To Own A Gun In Canada

Calm yourself , I didn't say you called anyone in particular an " anti " or an " alarmist " , I said you use these terms for anyone that is on the opposite side of these two issues and that these broad brush extremes do not favour discussion

 

...i am calm... i am just expressing that it's not sensible for those who live in glass houses to throw bricks...

...some of the terms i use are for convenience in discussion, ...a parlance of sorts, and getting one's thoughts out in a consise manner that is suitable for the format of web forum... i am not branding folks w/ these references... if it's true it takes two to tango, ...then there are most certainly two "sides" pushing in opposite directions, in reference to the topic of gun law...

 

frigging pros

 

...prose?...

 

I have a question for all you guys comparing gun violence rates between different countries. How do you justify a statistical analysis between apples and oranges?

The way I see it different countries have drastically different cultures, and there are many variables at play. To many variables to make an apples to apples comparison because of things like drugs, gangs, and so on which might be rampant in one country but must less existent in another.

If you want to compare something on a even basis, compare different areas within the same country where guns are banned and where they are not. I think if you do the research you will see that total gun bans in NYC, Philly, and Chicago have actually done nothing to reduce violent crime and have helped to increase crimes like robberies or breaking and entering compared to other major metro areas that do not have these types of bans.

 

I don't think a gun ban is being proposed, also, I don't think a gun ban in a single city would do much good. The problem is deeper than one city.

Plus, comparing cities 1/3rd of the way across the country from one another is just as, if not more, erroneous as comparing cities 100 miles across a border. I think the people in Seattle culturally are much closer to Vancouver than almost anywhere in the SE US. The same goes all over this country huge differences in SE to W or NE to S.

 

And big cities are where the gangs are at. Ban or no ban of course there's going to be more violence and murders if you're comparing it to bumblefuck county in the sticks where everyone has guns. That's hardly an accurate stat to say "well they don't have guns there and look the crime."

Let me guess, less people are getting herpes at church picnics than at frat parties, too.

 

Jtav2002; Please tell me where I compared metro areas to a "bumblefuck" county? Do you even read anyone's post before you quote it and respond?

If you would read my post that you quoted it says: "compared to other major metro areas that do not have these types of bans"

I was also not trying to compare an east coast city like NYC to a west coast city like Seattle. I was referring to other major metro areas right close around them.

The fact is that crime and gun violence in the same cities before the bans and after the bans has remained relatively unchanged, and crime like robberies has gone up since gangsters don't have to worry about getting shot by a home owner defending themselves anymore. The only thing that has changed is that the citizens, who live in those cities, have had their right to defend themselves and their home unjustly taken away!

 

A gun ban on certain types of guns certainly is being proposed, and I was using the U.S. cities that already have total gun bans in place as an example that it doesn't work.

Guns will never get banned all at once. It starts out with a total gun registration for all guns (like what is currently being proposed), then a ban on certain types of guns (like what is currently being proposed). Then as people get use to those ideas and it becomes the norm, they expand the ban to include more guns. Before you know it were allowed to hunt with nothing but muzzle loaders and .22s

You might think I'm crazy and it will never happen, but that's exactly the type of thinking that will cause it to happen eventually. Maybe not in our lifetime, but over the course of several generations.

 

Do you even read anything either? Everyone keeps saying banning guns doesn't work when no one is suggesting banning guns. Everyone keeps coming back to that defense. I'm not quite sure why people are intent on arguing a point that no one is making. I don't believe anyone in here suggested banning guns.

Statistics are pointless because both sides are just going to twist them to suit their argument anyway. Same with any other political issue.

Also Philly doesn't have a complete ban on guns.

 

Must be a cultural thing

 

Its a culture of acceptance. Its the norm. Rather than talk about ways you could prevent some of the violence lets just accept it will happen regardless and make sure everyone has instantaneous access to any weapon they want. I'm surprised that with some of the people who are against any control, background checks and all, that someone hasn't tried to implement a firearm vending machine.

 

I apologize for getting off topic in my initial posts, as I was bringing U.S. gun restriction proposals into this thread about Canada. As for the O.P., I do agree with more strict background checks and most of the items on the list for Canada. However these couple are just totally absurd to me:

7. Disclose the names and contact information of all conjugal partners in the last two years. These former and current partners are contacted to see if they have any concerns regarding the individual’s acquisition of a firearm.

Ok, so some woman who you broke up with for another woman and may hold a grudge against you should be able to lie and restrict you from obtaining a firearm? I could see looking into restraining orders, but just word of mouth from anyone you had a conjugal encounter with is a little over the top.


9. Disclose whether you have threatened or attempted suicide, any consultation or treatment for alcohol, substance abuse, and behavioral or emotional problems in the last 5 years.

Does this mean that if you have sought out treatment like AA or any other substance abuse that you should not be able to own a firearm? If so, that's wrong and alienates substance abuse and people with mild depression. Basically any firearms owner would be afraid to seek out treatment for fear of having their guns confiscated.

Violance offences and severe mental disorders are one thing. Someone seeking treatment for substance abuse, or for mild depression is another thing.

 

7. I can agree that this one is a little much. I can see where they're coming though who best to be a judge of character than someone who was around the person a lot (assuming they don't hold a grudge).

Same with the treatment one. I can see where its coming from if someone had an issue before that could be made worse by access to a firearm. Again I wouldn't actually support that extreme of a measure but I can see the logic. It would obviously never fly here.

 

When I applied for my PAL, none of the people I put on the list were contacted. Even my wife didn't get the phone call. Come to think about it, my character references didn't get called either. Maybe I'm just that good of a guy.

My friend that has his restricted license was treated for anxiety and take meds for it. All was disclosed on the application and he got it anyway. So I don't think it's a auto deny if you answer yes to those questions.

 

This. I know a guy who is bi-polar and got his license.

 

Sounds like they enforce current Canadian gun control laws about as well as they enforce current U.S. gun control laws here in the states.

For some reason you can fail 20 background checks here in the U.S. and keep trying, without ever having anything happen to you even though there are laws against it. But for some reason they think we need more new laws in the U.S., which Joe Biden is on record saying he truly believes any new laws created will make no difference whatsoever in preventing another mass shooting. hmmmm After he goes on national TV with kids standing behind him telling the exact opposite thing to the American people.

You can check the video out on you tube here:

Caught on Camera: Joe Biden admits gun control will not stop mass shootings or save lives

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgA-Ub4uY7k

 

Why do you say that ?

It doesn't state anywhere that any health condition , mental or otherwise would automatically disqualify you from being able to have a firearm

 

^^