Canada bans AR15's, 1500 other firearms

Point stands that this guy is claiming that .223 AR's are far too powerful for any civilian.

You seem to agree with him... ?

 

I don't think anybody should eat meat unless they either raise it themselves under humane conditions or hunt it themselves. That is the only way I will touch meat.

 

To hold him accountable (s)he sold weapons to people (s)he wasn't allowed to who commit some mass murder or whatever, as an accomplish.

The constitution says the right to bear arms. It does not specify fully automated weapons, semi automated... or just small handguns. A line is drawn somewhere. Might as well draw it somewhere else.

 

I don't see the purpose in team sports, but I don't try to keep other people from taking part in them. Some people really enjoy shooting.

 

What did I say that makes you think that?

 

My God, that was the lamest, most childish attempt at a retort I've seen to date. Clearly, you got nothing and can't to admit that. You're done and I'm done wasting time and space on you.

 

Right... because somehow you took that I care if people enjoy shooting things?? I said I don't.... that was all...

 

Thank you. Best of luck.

 

How would such actually be accomplished? Explain such. What is to stop the last known legal owner from simply claiming the firearm that was used was stolen from them? Or that they did indeed sell it, but not to the accused but rather someone else months ago?

Even in the state of California where all firearms are licensed, registered, and subject to reporting requirements if lost or stolen, the trafficking of firearms to criminals is still continuing unabated.

The second amendment was never intended to apply to only a specific category of arms, only armed in general. And as the united state supreme court has ruled at least twice now, it applies to all firearms that are in common use for legal purposes, even if they did not exist at the time of the ratification of the united states constitution.

 

Stats don't lie. Here's some...

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/topic-pages/expanded-offense

Those stats are recent, give you REAL numbers, and don't lie. The FBI bean counters did a good job getting all of those stats out there.
The numerous tables will break it down for you in many ways. Violence types, offenders sex (and, more importantly, race), areas (states, cities, and regions) where the violence occurs (like the area{s} of those strict "gun laws" you refer to), etc... etc... etc...
And, the best part of all of those tables and breakdowns, they PROVE that you are WRONG! as you usually are.
One thing those tables don't tell you is that Canada is a way more homogeneous society than the U.S. is. And, when you look at those numerous tables, you will CLEARLY see why that matters in the homicide rate in Canada as well as the "gun violence" rate.

 

people are already held accountable for this.

the supreme court has already ruled on this. It is unconstitutional to ban an entire class of firearm. So, unless you amend the constitution, you can never enact legislation that bans say.......all semi auto firearms, or all fully automatic firearms.

 

22% of Canadians are first generation immigrants.

This is the highest proportion in the G7.

This shatters the myth of a "homogenous society"...

Another interesting statistic is that a gun owner is 44 times more likely to commit suicide with his gun than to use it in self-defence.

How do you explain that ?

 

What percentage of the united states population is made up of first generation immigrants?

The same way one explains the work of Arthur Kellerman and the findings of his so-called "study" relating to homicide. He carried out another so-called "study" relating to firearm-related suicides, and his findings were the same. Those most likely to commit suicide, according to the parameters of his study, were individuals who come from broken homes, have criminal records, are prone to substance abuse and committing criminal activities, and who have no prospect for improving their quality of life under their present circumstances.

 

Each year....
About 22,000 people commit suicide with a firearm.
About 100,000 people use a gun in self-defense.
Thus, you cannot be right.

https://vpc.org/studies/justifiable19.pdf
Page 6

 

How many are from the U.S. and black?

Japan and South Korea have a suicide rate MORE THAN TWICE that of the U.S. and live in a country where the right to own/possess a firearm is almost non existent.

How do you explain that?

Furthermore, in the U.S., a firearm is used to thwart a crime from one to two-and-one-half MILLION times a year. A few are reported, most are not. Even the liberal PEW "Research" center admit that it is at least a million to a million and a half times a year. Even the "Joe Biden way" to thwart a intruder from committing a crime is rarely reported.

Shooting at or putting a bullet in a criminal in self-defense isn't the only criteria for using a firearm in self-defense.

IOW , "your 44 times more likely" statistic is bunk at best.

 

Racist comment.

Pass.

Irrelevant.

I didn't say shoot a criminal, I just said use it in self-defence.

I repeat the question:

How do you explain the fact that you're 44 times more likely to commit suicide with your gun than in self-defense?

Take your time answering that one.

 

The matter is quite simple. The so-called "study" presented on the part of yourself only counted defensive incidents where the assailant was killed. It failed to count any other incident where the assailant lived through the encounter, either due to fleeing the scene, being held by their intended victim until they could be arrested by law enforcement, or were shot but did not die as a result.

 

Been there, done that. Post # 214.

Each year....
About 22,000 people commit suicide with a firearm.
About 100,000 people use a gun in self-defense.
Thus, you cannot be right.

https://vpc.org/studies/justifiable19.pdf
Page 6

 

That's not at all what it says on page 6 of your report.

But before demolishing your argument, I would like you to read the first sentence at the bottom of the Introduction:

Guns are rarely used to kill criminals or stop crimes.

 

not irrelevant. it shatters your premise.

by pointing out that claim is demonstrably false.

 

You have to actually read it.

Self-Protective Behavior 2014-2016
Threatened or attacked with a firearm 177,3001. 123,8000 = 300,000 defensive uses of a firearm 2014-16

That's 100,000 per year

Thus:
About 22,000 people commit suicide with a firearm.
About 100,000 people use a gun in self-defense.

That being the case, how can you be right?
Take your time answering that one.

 

As those crime tables I directed to you show, blacks have a more propensity per capita to use a firearm in a crime. The truth may be racial but that doesn't make it racist.

Jesus! As I said...

...that bit of information pertains to USE of a firearm in self-defense. Actual comprehension from reading what I wrote is generally required to understand what I wrote.

USING a firearm in self defense can be the act of pulling one on some criminal or just even the presence of one where a criminal sees that you have one on your person at the ready to use it in ones defense.

Your "44 times" more likely figure is bunk as those statistics are most likely not included. And you didn't even link to your version of "facts" which makes it even more bunk.

 

Sometimes short and sweet works better than long and windy

 

WRONG! yet again...

Gary Kleck, a criminologist now retired from Florida State University, was likely astonished to learn that his controversial study, The National Self-Defense Survey, was accurate after all. He and FSU fellow professor Marc Gertz concluded, based on their carefully-crafted surveys conducted in 1993, that there were more than 2.2 million defensive gun uses (DGU) each year in the United States. The results were presented in 1994, published in 1995, and have been incessantly attacked by the anti-gun movement ever since. His conclusions didn’t fit the anti-gun narrative that guns are used in crimes far more than in self-defense and therefore private ownership must be abolished.

Kleck just learned that almost immediately after the publication of his study, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a federal agency that receives more than $11 billion of taxpayer money every year, conducted its own study of the matter. It conducted three separate studies, in fact, and each of them came to the same conclusion as Kleck and Gertz: Indeed, about 2.5 million Americans use guns to defend themselves or their families every year.

But the CDC studies were never published.

It would have infuriated the powers-that-be in the Clinton administration, and so the results were buried.

After reviewing the newly-discovered/recovered studies, Kleck — in his best professorial manner — wrote:

The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% [of the population experiencing a DGU in the past twelve months] therefore implies that in an average year during 1996-1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense. This estimate, based on an enormous sample of 12,870 cases (unweighted) in a nationally representative sample, strongly confirms the 2.5 million past-12-months estimate obtained [by me and Marc] Gertz in 1995 … CDC’s results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals.

Kleck added, “CDC never reported the results of those surveys, does not report on their website any estimates of DGU frequency, and does not even acknowledge that they ever asked about the topic in any of their surveys.”

In other words, the CDC got caught hiding information damaging to the anti-gun narrative then prevalent during the Clinton administration. But they didn’t bury it deeply enough.

More...
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usne...ied-data-supporting-defensive-use-of-firearms

 

When the cops can determine that there was a break in and the safe was broken into as well,.. than you know, people steal. But guns casually lying around, or no report was even filed that there was a break in.... people need to own up and held accountable for their role that aided terrorist and random murderers.

Yes. Have that excel list present and updated. Nice. But you need to do something with it and check if it's true. Might as well tax it, for the sake of public safety.

Yeah well. You still can not buy the newest type of a fully automatic firearm as far as I know, or a nuke. A line has been drawn. Might as well draw it somewhere else. It's not as if the people who wrote that 2nd amendment knew beforehand people now could make such a massive amount of firepower for personal use in a country where there is no need to gun down 30 people in a minute. And that's besides other countries don't have such a problem tweaking their constitution.