Quantcast

canadmos

Cake Tease
May 29, 2011
9,629
5,348
Canaderp
Not a reason to do nothing. Again, those are the same arguments people give that we should "do nothing" in the US. You like school shootings?

There is no such thing as a "law abiding gun owner". Ever gun owner I know chooses certain laws to obey and others that they discard. A "law abiding gun owner" is like a "True Scotsman", it doesn't exist. I'm all for gun ownership IF we make the requirements realistic, testing, licensing, controls in the system that help to ensure that people that own guns will do so responsibly. Right now, it's fuck-all give-away-guns-in-drawings (I shit you not). I don't trust the guy down the street with a gun any more than I trust him with my credit card number.
Of course I'm not saying to do nothing, that is asinine. Something needs to be done, but a knee jerk reaction to an event or a series of events won't solve things in the long run. Banning the legal sale of guns in a city will do nothing to stop guns from coming into the city, when you could buy them literally anywhere else in the province.

I am with you, the requirements for owning or purchasing firearms need to be strict. And the consequences if you fuckup or if your firearm ends up being used in a crime need to be much stricter. I don't care, build more jails for those asshats if we currently cannot handle them all.

My view might be slightly skewed as a Canadian, which I can understand. We don't have the same level of problem as you guys have. But no doubt, it still exists. Look up the history of Canada's gun registry and what it did. Quebec has their own now.

As for there be no "law abiding gun owners", I'm not sure about that. Perhaps if you include things such as speeding or something similar. All of the people I know who own any sort of firearm all follow the appropriate firearm laws. Including keeping them locked and secure, keeping ammunition separate and locked, transportation laws, registration rules if there are any, where and when you can use them etc etc. I would expect serious consequences for any of them, if they didn't follow the law.

For the record, I don't own and guns and will never own any guns.
 

rockofullr

confused
Jun 11, 2009
7,359
907
East Bay, Cali
Banning the legal sale of guns in a city will do nothing to stop guns from coming into the city, when you could buy them literally anywhere else in the province.
Saying nothing for or against banning guns or ammo in XYZ city.... Your logic doesn't follow. Lets do a little thought experiment.

Imagine a city where there are no bike shops withing 20 miles of you, and you can't buy bikes or bike parts online without having them sent to a bike shop to have a bunch of paperwork completed. Do you think more or less people would have bikes compared to a normal city?

Making something harder to get (more of a pain in the ass) will reduce the amount of that thing in circulation, assuming stable demand.
 

canadmos

Cake Tease
May 29, 2011
9,629
5,348
Canaderp
Saying nothing for or against banning guns or ammo in XYZ city.... Your logic doesn't follow. Lets do a little thought experiment.

Imagine a city where there are no bike shops withing 20 miles of you, and you can't buy bikes or bike parts online without having them sent to a bike shop to have a bunch of paperwork completed. Do you think more or less people would have bikes compared to a normal city?

Making something harder to get (more of a pain in the ass) will reduce the amount of that thing in circulation, assuming stable demand.
I do get what you're saying and yeah it would be more annoying to obtain. I'm not saying don't do it, but this issue spreads beyond one city. If they ban them in one city, they need to spread that across the entire province or country.

Where I lived in Colorado for a bit, we couldn't buy fireworks in the county (or city...can't remember). Everyone still had them. We just crossed the road to buy them in the next county...

But I guess if they were to put in proper laws and registration/background checks to see where you're from, they could catch where your residence is and choose to not sell you something.

And that is just talking about purchasing them legally. I've been trying to find some stats for crimes made with legal vs illegally owned firearms, but that seems hard to find.

Some interesting items in here, though; https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2014001/article/11925-eng.htm
 
Not a reason to do nothing. Again, those are the same arguments people give that we should "do nothing" in the US. You like school shootings?

There is no such thing as a "law abiding gun owner". Ever gun owner I know chooses certain laws to obey and others that they discard. A "law abiding gun owner" is like a "True Scotsman", it doesn't exist. I'm all for gun ownership IF we make the requirements realistic, testing, licensing, controls in the system that help to ensure that people that own guns will do so responsibly. Right now, it's fuck-all give-away-guns-in-drawings (I shit you not). I don't trust the guy down the street with a gun any more than I trust him with my credit card number.

Interesting take but hardly accurate by any means.
 

mykel

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2013
1,936
572
sw ontario canada
Interesting take but hardly accurate by any means.
What is the scope of your accurate?
If it is a law on the books and you violate it either by ignorance or design, you are not law-abiding.

Never speed.
Never turned right on a red.
Never did a stop and go thru a rural red at 3:00am without a car light in sight?
Never jay walked.
Never collected rainwater runoff your house to water your garden.
Never not stopped at an unmarked rural crossing and discharged a weapon skyward as a warning?
Never not proceeded your wife down the road with a red flag as a warning that she was driving?
Ever had oral sex.
Ever had anything other than missionary position sex.
Spit.
Swear.
etc
etc
etc

The law is so broad and has so many thing in it, that most people violate "it" many times a day, both knowingly and unknowingly.

So whatcha gotta say for yourself now ya crim? :D
 
I was referring to this portion of your comment

"I'm all for gun ownership IF we make the requirements realistic, testing, licensing, controls in the system that help to ensure that people that own guns will do so responsibly. Right now, it's fuck-all give-away-guns-in-drawings (I shit you not). "

I owned a couple of gun shops over the years and have yet to even see or hear of anything but "realistic, testing, Licensing controls in the system...."

Even with military and law enforcement contracts all of the buyers had to still go through the same stringent background checks and verifications as any civilian member of the general public and it has even been more so for concealed carry permits. Oregon is one of the more laxed processes in the country and the forms are all still verified via state or gov issued photo ID, fingerprints and state and federal instant background before a transaction is even taken place. The concealed carry process is another whole complicated bureaucratic process that involves the locally elected sheriff and a graded test after a minimum of a class portion and range time.

I am not sure why the weapon is considered the problem when it is an inanimate object. I spent nearly my whole life with firearms as tools in both competition, law enforcement and living by the gun while overseas. Not once did it behave badly.
 

Jm_

Turbo Monkey
Jan 14, 2002
9,118
1,525
AK
I was referring to this portion of your comment

"I'm all for gun ownership IF we make the requirements realistic, testing, licensing, controls in the system that help to ensure that people that own guns will do so responsibly. Right now, it's fuck-all give-away-guns-in-drawings (I shit you not). "

I owned a couple of gun shops over the years and have yet to even see or hear of anything but "realistic, testing, Licensing controls in the system...."

Even with military and law enforcement contracts all of the buyers had to still go through the same stringent background checks and verifications as any civilian member of the general public and it has even been more so for concealed carry permits. Oregon is one of the more laxed processes in the country and the forms are all still verified via state or gov issued photo ID, fingerprints and state and federal instant background before a transaction is even taken place. The concealed carry process is another whole complicated bureaucratic process that involves the locally elected sheriff and a graded test after a minimum of a class portion and range time.

I am not sure why the weapon is considered the problem when it is an inanimate object. I spent nearly my whole life with firearms as tools in both competition, law enforcement and living by the gun while overseas. Not once did it behave badly.
The weapon is the problem because we can’t control people. How is your mental health today a guarantee of your state tomorrow?
 

cecil

Turbo Monkey
Jun 3, 2008
1,826
1,343
with the voices in my head
I can hit someone in the head with a bat
I can drive my car into a crowd
I can stab them in a heart with an ice pic
I can pour gas them and burn them to death
I can stick them with syringe full of air
Or shoot with a gun

My mom raised me not to harm people to respect human life so I know better than to do any of those listed above

I don't own a gun never have but I do realize if someone has lost all respect or concern for their fellow human beings life and are set on killing them they probably will kill them with or without a gun

It starts at birth and continues all through your life family values respect compassion education empathy

Too many absentee parents not driving home these things to their children then their children grow up with no respect for life then those kids have kids with even less concern for life then the kids of the kids have more kids who parents are now advocating harm to others

The safety of everyone starts long before that child is old enough to buy a gun

That's my opinion

Now lets hear backlash

PS. Love thy neighbor but don't get caught haha
 

Jm_

Turbo Monkey
Jan 14, 2002
9,118
1,525
AK
I don't own a gun never have but I do realize if someone has lost all respect or concern for their fellow human beings life and are set on killing them they probably will kill them with or without a gun
That's the fallacy right there.

Multiple studies have shown that lowering the barriers and making killing "easier" increases the number of killings. The simple way to say it is that there are crazy people in every society, just that in the US, we flood the population with guns and generally make them much more easy to get, so we get a lot of killings. Another way to say it is the controls in a society, say Japan or Germany or whatever, keep a certain part of the population from acting out their craziness. Is it easier to put reasonable controls in, or to test every person in the population to try and assess their mental competence, and then is that mental competence a guarantee of their mental state in the future?

Can you have a mass-ice-pick stabbing? Not really.

Can you have a mass-baseball bat clubbing? Not really, people will overpower you and once you get too close you won't deliver enough power to kill a bunch of people.

Can you mow down a bunch of people with a car? Yes, but it requires you to actively drive at people and they have to exist in enough numbers and they can move out of the way. Consider how much faster a bullet moves compared to a car.

Pour gas on a bunch of people to kill them at once? Not really, but this kind of starts to bleed over into bomb-making, which the FBI monitors very closely and which is prohibited...wonder why?

Going to need a lot of syringes and a lot of people right next to you to kill a bunch of people with that.

Or yes, you can shoot people with a gun, being able to keep your distance from them, delivering death nearly instantly to a large number of people very quickly.
 

cecil

Turbo Monkey
Jun 3, 2008
1,826
1,343
with the voices in my head
That's the fallacy right there.

Multiple studies have shown that lowering the barriers and making killing "easier" increases the number of killings. The simple way to say it is that there are crazy people in every society, just that in the US, we flood the population with guns and generally make them much more easy to get, so we get a lot of killings. Another way to say it is the controls in a society, say Japan or Germany or whatever, keep a certain part of the population from acting out their craziness. Is it easier to put reasonable controls in, or to test every person in the population to try and assess their mental competence, and then is that mental competence a guarantee of their mental state in the future?

Can you have a mass-ice-pick stabbing? Not really.

Can you have a mass-baseball bat clubbing? Not really, people will overpower you and once you get too close you won't deliver enough power to kill a bunch of people.

Can you mow down a bunch of people with a car? Yes, but it requires you to actively drive at people and they have to exist in enough numbers and they can move out of the way. Consider how much faster a bullet moves compared to a car.

Pour gas on a bunch of people to kill them at once? Not really, but this kind of starts to bleed over into bomb-making, which the FBI monitors very closely and which is prohibited...wonder why?

Going to need a lot of syringes and a lot of people right next to you to kill a bunch of people with that.

Or yes, you can shoot people with a gun, being able to keep your distance from them, delivering death nearly instantly to a large number of people very quickly.
y

How can you quantity your first paragraph?

There are so many differing factors from person to person and culture to culture to make a world wide blanket statement. It's not a level playing field

You really think All the shootings in Chicago are done from registered gun owners, People who have legally purchased their firearm? Really, come on we all know better than that don't we? Hope so

I don't need multiple studies to say the amount of legal gun owners who commit mass shootings in America are less than one tenth of a percent


Multiple studies we all know studies and polls represent the agenda of the people taking them so they are usually slanted just as you slanted a simple statement if someone wants to kill that bad they will find a way to kill into mass shooting truck loads of needles bomb making and the fbi

as I said I don't own a gun and I don't feel the need to own any to protect myself and family so if the government and people want to ban them it does not affect me

Question have any of you who want to take away the guns ever owned or own guns?
 

Nick

My name is Nick
Sep 21, 2001
14,566
3,039
behind you, don't wait up.
That's my opinion
Now lets hear backlash

backlash in 3, 2, 1 ....


kidding. I agree with Cecil AND Jm_.

Guns don't make people kill, but it obviously makes it much easier for someone who wants to kill to do so.
I believe mass shootings are the events that get everyone's attention and draw the outrage, but the stats say 342 people are shot every day in America, the majority not mass incidents. Guns alone make shooting possible but there's lots of ways to kill someone.

I try to avoid gun control conversations as they rarely change any minds. I own and shoot and I'm all for enhanced background checks and think requiring training isn't a bad idea (though I can't imagine how that would be enforced). Training would make a more impactful difference than anything proposed that I've heard.
 

Jm_

Turbo Monkey
Jan 14, 2002
9,118
1,525
AK
y

How can you quantity your first paragraph?
Sure:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-guns-20140121-story.html


Now, this isn't the "one story where one guy with a gun stopped a bad guy" example where all the NRA facebook-types ejaculate all over each other, sure, there are those, but are there enough of those to make a dent in violent crime where a gun is used? Or is it the reality that flooding a population with guns increases violet crime and gun deaths? People seem to think we live in some kind of bubble where mental illness only happens here, and it's by way of some sort of unknown magical power that the nations with serious gun control don't have the mass shootings and gun deaths that we do. What are you going to do, take every man women and child and send them for mental evaluation and then what? The science shows that greater access to weapons=more gun deaths. What is so hard about that to understand, other than it goes against the grain of the NRA? I realize that to some extent, we've already crested the hill and gone bat-shit-crazy with gun ownership, as in "the cat is out of the bag". Guns get stolen from police officers all the time, guns get stolen from homeowners, guns get stolen from vehicles, guns get sold to family members, guns get lost, and so on. So many guns that a small percentage "falling through the cracks" is a large number of actual guns.

There are so many differing factors from person to person and culture to culture to make a world wide blanket statement. It's not a level playing field

You really think All the shootings in Chicago are done from registered gun owners, People who have legally purchased their firearm? Really, come on we all know better than that don't we? Hope so

I don't need multiple studies to say the amount of legal gun owners who commit mass shootings in America are less than one tenth of a percent


Multiple studies we all know studies and polls represent the agenda of the people taking them so they are usually slanted just as you slanted a simple statement if someone wants to kill that bad they will find a way to kill into mass shooting truck loads of needles bomb making and the fbi
I literally have no idea what you are saying here.

as I said I don't own a gun and I don't feel the need to own any to protect myself and family so if the government and people want to ban them it does not affect me
This is why we can't have civil discussions though, because people like you throw the "well, the other side just wants to ban firearms, 2nd amendment, open borders, Benghazi, emails...". You quoted my post, nowhere did I advocate banning guns, you pulled that out of your ass. I talked about reasonable controls. The far-right needs to demonize the left and make people think that they are coming for your guns, that they are the only thing stopping Nanci Pelosi and Hillary Clinton from beating down your door and taking all of your guns, and of course the next step is the concentration camps. It's just old and tired to hear the same shit over and over again. How about reasonable controls? Make ammo $200 a round, except at the range where you can shoot all day long. How about competency tests to ensure you know what the hell you are doing with a gun? We could go full-Swiss which is way way more "gun control" than we have. I could go on and on, but my point that you missed wasn't to ban guns, it was to put in reasonable controls like other nations have, you know, all those ones that don't shoot up their citizens constantly.

Question have any of you who want to take away the guns ever owned or own guns?
Of course, I own guns. I'm just not a dumbass about it thinking that they should be worshiped and hold some sort of magical power or that I'll shoot down a blackhawk with my AR-15.
 
Last edited:

cecil

Turbo Monkey
Jun 3, 2008
1,826
1,343
with the voices in my head
Sure:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-guns-20140121-story.html

you still did not quantify your statement in that first paragraph your referred to Germany and japan then posted american and la times articles thats apples and pencils not even close enough to be called apples and oranges let alone be compared as apples to apples

Now, this isn't the "one story where one guy with a gun stopped a bad guy" example where all the NRA facebook-types ejaculate all over each other, sure, there are those, but are there enough of those to make a dent in violent crime where a gun is used? Or is it the reality that flooding a population with guns increases violet crime and gun deaths? People seem to think we live in some kind of bubble where mental illness only happens here, and it's by way of some sort of unknown magical power that the nations with serious gun control don't have the mass shootings and gun deaths that we do. What are you going to do, take every man women and child and send them for mental evaluation and then what?

wouldn't the reasonable control you keep referring to include mental exams your contradicting yourself here a little and yes all the ones who want guns must have mental evaluations

The science shows that greater access to weapons=more gun deaths.

legal or illegal guns? im not afraid of legal gun owners they usually dont want to go to jail and i dont instigate them to shoot me

What is so hard about that to understand, other than it goes against the grain of the NRA?

not sure what nra is not interested in googling either

I realize that to some extent, we've already crested the hill and gone bat-shit-crazy with gun ownership,

how many legal gun owners kill each year compared to how many gun deaths?

as in "the cat is out of the bag". Guns get stolen from police officers all the time, guns get stolen from homeowners, guns get stolen from vehicles, guns get sold to family members, guns get lost, and so on.

these people are the problem not the gun in those cases above its about those individuals personal gun control that is the problem along with the person who stole it (lack of respect for other peoples property) not the inanimate object we call a gun


So many guns that a small percentage "falling through the cracks" is a large number of actual guns.



I literally have no idea what you are saying here.

some people and some cultures are more violent than others you cant compare violence in usa with japan usa has no consequence for violent crimes catch and release mostly. other countries actually have real punishment for any type of crime that also helps to deter violent crime not just gun control

This is why we can't have civil discussions

i have been totally civil to you not one personal slam or accusation against you and again "i just stated that lack of respect for other human life is the cause to take a gun and kill and if someone wants to kill that bad they will find a way to kill" and you spin to mass shootings bombs fbi gun control in germany and japan

the reason civil discussions dont exist is because people put emotion in and deviate from the actual point again "i just stated that lack of respect for other human life is the cause to take a gun and kill and if someone wants to kill that bad they will find a way to kill"

though, because people like you throw the "well, the other side just wants to ban firearms, 2nd amendment, open borders, Benghazi, emails...".

never said any of that! what other side? your making personal assumptions about me that you have no clue about

once again you are adding to the conversation "people like me" are you making this conversation about an inanimate object a personal slam to me! really jim, really? i have not nor will i throw personal slams at you stay on point please respond dont react


You quoted my post, nowhere did I advocate banning guns, you pulled that out of your ass.

you referenced countries that ban guns i never referred to "you" as the person banning guns once. i said "we and they" i did not make it personal as you continue to do towards me with personal slams and political assumptions towards me

I talked about reasonable controls. The far-right needs to demonize the left and make people think that they are coming for your guns, that they are the only thing stopping Nanci Pelosi and Hillary Clinton from beating down your door and taking all of your guns, and of course the next step is the concentration camps. It's just old and tired to hear the same shit over and over again.

making personal slams towards me again i never said any of that above yet you say "this is why we cant have civil discussions people like you" your the one being uncivil and im still being the bigger man by answering you with respect while you are making accusations about me personally and my political beliefs with no prior knowledge of who i am and what i stand for.
you made all that up i never said or believe any of that your calling me the far right and you have no clue where i stand again taking this "i just stated that lack of respect for other human life is the cause to take a gun and kill and if someone wants to kill that bad they will find a way to kill" and making it a personal political attack on me its actually comical



How about reasonable controls? Make ammo $200 a round
so only rich people can kill ? because in history no rich people have ever lost their mind and killed?


, except at the range where you can shoot all day long. How about competency tests to ensure you know what the hell you are doing with a gun?
lets train someone to be better with a gun rather than check their mental health so when they decide to do a mass shooting they can kill more people at once BRAVO!
We could go full-Swiss which is way way more "gun control" than we have. I could go on and on, but my point that you missed wasn't to ban guns, it was to put in reasonable controls like other nations have, you know, all those ones that don't shoot up their citizens constantly.




Of course, I own guns. I'm just not a dumbass about it thinking that they should be worshiped and hold some sort of magical power or that I'll shoot down a blackhawk with my AR-15.
of course everyone feels they are ok to own a gun just not the next guy


please only respond if you can remove the personal slams and off point political accusations and stick to the point i was making in my original post that when someone has no respect for human life wants to kill they will with or without a gun

please expand the quote to read all my
responses
 
Last edited:

Jm_

Turbo Monkey
Jan 14, 2002
9,118
1,525
AK
of course everyone feels they are ok to own a gun just not the next guy


please only respond if you can remove the personal slams and off point political accusations and stick to the point i was making in my original post that when someone has no respect for human life wants to kill they will with or without a gun

please expand the quote to read all my
responses
Nope, we're done.
 

Kevin

Turbo Monkey
of course everyone feels they are ok to own a gun just not the next guy


please only respond if you can remove the personal slams and off point political accusations and stick to the point i was making in my original post that when someone has no respect for human life wants to kill they will with or without a gun

please expand the quote to read all my
responses
Yeah thats just fucking bullshit.

A person is much more likely to kill someone when they have a gun.
Its much less personal then killing someone with a knife or a can of gasoline and a fucking lighter. Or driving over someone with a car or strangling a person.

The whole world has acknowledged the US has a huge problem when it comes to guns.
Youre just closing your eyes in fucking denial, Cecil...
 

cecil

Turbo Monkey
Jun 3, 2008
1,826
1,343
with the voices in my head
Yeah thats just fucking bullshit.

A person is much more likely to kill someone when they have a gun.
Its much less personal then killing someone with a knife or a can of gasoline and a fucking lighter. Or driving over someone with a car or strangling a person.

The whole world has acknowledged the US has a huge problem when it comes to guns.
Youre just closing your eyes in fucking denial, Cecil...

I already said I don't care either way about gun control
I was originally speaking of doing a better job teaching our children to respect human life
And that if someone wants to do something bad enough they will do it I never denied the problem stop putting words in my mouth

Then jm went all off the reservation with hate filled speech and political bulling with no correlation to what I said now you I never said there was not a killing problem in the us and I'm not closing my eyes to it

Let's try it this way if your car is out of alignment and the tire is worn out do you

A. Replace the tire (banning guns)

B. Get an alignment and a new tire (fixing the source of the problem and the result of the problem wow that's a thought)

C. None of the above

In short it's more than gun control it's avoiding hate filled rants as some people here who claim to be sane enough to own guns. teaching respect and tolerance it's punishing criminals with serious penalties from day one no more catch and release with a slap on the hand proper mental health treatment again catch and release you can't only try to fix the result of the problem you have to fix the source also

Geeze
 

velocipedist

Monkey
Jul 11, 2006
296
294
Cloudland Georgia
You equivocate, bad people do bad things, it doesn't matter the tool. BS, ease of access and guns greater magnitude for inflicting death and destruction matter.

You fail to see the forest for the trees if you cannot see the value in understanding how Germany, Australia, and Japan regulate guns.

I get it we are a special snowflake on Shining Hill, we are blessed to have disproportionately more gun violence than others nations.


I already said I don't care either way about gun control
I was originally speaking of doing a better job teaching our children to respect human life
And that if someone wants to do something bad enough they will do it I never denied the problem stop putting words in my mouth

Then jm went all off the reservation with hate filled speech and political bulling with no correlation to what I said now you I never said there was not a killing problem in the us and I'm not closing my eyes to it

Let's try it this way if your car is out of alignment and the tire is worn out do you

A. Replace the tire (banning guns)

B. Get an alignment and a new tire (fixing the source of the problem and the result of the problem wow that's a thought)

C. None of the above

In short it's more than gun control it's avoiding hate filled rants as some people here who claim to be sane enough to own guns. teaching respect and tolerance it's punishing criminals with serious penalties from day one no more catch and release with a slap on the hand proper mental health treatment again catch and release you can't only try to fix the result of the problem you have to fix the source also

Geeze