the Gun Control thread

[Ralphie]

I personally would kill anyone that entered my home in the middle of the night in a burglary scenario.


No joke.

Instant death sentance. I have kids and a wife. Im not fucking around, no way. Sorry to say it, but I would shoot anyone that happened to be lurking in my house in the middle of the night. Of course, I would wait to fire until I knew the person was in fact an intrueder.


I sleep on a different floor of the house than my kids. We have video on the main floor because of this. I would know as I approached the stair case if the asshole was a burglar, and yeah, for sure, I would blast a pair of 20g slugs right into their torso.


I don't really know why anyone would approach a burgler and ask what they are doing in your house.

Seriously, you didn't figure that out already?


I personally have a plan and a strategy for how I would clear my house in the event of a home invasion or burglary. Everyone should have a plan.


You guys remember that guy that was tied up, beaten and then left for dead in his basement? Those mother fuckers made him watch as they raped and killed his wife and daughters.


Fuck that. I would rather live with the guilt of killing someone. I'm not really all that sure I would feel that guilty either. Break into my house, threaten my family, you deserve dead.

If I call the police, you'll get away with a slap on your wrist and might even come back for more. Fuck that.

Also, I have programmed my brain to always shoot in pairs specifically for this situation. I would want the MOFO dead. No my word vs theirs shit.


No fucking way. Enter my home, threaten my family and face the fucking reaper.

Oh yea I wasn't saying im going to be asking questions in the middle of the night, only in Stewies scenario where someone was in my house in broad day light.

At 3am, your as good as dead.

If I think I can control the situation without firing, i still would, only because I don't want to deal with the bs, but the odds of that happening are slim.

Obv I would clear my house as well to mainly make sure its not one of my kids or family members in my sights.

...im not saying to surrender your guns

...restrict certain guns...like someone said, you can protect your house with a shotgun 10x better than an assault rifle.

toycar, you saying you'll kill anyone in your house...i hope to hell you honestly dont mean that...and if you do...america needs to up their health plan and someone needs to sign you up. just what defines a buglary to you???? what if your kids come home at 3 in the morning with a buddy, and one is drunk making a bit of noise..bumping into tables...lights out so he doesn't wake anyone up...gonna shoot??? cause right now it seems your mindset is shoot then ask..and im pretty sure if you were to flick a light on and have the kid turn around in a panic...you'd unleash on him.

your logic of "instant death sentance" is just flat out retarded to me.

ralphie, you served in the military, did they just hand you a rifle and say "pull this, and whatever this is pointed at dies" or did they educate you first? teach you how to use it safely around your fellow soldiers?

YOU and maybe a select few others on here, i would trust with a firearm, for the rest of the people...i wouldnt trust with a squirt gun. that doesnt mean that i think you should be entitled to ANY firearm, but i would trust you with a rifle/shotgun/pistol. not in public...but to own.

dont forget, this thread is basically less than 10 people going back and forth. 6 of you may have gun knowledge...congrats, how many people who live in your city who own a firearm can say that? a select handful??

as for you saying america is the greatest country a few posts back.

lets not forget that everything jeff daniels says here is a FACT. (from the hbo show the newsroom)



the 3 things your country leads the world in...no wonder ya'll need guns...

http://http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-shehori/poll-37-of-americans-unab_b_150933.html

pretty impressive...im not trying to bash on anyone of you here, but cmon...look...37% cant locate america on a map??? those 37% are allowed weapons??? they should be forced to be in school for the next 10 years instead.

Yes you get plenty of training on how to safely maintain and use your rifle.

How to dislodge jams etc.

Were not the police. Our training is for combat, so we expect that when were locked and loaded your weapon is on safe.

Every theater is different and I believe NATO and Theater Command control how shit goes down, can't say for sure because ive never deployed.

In any case, when shit pops off the weapon comes off safe and you put fucking shells down range. Its very simple and has worked for 200 years.

Can't even compare that situation to any in America or any place unless they are in a state of war or lawlessness.

Anyway, just because people are not outspoken does not mean they canno't be entrusted to handle a weapon. These threads always have the same 10 people in them anyway lol.

As far as my America is the greatest comment, please don't take offense to that.

When I say it, I don't mean that every other country sucks. Even though it implies other countries are of less value, I don't even mean that.

I just love my country and couldn't really imagine living anywhere else, im sure you feel the same way.

Yes, a lot of people here are stupid....if that 33% were much more educated, we might not be in the situation we are in today, but alas, people are fucking lazy.

Im sure Canada has that same 33%.

Every country does, its human nature, and doesn't prove anything.

And the huffingtonpost is wack lol.

[toycar]

Stewie;

Like I said, once an intruder was identified as being an intruder, I'd shoot them. So what if it was one of my sons friends?


Most of the time this kind of shit happens its someone you know. I don't see your point there other than I may inadvertently shoot someone for no reason.

I'm saying that wouldn't happen. I have infrared video in 3 locations on my main floor, because we sleep on a different floor of the house. I would know before hand if it was a burglar.


Yeah, I would kill someone for entering my house unlawfully in the middle of the night. Probably in broad day light just the same. I don't care if you are there to steal my movies, xbox or my children.

If you enter my house with bad intentions, ill protect what's mine. If that means I have to shoot someone dead over an xbox, ill gladly argue that my person was threatened as soon as this jackass entered my house.

I don't care what they are there for. It's not time for 20 questions or smelling the interior corners of my house. I would never turn my back and hope for the best.

Dead, plain and simple.



Let me ask you this;

At what point are you suggesting the situation escalates? Once they point a gun at you? Is that when you should start taking it seriously?

For me, you enter my house with bad intentions, Ill kill you. I could care less if you are there for my tv, to rape my wife or to smell my dirty socks.


Enter my house, uninvited, with bad intentions...... DEAD

[stewie]

ralphie, i dont take offence, and im sure canada has a % of people who cant locate it on a map, i just tried searching for it but couldnt find it, but if you could find it id really like to see and read the article.


toycar, it may be someone you know you shoot, yes, thats what im trying to get at there was if your son was home at 3am WITH his friend, your son goes to the bathroom, and his friend goes looking for a place to sleep in your house making some noise on the way. you look at your monitor, see 1 solo person, grab the gun, open fire, and kill. 2 seconds later your son comes out of the bathroom in complete horror as to what you just did. how do you explain that to him? you thought he was an intruder? thats going to fuck with your childs mind for the rest of his life, and unless he gets a therapist, he may not live up to his full potential or have a mental breakdown one day.


as for your question, when does a situation escalate. well, its always escalated, how you deal with it is what matters. shoot first ask questions to me seems like something a hillbilly would do (not saying you are one..). any problem that can occur inside a house can be diffused with words. it may take some compromising on both ends, but it can be done and please dont say it cant cause you know it can, you just dont want to. it just seems to me as if your country is just digging itself a hole it cant get out of, and at this point, common courtesy and respect for one another has completely gone out the window. everything has to resort to violence.

but like ralphie said, he says everything because he loves his country and couldnt imagine living anywhere else, which is the same reason i'm here, i love my country so much that i feel other countrys could honestly learn a thing or two from us (hence me talking about the gun policies).

but, this is a topic that is and always will go in a never ending circle. so, everyone clearly knows my stand point, i know all of yours. i just hope in the future your country can shape up its gun laws to make your country a safer place for everyone so everyone doesnt have to live in a seemingly state of fear towards one another. im just going to quit this thread. have i given up, no. i can go on for months on end about this, but i wont. its useless. its like you trying to tell a canadian that hockey isn't a sport.

[zmanwit90accord]

I've been lurking this thread since it started because I was seriously interested in learning others opinions on the subject since one day, I would like to own a hand gun of some sort.

I've hesitated to reply since I'm quite ignorant on both the gun and politics side of the argument but after seeing this article, I thought I'd share it with you guys to see if it changes anything.

http://news.yahoo.com/3-cops-shot-nj...opstories.html

Although I don't care for yahoo news, I'm sure there's a better article somewhere else on the interwebs.

As for my reasons to want to own a gun, I want one for when I own a house and possible have a family, although I have good reasons to want one now as well. I'd also like to get into target shooting at ranges because I've always been good at archery and bibi guns at camp and I'd like to take it up a notch.

[stewie]

Imnot responding towards gun policies anymore, just to the article that was shown.

In the article it says he was already at the station being held?

Were the police negligent and did not search him? Or did he wrestle with an officer and get his gun? Or did he have a weapon "inserted" in him? When they give the detailed article at 3pm I wanna read it.

[zmanwit90accord]

Imnot responding towards gun policies anymore, just to the article that was shown.

In the article it says he was already at the station being held?

Were the police negligent and did not search him? Or did he wrestle with an officer and get his gun? Or did he have a weapon "inserted" in him? When they give the detailed article at 3pm I wanna read it.

Yea there was so much information left out, I'm curious to see what happened as well.

I guess I posted the article to stir the pot a bit. Seeing as the supposedly contained criminal got his hands on a weapon proves that just because you have a weapon, doesn't mean it can't be taken away from you. No matter the situation and how tough and well trained you think you are. And although it was a police station and police are allowed to carry weapons, it also goes to show how many lives were saved because someone took the shot to end the shooter's life.

Imagine it was in a different setting, where the shooter took the gun off a single police officer and no one else had a gun because of laws, restrictions, etc, how many lives would the shooter take before someone intervened?

[toycar]

I'm not trying to go tit for tat, honest.

In my house, never would a situation arise that my son had friends over I wasn't aware of. He knows better. That probably sounds arrogant or cocky, but it is the truth. My kids are awesome, and they absolutely know better.


None the less I see your point.


I do want to point out that frequently in America, people are raped and killed for cooperating. It really does happen.



I do think 90% of the time you can resolve issues with words alone. The thing is, I would never risk that 10% chance of being beaten down, tied up and forced to watch my wife be raped or kids be killed.


And, that shit has happened all to often the last 10 or so years. I personally would rather live with the consequences, and KNOW I took care of my family, than ever take that chance.


Again, I'm not disputing what stewie is saying and generally speaking I agree with everything he has said.


In the home defense conversation I think I just feel different.

Nothing personal!

This has been a good conversation

[owequitit]

Statistically speaking, yes. The majority of violet crime is committed by young people of lower socioeconomic standing. SOURCE

This doesn't mean that people of low socioeconomic status aren't capable of being incredibly caring, wonderful people or that people of higher socioeconomic standing aren't capable of being incredibly harsh, violent individuals.

Note: Before anyone responds to this and insinuates this post and paints me as guilty of classism, I just want to make it perfectly clear I am talking from a pure statistical standpoint.

Scott, I completely agree with your problems with the way the US is dealing with the drug war that is going on just beyond, and sometimes within, our boarders. This just goes to show that the issues aren't even confined to our own boarders.

I still need to look over the data available to determine what my thoughts are about what the best way to find a solution to the US's gun problem, which is something no one is able to ignore. I can say now, even without looking at the data, there isn't going to be a silver bullet to the issue.

^yes

owequitit, if i were to walk past you at midnight, on my cellphone, wearing a gucci suit, and holding a briefcase in an industrial area downtown, an area where not many people are and you had a gun on your hip, would you be more prone to think of me as "a threat" to you"?

compared to us in the same spot, but this time me wearing baggy jeans that dont even stay up properly unless i hold them, baggy shirt and hoody, hat on backwards, with a lil gangster walk goin on. which one are you going to think of as a bigger threat?

you said we dont need training on cars or voting? did you just walk into the dmv and ask for a licence when you were of age? cause up here, it takes 3 years to get a drivers licence, 1 year straight driving with a qualified supervisor, followed by 2 years on your own with absolutely NO mistakes. a single ticket will reset you to the very begining. so yes, we do have driver training, and it teaches us proper driving techniques, and the rules to follow.

why is your president giving guns to mexican drug cartels? project gunrunner was set up by the ATF to stop it, and guess what? odds are they got greedy, and helped the flow of guns going there. i'm sure your president had good intentions of setting that program up, but greedy people got in the way and used it to their own advantage.

as for the canadian who hacked off anothers head, they were at a rest stop, the majority of the people on board were already off the bus. after you've had your throat slit, theres a very small chance that your going to save the person unless you have immediate proffesional care. do i think the people should have guns, no, should the driver? yes, in a lock box, just as pilots do. the drivers the one responsible for getting his passengers to their destination in a safe manner. passengers did try to save him but were unsuccessful.

to ferenza, i never said i would hide in a corner, i would acknowledge the burgler and just let him take what he wants. if its a family member, yes, then i would respond and attack as much as i could. other then that, i have insurance, and police responce times are usually less than 2-3 minutes, so he will be caught. i live in an extremely populated area, and its extremely safe for that reason. but you said if someone comes into your house without your permission or without a gun, he is asking for serious punishment or death. okay, lets say he has a gun, if he has one, he surely wont be walking around with it in a holster with the safety on...it'll be in his hand ready to fire at the first sign of danger, and are you going to take the chance and play russian roulette with him?? over what??? a fucking tv?? a laptop?? a few dollars?? 2 people facing each other, both have guns, 1 will die. are your materialistic possesions honestly worth more than your life??

but okay, heres a compromise towards your gun control.

keep all the guns you have as is right now, dont ban anything and you can still use them, however, everyone after this day has to go through a long process to aquire a firearms licence. basically a similar method me and evil demon need to go through to aquire one...tests, practical tests, police interviews, 3 refferal interviews, and then you can get your licence. or is that to harsh for you guys? it hasnt taken away your rights to bear arms, just makes it longer to aquire and deters those who just want the gun to show off and act hardcore to their friends. after getting the licence, you can go in a purchase a hand gun and walk out that day with it. hows that? or is that even to extreme for you?

yes, i see those stats, and they are for america, however, my province has the lowest crime rate in canada(cant find the actual stats on statscanada...but im sure they're there) source (yes its from a newspaper, but it states that stats canada has said it in it article)

the average home in vancouver is around 800(older 10year+ house) - 1.8 million (for a new house that doesnt require a full restoration). and for those prices, i do NOT live in a wealthy neighborhood. its safe...but by no means wealthy.

but like that article states, our teens are just doing other productive things with their time...i cant gurantee you, but i bet you if they let our teens have guns at an early age, the stats wouldnt be the same. if we had the ammount of firearms you have (americans) freely floating around and being sold illegally/stolen from home invasions, my city would be on a downhill slope, and the more its ignored by people saying "that boy was just troubled, he should have had help before he went on a mass killing spree" is flat out ignoring the fact that he did the crime. can you admit that there are a LOT of illegal firearms in america, able to be bought illegaly from the streets? that seems to me like an aide to criminals...similar to a gateway drug...a person starts off by stealing a bike..then moves on to a car...then he wants to rob a home, but he'll need some protection while doing so, so he gets a gun from an alley way from a crack head for 100$.

it just seems with the ammount of guns floating around, potentially capable of being stolen at any moment when someone isn't home and be resold on the streets is wrong. its a downhill slope, and its getting to the point where there will be no solution.

if your house was broken into while you were on vacation, and lets say 20 of your pistols were stolen(just a number im using), when you come back to see your firearms stolen, what will you do? go out and buy more to prepare yourself for the next home invasion? either way, those firearms are now being sold illegally to future criminals.

make it harder to aquire a firearm, and i honestly believe less firearms will be sold. as less firearms are sold, crimes will continue, and firearms will be seized. eventually illegal firearms will start to dwindle down.
its your right to buy a firearm, but if its going to take you a year to gain a firearms licence(length it took to aquire mine) and your a 17-18 year kid just out of highschool..are you really going to have the mind set that says "im of age! lets get a gun!!!!"? or would you say.."meh fuck it...my dads got a few guns...if i want to shoot em ill go with him"
however, if your shooting the guns without supervision from a licenced firearms holder, your firearms are seized on teh spot and if the owner knew that they were using the guns without his supervision, his licence will be stripped for a few years.

i know this is a one sided reply cause i dont know how it is in other cities across canada or usa, but i live maybe 5 minutes from a police station, and a community police station is found almost every 5 minutes of driving in populated areas (community police station as in a few clerks in case anyone needs help immediatly and goes in there for safety, a place where officers can park to take a quick snack break or lunch break) so anywhere you are in the city, a cop is no more than a few minutes away at all times.

Yes, to own and transport. I'd like to say to have them registered, that way if a stolen gun was seized in a crime, they can track it to the last owner and why it wasn't claimed as stolen...if he's no legitimate answer...how do you know he hasn't been selling guns to felons?

I can explain more later, but for now I'm actually in a guns store since they have a huge Xmas sale lol. So when I get home ill reedit this out

-edit-

home now, yes, the licence is to purchase a weapon/transport it. however im not so sure you would need to have transport papers since your allowed to open carry in certain states...so for now lets say its just specifically for purchasing a firearm/ammunition(in open carry states). start up a gun registration from tomorrow on. so what you have now...leave em be if its easier for people to cope with. for myself, registration is ONLY required for a pistol or a restricted weapon(assault rifle mainly). the process of obtaining a firearm isnt so much more difficult, as it is more indepth of the person whos wanting it, all you really need to do is have passed a basic gun test and practical test, and have an interview with a police officer as to why you want the gun, will it be for sport or defence..etc etc..have 3 proffesional friends interviewed over a phone (the better and more proffesional, the easier it is. if you have a family doctor and can get him to take a few minutes out of his day to answer a few questions, they might not even need to ask the other 2) but the interview will be the same, a police officer asking if you've ever been known to act out of rage, if your a violent person, have had severe depression before, what your money situation is like(my three were asked that in case i was low on money or in so much debt that they want to make sure i wont attempt suicide)...etc etc. let the paperwork go through, eventually it'll be finished and then you get a licence in the mail, photo id saying your allowed to own a weapon. from that day on, theres no 3 day wait period or background checks, its already been done. your licence will expire every 5 years like your drivers licence. just get a new photo and mail it in.

registering the guns, like i said, if your house is ever robbed and your guns are stolen, you report it immediatley, from that point on, cops come to your house, do the investigation, and if the gun ever comes up in a crime, your held free of accountability of future crimes that gun is involved with and whoever has the gun at that point takes the hook for breaking into your house even though he might have been the 10th criminal to own that weapon sice it was stolen. the gun will be used as evidence for the trial of the criminal, and after the trial is said and done, your gun is returned.

as to selling a pistol/rifle, its no different than selling a car, you transfer the paperwork over claiming you sold the weapon for this ammount of money to john doe, you both sign, and voila, hes the new owner. all you have to do is let a police station know of the transaction and they can swap over the registraion to that other person providing he has a licence. sure your in your 20's -40's and have many weapons, but when your kids are starting ot get to the point where they need to go to college, take a look at the weapons you own, and sort out a want vs need. maybe help your kid out with tuition that way?

but thats just my suggestion on gun control while trying to compramise as much as i can on your right to bear arms without having to be yelled at by someoen

How's this stats?

Gun deaths per country

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...-with-firearms

9369 compared to 144.

Gun control works the way I see it.

On the fist link it says the NRA says "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

Well not in my mind

I bet you we also have more guns than everyone put together on that list which makes us the least deaths together and we have the right to own guns.

Highly doubt that

But I'm not saying you don't have a right to own them, I'm merely saying tighten the laws to aquire, and gun crimes will go down. Not immediately, but over time.

that doesnt take into account population either.

here are the first 5 countries on that list (and canada, since we are talking about that) on a per capita basis (gun deaths divided by total country population according to wikipedia)
South Africa: 31,918/51,770,560= 0.0006165 deaths per person
Columbia: 21,898/46,839,000 = 0.000467 Deaths per person
Thailand: 20,032/65,479,453 = 0.000306 Deaths per person
United States: 9,369/314,982,000 =0.0000297 Deaths per person
Phillipines:7,708/92,337,852 0.0000834 Deaths per person
Mexico: 2,606/112,336,538 = 0.0000231 Deaths per person
Canada:144/35,015,000 = 0.00000411 Deaths per person

in terms of death per population, yes we are higher than canada or mexico, but nowhere near the rest of the top of that list. If you are having trouble reading the numbers, the US is a full order of magnitude safer from murderers that used guns than South Africa, columbia, and Thailand.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2...rochester.html

you guys sure you dont need gun control? someone gave that man a firearm, a man who was forbidden to posses one....would be nice to the families of the dead firefighters so they could find out who it was and see him punished.

i 100% agree with you, however, what i was trying to imply was a registration for guns that i mentioned in previous posts.

he has a gun illegally that he got from someone, that someone most likely got it from someone else(etc etc...) who stole it from a home invasion or bought it from a shop illegally.

registrations help identify where the gun started from. was it stolen and not reported? if not reported is it possible a man sold the gun without doing it the legal way? kinda like aiding and abetting, you know your selling a gun illegally, and your helping a criminal commit future acts of violence with that illegally obtained gun. if the gun serial numbers come back as never sold..then go after the distributor who it was sent to.

but anyways, its christmas eve, im gettin ready to go to church then meet up with my cousins, so have a merry christmas, and i'll be back in a day or 2 to defend my statements

even though we don't have registry it can still be traced to the last transfer and that is where the cops will do their job. It doesn't matter to me, Criminals will be getting their guns from somewhere either way because after all they are criminals and they don't follow the law.

He also burned his sister in the fire, such a shame.

NY also has every kind of ban you can think of and it still didn't do anything.

for all we know that gun came from Mexico or Cananda but we will never know because the media will not report it to make it look even worse.

Ya I mean im not going to sit here and argue over this, it's a very debatable topic, and Im in no place to lecture anyone or even try to convince anyone of anything as im no pro on this topic.


All I know, is that when intoxicated drivers were at an all time high, more restrictions didn't slow them down.

Education(MADD) and more policing/checkpoints did.

Im only for regulations on military spec weapons, as I served, and there is absolutely NO need to have an m240B or SAW on the streets.

Sidearms and hunting all the way.

Shotguns are great examples of protection peices.

High powered weapons are just over kill and just not necessary.

In the end however, people are going to aquire what they want and do what they want.

We can as a country come together and do more to advocate for the mentally ill and be alert to the signs but the human mind always needs an answer, and honestly as cruel as it is, there won't always be one.

Shit like Newtown will happen here and there and as long as we take steps to prevent it, then were doing what we can.

I don't think tighter regulations on all firearms or the stripping of Amendments are the answer.

Can't compare Canada and the U.S.

Even though there are similiarities, were just different countries with different outlooks.









See I thought about it, and even im torn.


I myself thought that eventually one day it would be cool to own an m16 or an m4.

I would do nothing more then go to the range with it.

It depends on where you live though.

I visited family friends in Fla(gulf coast) and he has a collection of diff types of weapons.

My father, him and I went to the range.

We shot a 22, 9mm, 38, 45, SKS, and one or two other weapons im forgetting.

We were with him, we brought all of them and our own ammo and they didn't bother us.

This particular range was made up of mostly older men, many older vets from WW2 who were all enthusiasts and collected time specific weapons.

I think that's cool and my reasoning for collecting an m16 would be for nostaligia.

I carried one for 4 years on active.

I never deployed but holding one just brings back so many memories of training. Days spend in the rain trying to improve my shot group and so on and so forth.

So Idk if I could even own one in my state, as I haven't even looked since my wife isn't even comfortable with handguns in the home(once we have kids and obv I want one for protection) but she has never been to a range and I think once she goes and see's that they are just peices of machinery that need to be operated in order to kill and as long as they are shown absolute respect and handled responsibly at ALL times, they are no more dangerous then a butchers knife.

I never in a million years thought id enjoy shooting.

Growing up in NY/NJ/Fla I thought it was a crazy mid west/Tx ideaology LOL, no offense.

Then I signed up and actually learned how to use them and saw that its quite competitive and just downright cool.

Now I miss the times spent at the range.


So with thoughts to control where does it end?

I do agree that high powered weapons don't belong on the street.

It just makes it harder for law enforement to do their job when shit hits the fan.

The reason why police started carrying more then 6 shooters was because the criminals started carrying magazine weapons that out powered them.

So now the Swat shows up with m4's etc and face off against these guys with high powered weapons....where does it end?

I don't know if I consider an m16 "high powered".

Its a military weapon, and it is built with intent on killing, but it only has two modes....single and 3 round burst.

Not really high powered compared to some of the shit they have now.

idk I guess it depends on how you look at it.

You can kill 10 people with an m16 in either mode, or with a 9mm if no one is armed or respond in time.

So what's the difference?


I mean shit, a well placed 22 round would kill 10 people....

but people have been known to walk off a 22 round lol.

High powered?

ralphie, i did read it say that brazil has 100 million fewer citizens that usa with many more restrictive gun laws and 25% more deaths. also read that many exported guns make their way back into brazil illegally, and many cops and soldiers have their guns "stolen". honestly i dont see to many american soldiers or police officers loosing or having guns stolen from them. i'm not saying it cant or hasn't happened, im just saying im pretty sure the rate there is higher than america.

but i would like to say something about your drinking and driving comment.
my city has canadas hardest drinking and driving laws, get pulled over or go through a road block, and are in the "warning range 0.05-0.08 (1-4 drinks): 3-day ban + $200 fine… additional fees make total $600, Greater than 0.08 (2-5 drinks): 90-day ban + 30-day car impound + $500 fine + possible criminal charge… additional fees of towing, interlock ignition device, responsible driver program, etc make total up to $4,060. i'm not going to lie, i used to go to my buddies houses, have a few beers while watching the hockey game, and drive home. but with the laws so strict now and the cons outweighting the pros...its easier for us to keep it legal now and just take a cab/public transportation to and from. so yes, more restrictions did work. the number of deaths/accidents from impaired driving has dropped significantly!

but other than that, yes, i agree with you, any weapon designed for military should not be able to be aquired to civilians, like you said, theres no need what so ever for someone to personally own a firearm like that.
but like you said, were different countries with different outlooks.

when i was a kid, yeah i thought owning a machine gun would be bad ass, but as i got older, i realized theres absolutely no point in me having one.
i never thought i would enjoy shooting either until my buddy took me camping in a remote part of the mountains and we started shooting clays. after that i was hooked, went and got my licence. even though im able to buy a semi auto ar-15 in canada, i will never buy one, its just not practical to me. i go to the range quite a bit, and like you, the range is usually full of older men with rifles, some fancy looking semi auto ones, some plain jane bolt action ones, mainly though, they're there to just practice their grouping or sighting in a scope.

yes, where does gun control end.
okay, we both agree high powered weapons dont belong on the street.
yes, it makes law enforcement a hell of a lot harder and unsafer when shit hits the fan.
yes, police started carrying more than 6 shooters because criminals started carrying gun with magazines that could hold 30+ in a weapon that made their 6 shooter look like a squirt gun. had a restriction been in place back then, do you think today would be where it is as in the whole "gun control" topic?
yes, and m16 isn't high powered to some, but for personal defence, its more than enough for any person. like you said, a pistol or a shotgun would be sufficient.

and its true, an m16 or 9mm can kill the same ammount of ppl if nobody is armed or able to respond in time. i mean fuck, a .22lr could do just as much damage if you can get every shot to count.

on a side note, my brother was even talkin about this, and yes, his analogy is pretty weak, but it was understandable to me. he said something along the lines of this. "the speed limit is 50kmph, and everyone pushes it a bit, some doing 55...some 60, etc. nobody thinks of themselves as a threat to society by speeding just a few kms over the limit, but when youve got several other people that are telling you time and time again that you need to slow down cause they dont feel safe with how fast your driving, maybe its time to take a hint and look at yourself and realize and think "am i a threat?" adn maybe tone it down a bit from there"

i was saying ar15 cause that was the first gun that came to mind since its been said 10million times in this thread.

but do you really have no idea why a surpressor is on a ban list?? how many people could be killed in public with a loud BANG for everyone to hear, compared to people seeing people just dropping like flys?

like i said, im canadian, and at every school in my province, we DO have police officers at schools(school liaison officers). an officer is designated at every school, his job is to walk the halls during the nutrition breaks/lunch, make sure he doesnt see any kids selling drugs or kids fighting, or if there was an even to hit the fan that involved a gun, hes first on scene. and he helps guide kids who seem to be going down the wrong path, take them on a personal field trip, let them see what they're life could and will look like if they continue where they're going...try to knock some sense into them basically.

like you said, government will do whatever they want to do. some will like it, others wont. when they do something that your completey for, how many people do you think there is that are completely against it?

Also I am curious as to what some of you guys are considering "high powered"?

I think harsher punishments against criminals who commit a crime with a gun could help, however if they are on a suicidal shooting spree not much will stop them except a "good guy with a gun."

for the first part highlighted in red, http://www.jhsph.edu/research/center...s_theft_fs.pdf

if a criminal plans on doing a suicide mission, i highly doubt hes going to care if he registers and obtains the gun legally.

These sound like stiffer penalties for committing the crime. Did they ban alcohol? Put regulations on how much you can buy? Swip your ID card everytime you want to purchase alcohol and put you on a list with how much you have purchased? Ask all your personal information before you could purchase alcohol?

yes, much stiffer penalties, which are there to deter you from doing so. alcohol is not banned...theres no limit to how much you can buy. yes, some places are able to swipe your drivers licence and read the magnetic strip on the back to see if its real...clubs do it even..proves if its a fake id or not. if they swipe the card, they dont ask, if you look under the age of 60, expect to have your id ready in hand. if the clerk sees you talking with kids outside the store, odds are the clerk will refuse you service due to you most likely buying beer for minors.(if they see a money transfer)
. im in my late 20's, and i went to a liquor store with my 12 year old female cousin and her 16 year old brother, and i was denied service.

when im saying high powered rifle, im mainly reffering to military spec weapons and assault rifles. (if you wanna keep em fine...use em at the range, not in the streets.)

We don't use them in the streets


Alcohol, cars, whatever are mute points. They are not rights they are privilages that can be taken away and regulated however government officials want.


Telling me what gun's I can and can't have and how much ammo and what mags I can have is like telling me what I can and can't say, when I can say it, who I can say it to, what religion I can practice and when and how often I can practice it.

It is a right, we will keep going on and on and on forever because no one else has a consitution like ours to compare to.

so if your a convicted felon, the government has no rights to say that your no longer allowed to posses a firearm because its your right?

im not going to tell you what you can and cant say, but just remember, sometimes its best to watch your mouth around certain people(no...im not directly threatening you im saying if you know a gang member, would you go up to him and start lipping him off and etc? you can only knock on the devils door so many times before he opens and answers)

yes, its a right to own guns and nobody else has a constitution to compare to you...is that a good thing or a bad thing? depends on what country you in when you say it.

i live no more then 20 min from usa...and i visit your country quite a bit...been there more than enough times to have made up my mind about it. when was the last time you visited canada and had first hand experience seeing how another country lives its way and how well its run? and i dont mean a family trip where you stay at an uncles house in a remote town in the mountains, im talking in a majaor populated area and see first hand how people interact with each other to strangers. personally, i believe canada is run better from our health care, policing, schooling system, gun control laws, the diversity of people, and all in all...natural beauty.
but thats a canadians point of view. your living in usa so you'll have a different view naturally.

you say you have a better constitution that can be compared to noone? read the canadian constitution acts, yours may seem better on paper, but go get first hand experience and live in canada for a while

question though, if you had to pick, give up your 2nd ammendment for free health care for you and your family, would you? you'd never pay a hospital bill again..go to your family doctor for free whenever and however often you want..break a leg? no worries, its taken care of.

From the guy who killed the fire fighters, it said he was a felon who wasn't allowed to possess a firearm.

I work for what I have as well, health care is a nice freebie though.

Last year, property tax was 3k, and I got back 2k from a tax return.


What part of Canada were you in that you found people rude?

In most parts yes, everyone is nice cept for a few bad apples, but those bad apples are the drug dealers and gang members...and even then, all they do is weed out the other gang members and drug dealers. It's not often we ever see a shooting that didn't involve a gang/drug member.

Stewie, you have pretty much destroyed any point you had in here.

1) Did it ever occur to you that perhaps crime in your area is low due to an overabundance of law enforcement, versus strict gun control laws?

2) It has already been shown that on a per capita basis (per some number of people, say 1,000), the US and Canada are nearly identical. With such a small difference in murders per population, I am not even sure the statistical difference between the US murder rate and the Canadian murder rate would be significant. Yet, you have such strict gun control laws and we are estimated to be armed at the 90% level, and our murder rate is essentially identical. Why do you suppose that is? Knowing what I know, it would be because the vast majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens. Law abiding implies that they don't use guns for crime. Thus, it also indicates that we have already done a fair job of removing guns from those hands intending to use them for crime, and have essentially achieved the same murder rate as Canada with far less restrictive laws, and more economic downside in the last 4-5 years to boot (the statement about socioeconomic status was correct, to a degree). What this indicates to me is that despite your much more sweeping gun control laws, your country has not been greatly more effective at removing guns from the wrong hands, simple as that. Think about it as a false sense of security. All that paperwork you have to do doesn't really make you safer, it simply makes you FEEL safer.

3) The fact that your solution to the gun "problem" in situations like the killer in New York is more gun control is really laughable. He is a felon convicted for beating his mother to death with a hammer (not a gun related murder), and he then obtains weapons illegally (can't purchase or own guns as a convicted felon), he then lights his house on fire (which is also an arson crime, while committing murder again by killing his sister in the process), and finally starts gunning down first responders as they arrive on the scene. He was perched, had planned and executed a scenario to kill people, but clearly bigger gun control would fix that problem right? Give me a fucking break. He is a serial killer, a clear sociopath, has violent tendencies, and clearly had total disregard for the law. The flaw in gun control advocates logic (which is PERFECTLY illustrated by your position) is that no manner of "control" is going to stop people like this, which is exactly why your gun crime murder rate is effectively identical to ours. At some point you only take guns away from the good guys. Why your side of the argument is completely indoctrinated into being unwilling to acknowledge that is beyond me. The ostrich theory I suppose. You are even more limited when the person takes their own life, because you have no penalty on them whatsoever. You can't convict Adam Lanza prior to committing the crime, and you can't convict or penalize him afterward, so any law you pass is 100% ineffective in those situations. He didn't obtain the guns legally, and he committed multiple heinous crimes in the process (including killing the person in control of the weapons, prior to stealing them). If you pass a law that makes it harder for me to get a gun, you have done nothing to stop the next Adam Lanza, or New York gunman, which is why we boil right back to the root cause of the issue which is bad people, not guns. A gun is a tool, and it only does what it is told to do by the person operating it. GUNS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. THE GUN IS MERELY A MEANS TO AN END, AND NO MEASURE OF CONTROL OVER THE END WILL STOP THE PEOPLE WITH THE MEANS. Guns kill people like spoons cause obesity.

Also, if you think this type of control is going to in anyway, limit the illegal gun trade, then you are burying your head in the sand here as well. It will have exactly the opposite effect, just like it has in the drug trade, the prohibition years etc. Most illegal weapons are untraceable because the serial numbers are ground off, and thus there is no way to track the weapon. Do you honestly think that the average criminal is not smart enough to get around the laws that are designed to stop them? Of course they are, which merely further supports the point that further gun control will probably be ineffective.

You can look at legislation as a continuum. On one side, you have total prohibition on something (like an assault rifle ban, where they are not even produced). Been there done that. Had zero effect on the murder rate. Or you can have totally the opposite stance which is no control at all. Obviously, in the case of felons, that might not be a good idea either, although it is very questionable to what degree that will stop those intending to do harm. Again, the numbers bear that out fully. If you look at some states and metropolitan areas that have the highest per capita crime, many of them have the strictest gun control measures. The handgun ban in Washington DC was a prime example. The only people carrying guns were criminals and police. Unfortunately, there were more criminals than police and thus a high gun crime rate. Guess what? When they pulled the ban on handguns in DC, the gun crime rate dropped over 30% within approximately one month. Of course the liberal media won't tell you that because they don't want you to think that having guns is a good idea. Why did the rate go down? Killers were getting killed by people defending themselves. They were no longer free to have the 5-10 minutes it takes police to respond to have their way with people.

As for some of your other claims, I am just going to pretend you didn't say anything because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about, and are making the grave mistake of assuming that just because you do things a certain way in Canada, that must be the way it is here. I am specifically referring to the driver's license comment, where in most states there is very little training or proficiency required to get one (which oddly, driving is NOT a right, but we try to protect it like it is; when gun ownership IS a protected right). You dismissals about deaths by car being not the same is REALLY laughable. People having their life stolen from them is people having their life stolen from them whether is a gun murder, a car murder, or a serial murder.

[H311RA151N]

^^^Holy sweet flyin fuck!

I scrolled through that and got scared!


stewie, Im afraid Ill have to agree with owequitit. Numbers 1 and 3 are right. I had never thought about it like that but its pretty simple to understand now.

[owequitit]

Stewie, you have pretty much destroyed any point you had in here.

1) Did it ever occur to you that perhaps crime in your area is low due to an overabundance of law enforcement, versus strict gun control laws?

2) It has already been shown that on a per capita basis (per some number of people, say 1,000), the US and Canada are nearly identical. With such a small difference in murders per population, I am not even sure the statistical difference between the US murder rate and the Canadian murder rate would be significant. Yet, you have such strict gun control laws and we are estimated to be armed at the 90% level, and our murder rate is essentially identical. Why do you suppose that is? Knowing what I know, it would be because the vast majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens. Law abiding implies that they don't use guns for crime. Thus, it also indicates that we have already done a fair job of removing guns from those hands intending to use them for crime, and have essentially achieved the same murder rate as Canada with far less restrictive laws, and more economic downside in the last 4-5 years to boot (the statement about socioeconomic status was correct, to a degree). What this indicates to me is that despite your much more sweeping gun control laws, your country has not been greatly more effective at removing guns from the wrong hands, simple as that. Think about it as a false sense of security. All that paperwork you have to do doesn't really make you safer, it simply makes you FEEL safer.

3) The fact that your solution to the gun "problem" in situations like the killer in New York is more gun control is really laughable. He is a felon convicted for beating his mother to death with a hammer (not a gun related murder), and he then obtains weapons illegally (can't purchase or own guns as a convicted felon), he then lights his house on fire (which is also an arson crime, while committing murder again by killing his sister in the process), and finally starts gunning down first responders as they arrive on the scene. He was perched, had planned and executed a scenario to kill people, but clearly bigger gun control would fix that problem right? Give me a fucking break. He is a serial killer, a clear sociopath, has violent tendencies, and clearly had total disregard for the law. The flaw in gun control advocates logic (which is PERFECTLY illustrated by your position) is that no manner of "control" is going to stop people like this, which is exactly why your gun crime murder rate is effectively identical to ours. At some point you only take guns away from the good guys. Why your side of the argument is completely indoctrinated into being unwilling to acknowledge that is beyond me. The ostrich theory I suppose. You are even more limited when the person takes their own life, because you have no penalty on them whatsoever. You can't convict Adam Lanza prior to committing the crime, and you can't convict or penalize him afterward, so any law you pass is 100% ineffective in those situations. He didn't obtain the guns legally, and he committed multiple heinous crimes in the process (including killing the person in control of the weapons, prior to stealing them). If you pass a law that makes it harder for me to get a gun, you have done nothing to stop the next Adam Lanza, or New York gunman, which is why we boil right back to the root cause of the issue which is bad people, not guns. A gun is a tool, and it only does what it is told to do by the person operating it. GUNS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. THE GUN IS MERELY A MEANS TO AN END, AND NO MEASURE OF CONTROL OVER THE END WILL STOP THE PEOPLE WITH THE MEANS. Guns kill people like spoons cause obesity.

Also, if you think this type of control is going to in anyway, limit the illegal gun trade, then you are burying your head in the sand here as well. It will have exactly the opposite effect, just like it has in the drug trade, the prohibition years etc. Most illegal weapons are untraceable because the serial numbers are ground off, and thus there is no way to track the weapon. Do you honestly think that the average criminal is not smart enough to get around the laws that are designed to stop them? Of course they are, which merely further supports the point that further gun control will probably be ineffective.

You can look at legislation as a continuum. On one side, you have total prohibition on something (like an assault rifle ban, where they are not even produced). Been there done that. Had zero effect on the murder rate. Or you can have totally the opposite stance which is no control at all. Obviously, in the case of felons, that might not be a good idea either, although it is very questionable to what degree that will stop those intending to do harm. Again, the numbers bear that out fully. If you look at some states and metropolitan areas that have the highest per capita crime, many of them have the strictest gun control measures. The handgun ban in Washington DC was a prime example. The only people carrying guns were criminals and police. Unfortunately, there were more criminals than police and thus a high gun crime rate. Guess what? When they pulled the ban on handguns in DC, the gun crime rate dropped over 30% within approximately one month. Of course the liberal media won't tell you that because they don't want you to think that having guns is a good idea. Why did the rate go down? Killers were getting killed by people defending themselves. They were no longer free to have the 5-10 minutes it takes police to respond to have their way with people.

As for some of your other claims, I am just going to pretend you didn't say anything because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about, and are making the grave mistake of assuming that just because you do things a certain way in Canada, that must be the way it is here. I am specifically referring to the driver's license comment, where in most states there is very little training or proficiency required to get one (which oddly, driving is NOT a right, but we try to protect it like it is; when gun ownership IS a protected right). You dismissals about deaths by car being not the same is REALLY laughable. People having their life stolen from them is people having their life stolen from them whether is a gun murder, a car murder, or a serial murder.

The other part I felt compelled to comment on is your assertion that your children have more "constructive" things to do with their time. I am curious for you to expand on that.

We have sports, music, shopping, woodworking, skating, skiing, after school programs, dance, and any other thing they possibly have in Canada. Even in the supposed "redneck" states, there is an abundance of optional activities, including art, science, reading and any number of other intellectual pursuits (contrary to their popular lore, liberals are not the only ones that like to use their brains, or are capable of it). You make it sound as though our kids go to school, shoot each other up, and then go home, get their rifles and head to the gun range until they go to bed.

It sounds to me like you might benefit from spending some time in the actual US and actually seeing the country for what it is. Surely, you won't like everything, but I think you find that we have at least as much moral code as any other place on the face of the planet. And rather than assume things about our country based on misinformation or assuming, you would probably find it enlightening to learn just how similar our country and people are.

It reminds me of a funny story. My aunt is American and married a Canadian. They live near Ottawa, ON. I have been there several times and love it. Great people, great place, great fun. However, some of their good friends wanted to drive the US. However, they were afraid that Americans were all mean, surly, gun toting hicks who hated everything but America (all this despite the hundreds of billions we funnel into the entire world in the form of no-strings-attached aid every year). My aunt told them it would be OK, and they were STILL apprehensive. Once they came here though, they said it was the best trip they had ever had.

Don't forget that both of our people originated from the same place. We had a different path to independence, but that is about it. In fact, it could be argued that if we hadn't taken OUR path to independence then the British Empire might not have discontinued its imperialistic ways and allowed countries to leave the commonwealth without fighting for it. Also remember that our love for guns and our unrelenting unwillingness to get rid of them comes from how we had to achieve our independence. We were stripped of our rights, our representation, and our liberties by our brothers who decided we didn't matter as much because our soil of origin was different. We took up arms to avoid tyrannic oppression, and it was written into our Bill of Rights to ensure that it never happened to our citizens again. The more political entities try and infringe upon that basic premise, the more I question their integrity. Ultimately, many of simply will NOT give up our ability to protect ourselves and make our own decisions. This was the REAL premise behind the American Civil War (State's individual rights to choose), and NOT slavery. Slavery was simply a convenient cover that gave the Union Army a way to motivate fighters. Slavery was already on its way out in the south prior to the Civil War and probably would have been gone nearly as fast as it was with the Civil War, but without the horrific loss of life incurred. The real premise behind the secession of the Confederate States was the Central Government attempting to put their importance above that of the states, even though the Constitution specifically forbids it.

[stewie]

http://guncontrol.ca/wp-content/uplo...deaths2012.pdf

as to #3, yes, he was a psychopath who killed his mother with a hammer, then lit his house on fire killing his sister and first responders. its pretty sad that its that easy to get a stolen gun in america.

you can pretend i didnt say whatever you want thinking i dont know what i'm talking about. its a different way of living up here, and guess what...its a whoooole lot safer...learn something from it.

[owequitit]

http://guncontrol.ca/wp-content/uplo...deaths2012.pdf

as to #3, yes, he was a psychopath who killed his mother with a hammer, then lit his house on fire killing his sister and first responders. its pretty sad that its that easy to get a stolen gun in america.

you can pretend i didnt say whatever you want thinking i dont know what i'm talking about. its a different way of living up here, and guess what...its a whoooole lot safer...learn something from it.

Gun control isn't going to make it harder to get an illegal weapon, and as such, laws that attempt to accomplish that are pointless.

You keep telling me how much safer Canada is, but the numbers say you are full of shit. If you look at raw numbers, MAYBE, but then again, we have something like 10x as many people, so of course there is going to be more crime. It is a statistical certainty, unless we adopt laws like Singapore has, which is not going to be accepted by the liberal left.

The point is that it really isn't safer, you simply have the false perception that it is.

The way I work is very simple. If the claim is correct, then it can be corroborated by other data, and in the case of gun control, it simply can't.

You haven't even spent time in most of the US, nor are you familiar with the way things actually are down here (illustrated by your completely false claims), so your assertions that Canada is so much safer are dubious at best. How many times have you had a crime committed against you in the US?

[H311RA151N]

Stewie has the Canadian hard head and the Canadian pride. That’s not a bad thing; it just pisses off people who aren’t Canadian

He’s not saying that the US is so bad as he’s saying Canada is so great.

You’re not going to tell him anything different than what he already believes.

I wish we had a country that we could believe that solidly on. But our people and government are so diversified.

Stewie, I don’t agree on everything you said but I respect your opinion.

[stewie]

owequitit, times ive spent in the us? cant sum it to an exact ammount, but id say...every 2-3rd weekend(not as often as a child...but after the age of 19), visit seattle for shopping and entertainment for 25+ years? have i ever had a crime committed against me?

no

how long have you spent in canada and have you seen or had a crime committed against you, and when you walk down a canadian street without a firearm at your side, do you still feel safe?

hellraisin, awww lol thank you if you(or anyone for that matter) ever decides to come to canada, specifically vancouver BC, i'll show you all the real canadian spirit. just ask tommi

nobody has to agree with me at all, if you do, cool, if not, oh well. these are all just opinions of mine of how i personally think the situation could be handled better.

[owequitit]

Stewie has the Canadian hard head and the Canadian pride. That’s not a bad thing; it just pisses off people who aren’t Canadian

He’s not saying that the US is so bad as he’s saying Canada is so great.

You’re not going to tell him anything different than what he already believes.

I wish we had a country that we could believe that solidly on. But our people and government are so diversified.

Stewie, I don’t agree on everything you said but I respect your opinion.

owequitit, times ive spent in the us? cant sum it to an exact ammount, but id say...every 2-3rd weekend(not as often as a child...but after the age of 19), visit seattle for shopping and entertainment for 25+ years? have i ever had a crime committed against me?

no

how long have you spent in canada and have you seen or had a crime committed against you, and when you walk down a canadian street without a firearm at your side, do you still feel safe?

hellraisin, awww lol thank you if you(or anyone for that matter) ever decides to come to canada, specifically vancouver BC, i'll show you all the real canadian spirit. just ask tommi

nobody has to agree with me at all, if you do, cool, if not, oh well. these are all just opinions of mine of how i personally think the situation could be handled better.

So we're so much unsafer, you have never had a crime committed against you in all that time?

As to your Canada question, I never had a crime committed against me in Canada. However, I am also not the one claiming how much safer one country is than the other, when in reality, they are effectively the same per capita. Trying to turn my claim around on me isn't going to work because I am not claiming the same thing you are. That is simply an attempt to create a smokescreen to the argument.

Also, I have lived in the US for over 30 years. Been to just about every part of the country, and live in a state with the most lax gun control in the US. Guess how many crimes have been committed against me?