The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Jarnhamar]

So the premier of the state of New South Wales in Australia is going to tighten up gun laws including possibly removing hunting as a reason to own a gun…

I'm sure that would never happen in Canada.

“…our focus now is on saying okay, yes, that we’re going to have to take away from people who were using them to hunt.”

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Imagine the carnage if these assholes would have "opened fire" with 2 haul trucks to start.

Prolly would've got stuck in the sand

 

[Fishbone Jones]

And no one is coming for those guns outside of few nuts that don't have broad support in the population, nuts that I would rather not have the support of petulant/ spiteful comments like the below to fuel their crusade.

There are a number of hunting rifles and shotguns that the whole liberal party agreed to put on the list. So, it's not just 'assault style firearms' being outlawed.

 

[Eaglelord17]

I'm sure that would never happen in Canada.

Remember a government which admits it has committed genocide believes it is important to disarm you because they always have your personal best interests at heart and wouldn’t ever do anything to compromise that… again

 

[Fishbone Jones]

And the problem will go away? Except now the assholes who don't obey laws will have guns.....and we won't.

Many hundreds of thousands of legal gun owners will become criminals the day after the ban goes into effect. And I am totally fine with laying it all at the feet of of any MP or Senator who voted for overt and blatant theft of private property.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Remember a government which admits it has committed genocide believes it is important to disarm you because they always have your personal best interests at heart and wouldn’t ever do anything to compromise that… again

Again, it's got nothing to do with personal safety. Unless you're a politician.

 

[suffolkowner]

Again, it's got nothing to do with personal safety. Unless you're a politician.

one would need to show a link between licensed firearm owners and crime.
Im pretty sure its a negative correlation.
Punitive laws without basis in reality invite disobedience

 

[Halifax Tar]

Obvious biases admitted

 

[IKnowNothing]

So the premier of the state of New South Wales in Australia is going to tighten up gun laws including possibly removing hunting as a reason to own a gun…

To clarify- that's a pretty inaccurate and inflammatory headline. What has actually happened

• Minns proposed reforms (some sensible, some reactionary) that don't mention anything about removing hunting.
  • in fact, as recently as this August the Minns government was supportive of a Private members bill to enshrine the right to hunt on public land.
• Sue Higginson - a Green politician (only slightly more relevant than our Greens, same ideological space) endorsed a gun-control lobby plan via letter to Minns and opposition leader, said letter contained the verbiage:

""Now is the time to heed the advice of experts, advocates and survivors and rule out recreational hunting as a genuine reason to own a firearm."

• When questioned about this Minns vague and noncommittedly punted :

"“We are going to review that,” he said, adding that the best approach to handle the matter has yet to be determined.

 

[Jarnhamar]

(some sensible, some reactionary)

Which do you think are sensible?

 

[IKnowNothing]

Which do you think are sensible?

Those related to police actioning intelligence wrt license denial/ removals, taking away the ability of a bleeding heart tribunal to overrule on police decisions.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Those related to police actioning intelligence wrt license denial/ removals, taking away the ability of a bleeding heart tribunal to overrule on police decisions.

That sounds reasonable.

Reclassifying pump action shotguns sounds like they're done.

 

[IKnowNothing]

That sounds reasonable.

Reclassifying pump action shotguns sounds like they're done.

It made me curious as to their classification regime and how that change would reflect from the status quo

https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__dat...e_Categories_and_Firearm_Types_FACT_Sheet.pdf
What Guns Are Legal In Australia? Complete Guide To Firearms Regulations And Licensing Requirements

Quick assessment -
pump action shotguns are already incredibly restricted, that change is pure reactionary fluff

But also - it's been released that Akram had an AB. If I'm not mistaken that's an SA charging handle and an 8 round tube. Unless I'm missing something that's a class D gun, how does he have it legally?

Edit- I was mistaken. That's a Stoeger M3000 straight pull with a10+1 mag tube. So a clear gap in their regime relative to pumps/ levers.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Quick assessment -
pump action shotguns are already incredibly restricted, that change is pure reactionary fluff

That's what I thought too, already fairly restricted.

Low hanging fruit reactionary gun control responses set up a slippery bananna flavored slope. Anytime a new incident happens authorities will look to that low hanging fruit and see what's next to ban.

I wonder what would happen if cops in Australia were stabbed and their guns taken like what happened to the two officers in Belgium.

 

[IKnowNothing]

That's what I thought too, already fairly restricted.

Low hanging fruit reactionary gun control responses set up a slippery bananna flavored slope.

I know you don't like my approach to this- but in my opinion the firearm (particularly that Stoeger) used set up the Australian gun lobby with a pretty easy play to mitigate the reactionary gun control responses.

Looking at their shotgun classification the logic is pretty clear (regardless of whether one agrees with it). Lever shotgun (5 round cap) in B. Pump shotgun (5 round cap in C), anything more than 5 in D. Civilians to be universally capped at 5. Clearly straight pull/ bolt action shotguns were not in the picture in 97, and the straight pull work around enabled asshole to have a 10+1 on a technicality. Serve that sacrificial lamb up on a platter and set straight pulls with a 5 round cap in B or C, greater than 5 to D, make the licensing intelligence/ appeal reforms and move forward.

The gun control lobby is going to studiously try to ignore straight pull > 5 technicality above while they try to leverage the tragedy for a bigger play.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I know you don't like my approach to this- but in my opinion the firearm (particularly that Stoeger) used set up the Australian gun lobby with a pretty easy play to mitigate the reactionary gun control responses.

I get it. When it comes to gun control people in general lacking practical experience get lured into a false sence of security and safety with magic numbers like only 5 rounds for a rifle or only 10 rounds for a pistol etc.

The next logical step for gun control advocates is why do you need more than 1 bullet to shoot an animal? If you can't kill the animal with 1 shot then you should become a better shot. Rifles and shotguns should be single shot only.

Looking at their shotgun classification the logic is pretty clear (regardless of whether one agrees with it). Lever shotgun (5 round cap) in B. Pump shotgun (5 round cap in C), anything more than 5 in D. Civilians to be universally capped at 5. Clearly straight pull/ bolt action shotguns were not in the picture in 97, and the straight pull work around enabled asshole to have a 10+1 on a technicality. Serve that sacrificial lamb up on a platter and set straight pulls with a 5 round cap in B or C, greater than 5 to D, make the licensing intelligence/ appeal reforms and move forward.

"Serve that sacrificial lamb up". That says it all right there.

I'm no Aztec but I'm pretty sure their sacrifices were yearly. Letting your neighbors daughter get thrown into the volcano thinking yours won't be next.

 

[IKnowNothing]

I get it. When it comes to gun control people in general lacking practical experience get lured into a false sence of security and safety with magic numbers like only 5 rounds for a rifle or only 10 rounds for a pistol etc.

The next logical step for gun control advocates is why do you need more than 1 bullet to shoot an animal? If you can't kill the animal with 1 shot then you should become a better shot. Rifles and shotguns should be single shot only.

They have an accepted regime, said regime has internally consistent logic, and has been in effect for almost 30 years with a general weakening (not tightening) since 97. If an event like Bondi only leads to closing loopholes and maintaining the same internally consistent logic - that's a line held.

Slippery slope is a named fallacy for a reason- it's not sound argumentation.

 

[Jarnhamar]

with a general weakening (not tightening) since 97.

Tightening since 1997 includes:

-2003/2004 National Handgun Agreement after Monash University (which lead to stricter licensing, magazine limits, and barrel lengths).

-2015 appearance-based reforms targeting rapid-fire aesthetics and imports.

-Repeated re-classifications and buybacks

-Ongoing tightening of storage, importation, and dealer requirements (all good things, still tightening)

 

[Eaglelord17]

They have an accepted regime, said regime has internally consistent logic, and has been in effect for almost 30 years with a general weakening (not tightening) since 97. If an event like Bondi only leads to closing loopholes and maintaining the same internally consistent logic - that's a line held.

Slippery slope is a named fallacy for a reason- it's not sound argumentation.

You call it a fallacy, yet it is not. It is only a fallacy when you over exaggerate the end result, which based off the evidence provided we are not. In Canada we are on the slippery slope argument, which can be proven through the continued and repeated attacks against legal firearms ownership.

Here is a good summary of Canadas laws over time (provided by the RCMP surprisingly). You will notice every time a little bit is given up they come back a few years later and take more.

To say they aren’t trying to slowly strangle firearms ownership in this country is at a minimum ignorant, at maximum it is purposely malicious to help achieve said goal.

History of firearms in Canada

On this page The 19th century The 20th century The 21st century The 19th century Before 1892, you weren't allowed to carry a handgun if you didn't have reasonable cause to fear assault against your life or property. Justices of the Peace could impose a six-month jail term on anyone carrying a...

rcmp.ca

 

[NavyShooter]

What they're really doing is they're strangling the manufacturers and dealers.

That's the thing which will, in the end, kill the sport.