Gun Control is Completely Useless.

[pgs]

I do dispute them.

Isn't that obvious?

So the gun problem isn’t gang related ?

 

[harrylee]

So the gun problem isn’t gang related ?

Of course not. Every liberal will tell you that once you come into possession of a gun, you become a raving murderous lunatic. It's just like cocaine. Maybe it's the gun powder? Gets up your nose and turns ya insane.

 

[Curious Cdn]

Of course not. Every liberal will tell you that once you come into possession of a gun, you become a raving murderous lunatic. It's just like cocaine. Maybe it's the gun powder? Gets up your nose and turns ya insane.

Some of the really stupid ones do.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Of course not. Every liberal will tell you that once you come into possession of a gun, you become a raving murderous lunatic. It's just like cocaine. Maybe it's the gun powder? Gets up your nose and turns ya insane.

Well, yeah. I do, anyhow. Must be that merciless Indian Savage thing.

 

[Curious Cdn]

Well, yeah. I do, anyhow. Must be that merciless Indian Savage thing.

Do you ummmm .....





.... ride bare back?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Do you ummmm .....
.... ride bare back?

PM me, you smoking-hot stud, you!

If you got the chaps, I got the spurs!

Or, I can lend you chaps. . .

 

[spilledthebeer]

Well, you can pretty well figure one thing for sure...……….It's very doubtful that any of his "buddies" are any brighter than he is or they'd be very embarrassed in his company!

Here is a "dumb hunter" riddle for you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


If you were part of a group of 3 women on horseback............................


riding through dense forest in an ISOLATED AREA KNOWN TO BE WELL USED BY HUNTERS...............................


AND ITS THE MIDDLE OF HUNTING SEASON....................................



and you heard a guy target shooting in the distance................................


WOULD YOU FEEL ENTITLED to ride where you please...............................


including riding straight up to the target shooter..............................


simply BECAUSE YOUR TRAIL which is one of several YOU COULD CHOOSE - leads that way.................................



even though neither riders NOR target shooter can see the other in the dense woods .............................


and slow moving horses on a sandy trail DO NOT MAKE ENOUGH NOISE..........................


to ALERT THE TARGET SHOOTER to their presence??????????????????????


And if the riders end up ALARMED at being in close proximity to some shots................................


AND ASSUME THE SHOTS WERE DIRECTED AT THEM - with the MISTAKEN ASSUMPTION THEY ARE DEER.......................



EVEN THOUGH THE SHOTS WERE directed only at the targets......................


then WHO is to blame for the riders discomfort?????????????????????????


I suggest THIS KIND OF ENCOUNTER is the root of many "dumb hunter" stories!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have heard many women sneer at hunters who are alleged to blaze away without identifying targets..............................


and the women laugh at what they consider the "BAD AIM" of the target shooter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Without considering that their own arrogance and entitlement put themselves in danger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[spilledthebeer]

Well, yeah. I do, anyhow. Must be that merciless Indian Savage thing.

Maybe its the gravy induced madness of LIE-berals????????????????????????


After all - the LIE-beral party is an EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER.............................


and GRAVY MAKES THEM ALL INSANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JLM]

Here is a "dumb hunter" riddle for you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


If you were part of a group of 3 women on horseback............................


riding through dense forest in an ISOLATED AREA KNOWN TO BE WELL USED BY HUNTERS...............................


AND ITS THE MIDDLE OF HUNTING SEASON....................................



and you heard a guy target shooting in the distance................................


WOULD YOU FEEL ENTITLED to ride where you please...............................


including riding straight up to the target shooter..............................


simply BECAUSE YOUR TRAIL which is one of several YOU COULD CHOOSE - leads that way.................................



even though neither riders NOR target shooter can see the other in the dense woods .............................


and slow moving horses on a sandy trail DO NOT MAKE ENOUGH NOISE..........................


to ALERT THE TARGET SHOOTER to their presence??????????????????????


And if the riders end up ALARMED at being in close proximity to some shots................................


AND ASSUME THE SHOTS WERE DIRECTED AT THEM - with the MISTAKEN ASSUMPTION THEY ARE DEER.......................



EVEN THOUGH THE SHOTS WERE directed only at the targets......................


then WHO is to blame for the riders discomfort?????????????????????????


I suggest THIS KIND OF ENCOUNTER is the root of many "dumb hunter" stories!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have heard many women sneer at hunters who are alleged to blaze away without identifying targets..............................


and the women laugh at what they consider the "BAD AIM" of the target shooter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Without considering that their own arrogance and entitlement put themselves in danger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well it's one of those situations where the perception of the danger is grossly out of proportion. Your chances of being killed or severely harmed by a 'stray' bullet in dense bush is actually less than about one in a million. Would I feel comfortable being in that situation? NO!

 

[spilledthebeer]

Well it's one of those situations where the perception of the danger is grossly out of proportion. Your chances of being killed or severely harmed by a 'stray' bullet in dense bush is actually less than about one in a million. Would I feel comfortable being in that situation? NO!

But AS I NOTED.........................


IT DOES NOT STOP stupid horse women from RAGING AT "hunters".................................


who are minding their own business..............................


AND HAVE LOUDLY AND REPEATEDLY ANNOUNCED THEIR PRESENCE IN THE AREA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Hunting season is BRIEF................................


but horse women want HUNTING PERMANENTLY BANNED in many rural areas..........................


simply for THEIR CONVENIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Colpy]

New Zealand Police Beg Criminals to ​

Hand in Their Guns​

In their effort to take guns out of the hands of gangs and organized crime organizations, New Zealand police have implemented a unique new program to ensure compliance with the nation’s latest gun ban. They’re saying, “Please.”


Gang and organized crime leaders have shown little interest in handing in their guns which, oddly, perplexes Police Commissioner Mike Bush.


“I think it’s fair to say they have a different approach than law-abiding members of the public. They’re very reluctant to be part of this [amnesty],” he said.


Apparently not.


With less than two months until the amnesty’s deadline, New Zealand gun owners are similarly “reluctant” to hand over their legally-purchased property to the state.


Compliance with New Zealand’s gun-back scheme sits at just 18 percent. This puts them on pace for a 30 percent compliance rate when the amnesty period ends in December, something Newsweek laughably frames as “a modest but tangible success for policymakers.”http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001ukeo...RWrG_UEVJBd-Y6E9GJ02kKyLl5rHOGKqYfNK9sUtahg==


This is worse than even the lowest estimate of Australia’s buyback in the late 1990s where, according to a comprehensive study by criminologists Peter Reuter and Jenny Mouzos, compliance ranged from 40 – 80 percent, depending on whose estimate of the number of guns you used.[ii]


When 70 percent of New Zealand’s licensed firearm owners refuse to comply with the law, how can you call it anything other than a colossal failure?


Speaking before the Justice Select Committee, Deputy Commissioner Mike Clement insisted they were making progress with the nation’s gangs and organized crime syndicates. He told the committee police had identified 115 key individuals in 37 gangs in New Zealand and that police met with 53 of these crime leaders “to discuss” surrendering their illegal guns.


“We know it’s difficult for people to hand in their firearms but we want to make it as easy and safe and, uh, the best experience it can possibly be,” Police Commissioner Mike Bush reiterated.


In New Zealand, neither career criminals nor licensed firearm owners are interested in this “experience.”


The former have no interest in complying because these criminals regularly use their guns to defend their illegal enterprises.


The latter have no interest because they have committed no crime, so why should they surrender their legally-owned and legally-acquired property?


It’s a question for which no politician has a legitimate answer – not in New Zealand, not in Australia before it, and not in Canada today.




Sources:


http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001ukeo...RWrG_UEVJBd-Y6E9GJ02kKyLl5rHOGKqYfNK9sUtahg== https://www.newsweek.com/new-zealand-buyback-program-guns-1469405
[ii] http://faculty.publicpolicy.umd.edu/sites/default/files/reuter/files/gun%20chapter.pdf – page 131

 

[taxslave]

So the gun problem isn’t gang related ?

Of course not. The real problem is those city oys shooting up beer cans before the idiot can cash them in.

 

[Hoid]

New Zealand Police Beg Criminals to ​

Hand in Their Guns​

In their effort to take guns out of the hands of gangs and organized crime organizations, New Zealand police have implemented a unique new program to ensure compliance with the nation’s latest gun ban. They’re saying, “Please.”


Gang and organized crime leaders have shown little interest in handing in their guns which, oddly, perplexes Police Commissioner Mike Bush.


“I think it’s fair to say they have a different approach than law-abiding members of the public. They’re very reluctant to be part of this [amnesty],” he said.


Apparently not.


With less than two months until the amnesty’s deadline, New Zealand gun owners are similarly “reluctant” to hand over their legally-purchased property to the state.


Compliance with New Zealand’s gun-back scheme sits at just 18 percent. This puts them on pace for a 30 percent compliance rate when the amnesty period ends in December, something Newsweek laughably frames as “a modest but tangible success for policymakers.”http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001ukeo...RWrG_UEVJBd-Y6E9GJ02kKyLl5rHOGKqYfNK9sUtahg==


This is worse than even the lowest estimate of Australia’s buyback in the late 1990s where, according to a comprehensive study by criminologists Peter Reuter and Jenny Mouzos, compliance ranged from 40 – 80 percent, depending on whose estimate of the number of guns you used.[ii]


When 70 percent of New Zealand’s licensed firearm owners refuse to comply with the law, how can you call it anything other than a colossal failure?


Speaking before the Justice Select Committee, Deputy Commissioner Mike Clement insisted they were making progress with the nation’s gangs and organized crime syndicates. He told the committee police had identified 115 key individuals in 37 gangs in New Zealand and that police met with 53 of these crime leaders “to discuss” surrendering their illegal guns.


“We know it’s difficult for people to hand in their firearms but we want to make it as easy and safe and, uh, the best experience it can possibly be,” Police Commissioner Mike Bush reiterated.


In New Zealand, neither career criminals nor licensed firearm owners are interested in this “experience.”


The former have no interest in complying because these criminals regularly use their guns to defend their illegal enterprises.


The latter have no interest because they have committed no crime, so why should they surrender their legally-owned and legally-acquired property?


It’s a question for which no politician has a legitimate answer – not in New Zealand, not in Australia before it, and not in Canada today.




Sources:


http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001ukeo...RWrG_UEVJBd-Y6E9GJ02kKyLl5rHOGKqYfNK9sUtahg== https://www.newsweek.com/new-zealand-buyback-program-guns-1469405
[ii] http://faculty.publicpolicy.umd.edu/sites/default/files/reuter/files/gun%20chapter.pdf – page 131

gun bans work

 

[JLM]

gun bans work

Yes they do...……………………………..but on the wrong people!

 

[JamesBondo]

gun bans work

I agree that you should be banned from owning one and the police should go through great efforts to ensure you don't get one.


Too bad that you are not the violent criminal, hoid.

 

[Danbones]

Do you ummmm .....
.... ride bare back?

Get a room.


Curious...?

WE didn't realize you types looked up to Biden for instruction... we thought he was a meme.

 

[Twin_Moose]

Guns and white supremacists don’t mix

Pam Palmater is a Mi’kmaw citizen and member of Eel River Bar First Nation. She has been a practising lawyer for 20 years and currently holds the chair in Indigenous governance at Ryerson University.
When Justin Trudeau was first elected as Liberal Prime Minister, he promised a new Canada—one based on a commitment to feminism and Indigenous rights. He also promised to address the loopholes in the gun laws created by the former Conservative government under Stephen Harper. Bill C-71, which was intended to strengthen rules around access to firearms especially for those with a history of violence, provided some improvements but fell short of what most Canadians wanted. Canadians want to feel safe. That cannot happen if hate groups are allowed to buy hand guns and assault weapons.
The Government’s defence of Bill C-71 was framed almost entirely with verbiage like “gangs and guns” and “gender neutral,” ignoring the bulk of the statistical evidence about gun violence in Canada. Women in Canada represent a higher proportion of victims of firearms violence than their male perpetrators. It is not “gender neutral” to worry more about the interests of the primarily male gun lobby and concerns of rural men than the voices of female victims. Further, the voices of Indigenous women were excluded despite the ongoing genocide of murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls.
The rise of white nationalism has happened so quickly in Canada that governments do not have a handle on the serious threat it poses to public safety and national security. The white nationalist movement (often referred to as the populist movement), has seen far-right Conservatives take increasingly more radical positions that are often racist, sexist and anti-human rights, often aligning themselves with the gun lobby.
MORE: New Zealand is not showing Canada the way on gun control
Through his own words and actions, U.S. President Donald Trump has further exacerbated the situation by creating a space for those consumed with hatred to share and act on their views more openly. Perhaps emboldened by Trump, the friends, colleagues and affiliates of white nationalists are now being elected as political leaders, hired within universities, and in the background agitating as pro-pipeliners, pro-choice, anti-immigration, anti-Indigenous and pro-gun.
The gun lobby acts as though there is a right to bear arms in Canada, but this is not the United States. The Supreme Court of Canada held—via the historic R v. Hasselwander case—that no such right exists. In fact, the only people with constitutionally-protected rights to bear arms are First Nations whose treaties and Aboriginal rights guarantee them the right to hunt and own rifles. But no one hunts with semi-automatic military weapons. So this has never been about hunting.
While not all gun owners have links to extremists, Canada needs to keep pace with the threats before the threats overtake Canada. Firearms are often used in hate crimes against racialized and other identifiable groups. The murders of six and injury of 19 Muslims at the Islamic Cultural Centre of Quebec City, is only one example of what happens when those who hate have easy access to guns. We can never forget that it was the mass shooting of 14 women at École Polytechnique in Montreal that pushed the conversation of gun control back onto the agenda.
The one target common to all right-wing extremist groups in Canada are “Aboriginal peoples” and the killing of Leo Lachance is just one example. Leo Lachance, a Cree man from Whitefish reserve, was shot and killed by a white supremacist, Carney Nerland, in Prince Albert in 1991. Nerland was a member of the Ku Klux Klan and leader of his local Aryan Nation group who got off with a plea bargain, claiming a misfire. Allowing hate groups, who condone lethal violence, to arm themselves with handguns and military-style assaults rifles, represents a significant public safety threat.
One need only look at the shooting death of unarmed Indigenous youth, Colten Boushie or the recent shooting of another Native youth, Kristian Ayoungman as prime examples of why there needs to be stricter gun control, especially on the Prairies. Both of these shootings are reported to involve elements of anti-First Nation racism, something that has been prevalent on the Prairies for decades. It wasn’t that long ago that the Neil Stonechild Inquiry brought the practice of “starlight tours” to the forefront. This is the practice by police of detaining a Native man, driving him out of town and abandoning him there. Racism is lethal for Indigenous peoples, and easy access to guns by those who hold racist views increase the risk.
To treat gun control as sex-neutral or race-neutral further perpetuates the risk to women and Indigenous peoples. Canada should be engaging with First Nations and Indigenous women’s group to address the threat of gun violence by both white nationalist hate groups and individuals with extreme right-wing, racist views.

FN with guns good, white man with guns bad. just WOW

 

[Hoid]

how could anyone read that and get "FN with guns good, white man with guns bad." ?

just wow.

 

[Twin_Moose]

how could anyone read that and get "FN with guns good, white man with guns bad." ?
just wow.

You don't even read links when it is pasted in the thread wow

In fact, the only people with constitutionally-protected rights to bear arms are First Nations whose treaties and Aboriginal rights guarantee them the right to hunt and own rifles.

 

[Hoid]

You don't even read links when it is pasted in the thread wow

Quote:
In fact, the only people with constitutionally-protected rights to bear arms are First Nations whose treaties and Aboriginal rights guarantee them the right to hunt and own rifles.

that isn't a statement of good or bad it is a summary of the law