• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
>If this is such a wicked awesome idea, why wasn't it carried out in all the flood effected areas?

The simplest and most likely explanation is that a house-by-house search wasn't deemed necessary or was not requested by civil authorities in all affected and evacuated areas.  However, if firearm retrieval was a feature in only one place, it looks less like "policy" - which should be applied uniformly - and more like one decision maker's "initiative" (quest).

The underlying principle - which is not protected by the law as written - is that an activity to accomplish "A" should not be or become a vehicle for surreptitious aim "B", particularly in the relatively small (and shrinking) areas of people's lives in which they still have an (intuitive, if not necessarily and completely legal) expectation of privacy.  There are more things than firearms that people have in their homes that they don't want authorities or neighbours to know about (a small community doesn't readily sustain the anonymity one can enjoy in a larger one).

Note that the underlying problem is that the legal and philosophical aspects of the issue are not properly aligned.  Law is a means to serve moral and ethical imperatives, not an end in itself.
 
Container said:
that lawyer needs to go back to school. Plain view doctrine has been enshrined in common law forever.

I do agree the laws need changing though.

If you were in the docket, for the Crown, Solomon Friedman would eat you for a snack.

Before you make statements on someone's competency, you should research their background.
 
Container said:
One of you PLEASE hypothesize what the dark hearted idea behind taking the firearms while the folks were out of town is?

I have no doubt that it was done in "good intentions," but to me that's irrelevant. There are people in this country, some of them RCMP, that would make it illegal for anybody to own a pellet a gun, all because of their "good intentions."

We have the law written down in black and white to keep people's good intentions and good ideas at bay.

Container said:
The statements have indicated they were improperly stored.

Only one statement says that, some of the others suggest otherwise. It is definitely still unclear, but when the dust settles down I believe we're going to see that anything in "plain view" was scooped up, properly stored or not.
 
ballz said:
I have no doubt that it was done in "good intentions," but to me that's irrelevant. There are people in this country, some of them RCMP, that would make it illegal for anybody to own a pellet a gun, all because of their "good intentions."

We have the law written down in black and white to keep people's good intentions and good ideas at bay.

Only one statement says that, some of the others suggest otherwise. It is definitely still unclear, but when the dust settles down I believe we're going to see that anything in "plain view" was scooped up, properly stored or not.

I for one have no problem with police doing things like this as long as they are transparent about what they are doing.  This is the number one problem I have with the RCMP as an organization:  They are almost never transparent. 

Another problem with our gun laws is they are poorly written and have large grey areas.  Don't get me wrong, I am a gun-owner and am definitely pro-firearm.  I am also a card-carrying NFA member.  I just feel this whole issue is being blown out of proportion and we are focusing in on it when we should be focusing on helping these people recover what they have lost.

Out of all of this I haven't really seen anyone ask the people of High River what they think about the whole thing.  The news cameras showed about 50 people arguing with police about going back into town this morning and then tried to make a loose connection that these people were upset about the police taking their firearms.  Not once did I hear one of the people arguing with police mention the word firearm.  Also High River has a population of just over 12,000 so clearly not everyone was incensed by being not let into town yet.

The media is basically trying to create a controversy out of this when their really isn't one and we are playing right into their BS.
 
It seems to my jaundiced eye, that at least some of the press coverage is less about the Donkey Wallopers' lack of a clear stated intent, and more "holy shit, look at all those insecure guns in Alberta!"  They keep mentioning a substantial number, not an accurate one.  And yes, if with the evacuation order there would have been a statement of intent to secure these firearms, a whole pile of bile would not have been expended over this.
 
Kat Stevens said:
It seems to my jaundiced eye, that at least some of the press coverage is less about the Donkey Wallopers' lack of a clear stated intent, and more "holy crap, look at all those insecure guns in Alberta!"  They keep mentioning a substantial number, not an accurate one.  And yes, if with the evacuation order there would have been a statement of intent to secure these firearms, a whole pile of bile would not have been expended over this.

Agreed, on one hand you have SUN News (AKA Fox News Canada) giving it to the government, then on the other hand you have the CBC and the Globe & Mail talking about how many unsecured guns.  Can we ever get a non-biased report in Canada.
 
Old Sweat said:
Think Bob Cole calling a Maple Leafs' game as the example of fair and unbiased.

3oske9.jpg
 
Hopefully this doesn't back fire and we end up having to keep ALL guns locked in vaults, out of sight, trigger locks on, bolts removed.
 
recceguy said:
If you were in the docket, for the Crown, Solomon Friedman would eat you for a snack.

Before you make statements on someone's competency, you should research their background.

Your lawyer friend is playing the media- as soon as a lawyer tells you that suing the RCMP wont change how they do business you know they dont have a leg to stand on. Thats the only way the government changes business. That and when the supreme court tells them something is wrong. So we'll have to agree to disagree. I disagree with his position. It is counter to everything I have ever testified to in court. Unless you mean his statement of carte blanche seizures. I agree with him on that.

But in hindsite- if thats what I thought I could have said that rather than make an off handed remark. I've yet to be "eaten" in court.

Rick Goebel said:
Container said:

"http://www.cisc.gc.ca/annual_reports/annual_report_2007/feature_focus_2007_e.html

The two main sources of firearms for crime in Canada are smuggled from the states or stolen. It s not up for discussion. Its geographic dependant- but stolen firearms are a huge source and concern."

I saw nothing in that article that suggested that domestically stolen guns are a large source of illegal weapons.  All it says is that this is one of two main sources.  It doesn't contradict a 97/3 split.

Allow me, it varies by geography and is nowhere near "97/3":

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2011/03/07/17527226.html

THE SOURCE

Roughly 50% of the guns police pull off Ottawa's streets are illegal handguns mostly sourced from the U.S.

The other 50% are long guns either stolen or obtained by other unlawful means and altered for portability.

50% - Smuggled
50% - Domestic

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/fire-feu-eval/t2a-eng.htm

•Many sawed-off shotguns (and other long guns) that are recovered on the streets of Toronto have been found to originate from break and enters carried out in the large cottage area just north of the GTA.

•Prairie (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba) - Long guns are preferred by the criminal element throughout the Prairie provinces as this type of firearm tends to be more readily available in rural areas and thus targeted for criminal acquisition.

http://metronews.ca/news/halifax/14324/police-guns-home-sourced/

Guns used in crimes – like the 26 shootings in HRM so far this year – are overwhelmingly homegrown, police say.

Halifax Regional Police and Halifax RCMP say they seized 129 crime guns in 2010, and were able to track roughly half of them. They discovered 53 were from Canada and seven were smuggled across the border.

In many other areas of Canada it’s the other way around.

ballz said:
I have no doubt that it was done in "good intentions," but to me that's irrelevant. There are people in this country, some of them RCMP, that would make it illegal for anybody to own a pellet a gun, all because of their "good intentions."

I agree. Thats why individual officers that mistake their authorities need to have education. Thats not whats going on. You guys are going global instead of micro. If the position was "Those cops that took trigger locked firearms on plainview screwed up" that would seem to be a different conversation than the statements about the RCMP is on a holy war to seize firearms...temporarily?
 
"Container wrote:
"http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/fire-feu-eval/t2a-eng.htm
Quote
•Many sawed-off shotguns (and other long guns) that are recovered on the streets of Toronto have been found to originate from break and enters carried out in the large cottage area just north of the GTA.
Quote
•Prairie (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba) - Long guns are preferred by the criminal element throughout the Prairie provinces as this type of firearm tends to be more readily available in rural areas and thus targeted for criminal acquisition"

Interesting that from the one legitimate source you quote in this post you only quote fuzzy statements that say nothing about the sources of the firearms and no numbers.  Try:

Looking at "A Report on the Illegal Movement of Firearms in British Columbia - November 2008" (you can find it through Google):

"In 2007, the Tactical Analysis Unit (TAU) of the Canadian Firearms Program conducted an
analysis of 2,863 crime guns from seizures made by the Toronto Police Service and firearms
submitted for tracing (not all crime guns in the country) and were able to determine the source
of 710 guns. Of the 710 firearms, 324 were sourced domestically and 386 were illegally in
Canada (Appendix L). The source of the other firearms was not able to be determined due to
factors such as the age of the firearm, obliteration of serial numbers and poor record-keeping
by businesses. Washington State was the source in 16% of the cases."

Note that of 2,863 crime guns seized the source was identified for only 710.  I would submit that the ones without an identified source would have been  unlikely to be stolen from lawful gun-owning individuals.  Further, for the ones whose source was identified, you should note that "sourced domestically" doesn't necessarily mean stolen from legitimate gun-owning individuals in Canada.  Other "sourced domestically" could mean guns legally purchased, guns illegally purchased, or guns illegally borrowed.

According to the "Statistical Overview" of an RCMP-produced "Canadian Firearms Program Evaluation" (at http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/fire-feu-eval/t2a-eng.htm) and the same report you quoted:

"Between 1998 and 2003 in Toronto, 93% of firearm homicides involved a handgun. In 2006, police recovered 61 (36%) firearms that had been used in homicides. Of these, 18 (30%) were registered (i.e., 12 rifles or shotguns, 4 handguns and 2 sawed off rifles or shotguns). Police were able to determine ownership in 45 (74%) cases: 26 were owned by the accused, 2 by the victim and 17 by another person (10 of these were reported as stolen)."

Note that guns reported as stolen could also have been from a gun shop.  The BC report quoted above discusses this problem in detail later in the document.

Yes, I know these figures are all for Toronto but at least they are from reputable sources.  How about some real numbers from reputable sources from you?

 
Question about Shotguns and the law.

Shotguns are limited to 3 rounds for hunting.  When someone buys a shotgun they don't always come with a plug.  If I am using a shotgun for target practice and it's fairly obvious I'm not hunting do I still need to have a plug in it? When exactly are shotguns required a plug?
 
ObedientiaZelum said:
Question about Shotguns and the law.

Shotguns are limited to 3 rounds for hunting.  When someone buys a shotgun they don't always come with a plug.  If I am using a shotgun for target practice and it's fairly obvious I'm not hunting do I still need to have a plug in it? When exactly are shotguns required a plug?

No you do not need the plug if you are using it for target practice. 
 
Sources: : Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Homicide Surveys? The Halifax police service?

Super unreliable?

And I like how you just assume that the untraceable firearms MUST have come from somewhere else. Thats an excellent assumption. Of course when I worked in forensic identification we couldnt trace firearms because of what the criminals had done to modify the firearm. But Im sure now they came from outside the country because you "submit" so.

Of the firearms Ive seized in raids in the last month- only the two tasers were from outside Canada. The simple fact is there are not real numbers here that speak to gun crime in Canada that work from coast to coast. Thats a stupid idea. When articles reference gun crime they reference BOTH sources and for a good damn reason- because depending on where you are the numbers are different.

I saw today in the updated news that the firearms are still being said to be left "insecure" laying in the open. They still arent defining insecure so the speculation remains.

Im not arguing this point anymore. The simple fact is youre choosing the stats to suit your viewpoint. The reality is it changes by area. There hasnt been a guns and gangs course, seminar, or file where domestically sourced isnt mentioned in the same breath as smuggled. There arent reliable statistics.

http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/prg/le/_fl/combattingillicitfirearms-en.pdf

More than 82% of firearms intercepted by CBSA were seized at the land border
(highway mode). During a five-year period from January 2001 to December 2005, CBSA
seized a total of 4,281 firearms, of which 2,698 (63.0%) were handguns and 1,541 (35.9%)
were long guns. The remaining 42 firearms were classified as "antique".

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/Article160.htm (from the RCMP)

2001
Lost/Missing          = 932
Stolen                    = 2,706
Recovered            = 1,379

2002
Lost/Missing            = 858
Stolen                      = 4,090
Recovered                = 1,879

Yes I know that includes thefts from gun shops. Which you feel is so epidemic it offsets all the other numbers. It varies geographically.

Not every gun seized at the border is used by organized crime. Not every stolen gun is either. Smuggled guns may well be a larger number- but stolen firearms are a HUGE part of the issue. Thats my entire point. Not that its a bigger issue. But that its a big enough issue it needs to be treated with respect.

PM me your response if you want to keep going. Post it here too or whatever but Im unsubscribing from this thread- I said my piece. We re now arguing about news articles and statistics. Not really a debate (im to blame for a good portion.) Ill come back around when we know something about the High River guns. For fun tomorrow Im going to run seized firearms from warrants since 2005 in my "district" and see how many were smuggled.

Rick Goebel said:
Looking at "A Report on the Illegal Movement of Firearms in British Columbia - November 2008" (you can find it through Google):

"In 2007, the Tactical Analysis Unit (TAU) of the Canadian Firearms Program conducted an
analysis of 2,863 crime guns from seizures made by the Toronto Police Service and firearms
submitted for tracing (not all crime guns in the country) and were able to determine the source
of 710 guns. Of the 710 firearms, 324 were sourced domestically and 386 were illegally in
Canada (Appendix L). The source of the other firearms was not able to be determined due to
factors such as the age of the firearm, obliteration of serial numbers and poor record-keeping
by businesses. Washington State was the source in 16% of the cases."

Note that of 2,863 crime guns seized the source was identified for only 710.  I would submit that the ones without an identified source would have been  unlikely to be stolen from lawful gun-owning individuals.  Further, for the ones whose source was identified, you should note that "sourced domestically" doesn't necessarily mean stolen from legitimate gun-owning individuals in Canada.  Other "sourced domestically" could mean guns legally purchased, guns illegally purchased, or guns illegally borrowed.

According to the "Statistical Overview" of an RCMP-produced "Canadian Firearms Program Evaluation" (at http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/fire-feu-eval/t2a-eng.htm) and the same report you quoted:

"Between 1998 and 2003 in Toronto, 93% of firearm homicides involved a handgun. In 2006, police recovered 61 (36%) firearms that had been used in homicides. Of these, 18 (30%) were registered (i.e., 12 rifles or shotguns, 4 handguns and 2 sawed off rifles or shotguns). Police were able to determine ownership in 45 (74%) cases: 26 were owned by the accused, 2 by the victim and 17 by another person (10 of these were reported as stolen)."

Note that guns reported as stolen could also have been from a gun shop.  The BC report quoted above discusses this problem in detail later in the document.

Yes, I know these figures are all for Toronto but at least they are from reputable sources.  How about some real numbers from reputable sources from you?
 
ballz said:
Like I said, this is a sideshow to the actual point, but interesting none the less.

I've no doubt those are the two main sources. What I question is which one is primary and which is secondary. Especially when it comes to handguns, everything I've read is that it is largely (like, 90%+) smuggled in from the US. Knowing how large of a source pillaged firearms are (and I mean hard data) would allow me to weigh the risks associated with leaving the firearms in place. Because my perception is that the risks associated of leaving all those legally stored firearms in place were not very high.

Of course its different geographically, but from what I've read the urban areas that have good access to the border show similar trends. Vancouver, southern Ontario, southern Quebec, and even New Brunswick as of left. It's no secret out west that organized crime is running between Vancouver and Calgary, and Calgary and Edmonton.

Totally missed this one. We re in agreement. And yes to your handgun stats- everything points to that being true.
 
According to this article, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, gun control ~ control of the guns that many (most?) people agree are problematical (unlicensed hand guns) ~ just got more difficult:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/u-of-t-teams-diy-handgun-tests-the-potential-of-3-d-printing/article12943852/#dashboard/follows/
U of T team’s DIY handgun tests the potential of 3-D printing

JUSTIN GIOVANNETTI
TORONTO — The Globe and Mail

Last updated Wednesday, Jul. 03 2013

It’s a pistol that sounds like a criminal’s dream. Undetectable, untraceable by police and assembled in downtown Toronto, it’s a handgun with a single part that could set off a metal detector: its deadly .380 bullet.

With law enforcement struggling to cut off the flow of smuggled firearms into Canada’s largest city, new technology is on the verge of making current policing approaches obsolete. In late May, a team of four at the University of Toronto set out to prove that they could build a working handgun with a 3-D printer.

It took them 26 hours and files downloaded off the Internet. The result was Canada’s first printed handgun, the tip of a new 3-D printed world where nearly everything can be created in your basement. The technology stands to change the world in both fascinating and frightening ways: just as major innovations such as the Internet have enhanced the way we live, they have rapidly created profound new debates over policy, safety and ethics.

The team at U of T didn’t break any laws. Using the plans for the Liberator, the world’s first 3-D printable handgun that was made in the States, the researchers changed the design of the pistol to make it impossible to fire – although it could have, had they kept the design intact.

The $300 price tag for materials to print the pistol is far below the going price for a street weapon.

The man behind the handgun isn’t a gun-rights advocate. The director of the university’s Critical Making Lab, Matt Ratto explained that his team built the weapon to better understand 3-D printing. He worries that the government won’t take 3-D printing seriously before one of the undetectable pistols is used on Toronto’s streets.

web-gun01nw1.JPG

University of Toronto professor Matt Ratto, left, used a 3-D printer to build a plastic handgun with his team:
postdoctoral researcher Isaac Record and PhD students Dan Southwick and Ginger Coons.
(PETER POWER/THE GLOBE AND MAIL)


The first working design, the Liberator, is still crude. “It’s only useful if you want to kill someone from about three feet away,” said Dr. Ratto.

While it is legal in the United States to build homemade firearms, Canadian law strictly prohibits the practice. Plans accompanying the design warn makers to insert a steel plate in the pistol’s grip to make it detectable, the only requirement under U.S. law. Built out of clear plastic, the white spring and hammer inside Dr. Ratto’s pistol is visible, making it look like a cross between a toy and a flare gun.

No Canadian law prohibits the downloading of gun files or requires the tracking of 3-D printers, devices which can make anything from ceramic coffee cups to steel firearms.

Canada’s police services have varying levels of knowledge when it comes to these weapons, with the advent of 3-D printable guns not yet on the radar of some forces. No 3-D printable weapon has yet to be used to commit a crime in Canada.

Declining an interview request, the RCMP told The Globe and Mail that it will continue to “monitor” the development of 3-D printers. The national force has no policies for 3-D printed handguns. Police officers in Montreal were unfamiliar with the technology, having never come across a 3-D printed handgun. One constable was left wondering how a “photocopier” could make a dangerous weapon.

Unveiled by Texas law student and anarchist Cody Wilson last May, the plans for the single-shot handgun are easily accessible online. After the first videos of the pistol firing, the U.S. State Department ordered Mr. Wilson to remove the files from his website, citing arms-export laws. The design was downloaded 100,000 times before he could comply.

“You have to accept that this is going to happen,” said Mr. Wilson of the spread of the 3-D-printed weapon.

Due to the success of the Toronto Police’s anti-gun strategy, even cheap handguns fetch as much as $2,000 on the city’s streets. During major raids by the police on June 13, 40 firearms were seized at a number of sites across the city. While guns like the Liberator are not expected to replace those seized, future versions could become more attractive in the years to come.

“It’ll be a judgment call for a criminal if they want to use the Liberator,” the 25-year-old Mr. Wilson said from his home in Arkansas. “There are already plans online for a submachine gun made from parts available at a hardware store.”

More than 10,000 Canadians are now thought to have access to 3-D printers, a number that is expected to explode over the next few years as cheaper and simpler models are unveiled. The office-supply giant Staples recently unveiled a $1,300 printer designed for hobbyists.

When asked how police could stop people from printing handguns in their basement, Dr. Ratto’s response was curt: “They can’t.” Worried that governments will react with strong-armed legislation and that police forces won’t have the proper procedures to react, he has offered to print a working plastic handgun for the Toronto Police. Contacted on Wednesday, the police confirmed they had declined the offer.

A self-described libertarian who has been labelled one of the world’s most dangerous men by Wired magazine, Mr. Wilson was not bothered that the Liberator had been printed in Canada.

“The kind of person who would print a Liberator in Toronto is probably someone curious and intelligent, someone who deserves the mercy of police and not the baton,” Mr. Wilson said.


I don't, yet, own a 3D printer but when the price is right I might buy one and the prospect of building a working, mechanical thing is intriguing.
 
By the way, the price of 3D printers is drifting down, towards "hobbyist" levels; see: here.

A101-1000_chiclet01_gfv_mn_8160365.jpg
$1,839.99 + taxes and shipping

A101-20001_vmain01_cp_mn_8160367.jpg
$50.89 + taxes and shipping.
 
While it is legal in the United States to build homemade firearms, Canadian law strictly prohibits the practice.

It is not against the law for individuals to manufacture their own firearms in Canada. The law does not prohibit it.

More unresearched hysteria from Canada's anti gun crowd.

The Liberator, while recent, is not news anymore.

Toronto geeks creating an agenda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top