Danforth shooting

[Brian P]

Sketchy places aside, one of the differences between the USA, and other places in the world where people have guns, is that most of the rest of the world sets boundaries on who can have them, how they can store or transport them, etc., and the USA doesn't appear to have any effective controls (and the NRA vehemently opposes any attempt to implement them). It's pointless for Chicago to implement city-wide gun control when people can simply drive to the next town and get what they want. (It's equally pointless for Toronto to attempt anything similar.)

Switzerland has high gun ownership. It also has strong background checks, and mandatory registration, and strong controls on storage and transport. Reading material: https://www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-of-gun-deaths-2018-2

 

[Riceburner]

Big difference between Chicago implementing a ban and Toronto.

That said, it won't make much of a difference in the illegal guns.

 

[jc100]

Amazing that sketchy places with guns don`t make you nervous . But law abiding people do . I figured it would be the other way around . I`m not even sure Americans can carry in Israel . I thought they had pretty strict gun laws .

Yes they can. There’s a lot of group leaders for tours that bring young people to Israel to show them around. Many of them religious. The leaders all seemed armed and ridiculously young. By the way, every single mass murderer in history was law abiding just before they killed. In the sketchy places I was in I wasn’t a threat or a target as I wasn’t a gang member. In Israel the young kids with uzis gave off a bad vibe.

 

[jc100]

Sketchy places aside, one of the differences between the USA, and other places in the world where people have guns, is that most of the rest of the world sets boundaries on who can have them, how they can store or transport them, etc., and the USA doesn't appear to have any effective controls (and the NRA vehemently opposes any attempt to implement them). It's pointless for Chicago to implement city-wide gun control when people can simply drive to the next town and get what they want. (It's equally pointless for Toronto to attempt anything similar.)

Switzerland has high gun ownership. It also has strong background checks, and mandatory registration, and strong controls on storage and transport. Reading material: https://www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-of-gun-deaths-2018-2

Switzerland also has compulsory military service too, hence discipline and training.

 

[J_F]

Switzerland doesn't have a vast amount of idiots
Canada doesn't (yet) but it's getting there
Can't do gun control?
How about we try American culture control

 

[pfbmgd]

Yes they can. There’s a lot of group leaders for tours that bring young people to Israel to show them around. Many of them religious. The leaders all seemed armed and ridiculously young. By the way, every single mass murderer in history was law abiding just before they killed. In the sketchy places I was in I wasn’t a threat or a target as I wasn’t a gang member. In Israel the young kids with uzis gave off a bad vibe.

So now it wasn`t the Americans with guns . Young kids checked out by the authorities don`t worry me . Sketchy places do when people have guns .

 

[jc100]

So now it wasn`t the Americans with guns . Young kids checked out by the authorities don`t worry me . Sketchy places do when people have guns .

Most of the group leaders were American that I saw and there were plenty of them, plenty of American settlers too (some Russian etc but mainly yanks).

 

[Roadghost]

 

[Genesis]

We need competent management to oversee a system so that responsible, mature and law abiding citizens have an avenue to protect themselves should they choose. Removing the choice almost completely for the average person is a sloppy way of addressing the issue and leaves the people defenseless.

No different than the current prison system where non violent offenders who are not spending life are thrown into a cement cell with a murderer or dangerous offender (crime school) then released back into society.

It's a brain dead way to deal with the problem. Can't educate or better the society? Just remove the right to protect themselves (...from the good guys?)

Have an incompetent rehabilitation system that fools the press to no end? Just put em behind bars and toss the key away for awhile until it's time to release em. That should solve the problem.

The height of incompetence. And that's the problem. The people in these positions of power that make decisions are often unqualified by life standards. They read about certain topics in books and then try to govern.

No different than a person who reads a book on how to ride a motorcycle telling you, a motorcycle rider, about how to ride one. Not to say you couldn't learn anything at all but there really is no comparison.

Sent from my SM-G955W using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app

 

[Genesis]

Big difference between Chicago implementing a ban and Toronto.

That said, it won't make much of a difference in the illegal guns.

I agree. Our current problem is with the illegal ones. I dont see how disarming citizens further will do anything about the illegal guns and criminals unless there is the suggestion that criminals would have a harder time getting access to them.

Technically yes there is a difference between being able to grab one off the table of your grandad vs making a shady call and driving out in the night to get one but the latter is already the case and still we are still having gun issues.

That's why this matrix is funny to me. People are better off when they don't know. Prefer to live in a dreamworld where they feel better. If they knew how many people pass them in a month with guns, (side by side in a car/ mall, etc) would they still feel safe without having protection?? Yet if they KNOW citizens possess one, they begin to tremble.

Interesting.

Sent from my SM-G955W using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app

 

[Riceburner]

That's the American way....and that's not working. We are in a better position currently...overall.

 

[backmarkerducati]

In the past "illegal street gun" = Gun Imported from the USA. At least at a very high percentage. In this context taking every legal gun away from all armed Canadians does not stop the importation directly to the street.

The stats they (the powers that be) are tossing around now is a high percentage (I have heard numbers approaching half) were LEGALLY purchased guns in Canada that have found their way to the streets. So on the surface less legal hand guns means less guns making the transition to the street. Just as a knee jerk reaction... but that all depends on who, what, why, when and where--and how...

Some of these guns are "stolen" from the legal owner. In these cases if the gun was NOT reported stolen we should hold the last legal owner responsible (criminally). If it was reported, we need to fully investigate how, where, etc. it was stored and if the previous legal owner fell short of the storage laws charge them with an offence in accordance, if it was really bad maybe even revoke their license.

Now they are also saying people are buying guns legally to transition them to the street as a money making proposition. Again, why not track them back and start looking at volumes, etc. May be hard to do (track back) as people damage the barrel to change ballistics and try their best to remove serial numbers etc. BUT... Mr. X you legally purchased 10 Glock 17 last year, where are they now. Target high volume buyers, and let them know in advance that this will be done... Don't have them and have no paper trail of the sale, we have a problem... Should not be any raid etc. Inform them that they need to produce in the next couple of weeks at their convenience as a first step, schedule an appointment. No need for jackboot action here, just making sure you are not a supplier to the street.

Remember we are talking about restricted registered weapons being used on the streets here, NOT long guns. Not a single ban of anything above today's rules. Minor changes to enforcement of existing laws (storage). Some legit police work (just a little more effort here) on seized street weapons back to the source. Some minor new laws that owners of registered restricted weapons (buying in volume) will have to have proper paper work on where those weapons are.

Then we will mostly be back to just imported from the USA....

 

[Brian P]

^ I've stated before that guns (every single one of them) ought to be serialized and registered, with an ownership-transfer process akin to that used for motor vehicles, with the current person holding ownership being held responsible for anything that happens with it. If that means they need to use sufficiently secure storage and transport such that the gun doesn't get stolen ... great. If that means they have second thoughts about carrying it around in public without suitable security measures ... great. If that shuts down people who are buying legally and selling them to an illegal market ... great. If that also means very high penalties in place for possessing an unregistered weapon (whether fail-to-register or stolen or "manufactured") - penalties including but not limited to confiscation and destruction of same, so be it.

 

[Roadghost]

 

[Brian P]

... or kill someone unintentionally or "in the heat of the moment".

If the number of those situations outnumbers the number of situations where someone shot a potential attacker, it's a net disbenefit. I suspect that's the case, and potentially by a rather large margin.

 

[Roadghost]

... or kill someone unintentionally or "in the heat of the moment".

If the number of those situations outnumbers the number of situations where someone shot a potential attacker, it's a net disbenefit. I suspect that's the case, and potentially by a rather large margin.

We'll never know in Canada, because not enough people have been afforded the chance to defend themselves. I can't remember a case in Canada where someone has shot the wrong person thinking they were trying to kill them. However, there have been several home invasions that have ended badly for the victims. I suppose Mayor Tory couldn't think of a reason they should have a handgun either, all the while he is protected by armed guards himself. I wonder if he sees a reason for them to have guns? Perhaps because his life is more important than the lives of the rest of us.

Statistically, registered gun owners are much less likely to commit a crime than other Canadians.

 

[GreyGhost]

... or kill someone unintentionally or "in the heat of the moment".

If the number of those situations outnumbers the number of situations where someone shot a potential attacker, it's a net disbenefit. I suspect that's the case, and potentially by a rather large margin.

Even in the recent grocery store hostage situation in LA, the only fatality was a bystander killed by a police bullet. Again, this comes back around to needing continual intensive training in order to shoot safely in ugly situations. That limits the people that should be carrying firearms to SWAT/SRU as normal line police don't have the time or budget to keep up this level of training.

I'm not saying only SWAT should possess weapons, but I do feel quite strongly that everybody else shouldn't be pulling or firing weapons outside of controlled environments. Front-line cops can carry less lethal options like tasers. If the person is outside of the 15' range and an imminent threat to others, they shouldn't be blasting away anyway as the risk of collateral damage is huge.

EDIT:
In roadghosts home invasion scenario, I personally wouldn't want to do it as the chance of penetrating a wall or making a mental error and hitting a family member is quite high but I don't think the public should be making that decision for each individual.

 

[jc100]

We'll never know in Canada, because not enough people have been afforded the chance to defend themselves. I can't remember a case in Canada where someone has shot the wrong person thinking they were trying to kill them. However, there have been several home invasions that have ended badly for the victims. I suppose Mayor Tory couldn't think of a reason they should have a handgun either, all the while he is protected by armed guards himself. I wonder if he sees a reason for them to have guns? Perhaps because his life is more important than the lives of the rest of us.

Statistically, registered gun owners are much less likely to commit a crime than other Canadians.

You sound like you want to move to the US? I like it here because it’s safe and part of why it’s safe is because it’s not the US with idiotic gun laws and paranoid citizens with a saviour complex and itchy trigger fingers.

 

[FullMotoJacket]

In roadghosts home invasion scenario, I personally wouldn't want to do it as the chance of penetrating a wall or making a mental error and hitting a family member is quite high but I don't think the public should be making that decision for each individual.

Which is why a defender style shotgun with zero choke and #6 shot is the preferred home defense firearm.

 

[Genesis]

We'll never know in Canada, because not enough people have been afforded the chance to defend themselves. I can't remember a case in Canada where someone has shot the wrong person thinking they were trying to kill them. However, there have been several home invasions that have ended badly for the victims. I suppose Mayor Tory couldn't think of a reason they should have a handgun either, all the while he is protected by armed guards himself. I wonder if he sees a reason for them to have guns? Perhaps because his life is more important than the lives of the rest of us.

Statistically, registered gun owners are much less likely to commit a crime than other Canadians.

Well said and agreed. Many don't realize that the mouth pieces chattering bull to people on the centre stage are gladly under protection by guns, even in their personal lives, whether that be in their homes, etc.

They value themselves as individuals and teach us to look at ourselves as a number. That's why when a few of us eats dirt (dies), the gravity of the situation and reaction is in no way as consequential as when one of them goes. A matter of importance, no doubt.

The more important and valued you are, expect gun possession or presence for protection. But...if you're just another average joe, well why bother. It's just a common life after all. Another number on a sheet.

P.S
I'm aware that high profile individuals need more protection because they get more exposure to public but my opinion is not limited to them. I believe that in general, people who have a higher expression of success or value for themselves show much more Interest in protecting themselves.

Sent from my SM-G955W using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app