Well, on Mars your best bet is to run to Hillary Clinton's Child Sex Slave Camp. They'll protect you, and they probably won't make you a sex slave due to your age.
Gun Control is Completely Useless.
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
Ottawa’s proposed firearm ban is an American solution to a Canadian problem
Robyn Urback
Updated January 7, 2020
When the Liberals unveiled their updated plan to tackle gun violence during last year’s federal election campaign, they made specific mention of one firearm in particular: the AR-15. It was the only firearm identified by name when the Liberals would recite their promise to ban military-style assault rifles: “Including the AR-15,” they repeated, just in case listeners didn’t quite appreciate the stakes the party was trying to convey.
To Americans, the AR-15 is tremendously evocative. “America’s Rifle,” as it is dubbed by the NRA, was the weapon of choice for many of the bloodiest gun massacres in recent U.S. history, including the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in 2018, the Las Vegas shooting in 2017 and the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.
But the AR-15 has no particular significance in a Canadian context, other than as a reflection of the extent to which we absorb American cultural issues. It was not the firearm used by Marc Lépine during the École Polytechnique shooting in 1989 (he used the Mini-14 semi-automatic) nor by Alexandre Bissonnette during the Quebec mosque shooting in 2017 (VZ58 semi-automatic and a handgun), nor by Justin Bourque during the 2014 Moncton shooting (M305 semi-automatic).
Statistically speaking, Canada’s gun crime issue is overwhelmingly a handgun crime issue, and where semi-automatic weapons are involved, the AR-15 doesn’t stand out. It’s an American symbol that really doesn’t mean much in the context of an nonequivalent Canadian problem.
That said, Canada does have its own pressing gun violence concerns. Last year, Toronto saw a record high of 490 shootings, and Regina police reported a 15-per-cent increase in violent incidents involving a gun between January and November compared to the same period the previous year. In Winnipeg, crimes involving firearms increased 66 per cent between 2014 and 2018 and rates of gun violence nationally have been trending upward since 2013.
But unlike the United States, Canada’s problem is less a culture of ubiquitous legal gun ownership than it is our proximity to a country with a culture of ubiquitous legal gun ownership, in both rural and urban communities. To our disservice, we do not have comprehensive data on the sourcing of the guns used in Canadian crimes, but the police data we do have (on firearms that can be tracked at all) suggest a good proportion do not originate in Canada.
Indeed, a 2018 report from Toronto Police’s Firearm Enforcement Unit noted that 70 per cent of guns used in crimes in the city came from the U.S., and Police Chief Mark Saunders recently pegged the proportion even higher, at 82 per cent. Police in Winnipeg, meanwhile, point to the issue of homemade guns as a growing concern, citing it as a major contributor to the city’s spike in violent crime.
Yet forthcoming federal measures to address gun violence, including a patchwork of municipal handgun bans and new list of restricted weapons, will address virtually none of this. Limited handgun bans will only matter to the extent that invisible boundaries control the flow of people and goods, and only to the degree that legal handguns are used in firearm-related offences, anyway.
Prohibitions on certain semi-automatic weapons might make it tougher for the next Marc Lépine to legally get his hands on a firearm that can kill or maim dozens in a matter of minutes, and on its own, that might be a worthy endeavour. But the gun violence problem that afflicts Canada daily is not one of mass shootings, and we’d be remiss to believe a ban on certain semi-automatic weapons – “including the AR-15” – will meaningfully temper the spate of gun violence afflicting Canadian cities and towns.
Applying tougher restrictions on legal gun owners is the easy part. The government already did that to some degree in 2018 when it introduced Bill C-71, which tweaked classification, record-keeping and background check regulations involving firearms. That, combined with a ban on “military style assault rifles” and scattered municipal handgun prohibitions, would be meaningful steps to tackle the gun crisis in a country like the U.S. But in Canada, material solutions are less straightforward.
Thankfully, we don’t suffer from daily mass shootings in this country, meaning the issues of gun violence plaguing Canada are more complex. Our problems with smuggled, homemade and straw-purchased firearms won’t be solved by banning the AR-15, nor will the issues that breed gun violence, including poverty, gang violence and addiction. The danger of looking at Canada’s gun crisis through an American lens is in mistaking grand gestures for impactful policy. Canada’s gun crime problem requires a Canada-specific solution.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-ottawas-proposed-firearm-ban-is-an-american-solution-to-a-canadian/
Robyn Urback
Updated January 7, 2020
When the Liberals unveiled their updated plan to tackle gun violence during last year’s federal election campaign, they made specific mention of one firearm in particular: the AR-15. It was the only firearm identified by name when the Liberals would recite their promise to ban military-style assault rifles: “Including the AR-15,” they repeated, just in case listeners didn’t quite appreciate the stakes the party was trying to convey.
To Americans, the AR-15 is tremendously evocative. “America’s Rifle,” as it is dubbed by the NRA, was the weapon of choice for many of the bloodiest gun massacres in recent U.S. history, including the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in 2018, the Las Vegas shooting in 2017 and the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.
But the AR-15 has no particular significance in a Canadian context, other than as a reflection of the extent to which we absorb American cultural issues. It was not the firearm used by Marc Lépine during the École Polytechnique shooting in 1989 (he used the Mini-14 semi-automatic) nor by Alexandre Bissonnette during the Quebec mosque shooting in 2017 (VZ58 semi-automatic and a handgun), nor by Justin Bourque during the 2014 Moncton shooting (M305 semi-automatic).
Statistically speaking, Canada’s gun crime issue is overwhelmingly a handgun crime issue, and where semi-automatic weapons are involved, the AR-15 doesn’t stand out. It’s an American symbol that really doesn’t mean much in the context of an nonequivalent Canadian problem.
That said, Canada does have its own pressing gun violence concerns. Last year, Toronto saw a record high of 490 shootings, and Regina police reported a 15-per-cent increase in violent incidents involving a gun between January and November compared to the same period the previous year. In Winnipeg, crimes involving firearms increased 66 per cent between 2014 and 2018 and rates of gun violence nationally have been trending upward since 2013.
But unlike the United States, Canada’s problem is less a culture of ubiquitous legal gun ownership than it is our proximity to a country with a culture of ubiquitous legal gun ownership, in both rural and urban communities. To our disservice, we do not have comprehensive data on the sourcing of the guns used in Canadian crimes, but the police data we do have (on firearms that can be tracked at all) suggest a good proportion do not originate in Canada.
Indeed, a 2018 report from Toronto Police’s Firearm Enforcement Unit noted that 70 per cent of guns used in crimes in the city came from the U.S., and Police Chief Mark Saunders recently pegged the proportion even higher, at 82 per cent. Police in Winnipeg, meanwhile, point to the issue of homemade guns as a growing concern, citing it as a major contributor to the city’s spike in violent crime.
Yet forthcoming federal measures to address gun violence, including a patchwork of municipal handgun bans and new list of restricted weapons, will address virtually none of this. Limited handgun bans will only matter to the extent that invisible boundaries control the flow of people and goods, and only to the degree that legal handguns are used in firearm-related offences, anyway.
Prohibitions on certain semi-automatic weapons might make it tougher for the next Marc Lépine to legally get his hands on a firearm that can kill or maim dozens in a matter of minutes, and on its own, that might be a worthy endeavour. But the gun violence problem that afflicts Canada daily is not one of mass shootings, and we’d be remiss to believe a ban on certain semi-automatic weapons – “including the AR-15” – will meaningfully temper the spate of gun violence afflicting Canadian cities and towns.
Applying tougher restrictions on legal gun owners is the easy part. The government already did that to some degree in 2018 when it introduced Bill C-71, which tweaked classification, record-keeping and background check regulations involving firearms. That, combined with a ban on “military style assault rifles” and scattered municipal handgun prohibitions, would be meaningful steps to tackle the gun crisis in a country like the U.S. But in Canada, material solutions are less straightforward.
Thankfully, we don’t suffer from daily mass shootings in this country, meaning the issues of gun violence plaguing Canada are more complex. Our problems with smuggled, homemade and straw-purchased firearms won’t be solved by banning the AR-15, nor will the issues that breed gun violence, including poverty, gang violence and addiction. The danger of looking at Canada’s gun crisis through an American lens is in mistaking grand gestures for impactful policy. Canada’s gun crime problem requires a Canada-specific solution.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-ottawas-proposed-firearm-ban-is-an-american-solution-to-a-canadian/
Ottawa’s proposed firearm ban is an American solution to a Canadian problem
Robyn Urback
Published 4 hours ago Updated January 7, 2020
5 Comments
% buffered
00:00
When the Liberals unveiled their updated plan to tackle gun violence during last year’s federal election campaign, they made specific mention of one firearm in particular: the AR-15
I don't think Canada has a "gun problem" per se, just problems with idiots and whackos!
LIE-beral gun law MAKES NO DISTINCTION between a fisherman...........................
or a camper...................................
or a prospector........................................
or an armed native group blockading a road..................
or a big city gang banger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LIE-berls are SO DESPERATE FOR VOTES that they are willing to SUCK UP TO PETA animal rights loons!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LIE-berals want guns GONE so people will have NO ABILITY to harm ANIMALS FOR ANY REASON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Consider::::::::::
Here is an article illustrating LIE-beral foolishness with regard to both animal and human welfare. And the article illustrates how lucky we are that LIE-berals have dropped their move towards electoral reform! With some comments of my own in brackets):
Ont. senior faces investigation after fatally shooting black bear bothering young mom
By Jim Moodie, The Sudbury Star. First posted: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 08:20 PM EDT | Updated: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 08:31 PM EDT
SUDBURY, Ont. - A 76-year-old Sudbury woman is under investigation after shooting dead a black bear that was pestering a young mom in her area.
After a summer filled with nuisance bears in Ontario's north, Jessica Stoner, a new mom with a seven-week-old baby, approached elderly neighbours Ludger Leblanc and Bertha Saikkonen for help in dealing with a pair of brazen bruins in her yard last week.
"They're eating 20 feet off my back door, all night and all day," says Stoner. "I'm at home with a newborn, because my husband works out of town, and what really concerns me is that these bears have no fear."
People in the area have been setting off bear-bangers and firing shotgun blasts to spook the animals on a near-nightly basis, she says, but they don't seem to spook. A call to the ministry of natural resources didn't help since they said the bears were more interested in eating the acorns in her yard.
(In other words, the bears were not lured by carelessly stored garbage- but were instead simply feeding on a natural food source that happened to be dangerously close to human habitation. PETA-people for the ethical treatment of animals consider that animals have as much right as we do and thus a human interfering with a bear eating acorns in your back yard is a violation of BEAR RIGHTS! And if LIE-beral electoral reform had gone through it would have allowed PETA candidates to run and possibly to become members of parliament- with the power to push their animal-centric views on us with LIE-beral aid! LIE-berals will okay any deal that allows them to cling to power at any price!)
(PETA also considers that eating meat is a crime and in concert with extreme environmental groups who would also seek seats in parliament under electoral reform, they would reduce us to living in wigwams and eating our daily meal of Dandelion greens raw because trees and wood are sacred and not for burning nor for building! Electoral reform would have opened the parliamentary doors to all manner of crazy pressure groups like these!)
She didn't think the situation warranted a call to 911, but after waking once again to a yard full of bears, she "I thought, enough is enough, and went over to Bertha's."
Saikkonen says her 82-year-old husband went out first, with a 30-aught-six rifle, and fired a warning shot to scare off the bears. One of the bears took off, but the other wouldn't leave, she says.
"When I got there Ludger handed me the gun," says Saikkonen, who is 76. "I tried the first time and missed, but with the second shot I got him down."
It wasn't Saikkonen's first shot — she is an Anishinabe woman — her maiden name is Debassige — who has done a fair amount of hunting over the years. But it might be her last.
The noise prompted another resident to call Greater Sudbury Police, says Saikkonen, and soon enough "a whole bunch of cruisers were out here."
She and her husband were charged with careless use of a firearm and "they took all our guns away," she says. The couple feels the police reaction was harsh. "They're treating us like criminals," says Leblanc. We found out later in the week that eight other bears have been shot in this area, and we're the only ones who have been charged.
(What it comes down to is they were the only ones who got caught red handed so to speak! Those who shoot and quickly dispose of the evidence get away free!)
The only reason she shot the bear, she says, is because Stoner "was terrified," she says. "She was having nightmares because she's got this new baby and her husband is away."
She and Leblanc were also under the impression that Stoner and her husband had "got permission from the MNR to shoot the bear," she says.
And landowners do have "the legal right to kill a bear in defence of property," according Jolanta Kowalski, spokesperson with the ministry of natural resources, but it must be done "humanely and safely in accordance with local bylaws that cover the discharge of firearms."
(A shot in the head at close range from a high powered rifle sounds quick to me!)
The MNRF strongly recommends "only an experienced hunter or trapper dispatch a bear," and reminds residents "to immediately report any bears that are killed in defense of property to your local ministry office in person or by telephone."
(OH right! Nobody wants to deal with that paperwork and the probable criminal charges as govt assumes we are at fault unless we prove otherwise, so its best to shoot and quickly bury the evidence!)
Failure to report a shooting is a violation of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, Kowalski notes.
(A violation that will now happen with increasing frequency thanks to LIE-beral efforts to suck up to environmentalists and animal rights nuts- at any price!)
Despite their trouble, Stoner says she's grateful for the couple's help, as "it's scary when you start getting outnumbered by bears." Bears have been conspicuous in many areas of Greater Sudbury lately, with 192 sightings posted at the city's online Report-A-Bear map over the Labour Day weekend, but it's a much calmer season than last year when many animals were trapped or killed.
No bears have been relocated or taken to a sanctuary this year by the MNRF, according to Kowlaski, while province-wide the ministry has trapped "just over 20 bears in 2016, including some bear cubs that were then moved to a wildlife rehabilitation centre."
Calls to the Bear Wise reporting line, meanwhile, have dropped by more than half compared to last year: In 2015, there were more than 2,000 calls to the Bear Wise hotline from the Sudbury area between April 1 and Sept. 6. This year, that number is 867 for the same time period.
At this time of year, bears are dining on fall food sources like acorns, chokecherries and apples. And while the berry crops may have suffered from drought conditions earlier in the summer, the apple crops have fared much better, says Kowalski.
For Stoner, it's not that she felt an imminent threat from the animals in her yard. But she has felt under siege, and she does fear a future incident. "It's fine when they have a food source, but what happens when that's gone?" Stoner says. "They're going to try to come inside."
(Its pretty hard to erase cooking smells from a kitchen in daily use and bears have very acute sense of smell-and they are known to enter buildings, camper vehicles and tents by following cooking odours to a possible food source- with dangerous consequences for humans in the structure!)
The ministry spokesperson says it's difficult to quantify how many bears might have been shot by landowners this year, as "not all property owners report to the MNRF that they have dispatched a bear."
Incidents of attacks have been rare. Kowalski says there was the one instance in Sudbury of a dog being fatally mauled by a bear, although MNRF assistance was not requested by police in that case.
On Labour Day weekend, two female hikers and their dogs were "involved in a bear encounter" in Mississagi Provincial Park, north of Elliot Lake, she says. MNRF staff are currently investigating that incident.
The shooting incident in Sudbury is also under investigation, says Kowalski.
Leblanc and Saikkonen may have had their guns taken away by authorities, but they were allowed to keep the bear itself, which they say was a yearling sow. By Friday Leblanc's son Joe was already busy butchering the animal and turning it into spiced sausage. "We don't waste any meat," says Saikkonen.
(The voice of experience there- if you have the experience to make good bear sausage you will also know how to kill the bear swiftly and painlessly with a quick shot thanks to regular practice! For political reasons- meaning fear of lost PETA and environmental supporter votes, LIE-berals want to paint Saikkonen as reckless and irresponsible and to shut down anybody who complains about nuisance bears with no fear of humans!)
I agre with a good bit with what you have to say son, but - less punctuation, makes reading them easier, non?
Would this be the link to the petition referred to in the podcast you posted?
https://petitions.ourcommons.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-2341
Here's an idea! How bout y'all ban the M-2 .50 caliber machine gun? I doubt if there's even one in civilian hands in Canada.
See, that way the Liberals can crow about how they've taken strong, effective measures to ban an incredibly dangerous weapon (the M-2 is no joke!) and we can all get on with it.
See, that way the Liberals can crow about how they've taken strong, effective measures to ban an incredibly dangerous weapon (the M-2 is no joke!) and we can all get on with it.
Is that the one doubling as a pizza parlour or the one selling the muffler bearings?
Exactly. This crap from the Gliberals is a populist's kneejerk reactionary pile of kamel krap.
lol Maybe I'll take a chunk of cedarwood and carve a AR-15 out of it to sell them. I wonder if they'd notice the diff.
Ottawa’s proposed firearm ban is an American solution to a Canadian problem
Robyn Urback
Updated January 7, 2020
When the Liberals unveiled their updated plan to tackle gun violence during last year’s federal election campaign, they made specific mention of one firearm in particular: the AR-15. It was the only firearm identified by name when the Liberals would recite their promise to ban military-style assault rifles: “Including the AR-15,” they repeated, just in case listeners didn’t quite appreciate the stakes the party was trying to convey.
To Americans, the AR-15 is tremendously evocative. “America’s Rifle,” as it is dubbed by the NRA, was the weapon of choice for many of the bloodiest gun massacres in recent U.S. history, including the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in 2018, the Las Vegas shooting in 2017 and the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.
But the AR-15 has no particular significance in a Canadian context, other than as a reflection of the extent to which we absorb American cultural issues. It was not the firearm used by Marc Lépine during the École Polytechnique shooting in 1989 (he used the Mini-14 semi-automatic) nor by Alexandre Bissonnette during the Quebec mosque shooting in 2017 (VZ58 semi-automatic and a handgun), nor by Justin Bourque during the 2014 Moncton shooting (M305 semi-automatic).
Statistically speaking, Canada’s gun crime issue is overwhelmingly a handgun crime issue, and where semi-automatic weapons are involved, the AR-15 doesn’t stand out. It’s an American symbol that really doesn’t mean much in the context of an nonequivalent Canadian problem.
That said, Canada does have its own pressing gun violence concerns. Last year, Toronto saw a record high of 490 shootings, and Regina police reported a 15-per-cent increase in violent incidents involving a gun between January and November compared to the same period the previous year. In Winnipeg, crimes involving firearms increased 66 per cent between 2014 and 2018 and rates of gun violence nationally have been trending upward since 2013.
But unlike the United States, Canada’s problem is less a culture of ubiquitous legal gun ownership than it is our proximity to a country with a culture of ubiquitous legal gun ownership, in both rural and urban communities. To our disservice, we do not have comprehensive data on the sourcing of the guns used in Canadian crimes, but the police data we do have (on firearms that can be tracked at all) suggest a good proportion do not originate in Canada.
Indeed, a 2018 report from Toronto Police’s Firearm Enforcement Unit noted that 70 per cent of guns used in crimes in the city came from the U.S., and Police Chief Mark Saunders recently pegged the proportion even higher, at 82 per cent. Police in Winnipeg, meanwhile, point to the issue of homemade guns as a growing concern, citing it as a major contributor to the city’s spike in violent crime.
Yet forthcoming federal measures to address gun violence, including a patchwork of municipal handgun bans and new list of restricted weapons, will address virtually none of this. Limited handgun bans will only matter to the extent that invisible boundaries control the flow of people and goods, and only to the degree that legal handguns are used in firearm-related offences, anyway.
Prohibitions on certain semi-automatic weapons might make it tougher for the next Marc Lépine to legally get his hands on a firearm that can kill or maim dozens in a matter of minutes, and on its own, that might be a worthy endeavour. But the gun violence problem that afflicts Canada daily is not one of mass shootings, and we’d be remiss to believe a ban on certain semi-automatic weapons – “including the AR-15” – will meaningfully temper the spate of gun violence afflicting Canadian cities and towns.
Applying tougher restrictions on legal gun owners is the easy part. The government already did that to some degree in 2018 when it introduced Bill C-71, which tweaked classification, record-keeping and background check regulations involving firearms. That, combined with a ban on “military style assault rifles” and scattered municipal handgun prohibitions, would be meaningful steps to tackle the gun crisis in a country like the U.S. But in Canada, material solutions are less straightforward.
Thankfully, we don’t suffer from daily mass shootings in this country, meaning the issues of gun violence plaguing Canada are more complex. Our problems with smuggled, homemade and straw-purchased firearms won’t be solved by banning the AR-15, nor will the issues that breed gun violence, including poverty, gang violence and addiction. The danger of looking at Canada’s gun crisis through an American lens is in mistaking grand gestures for impactful policy. Canada’s gun crime problem requires a Canada-specific solution.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-ottawas-proposed-firearm-ban-is-an-american-solution-to-a-canadian/
Thanks Colpy! I have to say I'm really impressed with Robyn's article.
YOU OFFER THE TYPICAL LIE-beral deceitful CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LESS DETAIL SUITS LIE-berals JUST FINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Less details means LESS SHAME for LIE-berals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Making stuff "easier to read" MAKES IT EASIER FOR LIE-berrls to DISMISS THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OR HIDE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One has only to look at the comments of that Joyless LIE-beral Monkey..........................
who believes he DESERVES the HOG BENEFITS from his previous working life...........................
and at the SAME TIME HE WANTS STRONG CAPITALIST COMPETITION....................................
so that his HOG benefits will stretch as far as possible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Socialist benefites for HOGS - and rigorous COMPETITION for all others!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or look at our resident Bluebyrdie35 who believes SHE IS ENTITLED to all the wealth that she possesses........................
and at the same time SHE DEMANDS that others be LIE-beral TAXED TO DEATH.................................
so that LIE-beral govt will have the gravy it needs to SUPPORT HER SELFISH CAUSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The biggest LIARS on this site are the ones who CLAIM "they are not affiliated with any political party"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And then they OFFER RABID AND RELENTLESS SUPPORT for certain selfish values!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The LIE-beral party and its supporters are the BIGGEST PURVEYORS of Fake News ON THE PLANET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Most significant catch from this: Tony Bernardo tells us there are 250,000 SKS rifles in Canada.
The gov't claims they are going to seize 250,000 long guns, which (they claim) is all the "assault weapons" in Canada.
That includes 250,000 SKS rifles, 75,000 AR 15 rifles, and untold numbers of Ruger Mini 14s, Norinco Model 305s, CZ 58s......all of which are very popular firearms, plus we expect several others.
They're lying again. Or they just can't do math............
Lying or stupid or both. What say you, Trudeau?