Gun Control in US and Canada

[Dave S]

I agree that the state of our society is the fundamental problem. I feel that the shift towards more violence is, not surprisingly, correlated to the shirt towards more inequality. Poor people with no access to mental healthcare are more likely to commit acts of violence. If anything I hope this absolutely tragic week of events sets some policies in action to prevent the root causes of these horrific shootings. I fear that there will be a strong force hoping to 'solve' these problems by putting in more metal detectors and arming teachers and mall workers which in my opinion would be going in the exact opposite direction. Can't imagine what the families in CT are going through at the moment.

Exactly! Metal health issues are likely the cause of 75% of mass shootings. It doesn't help that guns are so easy to access in some countries. Guns are not the root problem but better management of them would resolve a number of these killings.

 

[profisher]

Someone else stated that our laws here are about right and I almost agree with that. I however believe that those who work in the bush around Grizzlies, Cougars, wolves etc...should be able to pack a 45 for protection. That would be anyone who qualifies under the present restrictions. So if your in the wilds picking berries, mushrooms, a forestry worker, logger...what ever...I have no problem with those persons carrying a side arm for their protection. Still kept under lock and key at home and while in the vehicle transported to the wilds. Basically the same rules now as they apply to city streets...but an easing for the rules for those I mentioned.

 

[Sculpin]

Someone else stated that our laws here are about right and I almost agree with that. I however believe that those who work in the bush around Grizzlies, Cougars, wolves etc...should be able to pack a 45 for protection. That would be anyone who qualifies under the present restrictions. So if your in the wilds picking berries, mushrooms, a forestry worker, logger...what ever...I have no problem with those persons carrying a side arm for their protection. Still kept under lock and key at home and while in the vehicle transported to the wilds. Basically the same rules now as they apply to city streets...but an easing for the rules for those I mentioned.

I believe there are permit's that allow this already in this Country. They are very strict and hard to get.

 

[Dave S]

Again mis informed spouting off. THe guns were purchased LEGALLY. BY HIS MOTHER. THe mother he shot to death. Handguns in Connecticut are more tightly controlled than in almost any other state. In order to purchase one not only do you have to go through the federally mandated background check before buying the gun, but Connecticut also requires their citizens to have a permit to purchase the handgun and take a firearms safety course. The shooter was only 20 and not old enough to legally purchase the firearm in CT. (min age is 21)

Want other examples of how states with stronger control work. Google the shootings in chicago and colorado in there "no gun zones" Doesnt get anymore gun controlled then an area were its illegal for civilains to carry guns at all. THat worked pretty good to~!

We know where you stand on guns Lorne. But what we don't know is....What do you think the answer sir?..... More guns?.....I wonder why his mom needed a gun.

Can you agree that anyone that owns a gun needs to know how to handle that gun when in use AND when in storage? Requiring all gun owners to educate themselves and prove competence is gun control. How can anyone with a brain disagree with this?

 

[Dave S]

A homemade bomb unfortunatly. They are illegal too.

It takes a much smarter and resourceful person to pull this off without being caught first.

 

[Saxe Point]

Banning anything has not proven to reduce its availability to the criminally minded. Jamaica banned all guns back in the 70s and saw an increase in all crime including gun crime that has never fallen.

Do you have a source for your statement that Jamaica banned all firearms in the 70's and more importantly, that they still ban them? A quick Google search says that is not true.

 

[ziggy]

when was the last mass killing you heard of where the assailant used a knife or blunt object? Innocent lives were taken with a bullet, you can't divorce the method of killing from the equation, its one of the fundamental reason that so many lives were taken so quickly.

Watching coverage still, this has got to be one of the saddest things I've seen a long time, f*cked up doesn't describe it.

9/11 if I remember correctly, they used box cutters. Not against gun control simply answering a question

 

[Charter Tofino]

So what you are saying is, I live in british columbia and have no idea what im talking about so yah ill jus make off the cuff assumptions. IF he didnt have access to guns he coulda have drove his car through the play ground. Why is it so hard to understand its the indian not the arrow.


Lorne

You like to argue everything which is fine but at least have a good argument. You rarely have anything realistic to say.

The issue is that these mentally unstable people are so lost that they want to kill themselves and others. This happens all over the world, is a fact of society and will never be fixed. The issue that can be improved is what happens next. These people should not be able to walk down to their moms room, grab two pistols, a rifle, then walk down to a school and open fire. Nor should they be able to walk into a gun shop buy a bullet proof vest, assault rifles etc. This is easy access to guns and more specifically restricted weapons needs to change. There is no need for the public to have handguns or assault rifles. I realize again there are responsible people who really enjoy them but they need to make a sacrifice because the fact is that the negative impacts caused by these weapons in society hugely outweigh the positives.

Your argument that they will do it anyway has a few flaws. First off without a weapon and again more specifically a restricted weapon they will have a way harder time causing the damage to the same scale. Secondly a lot of these people honestly would not try to commit the acts that they do without the confidence of being fully armed. It may not sound attractive and i agree but many lives would be saved by very strict gun laws.

Here is an interesting stat that is trending. Ill be the first to say that this is biased as a normalized per capita value should be used but even with that the United States is head and above the rest of the world due to their huge numbers of firearms.

 

[Kildonan]

I read all of this but...
It really makes me feel sick that 20, 6 to 10 year old kids where gunned down by some... I don't even have words to describe what kind of animal. Imagine the horror as that was going down. Fawk!!! I'm so sad, sick and disgusted at the same time.

I posses firearms and think folks should be permitted to but, a lot of this happens in the USA and there has to be a reason why there. More than other places. One cannot help but think the lax gun laws play a part.

 

[lorneparker1]

You like to argue everything which is fine but at least have a good argument. You rarely have anything realistic to say.

The issue is that these mentally unstable people are so lost that they want to kill themselves and others. This happens all over the world, is a fact of society and will never be fixed. The issue that can be improved is what happens next. These people should not be able to walk down to their moms room, grab two pistols, a rifle, then walk down to a school and open fire. Nor should they be able to walk into a gun shop buy a bullet proof vest, assault rifles etc. This is easy access to guns and more specifically restricted weapons needs to change. There is no need for the public to have handguns or assault rifles. I realize again there are responsible people who really enjoy them but they need to make a sacrifice because the fact is that the negative impacts caused by these weapons in society hugely outweigh the positives.

Your argument that they will do it anyway has a few flaws. First off without a weapon and again more specifically a restricted weapon they will have a way harder time causing the damage to the same scale. Secondly a lot of these people honestly would not try to commit the acts that they do without the confidence of being fully armed. It may not sound attractive and i agree but many lives would be saved by very strict gun laws.

Here is an interesting stat that is trending. Ill be the first to say that this is biased as a normalized per capita value should be used but even with that the United States is head and above the rest of the world due to their huge numbers of firearms.

Thats a great pic. Have seen about 50 times on facebook so far today on every other liberal uninformed persons wall that is on my friends list.
What they forget to add as well as you, is how many of those are sucicides(more then half), where these guns came from, and all the other data. I 10000% agree with you that there are to many guns in the US. and banning will NOT STOP CRAZY FACKING PEOPLE FROM BEING CRAZY.
As far the flaws, the guy would have done just as much if not more damaged with a shotgun. Which by your standards is A. ok. I dont like to argue anything, but i do love to shoot holes in peoples ideologies that make zero sense. And this defintely falls into that catergory.

FTR i dont own any handguns, or assualt type rifles. I own 4 shot guns and 1 rifle. I am a duck hunter. Not a gun nut.

For what its worth, Here is a summary of gun laws in CT. For pistols it really isnt that much different then Canada.

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_ct.htm

 

[Charter Tofino]

Did you even read my post? I literally said exactly what you have in caps so great job pointing holes in "peoples ideologies that make zero sense".

 

[Charter Tofino]

Also for anyone interested this is a great documentary covering the same issues discussed here after a similar tragedy. Not a huge Michael Moore fan but its well done.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jGtAcDefHg

 

[lorneparker1]

Did you even read my post? I literally said exactly what you have in caps so great job pointing holes in "peoples ideologies that make zero sense".

THe first part was agreeing with you. The second part not so much.

Lorne

Doesnt get more one sided then Micheal Moore. Great post!

 

[Tsquared]

I've been thinking about this all day. I am the principal of an elementary school and the parents at my school trust me to look after and keep safe the most precious possession they have--their children. This is a responsibility that I take very seriously. There is not an unfamiliar adult who comes on or near our grounds that does not get approached by
myself
or one of my staff as to what their connection to the school is. My staff was at first reluctant to approach people like
this but I have worked with them and demonstrated that ALL people who have a legitimate reason to be on our
grounds (family members and friends of our students) will not only be cooperative but grateful that we are doing what we
do. So that takes care of any pervs that might be around but other than lockdown drills, which we do along with fire
drills and earthquake drills, how do you stop something like these weapons attacks?
I don't know and it does worry me.
T2

 

[Charter Tofino]

THe first part was agreeing with you. The second part not so much.

Lorne

Doesnt get more one sided then Micheal Moore. Great post!

Second part? That great argument that a shotgun would do as much damage? Ok? This issue is for all guns not just handguns. Or was your point that their gun laws are basically the same as ours? Oh wait that is BS because they're not. The processes for legally obtaining a pistol there are much easier and you even provided a ****** link to that. Lorne your a dipshit that can't backup any of your asinine arguments.

28 kids died today... There is a chance to reduce the impact of events like this in the future but simple minded people who refuse to make sacrifices for the greater good stand in the way. Im done with this thread, if you can't already see the logic in gun restrictions down there then further discussions are pointless.

 

[Saxe Point]

So what you are saying is, I live in british columbia and have no idea what im talking about so yah ill jus make off the cuff assumptions. IF he didnt have access to guns he coulda have drove his car through the play ground. Why is it so hard to understand its the indian not the arrow.


Lorne

This proposition is absurd. You can't seriously suggest that ready accessibility to firearms has no impact on public safety because people will use cars, knives, bombs or something else to wreak havoc. That line of thinking means that all restrictions on dangerous items, and especially weapons, are pointless, because people inclined to violence will always find an alternative and equally effective means of causing harm. Preposterous.

 

[sir-vivor]

Have not read the thread because its the same old pros and cons ........................ sick of it , reality is reality and if they had fishing rods the outcome would have been different so ............... hope you are all comfortable with your decision to own one and seriously I hope you, your family, your friends and all of us are safer with it being around .......... but I doubt it I because, even if you are 100% safe .... what about the other guy eh !

If we dont have them ............ nobody will use them !

 

[Gunsmith]

Would somebody please pass the popcorn? What a gongshow!

 

[Saxe Point]

Would somebody please pass the popcorn? What a gongshow!

People debate a very serious issue about which they feel strongly and you call it a gong show? What exactly do you mean by that?

 

[Lipripper]

Would somebody please pass the popcorn? What a gongshow!

I don't have enough....