are armed. They don't have to bring it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom