Liberal Firearm Committee Announced

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread looks just like an NRA argument. Don't regulate guns because it doesn't stop illegal gun activities. Unless Gun companies are selling guns for cash out the back door, virtually every illegal gun starts as a legal one. And as for gun owners being law abiding and no threat, they are until they are not. The Vegas shooter was the model NRA gun owner, white, wealthy, conservative, until he shot up a concert. Gun regulation in every country is is focussed on legal gun ownership because illegal ownership is already illegal! And it works, every country with significant restrictions on legal ownership has much less issues with gun violence than the US with its runaway legal ownership. The claim that every government that has enacted significant gun legislation is turfed out the next election seems just a little exaggerated. The Chretien Liberals introduced the ill fated long gun registry in 1993, it seems like a major piece of regulation, probably the most infamous for its lack of results, costs, and bureaucracy, yet they were not sent packing until 2006, and I would argue not because of the registry. I will not vote for Trudeau for a number of reasons, nor will I for one of the alternatives that supports certain terrorist groups, so that leaves only one kind of uninspiring guy to choose from. This gun regulation isn't one of the reasons I wont vote Justin, so if they want to fine tune the regulations, make them a tad more onerous, and it results in a few more semiautomatic weapon models being prohibited, then have at it. He needs to shore up his base and try to appeal to moderates and some very small c conservatives to keep power. With Scheer being further right than many are comfortable with, its quite possible Justin will be around for a while to keep these regulations in place.
 
... With Scheer being further right than many are comfortable with, its quite possible Justin will be around for a while to keep these regulations in place.

Possible, but not overly likely. Already just over 3 points behind in the polls, Trudeau et al have slipped another FIVE points since introducing this poorly thought out attack on legal firearm owners, putting them now 8+ points down. Given free reign, this Fool will indeed sink his own ship. I am actually counting on it. As for this BS Bill...

In my mind's eye, selling us a new Get Tough On Crime Bill that:
Is silent regarding gang crime,
Is silent on border firearms smuggling,
Is silent on ensuring current criminal firearms laws already on the books are strictly adhered to,
Is silent regarding penalties for crimes committed with the employ of firearms,
was and is in fact selling us a Bill of Goods.

It is nothing short of harassment of law abiding citizens in order to garner votes from the vast majority with little understanding of the gist of the matter.
And done so in the most vilifying methods possible, including outright lying from both the PM and Goodale.
Shameful indeed.
But once again not at all out of character for this particular government.

Cheers,
Nog
 
This thread looks just like an NRA argument. Don't regulate guns because it doesn't stop illegal gun activities. Unless Gun companies are selling guns for cash out the back door, virtually every illegal gun starts as a legal one. And as for gun owners being law abiding and no threat, they are until they are not. The Vegas shooter was the model NRA gun owner, white, wealthy, conservative, until he shot up a concert. Gun regulation in every country is is focussed on legal gun ownership because illegal ownership is already illegal! And it works, every country with significant restrictions on legal ownership has much less issues with gun violence than the US with its runaway legal ownership. The claim that every government that has enacted significant gun legislation is turfed out the next election seems just a little exaggerated. The Chretien Liberals introduced the ill fated long gun registry in 1993, it seems like a major piece of regulation, probably the most infamous for its lack of results, costs, and bureaucracy, yet they were not sent packing until 2006, and I would argue not because of the registry. I will not vote for Trudeau for a number of reasons, nor will I for one of the alternatives that supports certain terrorist groups, so that leaves only one kind of uninspiring guy to choose from. This gun regulation isn't one of the reasons I wont vote Justin, so if they want to fine tune the regulations, make them a tad more onerous, and it results in a few more semiautomatic weapon models being prohibited, then have at it. He needs to shore up his base and try to appeal to moderates and some very small c conservatives to keep power. With Scheer being further right than many are comfortable with, its quite possible Justin will be around for a while to keep these regulations in place.
He was in fact a registered Democrat and never a member of the NRA
 
Possible, but not overly likely. Already just over 3 points behind in the polls, Trudeau et al have slipped another FIVE points since introducing this poorly thought out attack on legal firearm owners, putting them now 8+ points down. Given free reign, this Fool will indeed sink his own ship. I am actually counting on it. As for this BS Bill...

In my mind's eye, selling us a new Get Tough On Crime Bill that:
Is silent regarding gang crime,
Is silent on border firearms smuggling,
Is silent on ensuring current criminal firearms laws already on the books are strictly adhered to,
Is silent regarding penalties for crimes committed with the employ of firearms,
was and is in fact selling us a Bill of Goods.

It is nothing short of harassment of law abiding citizens in order to garner votes from the vast majority with little understanding of the gist of the matter.
And done so in the most vilifying methods possible, including outright lying from both the PM and Goodale.
Shameful indeed.
But once again not at all out of character for this particular government.

Cheers,
Nog
I’m all for cracking down on illegal use of guns. I agree some guns are and should be illegal.I just don’t get why the government is intent on bringing in more rules if it hasn’t the ability or desire to enforce the ones we already have. Why are illegal weapons pouring over the border? Do gang bangers have a license, will they ask for an ATT for their drive bys? Do they only carry legal firearms?Somehow I doubt it! The politicians would rather hassle law abiding citizens than hurt the feelings of career criminals! Why? Because it’s easier!
I’d like to see a breakdown of gun crimes that removes the gang related and career criminal statistics from the mix!
 
"And as for gun owners being law abiding and no threat, they are until they are not." Wow that has to be one of the ****** thinks i have read in this whole thread.

"Unless Gun companies are selling guns for cash out the back door, virtually every illegal gun starts as a legal one" I'm sure there is no black market on firearms and i'm sure everyone of them are stolen or bought from a legal gun owners after the gun manufacture delivered them to a legitimate business. No even better we are probably all buying the guns then selling them to the black market to make some extra cash.

The long gun registry didnt take full effect until 2003 when all guns had to be registered by and if you dont believe that was one of the biggest reasons the liberals lost then you weren't paying very close attention.

No one in this thread has said we shouldn't have regulation for gun ownership and if you happened to even read what those changes are you would know that they do nothing to change anything in a way that would make our streets safer. Just in case anyone is unaware all restricted and prohibited guns are registered and still need to be.

Gun violence has been in decline since the 70's in canada not rising.
 
California, not sure what country you are in or what planet you are on. I would say and bet that gun crime will NOT go down because of bill C-71's new regs and nothing else put in place by Sunny Days or the fool leading BC. You are the first person who thinks it will that I have heard from. Lets wait and see, I remember the group of people on here that said Trudeau would be the golden guy for us here in BC. All were glad to see "Harper" go. Now after 2 requests I cannot even get an answer from any of them. Crickets, silence. Is Canada better now??? Glad you believe that the public is safer, of course the gang banger druggy will stop his illegal gun activities. Hell we have a new system of background checks that go back to birth, this will stop them.

HM
 
The trouble with this legislation is basically the same problem as every gun bill this party has ever introduced: the goal is not improved safety; the goal is to reduce numbers of civilians with guns.

They've started with and ideological conclusion: that fewer people owning guns legally is better and worked backwards to try to achieve that goal by steadily increasing the pressure and difficulty in simply continuing to own firearms. A perfect example is the proposed change in ATTs...was there even a single instance, ever, of someone using an ATT to transport a firearm for an illegal purpose? Of course not. If you're going to shoot someone as part of a criminal attack, you don't plan the trip so it's between your house and a gunsmith so you can legally transport the gun there, uncase it, use it, case it back up, and head to the gunsmith. That's such a bizarre proposition it's completely without merit.

Meanwhile, not only do we know that gun crime in the country has steadily fallen AS FIREARMS OWNERSHIP INCREASED (particularly handguns and AR-15s), the one sector where it's increased is among organized crime which fund their existence by importing vast quantities of illegal substances. If we clamp even further down on legal gun ownership in this country, at best, we'll just ensure that the relatively small percentage of formerly legally owned Canadian firearms that end up in criminal hands are replaced by a few extra guns that get smuggled in along with the massive amounts of drugs that get smuggled in.

It's just stupid and saying "this sounds like an NRA thread" is not an argument against anything, just a declaration that you don't like the NRA and you don't like guns. Which is fine, but meaningless to me. I work with guns and they're a big part of my life and I have spent a hell of a lot more time looking at arms industry related numbers than 99.999% of people. The most thorough studies show, at most, possibly a faint correlation between gun control and safety, worldwide. It's so slight it's hard to tell.

You want to ban something so people's lives stop getting wrecked? Try alcohol...there's no way to use it defensively, you can't use it to do anything productive, and the ONLY purpose is "because people like it". But we keep it around despite tens of thousands of deaths and unbelievable havoc wreaked on children's lives by people using it irresponsibly because it's fun and responsible users refuse to be held responsible for people who can't control themselves.

There are dozens of things you could try to ban that would have an actual, statistically significant impact on people's lives if you took them away. But I'm not turning in my scissors just because some other kid keeps running with his.
 
I don't know if these regulations will decrease gun deaths, and since I dont plan on buying a gun will not be personally affected. While canadian gun deaths are 1/5 that if the US, they are still 2x what they are in Australia, Germany and several other European countries. And homicide rates are 3x more. So obviously more could be done. Of course Canada suffers from illegal gun importation from a neighbor awash in guns, while Austalia as an island has more control, but also has very restrictive gun laws enacted after mass shootings, which included amnesties to hand in newly prohibited weapons.
 
I don't know if these regulations will decrease gun deaths, and since I dont plan on buying a gun will not be personally affected.

Yet you still want to squawk about them at every opportunity. :rolleyes:

While canadian gun deaths are 1/5 that if the US, they are still 2x what they are in Australia, Germany and several other European countries. And homicide rates are 3x more. So obviously more could be done.

And in study after study, it has been proven over and over again that you are a LOT more likely to be killed by a moose, or lightening, than by a legal firearm in Canada. Really.

Could more be done?
Absolutely!!
Target the REAL problems and issues centered on gang and street ILLEGAL firearm violence. Make the punishments harsh enough as to present a real deterrent for their illegal use. And quit the Catch & Release form of legal system we employ towards those poor coddled criminals when they are caught breaking the related laws.

But nope. Our Fools at the helm deem it much more important to once again use any excuse to openly harass legal firearm owners in this country, while completely ignoring the real matters of concern in this regard.

Mark my words, this will cost them, and cost them dearly.
Down another point in the polls today.
Seems they're on a roll...
Pozitive.gif


Cheers,
Nog
 
Yet you still want to squawk about them at every opportunity. :rolleyes:



And in study after study, it has been proven over and over again that you are a LOT more likely to be killed by a moose, or lightening, than by a legal firearm in Canada. Really.

Could more be done?
Absolutely!!
Target the REAL problems and issues centered on gang and street ILLEGAL firearm violence. Make the punishments harsh enough as to present a real deterrent for their illegal use. And quit the Catch & Release form of legal system we employ towards those poor coddled criminals when they are caught breaking the related laws.

But nope. Our Fools at the helm deem it much more important to once again use any excuse to openly harass legal firearm owners in this country, while completely ignoring the real matters of concern in this regard.

Mark my words, this will cost them, and cost them dearly.
Down another point in the polls today.
Seems they're on a roll...
Pozitive.gif


Cheers,
Nog

This is an open forum, as someone who comments on almost everything on the site I think its a bit of the pot calling the kettle black. Besides its hard not to poke gun nuts a bit when they are already so riled up about comparatively minor legislation.

I'm happy if JT is down some more in the polls, but its not an election, and with an NDP leader who cares more about Kalistan than Canada, and a conservative leader who's not exactly dynamic, in a campaign JT might be able to coalesce the center left and entice enough moderate conservatives in urban and suburban ridings to win again. He does campaign well. It seems the India trip fiasco is likely more to blame than gun legislation for JTs current troubles though.
 
I have plenty of friends who will never buy a boat...sure hope they aren't sufficiently selfish that they cheer on the idea of limiting civilian boat ownership.

Drowning being the 3rd leading cause of unintentional death in Canada, after all (at least according to the Lifesaving Society. Not sure if they're legit or just a propaganda tool for Big PFD). Hey, you pair that up with only selling alcohol to people who can prove a legitimate need to drink, and can pass a government safety course on what to drink and when, and then maybe eliminating hard alcohol entirely, and we can really make this place safer! I mean sure, it's intrusive, paternalistic, and fundamentally interferes with people's freedom to live their lives how they choose, but if you don't care about booze or boating, there's really no downside.

Let's get this place good and Ned Flanderized!
 
I don't know if these regulations will decrease gun deaths, and since I dont plan on buying a gun will not be personally affected. While canadian gun deaths are 1/5 that if the US, they are still 2x what they are in Australia, Germany and several other European countries. And homicide rates are 3x more. So obviously more could be done. Of course Canada suffers from illegal gun importation from a neighbor awash in guns, while Austalia as an island has more control, but also has very restrictive gun laws enacted after mass shootings, which included amnesties to hand in newly prohibited weapons.
This is the crux of the governments dishonest argument, quoting firearms statistics to imply there was a problem with current regulations and law abiding owners.
Is Canada seeing a rash of mass shootings? No. Is it seeing a large increase in gang violence where illegal firearms are being used? Absolutely. Are many of the gang members disinfranchised urban immigrants? Sure seems like it! Is it OK to point that out! No!
How about we publish gun crimes that were committed by urban gangs and career criminals, vs average Canadian citizens, you know those that actually follow rules?
 
Canada has a gun problem.
These five words are sure to inflame passions and set off intense disagreement among some Canadians. This is because the words challenge many Canadians' view of themselves and what they believe to be their level-headed approach to firearm ownership.


After all, when it comes to guns, Canada is a haven of calm, social liberalism, isn't it? One that stands in stark contrast to the violent world of the neighbouring United States. It's a view firmly laid down by Michael Moore in his film Bowling for Columbine and perpetuated, if nothing else, by the relative absence of debate about gun deaths in Canadian news media.

The problem, however, is one born from perspective. From where Canadians stand, their country probably feels safe. After all, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were more than 56,000 gun homicides in the United States between 2009 and 2013. Canada, during that period, tallied 977 firearm homicides, according to Statistics Canada.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2015001/article/14244/tbl/tbl03-eng.htm

The difference is so stark, it risks being blinding. Of course, the difference is partly because Canada has far fewer guns. The estimated number of firearms (legal and illegal) in the hands of civilian owners in Canada is about 10 million, about 31 guns per 100 people. The United States has far more guns: about 310 million, almost one gun a person. Even taking these numbers into account, however, it seems that, compared with the United States, Canada is a pretty safe place to be when it comes to guns.
And Canada isn't the United States, is it? It has a much more European approach to matters such as taxes, health care and education. So let's compare Canada with the European Union and the European Economic Area. Then the perspective on Canadian gun crime shifts dramatically.

If Canada were included as part of the 31 countries that make up the wider European region, it would rank fourth in terms of gun-homicide rates. In terms of sheer numbers, only France, Germany and Italy have more gun deaths a year. Suddenly it seems as if Canada isn't the haven of peace and gun harmony that people might think. And this is just homicides we're talking about.

There is another darker, hidden toll that blights Canada – gun suicides. As the
Department of Justice notes: "In Canada, about 80 per cent of firearm-related deaths are suicides." According to gunpolicy.org, in the 35 countries in the Americas only the United States, Uruguay and Argentina have more recorded gun suicides per capita than Canada.
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/wd98_4-dt98_4/p4.html

This is Canada's real gun problem. Between 2003 and 2012, at least 5,616 people were reported to have shot and killed themselves. It's a shocking firearm suicide rate, more than 12 times that of England and Wales (at about 80 firearm suicides a year).


Many people shrug when they hear about the methods employed when it comes to suicide. Well, they say, if they didn't find a gun to use, they would find another way to end their lives. But repeated studies have shown that limiting a person's access to a gun markedly reduces the risk of suicide.

A study about the impact of the Australian buyback initiative and strict gun-law reforms in the mid-1990s, for example, found that the measures led to a decrease in gun suicide, but had no significant impact on non-firearm suicide rates. Put simply, people did not choose to kill themselves by another way.

A gun, more than anything else, has the capacity to turn a moment of despair into a lethal moment. Its very presence in the home can rapidly escalate that risk. One study of survivors of self-inflicted gunshot wounds in the United States found that 40 per cent had contemplated suicide for less than five minutes beforehand.

So, yes, Canada has a gun problem. It has more than 500 gun problems each and every year; one for each time a man (and it is almost always a man) decides to pick up a gun to end his problems.

This hard reality shouldn't be one based on comparisons. Just because about 20,000 people shoot themselves in the United States every year doesn't mean that the 500 people who do the same in Canada are not worth concern. They are. More needs to be done in terms of mental health and access to guns in Canada. Gun suicide is all too often preventable – and the first way to address it is to acknowledge that it happens.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-canada-has-a-gun-problem/article29642837/
.
 
Sorry GLG, but that article is so fraught with mistakes (intentional methinks) that one simply does not know exactly where to begin. If you take many of his "facts" and compare them to what I have already posted, you will clearly see the differences between what he terms "facts", and what is reality.

Far too many "errors" to deal with on a one by one basis...

Suffice it to say that I don't think anyone could be surprised by this drivel, given the Globe's extreme left stance in this matter. From their chief editorial staff we get this little gem which well spells out both their bias, and willingness to publish non-factual information if it suits their agenda:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...gun-advocates-should-stop-playing-the-victim/

Cheers,
Nog
 
One Clear Voice is now in Campaign Two Mode.
Campaign One is still available if you missed it.

http://oneclearvoice.ca/

Campaign #2 - Shaky Ground
Next up are the MP's who only won their riding by a very slim margin. All of these MP's won by 5% or less, some by less than 1%! It is up to us to let them know that this bill will reduce their chances of re-election and in turn get them to put pressure on the Public Safety Minister. If you missed Campaign #1 it is still available in the top menu.

Strategy
In the past OneClearVoice.ca had been a letter writing platform with several letter options. While varied letters and written letters are still important, this time round OneClearVoice.ca is going to run focused campaigns. There will be one letter per campaign and it will be email only. The purpose is to send a rapid flood of unified emails that will be attention getting in order to show our numbers and our resolve.

Gathering momentum. Join us Folks!

Cheers & Thanks!
Nog
 
Sorry GLG, but that article is so fraught with mistakes (intentional methinks) that one simply does not know exactly where to begin. If you take many of his "facts" and compare them to what I have already posted, you will clearly see the differences between what he terms "facts", and what is reality.

Far too many "errors" to deal with on a one by one basis...

Suffice it to say that I don't think anyone could be surprised by this drivel, given the Globe's extreme left stance in this matter. From their chief editorial staff we get this little gem which well spells out both their bias, and willingness to publish non-factual information if it suits their agenda:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...gun-advocates-should-stop-playing-the-victim/

Cheers,
Nog

I must have missed the link you provided on the suicide by guns. I can only say that those numbers do seem correct to me based on other sources that I have checked. It is a topic that is not brought up when we are talking about gun deaths and it never seems to be included when I read most of the pro gun information. Perhaps it falls into the mental health part that advocates would like to have increase in spending. If you have another source on gun deaths that include the suicide numbers I would be interested to look at it.
Here is what the numbers seem to work out over the years. some years less some years more (plus or minus 5%)
1000 gun deaths
800 suicide
200 murder
https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-624-x/2012001/article/11696-eng.htm
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/54879-eng.htm
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top