Jump to content

Canada bans 1,500 types of assault firearms YES!


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, bpm57 said:
15 hours ago, jocal505 said:

It (meaning the statute of Northampton) expressly discouraged armed interactions.

Cite the statute, Joey.

Try Wiki. 

  • "...no person shall “go nor ride armed by night nor by day, in Fairs, Markets, nor in the presence of

            the Justices or other Ministers, nor in no part elsewhere.”

I'll do you one better--here's an explanation of your Sir John Knight, just to show how things worked wrt the Statute of Northampton.

Knight hated Catholics, and his personal-involvement thing was to persecute them. However, James II imprisoned Knight, and brought him before a jury, for something that was an official action. The Libertarians are making up goofy shit about why he was exonerated, Deadeye. Did you fall for it?

Quote

CHARLES_CHRISTENSEN HISTORIOGRAPHICAL CRISIS p1833

Here the (Second Amendment) Foundation advances five domino links that require the historical integrity of the former link for any subsequent links to fall. Thus, should any of the links prove historically untenable, the Foundation’s alleged “domino effect” results in a “domino defect.” Not surprisingly, given the poor foundation upon which the Standard Model is built, the Foundation’s “domino defect” presents itself at numerous points.

 

In fact, all five domino links can be dismissed by illuminating three very serious historical errors: (1) a misunderstanding of Sir John Knight’s case, (2) the mischaracterization of the Statute of Northampton’s prosecutorial scope, and (3) applying these two errors to claim the Founders believed a publicly armed populace or unorganized militia prevents and deters crime.

 

 Beginning with Sir John Knight’s case,610 as early as the 1980s, Standard Model writers have consistently misinterpreted the facts, legal issue, and holding as supporting a right to carry arms for selfdefense,611 when the case’s history actually undercuts it.612 At issue was whether Knight could be charged in violation of the Statute of Northampton, which stipulated that no person shall “go nor ride armed by night nor by day, in Fairs, Markets, nor in the presence of

 

609. Appellants’ Reply Brief at 6-7, Moore v. Madigan, No. 12-1269 (7th Cir. May 23, 2012) (citations omitted).

610. See Rex v. Knight, [1686] 90 Eng. Rep. 330; [1686] 87 Eng. Rep. 76.

611. See, e.g., Caplan, supra note 359, at 794-95. 612. See Charles, supra note 9, at 27-30.

 

 the Justices or other Ministers, nor in no part elsewhere.”613 It is important to note that a violation of the Statute was a misdemeanor, not a felony, meaning that the day-to-day enforcement of its provisions did not require a jury.

 

Knight’s case, however, was different. He was not just any person carrying arms in the public concourse. Knight was one of a number of armed government officials who seized a Catholic priest much to the anger of James II, yet he was also the only person imprisoned and charged with violating the law.614 Aware of the political nature of the charges and without any proof that Knight acted outside the scope of his authority, the jury acquitted him.615

 

 Knight never rested his defense on a right to go armed for personal self-defense. Instead, he defended his case in terms of “[l]oyalty.”616 In particular, Knight relied upon the public official exception to the Statute of Northampton.617 This is why the English Reports reference “evil intent,” for the crown’s attorney would have been required to prove that Knight intentionally acted beyond the scope of his employment—a burden the attorney failed to prove. There is absolutely no indication in either the English Reports or other contemporary sources that Knight’s case stands for the proposition that “the carrying of arms was not forbidden as a matter of public safety or crime reduction.”618

 

 The Second Amendment Foundation’s argument in this regard is not history, but the lawyering of historical sources to advance its own interests. In fact, the opposite held true regarding the Statute’s purpose, scope, and subsequent enforcement. There are a number of examples where the Statute was enforced to prevent crime and maintain the peace.619

Source: see page 1833 here   Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 39, pg 1727, 2012

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 500
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I spent some time earlier this year in the US (there is a thread about it).   For the Americans reading this thread, a helpful piece of advice is to stop thinking of Canadians as the same as Amer

What we are trying to do is create a public mindset that these things are just unacceptable, completely.  I think that the mindset is just as important as the actual legislation. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-gun-control-measures-ban-1.5552131 After last weeks mass shooting in Nova Scotia, Trudeau has lived up to his promise (and one of the key reasons why I vo

Posted Images

On 5/7/2020 at 1:44 AM, Ease the sheet. said:
On 5/7/2020 at 1:38 AM, Rain Man said:

Well, you folks are doing something wrong.  In 2017, in the USA, there were 39,773 gun deaths.  In Canada in the same year, there were 266.  Your population is 10 times ours, so if you were doing things our way, you would have only had 2660 deaths.  Your way caused an additional 37,113 deaths.  

But, hey, you do you.

 

Go research suicide stats.

Just so you're prepared for the inevitable strawmen....

He's only counting US suicides and excluding them from the Canadian numbers, using typical gungrabby levels of honesty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steganographic Tom said:

He's only counting US suicides and excluding them from the Canadian numbers, using typical gungrabby levels of honesty.

Ah yes, you demand honesty, in others.

Calculated dishonesty, by omission, is when Tom Ray will not weigh in on The Standard Model of the Second Amendment. LMFAO. It is a unique (and embarrassing) Libertarian creation.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look out! She's got a fake plastic toy gun! PANIC!
 

Quote

 

Star Wars fans all over the world celebrated the series on May 4th ("May the fourth be with you") on Monday. Because it's a Star Wars-themed pizza joint, Coco Vanilla Galactic Cantina in Alberta took advantage of the occasion to drum up more takeout business by having an employee stand outside the restaurant dressed as an Imperial stormtrooper.  

Then the police showed up. 

...

A statement by LPS said the employee "dropped the weapon but did not initially comply" with the orders. Whalen disagrees with the statement, saying the video is "very clear" that she was compliant. Whalen also notes that the hard plastic costume makes it difficult enough to sit down, let alone kneel.

In the video, the employee can be heard sobbing through her helmet as she attempts to kneel and get down on the ground.

"It could have been very simple and over at that point in time, but the city police here decided that they were going to escalate it and be physical with her," Whalen says.

The LPS statement goes on to say that the employee "sustained a minor injury," but does not provide any further information. Whalen tells Reason that the officers pushed her face down and ended up cutting her nose on the helmet, and that was after they had already determined that the gun was fake.

...

 

 

Geez, what would they do if she had an (assault weapon, ordinary .22)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to think that somewhere in suburban USA, some soccer mom reads a news article that says "Canada bans assault weapons".  And that same soccer mom might have read a while ago "New Zealand bans assault weapons".   And that soccer mom thinks "why can't we do the same in the USA?".  

And that is how change will come about.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Bugsy said:

I would like to think that somewhere in suburban USA, some soccer mom reads a news article that says "Canada bans assault weapons".  And that same soccer mom might have read a while ago "New Zealand bans assault weapons".   And that soccer mom thinks "why can't we do the same in the USA?".  

And that is how change will come about.  

Or maybe she'll do a little thinking about whether people who own ordinary .22's are really responsible for criminals' behavior and should really be punished by confiscation of their property. I've thought about those questions and my answers are still no and no.

Or maybe she'll wonder what suicides have to do with banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's). My answer is still not a damn thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Steganographic Tom said:

Or maybe she'll do a little thinking about whether people who own ordinary .22's are really responsible for criminals' behavior and should really be punished by confiscation of their property. I've thought about those questions and my answers are still no and no.

Or maybe she'll wonder what suicides have to do with banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's). My answer is still not a damn thing.

Guns. The method of choice for depressed older males attempting  suicide and again male suicide by cop.  Quite successful in both instances.  Suicides by other methods require courage, which is not always available to depressed older males. Compare the rate of such suicides in other constituencies than the US and it really does make a difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2020 at 6:46 AM, Bugsy said:

I would like to think that somewhere in suburban USA, some soccer mom reads a news article that says "Canada bans assault weapons".  And that same soccer mom might have read a while ago "New Zealand bans assault weapons".   And that soccer mom thinks "why can't we do the same in the USA?".  

And that is how change will come about.  

In the States these days she's more likely to think "I better get one now while I still can".

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

In the States these days she's more likely to think "I better get one now while I still can".

True.  Women are one of the fastest growing demographics of new gun-owners.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2020 at 4:18 AM, Female Canine Firestorm said:

Sorry, but in a country where the 2A specifically allows for self-defense and national defense via the militia - target shooting is an essential skill for regular folk too.  For the exact same reason it is for Mil and the Po-Leece.  

And no, the self-defense argument has not been debunked.  Quite the opposite actually.  

On that note, I'm going target shooting tomorrow specifically to hone my self-defense skills.  I'll be joined by a retired ex-British London Bobby who also believes that "regular folk" should be able to defend themselves, since the Po-Leece can't be everywhere all the time..  

When I go shooting, it’s not for self defence practice as people are not 5 inches in diameter or moving at 40 plus MPH through the air in every direction.......however some skills can be transferred if needed.

They better be fast moving Oompa Loompas if they want to play that game though ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mad said:

When I go shooting, it’s not for self defence practice as people are not 5 inches in diameter or moving at 40 plus MPH through the air in every direction.......however some skills can be transferred if needed.

They better be fast moving Oompa Loompas if they want to play that game though ;)

You never know.  If the zombies ever figure out how to use catapults to get some of their scouts over the walls..... your skillz will come in very handy in the post-apocalypse.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2020 at 6:59 PM, SloopJonB said:

Not to mention the heavy proportion of guns used in Canadian crime that are smuggled from - guess where?

If there wasn't an ocean of guns available across the border our numbers would be much lower - I suspect less than 1/2.

Well the UK has most of Eastern Europe to blame as well then for the smuggling issue....... and it’s still the legal, licence holding members of the population that get further restrictions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mad said:

Well the UK has most of Eastern Europe to blame as well then for the smuggling issue....... and it’s still the legal, licence holding members of the population that get further restrictions. 

And...... you're on a Fricken Island!!  Should be easy to stop smugglers, right?  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

You never know.  If the zombies ever figure out how to use catapults to get some of their scouts over the walls..... your skillz will come in very handy in the post-apocalypse.  

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

And...... you're on a Fricken Island!!  Should be easy to stop smugglers, right?  

 

Approximately 7000 miles of coastline, we’re gonna need a big fucking wall. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mad said:

Approximately 7000 miles of coastline, we’re gonna need a big fucking wall. 

Worked well for Hadrian, right?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2020 at 5:14 AM, jocal505 said:

However, James II imprisoned Knight, and brought him before a jury, for something that was an official action. The Libertarians are making up goofy shit about why he was exonerated, Deadeye. Did you fall for it?

Still awaiting your theory on why his "official action, he was a sheriff, etc" was never brought up in court. Instead he argued that it was a private affair.

Or why parliament felt the need to pass the Gun Licence Act of 1870 to raise revenue, if (as you claim) it had been illegal since the 14th century to "bear arms" outside of your dwelling.

Not that I expect you to ever answer them, since you seem to be unable to answer any question when it doesn't involve a cut-n-paste.

On 5/8/2020 at 5:14 AM, jocal505 said:

CHARLES_CHRISTENSEN HISTORIOGRAPHICAL CRISIS p1833

Google can't seem to find that. What a surprise.

BTW, Joe, have you figured out when the BoR was ratified? Your last couple attempts didn't go so well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bpm57 said:

Still awaiting your theory on why his "official action, he was a sheriff, etc" was never brought up in court. Instead he argued that it was a private affair.

Or why parliament felt the need to pass the Gun Licence Act of 1870 to raise revenue, if (as you claim) it had been illegal since the 14th century to "bear arms" outside of your dwelling.

Not that I expect you to ever answer them, since you seem to be unable to answer any question when it doesn't involve a cut-n-paste.

Google can't seem to find that. What a surprise.

BTW, Joe, have you figured out when the BoR was ratified? Your last couple attempts didn't go so well.

Are you presenting options for a US based culture or your comprehension of the culture that implemented the assault rifle laws?  If you wish to demean the culture, do so in that context.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bpm57 said:

Still awaiting your theory on why his "official action, he was a sheriff, etc" was never brought up in court. Instead he argued that it was a private affair.

Or why parliament felt the need to pass the Gun Licence Act of 1870 to raise revenue, if (as you claim) it had been illegal since the 14th century to "bear arms" outside of your dwelling.

Not that I expect you to ever answer them, since you seem to be unable to answer any question when it doesn't involve a cut-n-paste.

Google can't seem to find that. What a surprise.

BTW, Joe, have you figured out when the BoR was ratified? Your last couple attempts didn't go so well.

James II was kicked out of the country for not reading things right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Laker said:

Are you presenting options for a US based culture or your comprehension of the culture that implemented the assault rifle laws?  If you wish to demean the culture, do so in that context.

I was answering Joe. Or are you now the topic cop in here?

Why would I ever doubt a gov't that lists the HK416 & G36 rifles as 20mm firearms? ar15.com is banned also, so I guess canadians are no longer allowed to visit that website.

btw, some first nation folks seem to think some of the listed firearms have hunting utility. I'm sure that was just an oversight by the gov't

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Laker said:
13 hours ago, Steganographic Tom said:

Or maybe she'll do a little thinking about whether people who own ordinary .22's are really responsible for criminals' behavior and should really be punished by confiscation of their property. I've thought about those questions and my answers are still no and no.

Or maybe she'll wonder what suicides have to do with banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's). My answer is still not a damn thing.

Guns. The method of choice for depressed older males attempting  suicide and again male suicide by cop.  Quite successful in both instances.  Suicides by other methods require courage, which is not always available to depressed older males. Compare the rate of such suicides in other constituencies than the US and it really does make a difference.

But aren't the bans on (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) prompted by the fact that the banned guns fire more than one shot? Very few people shoot themselves twice, especially if they never did anything to piss off the CIA.

Anyway, I already did compare US suicides to other countries repeatedly over the years in the thread on that subject and I found that...

On 4/16/2015 at 9:52 AM, Steganographic Tom said:

Suicide-deaths-per-100000-trend.jpg

 

Must be the guns.

Still looks to me like the US has a pretty average suicide rate. I also compared our suicide rate to Canada's in that thread.

And I found that...

On 4/23/2020 at 6:58 AM, Steganographic Tom said:

Canada and the US have very similar suicide rates, with the Canadian rate topping ours in all age groups up until people are pretty old.

I don't want to see an idiotic confiscation program like they are undertaking for such questionable benefits.


Sorry, my answer is still that banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) has not a damn thing to do with suicides. They're just convenient for padding numbers to scare people in comparisons like the one by Rain Man that I quoted in post 204.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bpm57 said:

ar15.com is banned also, so I guess canadians are no longer allowed to visit that website.

 

They are actually banning a website?  Is this now the Democratic People's Republic of Canada?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bpm57 said:

 

btw, some first nation folks seem to think some of the listed firearms have hunting utility. I'm sure that was just an oversight by the gov't

Probably some Alberta farmers think the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steganographic Tom said:

But aren't the bans on (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) prompted by the fact that the banned guns fire more than one shot? Very few people shoot themselves twice, especially if they never did anything to piss off the CIA.

Anyway, I already did compare US suicides to other countries repeatedly over the years in the thread on that subject and I found that...

Still looks to me like the US has a pretty average suicide rate. I also compared our suicide rate to Canada's in that thread.

And I found that...


Sorry, my answer is still that banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) has not a damn thing to do with suicides. They're just convenient for padding numbers to scare people in comparisons like the one by Rain Man that I quoted in post 204.

I think you will find a difference in suicide by firearm. Apparently drowning is a biggy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That Canadian Privacy Hedge was a great bit . . 

I'll wager most of them wish is was actually a thing. 

https://outabouter.com/2018/12/21/canadian-gofundme-raises-6b-in-two-hours-to-pay-for-privacy-hedge-along-entire-us-border-2/

And some "people" believed it - amazing. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/canada-border-privacy-hedge/

But actually, it's no more implausible that the Reichista lies that their followers are expected to swallow. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

They are actually banning a website?  Is this now the Democratic People's Republic of Canada?  

People's Democratic Republic of Canada - get your insults right for once.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Laker said:

Probably some Alberta farmers think the same.

I guess if you are shooting gophers and you are a lousy shot it would be important to have an AR-15.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rain Man said:

I guess if you are shooting gophers and you are a lousy shot it would be important to have an AR-15.  

Land mines. Also to repel the invasion of darkies and ethnics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rain Man said:

I guess if you are shooting gophers and you are a lousy shot it would be important to have an AR-15.  

Looking for this great ad I saw once where a farmer? was using a Thompson sub-machine gun on gophers.  A bit enthusiastic I thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:
4 hours ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

They are actually banning a website?  Is this now the Democratic People's Republic of Canada?  

People's Democratic Republic of Canada - get your insults right for once.

Tomato...... toma-toe.  Fair point though....  After several GnT's, I thought I was fairly lucid.  :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laker said:

Looking for this great ad I saw once where a farmer? was using a Thompson sub-machine gun on gophers.  A bit enthusiastic I thought.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

They are actually banning a website?  Is this now the Democratic People's Republic of Canada?  

17.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Laker said:
8 hours ago, Steganographic Tom said:

But aren't the bans on (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) prompted by the fact that the banned guns fire more than one shot? Very few people shoot themselves twice, especially if they never did anything to piss off the CIA.

Anyway, I already did compare US suicides to other countries repeatedly over the years in the thread on that subject and I found that...

Still looks to me like the US has a pretty average suicide rate. I also compared our suicide rate to Canada's in that thread.

And I found that...


Sorry, my answer is still that banning (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) has not a damn thing to do with suicides. They're just convenient for padding numbers to scare people in comparisons like the one by Rain Man that I quoted in post 204.

I think you will find a difference in suicide by firearm. Apparently drowning is a biggy.

I looked and found that dead is dead. If our gun ownership rate were a driver of suicides, wouldn't our suicide rate be higher than seen in Canada and other places that ban (assault weapons, ordinary .22's)?

By the way, do you think suicidal people (who have not pissed off the CIA) shoot themselves more than once, or is your argument confirmation of my belief that "assault" weapon is just a term for "gun that goes BANG" and they all need to be banned so that suicidal people won't use them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Steganographic Tom said:

I looked and found that dead is dead. If our gun ownership rate were a driver of suicides, wouldn't our suicide rate be higher than seen in Canada and other places that ban (assault weapons, ordinary .22's)?

By the way, do you think suicidal people (who have not pissed off the CIA) shoot themselves more than once, or is your argument confirmation of my belief that "assault" weapon is just a term for "gun that goes BANG" and they all need to be banned so that suicidal people won't use them?

Stuck in a rut much? You are out there, Tom. Programmed, self-induced bullshit, into a mirror...while suffering defeat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, bpm57 said:

Still awaiting your theory on why his "official action, he was a sheriff, etc" was never brought up in court. Instead he argued that it was a private affair.

JFC. Wrong, on all counts. A Deadeye fail.  I tried to school you, too. Please familiarize yourself with the Sir John Knight affair. 

 

13 hours ago, Laker said:

James II was kicked out of the country for not reading things right.

The glory went to Parliament, and the glory was virtually bloodless.

  • James had been informed in vague terms that the militia was controlled by Parliament. 
  • (Note: a suspension of their natural right to fight tyranny had been granted to James' father, Charles I. Formally. In writing.)
  • Tom Ray adamantly denied this sequence 4X in one week.
  • James had been informed that if four auxiliary rights (including representation in Parliament, and pleadings in the courts) were violated, their militia hereby retained the right to act against an unjust ruler (thus exercising their fifth auxiliary right).
  • James had been informed that their militia weapons were not to be, what was the term?... infringed upon.
  • James made a power play to arm the Catholic minority by appointing Catholic militia captains.
  • Voila, the Sir John Knight affair.
  • James the II got the GTFO. 
  • In this case, the issue of the control of militia weapons went to the (Protestant) Parliament.
  • A century later in the USA, under the Militia Act of 1792,  this issue of the specification and control of the militia weapons went to the states.
  • The control of the militia itself became shared by both the feds and the states.
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rain Man said:

I guess if you are shooting gophers and you are a lousy shot it would be important to have an AR-15.  

What would an AR-15, or any other AR platform, do to make shooting a gopher easier, or make up for poor ability to aim?  LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mohammed Bin Lyin said:

cuck.jpg

Haha, I'm getting a chuckle out of that as I sit and drink my morning coffee out of my favorite BRC mug.  

 

IMG_6087.JPG

IMG_6088.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jocal505 said:

have you become a mere mini-van?

And what it that Joe?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

I remember a grand soul, has it come to this?

Keep doing it Joe, I have better things to do than add traffic to his business.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, astro said:

Keep doing it Joe, I have better things to do than add traffic to his business.


Go your way. You are the legend who put Brady's Best behind us.

Go your way. The bullshit and poison isn't being mainstreamed into your country or your hemisphere.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jocal505 said:


Go your way. You are the legend who put Brady's Best behind us.

Go your way. The bullshit and poison isn't being mainstreamed into your country or your hemisphere.

 

Brady's Best was just one example of how easy it is to counter Tom's lies.  But what did that accomplish?

At some stage you have to ask yourself that question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Curiously, I don't think I'm missing much in this exchange. I'm not going to look.

You've chosen to ignore content by Steganographic Tom. Options


You've chosen to ignore content by astro. Options

You've chosen to ignore content by jocal505. Options

You've chosen to ignore content by astro. Options

You've chosen to ignore content by jocal505. Options

You've chosen to ignore content by astro. Options
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, astro said:

Brady's Best was just one example of how easy it is to counter Tom's lies.  But what did that accomplish?

At some stage you have to ask yourself that question.

Sure. It's just that sometimes, we find ourselves staring at certain stuff. 

pig balls.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada is apparently not safe enough
 

Quote

 

The government has finally moved to ban military-style assault rifles & ordinary .22's. Great. So now let's go to the next step, a complete and comprehensive ban on the sale and ownership of all handguns.

There is no conceivable reason why an ordinary person needs to own a handgun. No reason whatsoever.

 

Because self defense is not a valid reason for anyone who doesn't have a government job.

Quote

Many people enjoy target shooting. Bolt-action rifles for targets and shotguns for skeet shooting are perfectly suited for this, and if you want to use a handgun, there are gas- or air-powered replicas available in sporting goods stores. They function almost exactly like the real firearm, but are much less dangerous — they shoot pellets half the size of 9-mm parabellum ammo and at a much lower velocity...

I guess Canada doesn't need to keep up with New Jersey, where Airsoft guns are "assault" weapons.

Quote

 

A suggested scenario:

  1. A total and absolute ban on handgun sales, and on handgun ownership by private citizens. (With long prison terms for violation.)
  2. Restriction of long guns to bolt-action rifles and limited-magazine shotguns.
  3. Firm enforcement of minimum sentences for possession of any restricted weapon, and even more stringent penalties for anyone committing a crime with a firearm.
  4. Exemptions, under strict controls, where subsistence hunting is a way of life.

 

Another suggested scenario: lots and lots of "boating accidents."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike the US, Canada's politicians found strong support from the population for a ban:

http://angusreid.org/assault-weapons-ban/ (Angus Reid is a big pollster in Canada)

The results of the latest public opinion survey from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute show an overwhelming majority – nearly four-in-five – support a complete prohibition on civilian possession of the types of weapons used in the Montreal Massacre in 1989, and most recently, the rampage of an assault weapon-carrying murderer who killed 22 people in Nova Scotia last month.   Significantly, two-thirds (65%) strongly support such a move, giving federal policy makers a clear mandate to go forward


In the US, I've only seen about 60-65% support for "increased gun control" among polls.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zonker said:

Unlike the US, Canada's politicians found strong support from the population for a ban:

http://angusreid.org/assault-weapons-ban/ (Angus Reid is a big pollster in Canada)

The results of the latest public opinion survey from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute show an overwhelming majority – nearly four-in-five – support a complete prohibition on civilian possession of the types of weapons used in the Montreal Massacre in 1989, and most recently, the rampage of an assault weapon-carrying murderer who killed 22 people in Nova Scotia last month.   Significantly, two-thirds (65%) strongly support such a move, giving federal policy makers a clear mandate to go forward


In the US, I've only seen about 60-65% support for "increased gun control" among polls.

Not sure the US is all that different. Every Presidential contender from one of our major parties wants to follow the Canadian and Australian lead and ban (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) and they seem to have pretty strong support from sailors here.

I think prohibition programs like yours are more likely to cause "boating accidents" than actual confiscations of (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) because 20% of your population is still a lot of people and the number in opposition might just grow when people realize that "assault" weapon = ordinary .22.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

I think prohibition programs like yours are more likely to cause "boating accidents" than actual confiscations of (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) b

Tom's still upset about Canada.

sad1.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Canada is apparently not safe enough
 

Because self defense is not a valid reason for anyone who doesn't have a government job.

I guess Canada doesn't need to keep up with New Jersey, where Airsoft guns are "assault" weapons.

Another suggested scenario: lots and lots of "boating accidents."

The problem doesn't come if it sits at the bottom of the lake.  It comes when you retrieve it and are found with it.  Bigger problem for you.  BTW, .22s can still do a lot of damage.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Laker said:

The problem doesn't come if it sits at the bottom of the lake.  It comes when you retrieve it and are found with it.  Bigger problem for you.  BTW, .22s can still do a lot of damage.  

Is the bigger problem that you are found dead with it?

We are still talking about using suicides to justify banning guns, right?

Yes, of course any single shot gun can be used for that purpose, even a .22.

The logical conclusion is that people who use suicides to advocate gun bans are not just talking about some arbitrary classification like "assault" weapons, but want to ban all guns (except, of course, those in the hands of government employees.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

but want to ban all guns (except, of course, those in the hands of government employees.)

It's the fucking government is it?

How disingenuous of you Tommy.

So when your wife leaves the house with her gun ... who is she protecting herself from?

The government?

image.thumb.png.04b8e81e45379558973481307cfec37d.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, astro said:
2 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

people who use suicides to advocate gun bans are not just talking about some arbitrary classification like "assault" weapons, but want to ban all guns (except, of course, those in the hands of government employees.)

It's the fucking government is it?

How disingenuous of you Tommy.

So when your wife leaves the house with her gun ... who is she protecting herself from?

The government?

image.thumb.png.04b8e81e45379558973481307cfec37d.png

Not sure what your question or the picture of a rapper who is in prison have to do with suicides and gun bans. Is that guy supposed to look immature and volatile to me or something? He doesn't, but you might try it on jocal if that's the reaction you seek.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Not sure what your question or the picture of a rapper who is in prison have to do with suicides and gun bans. Is that guy supposed to look immature and volatile to me or something? He doesn't, but you might try it on jocal if that's the reaction you seek.

So is your wife carrying a gun to protect herself from the Government, or black men?

source.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Is the bigger problem that you are found dead with it?

We are still talking about using suicides to justify banning guns, right?

Yes, of course any single shot gun can be used for that purpose, even a .22.

The logical conclusion is that people who use suicides to advocate gun bans are not just talking about some arbitrary classification like "assault" weapons, but want to ban all guns (except, of course, those in the hands of government employees.)

I am not saying that.  I am saying if you are found with a weapon in Canada that had a boating accident, the penalties are hash.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Laker said:

I am not saying that.  I am saying if you are found with a weapon in Canada that had a boating accident, the penalties are hash.

You're going to have stoners rushing to have boating accidents and then somehow get caught with the drowned guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:
6 hours ago, astro said:
6 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

people who use suicides to advocate gun bans are not just talking about some arbitrary classification like "assault" weapons, but want to ban all guns (except, of course, those in the hands of government employees.)

It's the fucking government is it?

How disingenuous of you Tommy.

So when your wife leaves the house with her gun ... who is she protecting herself from?

The government?

 

Not sure what your question or the picture of a rapper who is in prison have to do with suicides and gun bans. Is that guy supposed to look immature and volatile to me or something? He doesn't, but you might try it on jocal if that's the reaction you seek.

 

Hi Tom, is all the race-baiting in your DNA? You can't help yourself. This bit was five years ago:

Quote

 

 On 3/26/2015 at 5:45 AM, Mark K said:

WTF is all that shit about? Your assertions of my inability to admit those things are based on what?

 

Any idea why MLK's application for a CWP was denied?

 

All that shit is about the fact that you won't answer that question.

 

(Tom to Mark K, March 26th 2015)

(Tom) I asked twice. I'll bold and highlight in red this time.

Does anyone want to guess at the reason Martin Luther King's concealed weapons permit was denied?

Any idea why his application for a CWP was denied? Even a wildass guess?

and we got this, quite a bit:

Quote

Tom Ray Posted 27 April 2015 - 03:07 AM

This is my favorite on the growing list of questions you won't answer:

 

So if guns cause violence and whites own guns at more than twice the rate of blacks, how did jocal show at post 127 that the homicide rate among blacks is six times higher than among whites?

How about this jewel? Mind you, this came ten days after Dylann Fucking Roof.

Quote

Looks like the dream of a race war is not dead

  Quote

Louis Farrakhan addressed hundreds Wednesday at the Metropolitan AME Church in D.C. Religious leaders from various background joined Farrakhan to talk about the Millions for Justice Mobilization taking place in D.C. in October.

His speech took an angry turn when he said white people don’t care about the people who died in the South Carolina church shootings.

“White folks march with you because they don’t want you upsetting the city,” he said in reference to protesting against the South Carolina shootings.

His comments were met by cheers and applause.

 

(Tom) He also seems to think display of the American flag is even worse than the Confederate battle flag.

I guess that makes sense, that being the flag of racist white people who don't care about the dead in SC.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laker said:
6 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Is the bigger problem that you are found dead with it?

We are still talking about using suicides to justify banning guns, right?

Yes, of course any single shot gun can be used for that purpose, even a .22.

The logical conclusion is that people who use suicides to advocate gun bans are not just talking about some arbitrary classification like "assault" weapons, but want to ban all guns (except, of course, those in the hands of government employees.)

 

Seriously oversimplified, but yes, there are a lot of Canadians who would be in favour of banning most guns. You make it sound like it's a bad thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Female Canine Firestorm said:

CREE  

 

PEE

Hi there, Jeffie. That's your spin, and it's more fluff. I think that the race-baiter behavior itself is creepy, and that flagging it is healthy.

The joke is on any community that will accept Jim Crow being live-streamed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

Hi there, Jeffie. That's your spin, and it's more fluff. I think that the race-baiter behavior itself is creepy, and that flagging it is healthy.

The joke is on any community that will accept Jim Crow being live-streamed.

I think what's even CREE PEE'er and more race-baiting-ish is calling blacks more immature, more violent and more volatile than even whites.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ishmael said:

Seriously oversimplified, but yes, there are a lot of Canadians who would be in favour of banning most guns. You make it sound like it's a bad thing.

Boys gotta have their toys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ishmael said:
17 hours ago, Laker said:
22 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

We are still talking about using suicides to justify banning guns, right?

Yes, of course any single shot gun can be used for that purpose, even a .22.

The logical conclusion is that people who use suicides to advocate gun bans are not just talking about some arbitrary classification like "assault" weapons, but want to ban all guns (except, of course, those in the hands of government employees.)

 

Seriously oversimplified, but yes, there are a lot of Canadians who would be in favour of banning most guns. You make it sound like it's a bad thing.

Most? Seems to me that any gun can be used to commit suicide so using suicide stats to justify gun bans would cover all guns. Why would it be only "most" guns?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

You're going to have stoners rushing to have boating accidents and then somehow get caught with the drowned guns.

There will be a spike in the sale of cosmoline nation wide.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ishmael said:

I always thought girls were way more fun than guns. Slaughtering moose had nothing on a weekend with a pretty lady.

The savy do both.   Why limit yourself?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ishmael said:

Seriously oversimplified, but yes, there are a lot of Canadians who would be in favour of banning most guns. You make it sound like it's a bad thing.

Name anything and you could find a lot of people who would be in favor of banning it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:
19 hours ago, Laker said:

I am not saying that.  I am saying if you are found with a weapon in Canada that had a boating accident, the penalties are hash.

You're going to have stoners rushing to have boating accidents and then somehow get caught with the drowned guns.

Couldn't resist doing that thing where I respond to typo's as if they were intentional.

But speaking of hash, in Texas possession of it is a felony and can get you anywhere from 6 months to life in prison. And I bet I could go to Texas and find some anyway. Penalties don't get a whole lot more harsh than life imprisonment but they still can't make prohibition programs work. And when (not if) they fail, the responses involve even more harsh penalties, along with things like asset forfeiture abuse, erosion of privacy rights, and dangerously over the top police tactics like no-knock raids.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Most? Seems to me that any gun can be used to commit suicide so using suicide stats to justify gun bans would cover all guns. Why would it be only "most" guns?

 

 

Does the word "context" mean anything to you.  Living in downtown Toronto, there is no need for you to own a firearm at at all.  Living in Point Pelly (look it up),  yeah you will need a firearm to live.  An automatic weapon tends to be expensive in ammunition and rip up the meat, I am told.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Laker said:

Does the word "context" mean anything to you.  Living in downtown Toronto, there is no need for you to own a firearm at at all. 

???

How else are you going to shoot up Yonge St.?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Laker said:
On 5/20/2020 at 4:48 AM, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Most? Seems to me that any gun can be used to commit suicide so using suicide stats to justify gun bans would cover all guns. Why would it be only "most" guns?

 

 

Does the word "context" mean anything to you.  Living in downtown Toronto, there is no need for you to own a firearm at at all.  Living in Point Pelly (look it up),  yeah you will need a firearm to live.  An automatic weapon tends to be expensive in ammunition and rip up the meat, I am told.

In the context of using suicide stats to justify gun bans, I'm not sure how your comment is relevant. Please explain the relevance to suicides.

There were a few shootings in Toronto this week. At least one looks a lot like the stupid drug war type that dominates our "mass" shooting stats in the bolded way:

Quote

Police say that a male victim was located at that scene with a gunshot wound and taken to hospital in non-life threatening condition. The victim is not cooperating with the investigation, police say.

Not sure if about Canada, but in the US, automatic weapons are only for the rich since the registry was closed in 1986. They're not used for hunting nor in crimes. As for (assault weapons, ordinary .22's), some of them (specifically, the ordinary .22's) are not legal for hunting deer in most places because they're not considered lethal enough to be humane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

In the context of using suicide stats to justify gun bans, I'm not sure how your comment is relevant. Please explain the relevance to suicides.

There were a few shootings in Toronto this week. At least one looks a lot like the stupid drug war type that dominates our "mass" shooting stats in the bolded way:

Not sure if about Canada, but in the US, automatic weapons are only for the rich since the registry was closed in 1986. They're not used for hunting nor in crimes. As for (assault weapons, ordinary .22's), some of them (specifically, the ordinary .22's) are not legal for hunting deer in most places because they're not considered lethal enough to be humane.

They aren’t legal for hunting because they 1) travel so far and 2) ricochet easily.

A 22 mag puts a deer down instantly when you put in the head though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
4 hours ago, Keith said:
21 hours ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Pretty good list of suggestions...

2020-10-01_sm.jpg

It's missing, disarm the American population, or nothing will change.


Have you started packing yet? I assume you're going to leave Canada for a couple of years until Trudeau's ban on (assault weapons, ordinary .22's) takes effect?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly the "protect myself from the Government" thing has been debunked.  No one is out there shooting Trumps Troops when they kidnap people off the streets.

So that leaves "I'm shit scared of black people" thing.  Glad that has been cleared up.

Link to post
Share on other sites