The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[OldSolduer]

No. That conflates the debate and brings in whatever Trudeau said. This is still just the argument over whether a tube fed bolt action 22LR is the same level of dangerous/deadly as a higher calibre semi-automatic.

At the risk of y'all yelling at me "if it saves just one life, its worth it elbows up" crowd should focus on unsafe things that weigh tons and speed along roads. Or maybe they are the same crowd as the anti gun people.

 

[Halifax Tar]

At the risk of y'all yelling at me "if it saves just one life, its worth it elbows up" crowd should focus on unsafe things that weigh tons and speed along roads. Or maybe they are the same crowd as the anti gun people.

The real mass murderers in our society are alcohol, drugs, tobacco, shitty food and a lack of fitness.

 

[Lumber]

At the risk of y'all yelling at me "if it saves just one life, its worth it elbows up" crowd should focus on unsafe things that weigh tons and speed along roads. Or maybe they are the same crowd as the anti gun people.

I agrees with the underlying point you are trying to make. Trying to ban semi-autos and take them away from lawful gun owners makes about as much sense as banning pickup trucks.

But, along the same lines as my current argument and using your metaphor: a person with a pickup truck is more dangerous and can do more damage than a person riding a bicycle...

"Nuh uh! A vehicle is just an inanimate tool unless some one decides to use it dangerously! Someone with a bicycle is just as deadly as someone with a pickup truck!"
(-Fishbone, probably...)

 

[OldSolduer]

"Nuh uh! A vehicle is just an inanimate tool unless some one decides to use it dangerously! Someone with a bicycle is just as deadly as someone with a pickup truck!" (-Fishbone, probably...)

Don't get me started on asshole cyclists.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I agrees with the underlying point you are trying to make. Trying to ban semi-autos and take them away from lawful gun owners makes about as much sense as banning pickup trucks.

But, along the same lines as my current argument and using your metaphor: a person with a pickup truck is more dangerous and can do more damage than a person riding a bicycle...

"Nuh uh! A vehicle is just an inanimate tool unless some one decides to use it dangerously! Someone with a bicycle is just as deadly as someone with a pickup truck!"
(-Fishbone, probably...)

Me.

The words I have highlighted are the operative words. People are bad, not objects. Ban dangerous and bad people.

 

[Lumber]

Me.

The words I have highlighted are the operative words. People are bad, not objects. Ban dangerous and bad people.

Agreed. It should be easier to prevent bad, but more importantly dangerous, people from driving.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

"Nuh uh! A vehicle is just an inanimate tool unless some one decides to use it dangerously! Someone with a bicycle is just as deadly as someone with a pickup truck!"
(-Fishbone, probably...)

Smarten up buckwheat. You don't know me well enough. Stick to the subject rather than poking people in the eye.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Agreed. It should be easier to prevent bad, but more importantly dangerous, people from driving.

Life is dangerous. And none of us get out alive.

 

[Lumber]

Smarten up buckwheat. You don't know me well enough. Stick to the subject rather than poking people in the eye.

I'm literally the only one staying on point!

 

[NavyShooter]

All guns are deadly.

For a number of years in the US, the most 'deadly' caliber - the one which caused the most deaths, was actually .22 LR.

I think that has now been surpassed by 9mm.

That said, a focus on the caliber, or the type really loses focus on the actual cause of things.

A car doesn't drive itself into a crowd on it's own. A gun doesn't load itself.

A person is the operator in both cases, and it's the operator that the focus must be on.

We've come 35+ years down the trace since Gamil Gharby shot up a school in Montreal, and there has not been a single law proposed, nor put on the books which would have prevented it.

It is impossible to write law after law after regulation after OIC for 35 years, and continually miss the mark unless it's deliberate.

In truth, politicians don't seem to want to fix the actual problem...they just want the political gain/profit from using firearms as a wedge issue every election.

All we are is pawns in their game.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

All guns are deadly.

For a number of years in the US, the most 'deadly' caliber - the one which caused the most deaths, was actually .22 LR.

I think that has now been surpassed by 9mm.

That said, a focus on the caliber, or the type really loses focus on the actual cause of things.

A car doesn't drive itself into a crowd on it's own. A gun doesn't load itself.

A person is the operator in both cases, and it's the operator that the focus must be on.

We've come 35+ years down the trace since Gamil Gharby shot up a school in Montreal, and there has not been a single law proposed, nor put on the books which would have prevented it.

It is impossible to write law after law after regulation after OIC for 35 years, and continually miss the mark unless it's deliberate.

In truth, politicians don't seem to want to fix the actual problem...they just want the political gain/profit from using firearms as a wedge issue every election.

All we are is pawns in their game.

100%. Well said NS. Unfortunately, we'll never satisfy the hoplophobes with their obtuse stubborness to admit they are wrong. Fortunately though, even the NDP is against the liberal gun ban and buyback, which proves you can change and there's no need to go through life stupid.

 

[Haggis]

Fortunately though, even the NDP is against the liberal gun ban and buyback, which proves you can change and there's no need to go through life stupid.

They are against it now because it's popular to oppose it. Once the leader is crowned I expect the support will flip back to the government's side.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

They are against it now because it's popular to oppose it. Once the leader is crowned I expect the support will flip back to the government's side.

One can hope.

 

[Halifax Tar]

You know it's bad when this hour has 22 minutes is poking at it.

86K views · 1.8K reactions | You can’t buyback the buyback… | This Hour Has 22 Minutes

You can’t buyback the buyback…

www.facebook.com

 

[Haggis]

Sarnia Police just posted that they will not be participating.

 

[North Star]

I've lost track, but how many provinces are either opposing or not assisting this..."program?"
I think this will go down in history as yet another example of Canadian "asymmetric federalism." Only this time, it's creeping into the Criminal powers of the federal government instead of other "squishier" areas.

 

[Haggis]

I've lost track, but how many provinces are either opposing or not assisting this..."program?"
I think this will go down in history as yet another example of Canadian "asymmetric federalism." Only this time, it's creeping into the Criminal powers of the federal government instead of other "squishier" areas.

I believe the only participating police services are Fredericton, Halifax, Winnipeg, the Sûreté du Québec and all of QC's municipal services.

 

[Haggis]

I believe the only participating police services are Fredericton, Halifax, Winnipeg, the Sûreté du Québec and all of QC's municipal services.

Forgot the wildly successful pilot with the Cape Breton Police Service.

 

[Haggis]

Forgot the wildly successful pilot with the Cape Breton Police Service.

Adding in Saugeen Shores (ON) Police Service. They are not participating.