• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What lessons can Canada teach America about deadly gun violence?

I know plenty of liberal gun owners. It's not their politics I have a problem with. I firmly believe that if we could somehow disarm our society, we would see a large reduction in deaths and injuries from firearms. Your guess is as good as mine as to how to accomplish that, however.
why should those of us who enjoy the shooting sports and understand that the police rarely can stop a crime before it happens, want to give up our guns when those who cause crimes won't?
 
The SCOTUS has upheld gun legislation before, I see no reason that they couldn't do so again.
yes, the FDR supreme court violated the tenth, ninth and second amendments, and Democrats would like to have justices who do that again. no one on the gun ban side has ever told us what in the constitution actually supports such dishonesty. why is every gun banner on this board a left winger? because gun control is a political weapon of the left
 
I know plenty of liberal gun owners. It's not their politics I have a problem with. I firmly believe that if we could somehow disarm our society, we would see a large reduction in deaths and injuries from firearms. Your guess is as good as mine as to how to accomplish that, however.
If you wanted to disarm our society,

1. Repeal the 2nd and 4th Amendments.
2. Overturn at least five SCOTUS decisions.
3. Create a police state.
4. Confiscate about 400 million firearms
5. Kill an unknown number of citizens.
 
The SCOTUS has upheld gun legislation before, I see no reason that they couldn't do so again.
Scalia in Heller and Alito in McDonald, later, expressed a very limited view of what gun control laws could be considered Constitutional.
DC v Heller
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
Chicago v McDonald.

"We made it clear in Heller that our holding did not cast doubt on such longstanding regulatory measures as “prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill,” “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.” Id., at ___–___ (slip op., at 54–55). We repeat those assurances here. "

The restrictions listed in these two opinions are the only ones that can be presumed to be Constitutional. All others must be reviewed for Constitutionality.

A training requirement would be analogous to a literacy test to vote, which has been found to be unconstitutional. Magazine restrictions violate Heller and Caetano. Waiting periods are arbitrary and capricious.
 
Criminals are law breakers by definition. You can legislate 1,000 laws pertaining to firearms, and they'll still have them.
 
More suicide than other are by gun owners whom have firearms at hand regardless of bothering to climb stairs or go buy a gun they already have.
If that's the case making guns harder to get will not reduce suicide, not if people who commit suicide with guns do it with guns they already have.
In Japan, " Police records show that, in 2010, there were 247 suicide attempts (54 of which were fatal) in the forest"
If these suicide attempts are taking place in the forest that means they're most likely hanging attempts where people try to hang themselves from trees. Hanging is a less effective means of suicide than jumping from a height, or jumping in front of a train, both of which are common suicide methods.
 
why do you lie when my posts clearly demonstrate that you are. I have said that laws that severely punish those who misuse firearms to illegally harm others are proper and states certainly have the power to deny felons, juveniles etc carrying or purchasing firearms. waiting periods deny a right and only harm legal owners who buy from a dealer. YOU DO NOT NEED A REASON TO EXERCISE A RIGHT


Try comprehending the English language. I did not imply you aren't against those that misuse firearms with the intent to "illegally harm others". I'm talking about new law that goes more to safety than just beyond what we already do, denying "...felons, juveniles etc carrying or purchasing firearms." You proved what I said by saying you would be against such legislation as extending waiting periods.
 
Here you go



the FDR administration created a power for the federal government that it was never intended to have, and the FDR minions on the courts upheld that to the point it has become established precedent and conservative justices tend to respect even bad precedent


There you are.

We are a nation of law, not TurtleDude.
 
Try comprehending the English language. I did not imply you aren't against those that misuse firearms with the intent to "illegally harm others". I'm talking about new law that goes more to safety than just beyond what we already do, denying "...felons, juveniles etc carrying or purchasing firearms." You proved what I said by saying you would be against such legislation as extending waiting periods.
What good do extended waiting periods do in keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals? What good do waiting periods do if the buyer already owns a gun?
 
There you are.

We are a nation of law, not TurtleDude.
wow, of stupid throwaway lines that demonstrate you have no real point, that has to be a winner
 
What good do extended waiting periods do in keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals? What good do waiting periods do if the buyer already owns a gun?
why do people keep thinking that CRIME CONTROL is what motivates those who want to harass lawful gun owners? harassing lawful gun owners is the real motivation. that is why they want laws that do nothing to impede criminals and have no rational role in reducing crime, but will harass people trying to lawfully own guns.
 
How to remain largely homogeneous and lilly white, except for the Aboriginal people you live separate from? Eureka...you have found the European model of avoiding violence in minority communities. Don't have them.
 
If that's the case making guns harder to get will not reduce suicide, not if people who commit suicide with guns do it with guns they already have.

If these suicide attempts are taking place in the forest that means they're most likely hanging attempts where people try to hang themselves from trees. Hanging is a less effective means of suicide than jumping from a height, or jumping in front of a train, both of which are common suicide methods.


Quite common among suicide is mental illness. Epidemiological research has found:

"However, more than 99% of gun-disqualifying mental health records archived in the NICS have not resulted in any denials of attempted firearms purchases by prohibited individuals"

(see 6th para of section "The federal policy approach to preventing gun violence involving people with serious mental illness"):

It is obvious not enough attention is being payed to preventing guns from falling into the hands of those most likely to commit suicide by firearm.

The point with Japan's low success of suicide by hanging is that if guns were more available as they are in the US as an option vs hanging, the success rate would, logically, be much higher and result in a worse already high rate of suicide.
 
It is obvious not enough attention is being payed to preventing guns from falling into the hands of those most likely to commit suicide by firearm.
And how do you propose to do that?
The point with Japan's low success of suicide by hanging is that if guns were more available as they are in the US as an option vs hanging, the success rate would, logically, be much higher and result in a worse already high rate of suicide.
No, another common method of suicide is jumping in front of a train which is just as likely to kill you as shooting yourself.
 
What good do extended waiting periods do in keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals? What good do waiting periods do if the buyer already owns a gun?


Extended waiting periods give more time to review the qualifications of the applicant to not let slip by for lack of timely review someone whom is not qualified.
 
Extended waiting periods give more time to review the qualifications of the applicant to not let slip by for lack of timely review someone whom is not qualified.
That's not what waiting periods do. The background check is almost instant. The buyer who passes a NICS check doesn't have any further investigation on them during the waiting period. They are fully approved by the government but must wait some arbitrary period before taking possession.

If a buyer already owns a firearm, the waiting period does absolutely nothing.
 
That's not what waiting periods do. The background check is almost instant. The buyer who passes a NICS check doesn't have any further investigation on them during the waiting period. They are fully approved by the government but must wait some arbitrary period before taking possession.

If a buyer already owns a firearm, the waiting period does absolutely nothing.
it is obvious he wants to impede honest people being able to own guns and another goal is to put gun shows out of business. That is the only rational reason for extended waiting periods
 
Extended waiting periods give more time to review the qualifications of the applicant to not let slip by for lack of timely review someone whom is not qualified.
complete bullshit. the background check is done the same way that a traffic stop is done. It is almost instantaneous
 
And how do you propose to do that?

No, another common method of suicide is jumping in front of a train which is just as likely to kill you as shooting yourself.

For one, removing guns from the hshld when someone is known to be in a depressed state:


Extending the waiting period to be sure someone with a mental health condition doesn't acquire a gun only because the waiting period has expired. More safety training and education of everyone, that would incl addressing mental health, that would help people be more mindful of being careful with guns, especially as respects compulsive acts. In general, most anything that reduces ease of access to guns. Improve the accuracy and completeness of NCIC and NICS records for background checks. Make Fed law for firearm registry and centralize background checks.

No significant number of people choose suicide by train. Half of all suicide by gun which is 85% successful and most easily accommodates impulse, a lead factor in suicide attempt. If an attempt is unsuccessful, 90% do not try again.
 
For one, removing guns from the hshld when someone is known to be in a depressed state:

That article is based on information, or to put it more accurately misinformation, put out by the Brady campaign, which means its very unreliable.
Extending the waiting period to be sure someone with a mental health condition doesn't acquire a gun only because the waiting period has expired.
The gun control crowd likes to make the claim that most gun purchases are repeat purchases, that they're done by people who already own guns who just want to add to their collection, in that case waiting periods will be useless in preventing suicide by guns.
More safety training and education of everyone, that would incl addressing mental health, that would help people be more mindful of being careful with guns, especially as respects compulsive acts. In general, most anything that reduces ease of access to guns. Improve the accuracy and completeness of NCIC and NICS records for background checks.
Much of what you talk about is in direct violation of the 2A.
Make Fed law for firearm registry and centralize background checks.
Registration leads to confiscation, just look at the UK and Australia as examples.
No significant number of people choose suicide by train.
Sure they do.
Half of all suicide by gun which is 85% successful and most easily accommodates impulse, a lead factor in suicide attempt. If an attempt is unsuccessful, 90% do not try again.
I have no desire to commit suicide, therefore my access to guns should not be restricted or hindered.
 
For one, removing guns from the hshld when someone is known to be in a depressed state:


Extending the waiting period to be sure someone with a mental health condition doesn't acquire a gun only because the waiting period has expired. More safety training and education of everyone, that would incl addressing mental health, that would help people be more mindful of being careful with guns, especially as respects compulsive acts. In general, most anything that reduces ease of access to guns. Improve the accuracy and completeness of NCIC and NICS records for background checks. Make Fed law for firearm registry and centralize background checks.

No significant number of people choose suicide by train. Half of all suicide by gun which is 85% successful and most easily accommodates impulse, a lead factor in suicide attempt. If an attempt is unsuccessful, 90% do not try again.
That is a key desire of the anti gun left to harass lawful gun ownership., And if someone already owns a gun, there is absolutely no reason for it. there rest of what you want is unconstitutional bullshit designed to harass gun owners. Suicides are not a valid reason to infringe on the rights of others.
 
How do waiting periods help? Once you have a gun, whether it is immediately or four weeks after the purchase, you can kill people with it.

The only solution is get rid of "keep and bear arms without infringement" in 2A. Of course that will never happen.

It might help at the margin, and reduce impulsive gun crime.

But you're right, the only way to significantly reduce shootings/mass shootings are gun bans.
 
That's not what waiting periods do. The background check is almost instant. The buyer who passes a NICS check doesn't have any further investigation on them during the waiting period. They are fully approved by the government but must wait some arbitrary period before taking possession.

If a buyer already owns a firearm, the waiting period does absolutely nothing.


For lack of protective safety law, there is hardly any single law that does much of anything without in combination with other law. While an extended wait period might defer suicide, the dataset of the person in question is often incomplete. Hence, recent legislation to improve records keeping to assure more accurate and complete information available in a background check. As the central database is updated, a longer waiting period will catch what otherwise would be missed as info is added/updated. That's a very small part of the whole and meaningless without the rest.
 
For lack of protective safety law, there is hardly any single law that does much of anything without in combination with other law. While an extended wait period might defer suicide, the dataset of the person in question is often incomplete. Hence, recent legislation to improve records keeping to assure more accurate and complete information available in a background check. As the central database is updated, a longer waiting period will catch what otherwise would be missed as info is added/updated. That's a very small part of the whole and meaningless without the rest.
bullshit. with computer based data banks, there is no reason to need a longer waiting period. If the information isn't there NOW, it won't 'be in a week
 
Back
Top Bottom