Gun Control: US and Global

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Fascinating, according to the article - and I quote:

"Parliament is also set to take up heavy "knife control" legislation when it resumes this week. The U.K. government is expected to introduce a ban on online knife sales and home knife deliveries, declare it "illegal to possess zombie knives and knuckledusters in private" — "zombie knives" are those defined as being manufactured for the purpose of being used as a person-to-person weapon"

I wonder - Anybody from Parliament ever visited Windsor Castle - or many other such grand residences of the nobility?

;D

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Zombie knives = assault rifles.

Going down the same well worn path of declaring something as deadly, by the look of the item.

I've got a 17" German steel Heinkel meat knife that'll open you like a ripe watermelon, but it's not a zombie knife. I don't think so anyway, that's likely a judfgement call be the Bobby that stops you.

The problem is, as has been shown a multitude of times, it doesn't work.

Soon their new law says you can't carry them. Can't get them by mail. So you go to the store and buy them. How do you get it home now? Will it require a permit? Will you have to register the sale and let the police know that you just sold one and to who? How long after a murder with a certain type of knife before they're at your door asking to see it?

This is what happens every time some politician, without a clue, tries to fix things with no real knowledge of the problem.

Now that acid attacks have been mentioned in conjunction with the increase in all things blades, we know who's going to be targetted for stops. Then the ghettos will complain that they are being unfairly treated and targetted, demanding action and when not forthcoming, we should be right in the middle of the fighting season. which has shifted from the mountains of the ME to the street of Europe's major cities. The season is just starting as witnessed by the increase in attacks around Europe. On the other hand, you're going to have the militant 'other' side that complain their rights are being infringed because of the bad actors of the opposite side. It'll devolve like it always does when people lose sight of the big picture, which is already happening and this is just another nail in the coffin of desegregation. That's conjecture on my part, but it is more than idle fantasy, I believe.

Maybe I'm alarmist, but I see a lot more human damage being caused by this knee jerk reaction of ignorant politicians than the original problem created. Simple cause and effect.

The original point stands though, no matter what happens. Objects being banned by what they look like, instead of taking care of the true problem. The nut on the end of the handle.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Maybe what North America needs are police who can stop and search anyone they deem may be carrying prohibited items and illegal substances.

 

[FJAG]

Maybe what North America needs are police who can stop and search anyone they deem may be carrying prohibited items and illegal substances.

That's one of the hallmark's of the term "Police State". In our case it would need a constitutional amendment to negate section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_8_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

:cheers:

 

[Jed]

Well, we definitely don’t need or want a Police State. We need to trust our police again.  We don’t want this to deteriorate so relationships with the police are akin to 3rd world countries. You know, were the last thing you want to do is to ask a cop for directions or something for fear of being scrutinized.

 

[FJAG]

Well, we definitely don’t need or want a Police State. We need to trust our police again.  We don’t want this to deteriorate so relationships with the police are akin to 3rd world countries. You know, were the last thing you want to do is to ask a cop for directions or something for fear of being scrutinized.

The level of trust which we as a "collective society" give to our police in this respect is the difference between the words "... they deem may be carrying ..." and "... have reasonable and probable grounds to believe ...".

:cheers:

 

[Jarnhamar]

That's one of the hallmark's of the term "Police State". In our case it would need a constitutional amendment to negate section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_8_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

:cheers:

I hear you. Humour me.  Without trying to sound woe as me I have no criminal record but (in Canada) depending on how many hand guns/ restricted guns I have  (I believe under/over 10) the police can either ask to set up a date, somewhat at my convenience, to inspect my guns OR tell me when they'll be checking my storage/ making sure I still have them.

That doesn't bother me all that much.  They caught a young guy in Toronto that way who had been selling guns to criminals.

But I'd really like that oversight extended to known criminals too, in Canada and the US. People who have been found guilty of rape, violent assault, weapons offenses, drug offenses, pedophiles. Let the police make spot checks on them.  Let the police knock on a pedophiles door anytime they want to inspect their laptop or check a drug dealers place for a stack of drugs.

As for stop and search the police know full well what areas or Chicago, Vancouver, Toronto etc.. are the trouble neighbourhoods.  If we want to crack down on illegal guns let's let police start acting on their experience, intelligence and gut feeling. If we want to save lives isn't it worth it?

 

[FJAG]

I hear you. Humour me.  Without trying to sound woe as me I have no criminal record but (in Canada) depending on how many hand guns/ restricted guns I have  (I believe under/over 10) the police can either ask to set up a date, somewhat at my convenience, to inspect my guns OR tell me when they'll be checking my storage/ making sure I still have them.

That doesn't bother me all that much.  They caught a young guy in Toronto that way who had been selling guns to criminals.

But I'd really like that oversight extended to known criminals too, in Canada and the US. People who have been found guilty of rape, violent assault, weapons offenses, drug offenses, pedophiles. Let the police make spot checks on them.  Let the police knock on a pedophiles door anytime they want to inspect their laptop or check a drug dealers place for a stack of drugs.

As for stop and search the police know full well what areas or Chicago, Vancouver, Toronto etc.. are the trouble neighbourhoods.  If we want to crack down on illegal guns let's let police start acting on their experience, intelligence and gut feeling. If we want to save lives isn't it worth it?

Our thoughts are pretty much similar.

I'm of the view that any law that allows the police to "inspect" anyone's legal firearms holdings on a whim is one that is probably too broad and offends s 8 of the Charter. That kind of action is nothing more or less than a "search" looking for evidence of an offence being committed.

On the other hand, a law which permits the search of a convicted felon etc (especially where there is a banning order probation conditions, parole etc) would probably be a reasonable one as the search/inspection is not "unreasonable" (again, especially where a court order, bail condition, etc is in effect)

I myself have absolutely no problem with police "field interview notes", "shake card" etc being maintained. Police should be able to engage with the public to gather intelligence. In the appropriate situation--for example, officer safety--that ought to include the ability to detain and search. Not being allowed to do so, IMHO, impedes proactive policing.

:cheers:

 

[Jarnhamar]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/29553/report-dicks-sporting-goods-destroying-assault-emily-zanotti?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

Dicks Sporting goods is destroying Ar15s and wants everyone to know.

In February after the Parkland shooting they decided to very publically ban the sale of AR 15s. Some people accuse then of using the shooting and subsequent public anti AR15 move to try and garner public support to turn around their low sales numbers.


I wonder if they'll saw the barrels of the AR15 off like that woman politician in the states did. Which was a felony since she made a short barrel rifle and didn't pay the proper tax. Opps