Canada soon to outright ban more categories of guns

Well, we in Australia have restrictions on most firearms. We don't have a gun problem like
America has, forever.

 

Australia has traditionally not had the type of diversity America has had either. That is a big point to consider.

It's true Australia has been bringing in more migrants these days, but it is worth pointing out most of those migrants are not coming from Africa, so I would not say it's quite fair to compare Australia's diversity 1 on 1 to America's level of diversity, just going by the simple numbers.

The parts of America that have had similar levels of diversity to Australia, let's say, have traditionally had low crime rates, and gun homicides have never been considered a specific problem there.

These are all factors that have to be considered when honestly asking ourselves whether things are different in Australia due to the laws, or whether there might be other factors.

 

The nation of Australia is a very small, isolated island not land-locked with any other nation. The united states is not, as it is quite massive, and land-locked with one of the most violent, corrupt nations to be found on the planet, that being the nation of Mexico.

The two simply cannot be compared in an honest and legitimate manner. It is not so much comparing apples to oranges, but rather comparing apples to cinder blocks.

 

As much as I love firearms I don't see a place for them as casual carry items. If you aren't
in a prescribe militia (even one designed by the NRA) then you shouldn't have a gun.
Per head of population shows America to be a far more dangerous place than any other
Westernized white nation (though I do understand that fear of crime can drive this.)

 

Remove gang banger's from the equation and the U.S. becomes a very safe place to live. Of course they are not allowed by law to use guns for such purposes, but they are criminals don't care about laws which is why gun laws only restrict law abiding citizens turning them into easy to attack subjects.

So you advocate people being forced into becoming victims?

 

I understand and respect your POV. Fear is a very real thing.
As I see it, Americans are trapped into a situation where they can't rid themselves of guns.

 

We are not trapped into a situation, we are exercising a natural right to be able to protect ourselves, law enforcement is stretched too thin and now there is a movement underfoot to neuter them, so what's left to protect us?

Nothing, so we must prepare, train and be ready to protect ourselves because their is no one else to turn to.

 

Yes you are trapped because the main fear, as I see it, is armed attacks.
In Australia hand guns are rare. The only ones around are those smuggled
into the country.
Ask any America why they have guns and they cite other people having
guns. That's a vicious circle.
The argument about fighting the govt is absurd - you need Ohio class subs,
A10's and nuclear cruise missiles for that.

 

It's not fear it's accepting reality, America is changing and in many ways not for the better, that's the reality, the solution, be able to defend oneself and family.

It doesn't matter, Americans are not Australians, we have a culture of violence, it's entertaining and it's profitable, we have a huge drug problem and the more money we toss into the War on Drugs the worse the problem becomes, and we have cities where people are living in conditions that if someone exposed a dog to, they would go to jail.

Do you have a better plan?

Who's talking about fighting the government? What we the law abiding care about, is limiting government, not fighting it.

 

A great many individuals think the same way. Up until they realize the real world does not work on the basis of their perspective, and they are forced to find out just how violent and dangerous the real world truly is.

How well has such been working out in the nation of Venezuela? Or the nation of Brazil?

How many violent criminal individuals is the nation of Australia home to? Does it as a nation have a thriving sub-culture that glamorizes violence, that promotes the idea of widespread sexual assault for the fun of it, killing individuals who cooperate with law enforcement, or believes that murdering someone is perfectly acceptable over being disrespected?

 

I accept your points. I see America as caught in a vicious cycle - more crime leads to more
guns leads to more crime.

 

Factually incorrect. Firearms are neither the cause, nor source, of either crime or violence in the united states, but rather the individuals themselves. The society of the united states holds many individuals who have proven conclusively, beyond all reasonable doubt, that they simply do not belong in society under any circumstances. And yet despite that, they still remain in society regardless, free to victimize others as they see fit. An untold number of hundreds of thousands, if not outright millions, of convicted violent offenders, have been mass released back into the population due to fear of coronavirus outbreaks in prisons, putting the public at great risk from these offenders who have proven they both cannot, and will not, abide by the rules of a civilized society.

 

So let's say the effect of guns in crime is worse than no guns.
And the murder rate per thousand is much higher.
In Australia I cannot have a rifle without a license. As I live on
one side of the border and my property is on the other I must
have licenses in both states - and must travel quite some way
to secure these licenses. I just gave up. I can't even have a
.17 air rifle.
But here you don't have the sounds of gun shots. There's no
hand guns in road rage. Few armed robberies. A mass killer
must resort to more limited weapons such as knives. A terrorist
would be hard pressed to acquire "assault rifles." You generally
feel safer.

 

Is feeling safe the same thing as actually being safe?

In the city of Nice, in the nation of France, a terrorist committed a mass killing that resulted in eighty six individuals being murdered, and another four hundred and fifty eight individuals being seriously injured within the span of five minutes. All committed with neither firearms nor explosives, but a common motor vehicle.

Did an absence of freely-available firearms serve to make these people anymore safe than people in the united states? Did they feel safe in the moments leading up to them discovering that they were not?

The concept of "safety" is little more than an illusion. One can be safer than others in a particular situation, but no one is ever truly safe. Those who believe otherwise have allowed themselves to be fooled by false notions fueled by their sense of vulnerability in the real world.

 

The "illusion" ought to be dispelled in the stats, but it holds up - we are safer
as a result of not having guns. I understand it's a different situation once guns
are prevalent.
If a nation went from no guns to all guns then the stats on gun deaths would
sky rocket.

 

Those who have been victimized through other means, while being legally prohibited from protecting themselves on the grounds they may cause their attacker harm, would beg to differ.

When those who are in charge place a greater emphasis on the well being of the individual who is committing a crime against others, than on the well being of those who are the victims of said crimes being committed, the system does no favors to the people it is supposed to be protecting from harm.

The difference is the people and cultures, not the implements.

So what is ultimately being stated on the part of yourself, is that culture makes absolutely no difference in the matter? Absolutely no difference whatsoever? Is is being stated that if firearms were to become quite prevalent in the nation of Japan, their peaceful supposedly peaceful society would utterly evaporate due to the people having the physical means to engage in violence against others?

 

Trudeau needs to find a real job.

For one thing, you cannot hold the whole responsible for the sins of a very few. He's politicking lies and he damn well knows it. What's more, your bullshit won't stop the sins of a very few.

You are abetting the bad guys, Trudeau.

Off to hell with you then, Justin.

 

Yes. Japan has criminals too. Now guns would be used in more crimes, and people would
buy guns to protect themselves. And more guns in homes would lead to more gun deaths.
And a gun culture would grow - but the net effect is less security, not more.

 

It was a valid argument in 18th Century. Now guns are used mostly for murder and suicide.

 

Also many people do not care about those suffering Severe Depression -- they commit suicide very often.

 

Sad but true. Sadly many people do not view Life as sacred.

 

Such as many individuals who hold political office, and who view their voting constituents as nothing more than commodities to be bought, sold, and traded for their own benefit.

 

So what is ultimately being stated on the part of yourself, is that culture makes absolutely no difference whatsoever? Firearms are the one sole factor that make any difference under any circumstances?

 

Aust had more guns per head of population than America. Our politically correct
have even removed them from museum exhibits. That's more than a shame -
it's the erasure of history that Orwell speaks of - something happening now with
nearly everything in America.
Not sure if a non-gun culture could become a gun culture quickly, but over time
it will happen. Today's novelty is tomorrow's culture. Only in this instance it isn't
smart phones but guns.

 

And it is not believed that said firearms culture would be peaceful or responsible? It is automatically assumed it would always be one of violence?