School shooting Florida

[MikeG]

I agree Nessie. I believe that the gun prohibitionist are being disingenuous. Complete gun prohibition is their true motive.........

You just keep telling yourself that.

That's up there with 9/11 "truth" as a conspiracy theory.

 

[ServiceSoon]

Firearms are not prohibited in Canada. Owners are licensed and those without a license cannot purchase ammunition. Certain classes of firearms are prohibited.

There are 3 classes of firearms in Canada - Unrestricted, Restricted, Prohibited.

Off the stop of my head the types include:

Unrestricted: Shotguns - min. barrel length of 18", max capacity 3 rounds
Rifles - min. barrel length of 18", max capacity of 5 rounds (exemptions for the Lee Enfield, rifles with a fixed mag capacity and no detachable magazine, rifles with a tubular magazine, .22 rim fire rifles)
Restricted: pistols with a barrel length greater than 4", max mag. Capacity of 10 rounds
Modern military style rifles
Prohibited: automatic or selective fire weapons,
Rifles or shotguns with a barrel length of less than 18"
Pistols with a barrel length of less than 4"

And before anyone asks, yes the police forces and military have exemptions.

Fair enough, I miss-spoke. THank you for setting me straight. What I meant is that relative to the US's firearm laws, Canada's are more restrictive. What benefit has that provided the citizens of Canada? What benefit did Canada's long-gun registration provide the citizens of Canada? We know that said registry used a portion of Canada's finite capital. Would that money have been spent more wisely on other methods to combat the homicide rate?

Sounds like an insult to the very idea of freedom and liberty and your socialist hell-hole of a country is obviously going to hell in a handcart.

For the non-loonies, it seems to have produced a system where most people who want or need a weapon can have one, and where spree shootings are much reduced compared with your southern neighbour.

Socialist hell-hole Why do you speak so ill of Canada?

If you intended to repeat back what I was saying then I would have accepted something to the tune of; such laws had no impact, or had such a small impact as to not be statistically relevant. This isn't cause for celebration. It's cause for pause and reflection to formulate a new plan to improve the quality of life in society.

 

[ServiceSoon]

You just keep telling yourself that.

That's up there with 9/11 "truth" as a conspiracy theory.

There is plenty of data available to you that ask if gun bans make society after. Some say yes, some say no; we call that inconclusive. That's hardly a conspiracy theory.

Similar studies have established a strong link between demographics such as poverty, the amount of young-males, weather patterns, etc. We should focus on these aspects. This is also not a conspiracy theory.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

Well NRA supports the current model, where everybody can have gun, unless there is 'a problem' with him. And 'a problem' does not include mental illness .. no medicine 'background check' is needed.

Mental illness does actually disqualify you from owning a gun and I don't think the NRA opposes that. I agree that the NRA ultimately wants as many dues paying members as possible and more gun owners means more potential members. Despite the "well-regulated militia" part of the second amendment, I've never heard of them advocating that non-citizens should have their guns confiscated. I don't think they would even have a problem with illegal aliens possessing a gun or being able to buy ammunition. So, yeah, the NRA isn't perfect by any stretch.

In most countries the model that nobody can have gun, unless they get the license. Which is much more thorough and longer process, typically also including medical evaluation. And in most countries the gun is registered, so in case of change in mental state of the gun holder, the guns can be taken from him.

Here's a question everybody who doesn't live in the United States: What exactly do you have to do to get a gun in your country as far as background check for mental illness? I know it's much more difficult in some countries to get one but I don't think it is impossible anywhere. If your country mandates background checks and mental fitness tests, what do these consist of? How effective are they? If somebody, say, has an imaginary friend who they talk to regularly and who tells them how to behave towards others or what foods they can or cannot eat on which days or what clothes they need to wear in public, would they pass a mental fitness test for owning a gun?

In this case it was very simple for Cruz to get a gun, and him buying gun was completely legal. AFAIK nobody who knew about his psychological problems was bound to do anything by law.

Perhaps not. But the police did know Cruz was violent. He had physically assaulted the people he had been staying with. The police were told he had held a gun to people's head. The police were told that he had bought a gun and was waiting to pick it up. They knew he had tons of ammo. The FBI was warned he might shoot up a school and they failed to follow up on this warning. Law enforcement could've stopped this shooting by taking actions they are mandated to take under existing laws but didn't. More laws won't help if the police aren't willing to enforce them.

I see role of NRA more in uniting voters, rather then lobbying. Republicans and Trump have pro-gun opinions openly and for a long time. It's not like they are doing something against their voters. NRA is good in keeping the opinion 'any gun control is bad' .. and democrats are not helping with extreme or uninformed anti-gun ideas.

That's the problem I have with the anti-gun people...especially those annoying little twits, but totally not crisis actors, Hogg and Gonzalez.

 

[Border Reiver]

Fair enough, I miss-spoke. THank you for setting me straight. What I meant is that relative to the US's firearm laws, Canada's are more restrictive.

US gun laws is a bit of a misnomer. Laws aren't consistent across the US, making it easy for people in an area with more restrictive laws to go to an area with less restrictive laws and get what they want. This is why I roll my eyes when I hear Chicago mentioned. The laws in Chicago might prohibit pistols, but the neighbouring counties in Illionois don't, meaning that anyone with access to a car can get what they want easily. Either the federal government needs to set the restrictions in place - which could be done with the commerce clause, but will run afoul of the 2A resulting in a drawn out court battle or an amendment to the US Constitution, but will take considerable time, energy and political capital , or each State needs to adopt similar legislative restrictions - and given the history of the US seems unlikely.

What benefit has that provided the citizens of Canada?

The general restrictions have been in place since the mid-1920s. This has had the effect of restricting the numbers of weapons more suitable for crime (pistols, short barrelled shotguns) and the use of penalties for use of restricted or prohibited in crimes has had an effect on criminals (or at least those that make calculations before they commit crimes).

The change to the law that requires a valid license to purchase ammunition restricts sources for criminals to get bullets.

Essentially, this has been a long term strategy of Canadian society. Restricting access to firearms to those who have not passed certain tests (no serious criminal records, no mental health issues, etc) by licensing, reducing the pool of weapons that criminals can draw upon.

What benefit did Canada's long-gun registration provide the citizens of Canada? We know that said registry used a portion of Canada's finite capital. Would that money have been spent more wisely on other methods to combat the homicide rate?

The long gun registration had mixed results. It was a useful database for police to know if there were guns in a house where a domestic disturbance was going on and could be a way to ID who was the legal owner of a weapon used in a crime, but was deeply unpopular with the generally law abiding owners. It was argued that this was a violation of the Canadian Constitution (the regulation of private property is a provincial government responsibility, and the registry was a federal system). It was politically unpopular and has been abolished.

The violent crime rate has even steadily decreasing for decades in Canada, could the money spent on the registry have been spent on other crime prevention measures? Maybe.

The tightening of the licensing requirements has been fairly well accepted by gun owners as a reasonable restriction - the federal government set tHe standard to be met and then let the provinces enforce the regulations in a manner they felt was appropriate.

 

[MikeG]

There is plenty of data available to you that ask if gun bans make society after. Some say yes, some say no; we call that inconclusive. That's hardly a conspiracy theory.

Similar studies have established a strong link between demographics such as poverty, the amount of young-males, weather patterns, etc. We should focus on these aspects. This is also not a conspiracy theory.

twaddle. All of it. You are just ignoring the international data. Why?

Because it doesn't suit your narrative.

 

[Border Reiver]

(Duplicate)

 

[MikeG]

........Socialist hell-hole Why do you speak so ill of Canada?.........

It's always said over here that Americans have no sense of irony. That really hasn't been my experience on this forum, so please don't wreck my confidence in dismissing this generalisation.

 

[Meadmaker]

If Sandy Hook was not a tipping point, then nothing is going to be too shocking to create one.

Then, even if there is a tipping point, no one can agree what to do.

Then, how do you get an unknown number of weapons off an unknown number of people, many of whom are criminals or nutters who will fight the police when they arrive to take the guns away?

Is it possible even more people will die than the present rate of gun deaths, as the police fight civilians to get guns off those considered not suitable to have them?

Will anyone be able to persuade the police to go and do daily battle to get the guns?

I understand your pessimism, but it seems to go beyond that. You seem almost personally committed to the failure of the nascent, post Parkland, activity, like if it did somehow actually result in meaningful legislation, you would feel upset for having been wrong.

Well, regardless, I fear you are correct, but I retain some hope. By the way, the police in America will never "fight people for their guns", or even go out of their way to seize them. I would be extremely surprised if existing guns, regardless of type, were not "grandfathered" by any legislation that might actually pass.

 

[beren]

<snip>

That's the problem I have with the anti-gun people...especially those annoying little twits, but totally not crisis actors, Hogg and Gonzalez.

Conversely, I know I am ignorant about guns, and I would love the more informed to propose solutions. All I ever see is "more guns" or "arm teachers. " The later of these is oftenproposed by gopher ignorant of how schools will, ironically.

When the knowledgeable throw up there hands and refuse to be part of the solution, what would you have us do?

 

[sadhatter]

Conversely, I know I am ignorant about guns, and I would love the more informed to propose solutions. All I ever see is "more guns" or "arm teachers. " The later of these is oftenproposed by gopher ignorant of how schools will, ironically.

When the knowledgeable throw up there hands and refuse to be part of the solution, what would you have us do?

Become knowledgeable.

Would your theory work for brain surgery? " the surgeon is a dick head so I guess I better go in with an ice cream scoop and a fork".

Or to be less of a jerk about it, your logic gets people trapped in snow storms killed, pretty good evidence it doesn't work in a crisis.

 

[MikeG]

.......You seem almost personally committed to the failure of the nascent, post Parkland, activity, like if it did somehow actually result in meaningful legislation, you would feel upset for having been wrong......

Exactly.

 

[Hungry81]

Become knowledgeable.

Would your theory work for brain surgery? " the surgeon is a dick head so I guess I better go in with an ice cream scoop and a fork".

Or to be less of a jerk about it, your logic gets people trapped in snow storms killed, pretty good evidence it doesn't work in a crisis.

Well some of the so self titled knowledgable people here don't seem to admit the leathality difference between a musket and a mid to high capacity semi auto rifle. Some of the knowlegeable people here can't at all see the link between guns and gun violence. So forgive me if I don't want to become as knowledgable as them, even thoigh I'm sure they would jump all over the chance to educate me in the difference between a magazine and a clip, or the damage a blunted 9mm does vs a standard .44

 

[thaiboxerken]

So forgive me if I don't want to become as knowledgable as them, even thoigh I'm sure they would jump all over the chance to educate me in the difference between a magazine and a clip, or the damage a blunted 9mm does vs a standard .44

If you don't know the nominal grain load of different size slugs of bullets, then you aren't qualified to have an opinion on gun violence..........

 

[Nessie]

I understand your pessimism, but it seems to go beyond that. You seem almost personally committed to the failure of the nascent, post Parkland, activity, like if it did somehow actually result in meaningful legislation, you would feel upset for having been wrong.

I would be delighted if there was a tipping point, my commitment is not failure, but to pointing out the inevitable.

Well, regardless, I fear you are correct, but I retain some hope. By the way, the police in America will never "fight people for their guns", or even go out of their way to seize them. I would be extremely surprised if existing guns, regardless of type, were not "grandfathered" by any legislation that might actually pass.

Unless you can remove guns from those who should not have them, there is no solution to the present situation.

 

[Nessie]

Exactly.

The committent to failure and upset at being wrong, is from those who think that deciding what type of gun civilians can possess in the USA is a possible solution.

Lets say the AR15 is made illegal to possess. What next?

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'd be interested in hearing what good things you think the NRA has been doing. Blaming the NRA for the actual things they've been doing is entirely fair. Blaming them for the failures at Parkland is entirely unfair. They don't advocate for letting mentally unstable people acquire guns

Yes they did, see the whole Trump rescinding Obama's executive order on that. Please try to be remotely factual.

 

[Meadmaker]

Become knowledgeable.

Would your theory work for brain surgery?

There's an irony here. I was going to post something that started very much like your post, and indeed, I thought someone had beaten me to it until I saw who the author was.

What I was going to post was a question asking about whether anyone who was not a rocket scientist was allowed to have an opinion about the US space program. Before you criticize American space policy, or propose changes, you must demonstrate knowledge of rocketry or a closely related field. Otherwise, your opinion does not matter. Become knowledgable before you speak up.

I was going to go with rocket science instead of brain surgery because I have knowledge and a tiny bit of experience with rocket science, but none of surgery, brain or otherwise.

 

[Aridas]

Yes they did, see the whole Trump rescinding Obama's executive order on that. Please try to be remotely factual.

A nitpick - It wasn't specifically mentally unstable people. Mentally impaired would be more accurate, which can include, but is not limited to mentally unstable. Also of note is that Obama's executive order probably wouldn't have added anyone new to the groups of people who aren't allowed to have guns, but rather just enabled information to be passed between agencies so that already existing laws could be enforced far more easily and effectively.

Of course, with that particular example, he can deflect the part of the blame that would normally fall on the people using Trump onto Trump.

 

[Checkmite]

Jordan Jareb, the man who in the hours after the Parkland school shooting claimed the attacker was a member of his white-supremacist militia group and later withdrew the claim, was arrested yesterday following an FBI raid on a residence owned by his mother, from which they removed several bags of evidence.

The FBI has confirmed the arrest but has not indicated whether it is connected in any way with the school shooting claims. I'm only posting it here because this was a recent major event with which this guy involved himself, if briefly.