Toronto shootings

[hannibal]

I don't have to chose. In fact I am all for banning without any compensation whatsoever.

AoD

Canada is county with rule of law. Society is based on rules based system of governance and same applies to justice system. Property right are protected under charter of rights and cannot be infringed upon. By passing such laws to confiscate legal property would be challenged under the charter of rights and tossed aside.

Think about it if Government like your house, do you think they can just come in and say move out without compensation. This is what happens in socialist banana republics.


I understand your slight authoritarian streak to punish legal gun owners who don't conform to you social views and norms but law of the land has to be compatible with the constitution and charter of rights.


Anyways I am done with this topic. I think this a lazy policy by liberals and not really through out with pros and cons. I don't see any social benefits. The money can be spent else where to save many more lives.

 

[Towered]

Plus a number of bombings and arsons, etc. It is utterly bizarre to harbour any kind romantic notions about them.

AoD

Agreed. I consider organized crime like the mafia to be an even lower form of scum than random troubled youth from low income neighbourhoods.

 

[Rufus8]

One of the latest murder victims was a 16 year old boy out at 2am with his 14 year old friend. No shooting involved but yet again the media are hysterical, running around saying "this is what our society has come to". What about the question "what the heck were 2 teens doing out at 2am on a Monday (school night) morning?", again all we have the family members weeping and invoking God's wrath. I'm not saying anyone deserves to be murdered by car, gun or knife but we have to acknowledge the parallel society that emerges when morality or social responsibility are ridiculed as out dated and unnecessary. The parents are not going to take any responsibilty for the environment these people grew up in.

 

[lenaitch]

The point I am trying to make is that Liberal firearms policy misdirected. banning gun from law abiding legal owner wont solve anything. law abiding owners will hand in their guns.

Do you think the gang bangers will?


Also the on Ar-15, it has not been used to kill anybody in Canada Ever. It has been inCanada for 50+ years

It may be true that the Armalite (now Colt) AR-15 has not been used in a mass shooting in Canada, but I will accept that it is being used as an example of a type of weapon to be banned. The AR-15 has become an eponym for of 'assault-type weapon' - generally meaning non-wooden stock, pistol grip, carry handle and generally scary-looking black - it's something the general non-gun-knowing public can get its head around. In the end, the ban will have to list weapons model by model in regulations because they are not prohibited by definition.

But . . . similar 'assault-type weapons have been used:
Ecole Polytechnique - Ruger Mini-14

Dawson College - Beretta CX4 Storm

Agree nobody NEEDS it.

Also no body needs F-150.

Spending 250mm+ which can easily balloon to $1B+ to solve a problem which dos not exist is not prudent policy.

Spending that money $1B to create jobs and livelihood for troubled youth would go a long way in saving lives and improving lives. Alot more bang for the tax dollars.

It about policy.

Nobody? People like farmers, contractors, those who tow large trailers, etc. might disagree. Overly broad statements weaken arguments.

 

[Videodrome]

At least we haven't had an incel based mass murder so far.

 

[Johnny Au]

At least we haven't had an incel based mass murder so far.

Does the van attack at North York Centre last year count?

 

[Ritachi]

I think that was sarcasm but I can't tell

 

[Videodrome]

Does the van attack at North York Centre last year count?

I meant this year. Incel attacks are escalating.

 

[Admiral Beez]

It may be true that the Armalite (now Colt) AR-15 has not been used in a mass shooting in Canada, but I will accept that it is being used as an example of a type of weapon to be banned. The AR-15 has become an eponym for of 'assault-type weapon' - generally meaning non-wooden stock, pistol grip, carry handle and generally scary-looking black - it's something the general non-gun-knowing public can get its head around. In the end, the ban will have to list weapons model by model in regulations because they are not prohibited by definition.

Appearance makes no sense, function is what’s important. If I had the say, I’d ban civilian ownership and sale of: all semi automatic rifles; shotguns with short stock/barrel and high capacity magazines; all handguns; all detachable magazines over ten rounds; AP rounds. This would leave bolt action rifles like the new Colt Canada C19 (called the Tikka T3X for civilian sale) and long shot guns.

I’d also have a government buy back of all the above banned types, with bonus dollars for functional weapons as opposed to decommissioned or historic nonfunctional pieces.

I’d also clear the prisons and justice system of minor drug and property crime offenders ( these folks often need help with homelessness and addictions, not jail) to make space for bangers using guns. No more bail for gun crimes, and strict deportations for any non-citizens convicted of gun crime. Lastly, we need to stop more guns from crossing from the US. This could be through better intel, such as CBSA or RCMP visiting gun shows to look for Canadian residents, license plates, use face recognition, etc.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I meant this year. Incel attacks are escalating.

They are? In Canada?

 

[hannibal]

Appearance makes no sense, function is what’s important. If I had the say, I’d ban civilian ownership and sale of: all semi automatic rifles; shotguns with short stock/barrel and high capacity magazines; all handguns; all detachable magazines over ten rounds; AP rounds. This would leave bolt action rifles like the new Colt Canada C19 (called the Tikka T3X for civilian sale) and long shot guns.

I’d also have a government buy back of all the above banned types, with bonus dollars for functional weapons as opposed to decommissioned or historic nonfunctional pieces.

I’d also clear the prisons and justice system of minor drug and property crime offenders ( these folks often need help with homelessness and addictions, not jail) to make space for bangers using guns. No more bail for gun crimes, and strict deportations for any non-citizens convicted of gun crime. Lastly, we need to stop more guns from crossing from the US. This could be through better intel, such as CBSA or RCMP visiting gun shows to look for Canadian residents, license plates, use face recognition, etc.

Now that's a reasonable policy. Function not appearance that matters.

But do you know how many semi autos are in Canada. When long gun registry was in place. There close to 8 million. I would say half are semi auto.

4-5 million at what 1-3k a piece is not small sum.

That's what is required to cleanse the system. But Liberal policy is just virtue signaling to ban only ar-15. Which may the most popular restricted semi auto. But it would leave every other semi auto in circulation.

At the end of the day I don't think this would be wise use of tax dollars. I would spend that money on other areas with 100 - 1000x of lives saved. I would spend that money on health care and community development for under privileged areas. $1billion for the poorest of the poor would go really long way

Btw I agree with all your suggestions for stuff penalties for any gun law violations.

 

[hannibal]

It may be true that the Armalite (now Colt) AR-15 has not been used in a mass shooting in Canada, but I will accept that it is being used as an example of a type of weapon to be banned. The AR-15 has become an eponym for of 'assault-type weapon' - generally meaning non-wooden stock, pistol grip, carry handle and generally scary-looking black - it's something the general non-gun-knowing public can get its head around. In the end, the ban will have to list weapons model by model in regulations because they are not prohibited by definition.

But . . . similar 'assault-type weapons have been used:
Ecole Polytechnique - Ruger Mini-14

View attachment 208141

Dawson College - Beretta CX4 Storm

View attachment 208142



Nobody? People like farmers, contractors, those who tow large trailers, etc. might disagree. Overly broad statements weaken arguments.

Both firearms you have posted are non restricted. It mean they are not registered. Also they won't fall under Liberal AR-15 ban

It is very ironic that Ruger Mini 14, referenced above, which was used in Montreal poly massacre was still left as non restricted. The function and cartridge for this rifle and AR-15 is the same .223/5.56 NATO. Why is one restricted and other non restricted. Our laws are retarded as it is. And now with new policy they will be even more retarded.

Also m305 or m-14 which was used in NB shooting which resulted in 4 RCMP fatalities was also no restricted. Now RCMp is giving each of its officers AR-15. They don't call it assault rifle, but rather amusingly less lethal name, "Patrol Carbibe".

Also last night Trudeau pulled another stunt to show up in kevlar vest. Meanwhile his security detail had these "Patrol Carbines " in their back packs. When has Canada ever had a political violence in recent history.

I am just cynical. I don't think these politician will ever give us fact based policy based on cost/benefit analysis.

 

[lenaitch]

Both firearms you have posted are non restricted. It mean they are not registered. Also they won't fall under Liberal AR-15 ban

It is very ironic that Ruger Mini 14, referenced above, which was used in Montreal poly massacre was still left as non restricted. The function and cartridge for this rifle and AR-15 is the same .223/5.56 NATO. Why is one restricted and other non restricted. Our laws are retarded as it is. And now with new policy they will be even more retarded.

Also m305 or m-14 which was used in NB shooting which resulted in 4 RCMP fatalities was also no restricted. Now RCMp is giving each of its officers AR-15. They don't call it assault rifle, but rather amusingly less lethal name, "Patrol Carbibe".

Also last night Trudeau pulled another stunt to show up in kevlar vest. Meanwhile his security detail had these "Patrol Carbines " in their back packs. When has Canada ever had a political violence in recent history.

I am just cynical. I don't think these politician will ever give us fact based policy based on cost/benefit analysis.

Beg to Differ. A firearm can be considered 'restricted' or 'prohibited' two ways. Per Criminal Code Section 84(1), by described design/function or by specific designation by Regulation.

prohibited firearm means

• (a) a handgun that
  • (i) has a barrel equal to or less than 105 mm in length, or
  • (ii) is designed or adapted to discharge a 25 or 32 calibre cartridge,
• but does not include any such handgun that is prescribed, where the handgun is for use in international sporting competitions governed by the rules of the International Shooting Union,
• (b) a firearm that is adapted from a rifle or shotgun, whether by sawing, cutting or any other alteration, and that, as so adapted,
  • (i) is less than 660 mm in length, or
  • (ii) is 660 mm or greater in length and has a barrel less than 457 mm in length,
• (c) an automatic firearm, whether or not it has been altered to discharge only one projectile with one pressure of the trigger, or
• (d) any firearm that is prescribed to be a prohibited firearm; (arme à feu prohibée)

The "prescribed" part in Paragraph (d) is covered in Regulation SOR 98-462, which lists the various iterations of the M-16 (AR-15) as Restricted in Part 2, Section 2 of the Schedule related to Section 3 of the Regulation itself. I didn't research the other firearms cited.

Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and Other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridge Magazines, Ammunition and Projectiles as Prohibited or Restricted

Federal laws of Canada

laws-lois.justice.gc.ca

The point being that Cabinet can name any firearm or other device in Regulation as either Restricted or Prohibited by identifying it by its manufacturer's designation or by functional design. For example, 'brass knuckles' and the 'bump stock' of Las Vegas infamy are both 'described prohibited devices' in the Regulation.

Whether the Mississauga event was a "stunt" will no doubt remain in the partisan mind of the observer, since we will likely never know the security or intelligence details, nor should we. If there is some perceived horror in the police carrying a restricted rifle, news flash - they carry restricted handguns too. Do you think the PM's regular security detail carry water guns?

No recent political violence? I suppose the armed storming of Parliament was, what, an attempted robbery? He thought it was a convenience store?

 

[Admiral Beez]

But do you know how many semi autos are in Canada. When long gun registry was in place. There close to 8 million. I would say half are semi auto.

You make it illegal to own one, giving everyone six months grace period to turn it in or face criminal charges for possession of an illegal firearm. The buy-back sum would be perhaps a couple of hundred dollars in the form of a tax credit, not cash. The real incentive and benefit of handing in your now illegal guns is not the financial reward but the avoidance of heavy fines and jail time.

To encourage compliance you make it illegal for any gun club to allow semiautomatic rifles, handguns or other illegal weapons on their range or property, and make it compulsory for any club to report sightings of illegal firearms at risk of shutdown and arrest of the club’s management. Government departments that monitor hunting and record kills, such as DNR must report and seize any sightings of illegal guns. Any hunter or club member that takes part in a shoot alongside someone else who is using or possessing an illegal firearm will be legally considered a party of the offence. Enforcement in indigenous reserves will be tricky, but for especially tough and politically charges cases, an 1-for-1 exchange of semiautomatic rifles for new Colt Canada C19s would probably be welcomed.

Move every gun over to bolt action rifles and long shotguns and we need only fix the border issues.

 

[hannibal]

You make it illegal to own one, giving everyone six months grace period to turn it in or face criminal charges for possession of an illegal firearm. The buy-back sum would be perhaps a couple of hundred dollars in the form of a tax credit, not cash. The real incentive and benefit of handing in your now illegal guns is not the financial reward but the avoidance of heavy fines and jail time.

To encourage compliance you make it illegal for any gun club to allow semiautomatic rifles, handguns or other illegal weapons on their range or property, and make it compulsory for any club to report sightings of illegal firearms at risk of shutdown and arrest of the club’s management. Government departments that monitor hunting and record kills, such as DNR must report and seize any sightings of illegal guns. Any hunter or club member that takes part in a shoot alongside someone else who is using or possessing an illegal firearm will be legally considered a party of the offence. Enforcement in indigenous reserves will be tricky, but for especially tough and politically charges cases, an 1-for-1 exchange of semiautomatic rifles for new Colt Canada C19s would probably be welcomed.

Move every gun over to bolt action rifles and long shotguns and we need only fix the border issues.

Lol . So you intend to amend millions of legal gun owners criminals by stroke of a pen for following the law? And deny them the property right which are enshrined in the charter of rights.

So $10 billion worth of property should be confiscated without compensation. I wonder if this does not qualify as tyranny, what would. You do that and results would follow. Remember what happend after long gun registry. You will be inviting a wrath 10x bigger.


Let's forget the gang bangers and criminals and go after legal gunowner with draconian laws backed by threat of jail time. Good to k ow that we live in a democracy.

You quoting criminal code about prescribing firearms as prohibited/restrcuted proves my point. The whole point about prescribing firearms by name as prohibited is retarded. Ak47 is prohibited CSA 58 and Chinese type 81 are OK. There hundeeed of such examples.

Also cabinet has named non-existent weapons as prohibited because some bureaucrat in ottawa saw it in a magazine.