The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Eaglelord17]

Good for you. I can fire 30 rounds in about 6 seconds from a semi-auto, and there's less chance of me coming off aim from taking my hand off the trigger to cock the bolt. Also, you've got tons of experience. Can someone with less experience and practice pull off the same?

Oh well I guess since we cant stop someone from using a knife or a car for mass kurder, we shouldn't bother trying to stop them from using a gun! While we're at it, let's bring back fully automatics and hand grenades for public use. Sure, they could be used to cause mass casualties, but people are still commiting those atrocities anyways, so what's the point?

Your missing my point. If the argument is those items are too dangerous for the public to own why are you not going after items shown to be equally dangerous if not more (even if the public doesn’t perceive them as such)?

Nice showed that having a firearm doesn’t matter. You would be hard pressed to equal the damage caused by that as a single person with any type of firearm, be it full auto, semi, manual, etc.

Lots of things can be used to commit mass casualty situations. Going after specific technology which has been publicly available for over 100 years and imagining it will change much in the grand scheme of things is asinine.

What makes sense to control is who has access to what, not what exactly is being accessed. A firearm is a firearm. If you can’t ‘trust’ them with a semi-auto you can’t trust them with a manual either. You also can’t trust them with a vehicle.

Making legislation around ‘preventing damage’ in a mass casualty situations is poor legislation which really doesn’t actually target your primary issue which is people trying to do mass casualty situations.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Does it matter? If my intent is to kill I have the means.

To the public it does. You don't get to define what does and does not matter to the public. You do get to abdicate your voice by trying.

You need to address why people want to kill or who has access not the type.

Who gets to decide who has access and why? Which affiliations and comments trigger the flags that have rights/priviledges restricted?

Again I can do more damage with a truck yet you’re refusing to discuss banning them.

Explicitly addressed in the conceptual discussion of risk vs utility.

 

[Fabius]

Caveat- this is what I see as a best case forward, not what I would like in a vacuum.

1. Accept that there will be increased regulation compared to pre 2020.
2. Use the legislative definition in C-21 as a jump off point to define what that is going to look like
   1. Engage meaningfully with said definition and try to improve it, future proof it against encroachment, and create codified carveouts to protect as much as possible as NR (SKS etc)
   2. Codify Protection against future executive regulatory encroachment above and beyond said definition (Ban banning by OIC)
3. Reverse all OIC's and reissue classification list based solely on the definition established in 2.1, no name or furniture based classification
   1. Have firearms that run contrary to the definition (that don't meet the pre bill C21 prohib threshold) be classed as restricted rather than prohibited, provide 5 year amnesty period for current owners to up their license. Make eligible for sale and transfer and use as Restricted class firearms.

In my opinion you don't change the conversation with Poly, you provide the more reasonable, informed voice and engage meaningfully with government so that they (Poly) seem completely unreasonable to the electorate at large and get tuned out.

No. Lots. See above.

Nope- but I don't think papering over the capability difference is the path forward. I don't think you can win long term by telling people the sky is purple.

Your point 1 is dead on arrival for most firearms owners now. Provinces, municipalities, police forces, and individuals don’t buy into it and are simply refusing to comply.


The rest of your arguments have been tried repeatedly by individuals, groups, and provinces in the last 40 years. They have made zero progress with the LPC as it’s idealogically captured by Poly and Poly’s Quebec supporters ( as admitted by the current Public Safety minister).

Best of luck with your approach.

 

[OldSolduer]

The Poly people will never let up. Once firearms are corralled they’ll move onto other weapons. You have a Gerber Commando knife? That’s scary and you’ll have to surrender it.
It’s never enough.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The Poly people will never let up. Once firearms are corralled they’ll move onto other weapons. You have a Gerber Commando knife? That’s scary and you’ll have to surrender it.
It’s never enough.

You can't reason with Poly. They are zealots, not unlike snake handlers.

 

[Eaglelord17]

To the public it does. You don't get to define what does and does not matter to the public. You do get to abdicate your voice by trying.

Who gets to decide who has access and why? Which affiliations and comments trigger the flags that have rights/priviledges restricted?

Explicitly addressed in the conceptual discussion of risk vs utility.

The public doesn’t get to arbitrarily restrict rights and freedoms just due to their own ignorance.

Canadians have the right to ‘Life, Liberty, and security of the person’. All these laws in my opinion violate that as they have no data supporting any of their gun control measures being effective. My rights don’t end because a majority wants it to.