Liberals want Handgun Ban

[Acorn]

I'm a former firearms owner (handguns and long guns) who succumbed to the "rules" due to the paperwork nightmare of transporting firearms to and from different provinces and abroad (too many postings in the past 20 years). I don't own any any more.

However, this 'ban" is a pure vote-grab, in urban Canada, and especially (IMO) in Edmonton. TO will vote Liberal no matter what. Edmonton is "suffering" a "murder epidemic" and is the home of Landslide Annie, who PM would like to keep in cabinet. A high profile Liberal in Alberta mitigates the political cost of a Liberal washout through the rest of the province. They can say "not all those rednecks think the Liberals are bad."

I hope this one really backfires (in a firearm sense) on them. Some days I wish my wife wasn't so attached to Canada. Wes, how easy is it to immigrate to Oz?

Acorn

 

[1feral1]

What's the point in owning a handgun? It is useless for hunting and it's only purpose is to kill other human beings.

Then why is it a recognised Olympic Sport?

Acorn, things aint so rosey here for gun owners, just watch the Australian government copycat whats going on in Canada now.

The hoops one has to jump thru just to own a bolt action rifle here ( obtain a new state licence $85. and a 28 day wait, a proper purpose bulit gun safe $550, store the bolt separatly even when the rifle is in the safe, and ammo locked and secured separatly too. To think, all this for one rifle. Then to apply for a permit to acquire, and wait another 28 days.

All the laws are designed to have owners submit to packing it all in becvause of red tape nightmares. Its outragous, at least for this prairie lad. Each state has its own regulations, and I now reside in Australia's Alberta (which I love), the state of Queensland, which is the best state of them all.

Cheers,

Wes

 

[Jarnhamar]

What's the point in owning a handgun? It is useless for hunting and it's only purpose is to kill other human beings.

RTFO.

What don't you guys understand?
This ban will NOT effect criminals.
Only law abiding citizens will be effected by this.

HOW is this a good idea?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I'm getting the impression that the few on this thread that are in favour of this idea are only in favour of it because it came from the Liberal party.....if the Reform had announced it I'm sure they would be chiming right in with the rest of us.

At least I can admit that my party has some bad idea's too.....

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I wonder if the University of Calgary will take me for next year, the Liberal/NDP-ness in this province is suffocating...at best.

Crime control, not gun control. Simple really.

You've never actually been to the U of C, have you.

 

[nULL]

Isn't this point of this not to prevent hardened criminals with ties to the black market from getting weapons? Isn't it to prevent young punks who think guns are fashionable to use their legally purchased/registered firearms on the rest of us in moments of bad judgement?

 

[R0B]

Then why is it a recognised Olympic Sport?

The primary purpose of a handgun is indeed to cause harm to human beings, sporting and collecting are secondary purposes. Canada does not recognize the legitimacy of handgun possession for self-defense purposes.

This is absolutely ridiculous, but I'm sure it'll buy the votes of enough idiots ready to sacrifice freedom for the illusion of safety.

Most of the firearms homicides that have been getting media attention in Toronto have involved illegal firearms and criminals â “ on both ends. Illegal firearms sell for thousands of dollars on the streets. Why would a law banning handguns prevent someone with thousands of dollars and no respect for the law from obtaining one if current laws haven't done a thing?

Florida's Castle Doctrine, now that's a tough approach to crime.

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

 

[Infanteer]

This prompts an interesting (to me) question.  If Canadians had to rise against an oppressive and dictatorial government, the weapons of choice would be long guns, not pistols.  In principle handgun ownership can be conceded without necessarily losing one's ability to defend one's freedom against an unjust state.  If a rifle/shotgun ban were proposed - either immediately or as a phased escalation - it would represent a decision point: acquiesce and accept living according to the whims of the rulers indefinitely, or revolt to regain one's essential freedom.  The question is this: would we be partly at fault for bringing that more difficult decision about if we didn't take every prior opportunity to send an unequivocal message to the political and elite classes - the message being that while we accept stringent guidelines (storage, transportation, etc) to encourage responsible behaviour, ownership is not negotiable?

Interesting point - while I am reassured by the fact that we still have access to what really counts, the gradual erosion is disheartening.   When the time comes and the ban on long-guns is called, will the people have anything left in them to say enough is enough?

This is absolutely ridiculous, but I'm sure it'll buy the votes of enough idiots ready to sacrifice freedom for the illusion of safety.

Florida's Castle Doctrine, now that's a tough approach to crime.

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

Well, you may have your own thoughts on external threats, but at least you got it nailed down when it comes down to internal threats against the right of the individual.

I see this as you put it, a sacrifice of freedom.   Brad referred to this as a "stateist" move; sacrificing the liberty of the individual for the perceived "safety" of the group.   Simple logic points out that this safety would be an illusion with the measures the Liberals have proposed; so one must assume that a different motive is at work here.   Benjamin Franklin's statement comes to mind:

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Assholes.  

 

[Abaddon]

This is definitely a case of Liberal vote-grabbing. After all, Paul Martin's got to counter Steven Harper's child care credit. Just the thought of that fills me with dread. If the $1200/yr for every child under 6 does go through, stupid people across Canada will start to have children just for the sake of obtaining that money. Subsequently in about 14 - 18 years we can expect an epidemic of violence and crime that will dwarf anything we have ever experienced. One of the proposed explanations for the decrease in crime rates in the US over a certain period of time was due to the introduction of the birth control pill which reduced unwanted pregnancies, and thus problem children who were significantly more at risk of criminal behavior.

There are two ways to look at the criminal handgun issue.  1.Murder by handgun is a problem  and  2.Murder by handgun is merely a symptom of another problem, namely drugs, gangs, dysfunctional family units, unemployment, and bling bling.

I think after all the discussion, it is safe to say that a law prohibiting ownership of handguns will not solve problem #1. This law also does nothing to address problem #2 as well. Dealing with problem #2 will automatically take care of problem #1.

The best and most effective solution would be to deal with problem #2, however this is a monumental task that is not to be lightly undertaken. Ex NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani suggested that in order to deal with the crime problem a number of initiatives should be undertaken. One of them is to collect crime statistics. But we know that will never fly in politically correct Toronto, home of Dudley Laws and suchlike ilk.  Another way to deal with the issue is to stem the tide of American media which saturates our society and impressionable young people with the glorification of crime, ignorance, conspicuous consumption etc. However, I am probably quite alone in that particular opinion. Free speech advocates would be the first to cry out about the injustice of censorship etc. I for one am very strongly in favor of Canadian content requirements in our media for the goal of maintaining and even developing and promoting a Canadian cultural identity distinct from that of our neighbors down south. Heritage Minister Sheila Copps apparently feels the same. It seems that the US is exporting its social problems to Canada as well as illegal firearms. It is enough that merely the perception of social problems exist up here regardless of whether they really do or not. For example, why exactly were there Rodney King riots on Yonge St in Toronto back in 1992? Is there systemic Canadian anti-black racism that may be at the root of responsibility? We'll never know because the Metropolitan Toronto Police force does not collect crime statistics based on race.

There are a few other points I would like to make.

If I remember correctly, the fine for importing illegal firearms into Canada is a mere $5000. This is hardly a deterrant, considering each weapon on the street sells for at least $500.

The weapons that were turned in by legal gun-owners to the Toronto Police were illegally resold by a police officer. So basically that gun amnesty was effectively transferring ownership of weapons from law abiding citizens to criminals. 

In the end though, this is an election promise, and as such merely much sound and thunder signifying nothing.

 

[Infanteer]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/08/martin-gunreact051208.html

Apparently, many are seeing this proposal for the fraud that it is.

Harper's scored points with "5%" and "Choice-on-Child-Care" while Martin gets a lamer....

 

[Spr.Earl]

Does not matter what bans,laws are put in place the Criminals will all way's be armed.
This is like a fence which just keeps honest people out but too the criminal it's a joke.
I know people with very fine hand gun collection's and they just target shoot and educate others in safe weapons handling and the fun of shooting.

 

[MG34]

I'm getting the impression that the few on this thread that are in favour of this idea are only in favour of it because it came from the Liberal party.....if the Reform had announced it I'm sure they would be chiming right in with the rest of us.

At least I can admit that my party has some bad idea's too.....

I am still flabberghasted that anyone in uniform could actually claim to be a supporter of the Lieberal party,I mean come on people WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!

 

[Spr.Earl]

I am still flabberghasted that anyone in uniform could actually claim to be a supporter of the Lieberal party,I mean come on people WAKE THE frig UP!!!!

What!
Out back of the Shack now!

 

[Taylor187]

Bloody hell. If the crime syndicate known as the liberals win another minority this election I am going to take a serious look at getting american citizenship and moving south of the boarder. I can only put up with orginized crime for so long before I snap.

Lets just hope there is some epidemic across canada during the election period that only effects liberals.

 

[UberCree]

So as details of this ''plan'' emerge it seems there is really no substance to the policy.  The 'banning' would mean that collectors would not be allowed to keep their handguns, unless they become 'target shooters'.  Target shooters would be allowed to keep their handguns.  Everyone with a hardgun that I know is a target shooter (IPSC, IDPA, cowboy etc.).  Every range records use for this reason.  Provinces would also be able to opt out of the 'banning of collections'.  This does not make sense to me at all. 
In essence the PM wants to ban museum collections ???.

 

[COBRA-6]

So what can we do? Most of the public are ignorant of gun laws, the facts surrounding this issue, and the so-called ban. If you want to make a difference send an email to your friends and family outlining the situation, ask them to forward it on, it might help or it might not, but at least we tried. The solution to ignorance is education.

This is what I sent:


Okay, I feel I must comment on the so-called Liberal handgun ban, because it makes me so angry I could vomit.

This is nothing more than a vote-grab and an attempt to shift political focus away from their party's coruption scandal, while at the same time making the Conservatives look evil. They hope it will suceed because the Canadian Sheeple don't know the facts, I hope it will blow up in their face. So prepare to be educated...

Fact - Handguns are already illegal to posess unless you have the required licenceses, which involves firearm safety training and police background checks. Handgun registration has been mandatory in Canada since 1934.

Fact - Even for those that legally own handguns for sporting purposses, it is illegal to take them anywhere except:
1) your home, where they must be locked in a safe
2) a licenced firing range
3) in direct transit between the first two, locked in a secure case.
Any deviation to the above is illegal and will land you in jail.

Fact - the vast majority of handguns used in street crime are smuggled in from the U.S. This is possible because customs don't inspect most of the trucks and containers that enter Canada, why? Lack of funding from the Liberals.

Fact - the only people this will affect are legal gun owners. Criminals use illegal firearms, you can't make illegal firearms more illegal, just like you can't make a preganant woman more pregnant. The liberals know this, but hope you don't. They think this ban will make them look tough on crime, instead of addressing the real problems - street gangs and cross-border smuggling.

Fact - most of the dreaded "handgun murders" (71%) are gang/drug related. There is a gang problem in Toronto, not a handgun problem. What is needed is anti-gang legislation.

Fact - of the 622 murders in Canada last year, only 172 were committed by firearms. In fact stabbing was the most popular method of murder. Source: StatsCan

Don't let the Liberals get away with lies and untruths, forward this to your friends, educate yourselves, ask questions!!!

 

[1feral1]

The primary purpose of a handgun is indeed to cause harm to human beings, sporting and collecting are secondary purposes. Canada does not recognize the legitimacy of handgun possession for self-defense purposes.

ROB, WTF do you know? Ever owned one?  My first one was 28 yrs a go, and I still own 5. I see you are up to your old games, a leopard does not change its spots.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

If Martin wins this election... I ... I just can't see why people would vote for him. It simply boggles the mind.

"Lets put a ban on all registered handguns."
"But Mr Martin, criminals dont register handguns.."
"Who cares! People are stupid! Weee!! ... By the way, I want this ban to cost as much money as possible.Tell them itll cost a million, but shoot for the billions."

STUPID STUPID STUPID STUPID STUPID!

 

[axeman]

my only thought on this is that the handguns that are being used in the crimes are the illegal ones this is a moronic law . maybe if we started getting tough withthe ppl that break the law  we'd have less troubles.. maybe if you get busted in a violent act like that you get dropped off in the far north  with your hand gun a bullet or 2 and a map enjoy making your way back to civilization .. maybe if you survive you may apperciate it a little more .. self defence is a reason for a handgun. but because of the pantywaisted nancy's  we have in the goverment we cant do that now  but i can use my  12 gauge defender chopped down to 18.5 inches to discorage someone breaking in to my house that may have a weapon on them .. maybe that would discourage someone if i popped a round a few inches from them . what the f...k is that person doing in my house ?"i thought i was in mortal danger" if ppl followed the law we wouldnt have to have this crap happening . its not the legal owners that are doing the crimes  so why are they the ones going to be punished ...

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

I think we have to be clear: self defence is a lousy reason to own a handgun.

Not only is it a legal grey area, but if your handgun is properly stored it's not going to be much good "in the heat of the moment." Mine is literally stored behind 4 locks, with the firing pin and ammo locked in a separate location and the keys in yet another. I loathe having to gain access to my firearms because of the ordeal involved, which is the way it should be.

In my opinion, introducing a handgun to a home invasion situation is not going to improve the outcome for anyone. Besides, statistics show that knives are more effective and don't have to be locked away.