What lessons can Canada teach America about deadly gun violence?

[jaeger19]

No, I don't want to waste my time on some links and your and/or their conclusions, I'd rather get down to the principles of the matter.

Should we abolish all gun laws because "gun laws don't work"?

In other words.. you again have no cogent rebuttal.

 

[Antiwar]

In other words.. you again have no cogent rebuttal.

I can do a quick search and find some gun laws that did work. Would that mean that "all gun laws work perfectly? Of course not. You've used very similar logic.

What should we do about your conclusion? Abolish all gun laws?

 

[Big Steve]

So what is Canada doing correctly then? Why is Canada different from the US?

Because Canada's not as great as the US...

 

[Rucker61]

I can do a quick search and find some gun laws that did work.

Standing by.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Canada can't teach America anything about deadly gun violence, the US are already in a league of their own!

 

[Antiwar]

Standing by.

Has anyone ever been arrested and convicted for breaking a gun law?

 

[Rucker61]

Has anyone ever been arrested and convicted for breaking a gun law?

Of course. Didn't they have to break the law first?

 

[Antiwar]

Of course.

So some gun laws have worked.

Didn't they have to break the law first?

Not necessarily. Why?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Yep.., Canadian gun laws have never made sense. I spend a lot of time in Canada hunting. Its some crazy views up there... but nice folks.

Back in the 1960s (when I purchased my first handgun) the Canadian gun laws were looser than those in the US - AND Canada had a lower rate of gun crime than the US did.

Today (for most classes of people) the Canadian gun laws are tighter than those in the US - AND Canada STILL has a lower rate of gun crime than the US does. However, for one class of people) the Canadian gun laws are loser than those in the US - AND Canada STILL has a lower rate of gun crime amongst that class than the US does.

Do you see any connection between the following

[1] looser gun laws + Canada = lower gun crime rate​

[2] tighter gun laws + Canada = lower gun crime rate​

and​

[3] looser gun laws (specific class) + Canada = lower gun crime rate​

(and I'll even give you a hint "look at the bits after the '+' sign").

A goodly part of the difference is that the "Canadian mythos" does NOT "glorify" violence to the degree that the "American mythos" does.

In fact, Canadians consider it rather impolite to kill someone else simply because they took too long to pull off from a stop sign or because you can't get laid.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Do you have a cite for this?

Please see the respective laws regarding "felons" and "firearms ownership" in Canada and in the United States of America.

In order for a person to be barred from owning firearms in Canada, they must be subject to a specific judicial order which can only be made after a hearing in which the person has the right to "make full answer and defence" and which starts with the presumption that the person DOES have the right to own firearms.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

LOL. You know actually TRAVELLING to Canada isn't hard for most people in America. You can even TALK TO CANADIANS! Many of them speak ENGLISH!

I hate to tell you this, but I once (within the past 5 years) actually met an American who was surprised that I, who live in Canada, actually spoke "American".

 

[Glitch]

In fact, Canadians consider it rather impolite to kill someone else simply because they took too long to pull off from a stop sign or because you can't get laid.

Considering that 21 of the last 27 terrorists to attack US soil did so by entering the US via Canada, your so-called "fact" is obviously complete BS. Canadistan is a terrorist sponsoring nation, and needs to be dealt with accordingly.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

How to do you think I got to Alaska?

The first thing you should know is that Canadians have no rights. So if you want to talk with one, it had better be in the US, or you will face government censorship, a fine, and possibly even imprisonment. England puts on average 9 people per day into prison for what they say and post online, and Canada has similar laws.

British Police Arrest At Least 3,395 People for 'Offensive' Online Comments in One Year

British police forces arrested at least nine people a day for "offensive" comments on social media n 2016.

www.breitbart.com

Anytime Canada's government wishes to seize anything you own, for any reason they like, they can.

Canadians are not citizens because they have no protected rights under Canadian law. They are pathetic government slaves, and that is the primary difference between the US and Canada.

I guess that you got tired of reading before you got to the "which makes it illegal to intentionally “cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another”" bit.

As for the rest of your post, it shows about as much knowledge as your avatar graphic.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Considering that 21 of the last 27 terrorists to attack US soil did so by entering the US via Canada, your so-called "fact" is obviously complete BS. Canadistan is a terrorist sponsoring nation, and needs to be dealt with accordingly.

Considering that your "21 of the last 27 terrorists" is total crap, I'm beginning to wonder if

..............\|||/.............
..............(0 o)..............
......,---ooO-()----------,....
....|.........PLEASE........|...
.....|......DON'T FEED.....|....
.....|.....THE TROLLS......|....
.....'------------Ooo----'....
.............|__|__|.............
..............|| ||..............
.............ooO Ooo.............
=================================================​

isn't appropriate here.

 

[Lursa]

From the article:

According to training expert Travis Bader, the Canadian government does "criminal record checks, background checks, reference checks," and interviews spouses and family members of gun license applicants.​

Bader noted that, even after students pass the mandatory training program, national law enforcement officials run daily database checks on those with gun licenses to ensure they have not engaged in criminal activity.​

​

What lessons can Canada teach America about deadly gun violence?

As Americans across the country celebrated the nation's independence and its freedom from the apparent worst of the coronavirus pandemic, an epidemic of a different kind remained on familiar display: the surge in shootings.

www.cnn.com

What? Come on, that's got to be bullshit. And if not, it would cost a fortune in the US. Mega-bureaucracy and $$$$. It's the epitome of "Big Brother"...and ludicrous for a Const. right.

Here, at minimum, 10's of millions of database checks/day?

 

[Lursa]

No, I don't want to waste my time on some links and your and/or their conclusions, I'd rather get down to the principles of the matter.

Should we abolish all gun laws because "gun laws don't work"?

Yes, heaven forbid we ignore the details and reality and just try to use oversimplified rhetoric.

This is why so many of your threads fail (not that this one is yours). When reality and the details get in the way, you demand oversimplification focused on your agenda.

 

[Lursa]

Nothing Canada does prevents 'good citizens' from owning guns. It just does a better job of identifying who are the good guys. Current US laws are a sieve that allow almost everyone through and the processes that would identify when someone later becomes dangerous aren't rigorous enough.

Really? A spiteful boss or wife or husband cant provide damning references and prevent it?

 

[Lursa]

Initially by massively decreasing the amount of guns available in the system. If guns are much harder to get for everyone then the pipeline of legal guns getting into illegal hands will be decreased.

Right now it's a statistics game. We KNOW from studies that increased gun ownership is a predictor of gun violence (Study HERE). So until we are able to achieve a perfect law enforcement system the primary approach is to eliminate some of the gun "glut" that in American society.

By what legal mechanism can you force people in the US to give up their guns? And would that be their 'excess' guns? There are 400 million guns in the US. And yet, only ~12,000 gun crime deaths/year. ???? How many do have to be taken from the law-abiding before we to some number that's 'acceptable?'

Whatever mechanism you come up with, by definition, the criminals will refuse...esp. since there's no way to track them since they would not license or register their firearms.

 

[Lursa]

It is a stochastic process. Only in the case of guns the ONLY reason for a gun is to harm or damage a life.

That's wrong. Is that the reason the Founding Fathers created the 2A?

And not only that, many families/people use firearms to protect life.

 

[Rucker61]

Please see the respective laws regarding "felons" and "firearms ownership" in Canada and in the United States of America.

In order for a person to be barred from owning firearms in Canada, they must be subject to a specific judicial order which can only be made after a hearing in which the person has the right to "make full answer and defence" and which starts with the presumption that the person DOES have the right to own firearms.

You posted "a greater percentage of Canadians can legally own guns that the percentage of Americans who can legally own guns"

This implies numerical data. Do you have such?

 

[Rucker61]

It is a stochastic process. Only in the case of guns the ONLY reason for a gun is to harm or damage a life.

Not according to Congress:


The Gun Control Act of 1968 found that legitimate uses of firearms included “…hunting, trapshooting, target shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity”.

 

[Rucker61]

that is another canard I rather not address, it is comparing apples and oranges.
the ORIGINAL thesis of THIS OP was comparing gun violence in the US to Canada.
Address THAT thesis, not a different one.
You can not massacre a school full of kids with a knife, but you sure can with an AK 15.
'Nuff said?

You can have a school mass shooting with a .22 rifle, a 9mm pistol, a .38 revolver, a pump shotgun, a .22 pistol, a double barrel shotgun, etc.

And evidently, a knife.

Nanping school massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Lursa]

I support some training before you're allowed to own a gun or buy ammo or reloading supplies. The training would cover suicide prevention, we lose about 25,000 a year to gun suicides, gun safety, don't point it at anyone, and anger management.

A test would be required. After you pass, you'd be allowed to buy guns and ammo.

How does training prevent gun crimes? What training is required? Point and pull trigger.

And yes, I specify gun crime because for the most part, suicides do not endanger public safety.

More practically, unless the 2A is repealed and all guns confiscated, the 2A allows for an adult, non-prohibited citizen to own a single revolver or rifle. So...without that, the argument is moot and certainly 'training' is.

 

[Antiwar]

Yes, heaven forbid we ignore the details and reality and just try to use oversimplified rhetoric.

What "oversimplified rhetoric" would that be?

This is why so many of your threads fail (not that this one is yours). When reality and the details get in the way, you demand oversimplification focused on your agenda.

What's "you demand oversimplification focused on your agenda" supposed to mean?

 

[Glitch]

How does training prevent gun crimes? What training is required? Point and pull trigger.

And yes, I specify gun crime because for the most part, suicides do not endanger public safety.

More practically, unless the 2A is repealed and all guns confiscated, the 2A allows for an adult, non-prohibited citizen to own a single revolver or rifle. So...without that, the argument is moot and certainly 'training' is.

I think anyone who is armed should be adequately trained to use their weapon of choice safely and proficiently, but it certainly should not be a requirement or a condition of ownership. It is just good common sense. Does someone need to have common sense to buy and own a firearm? No.

That is why we created Darwin Awards.