Gun Laws in Canada to become stricter

[limitles]

Here's a good example of a politician doubling down.
Canada hates gun crimes already
They see the ignorance south of the border
So the Prime Minister decides to make it even harder to own handguns
or semi automatic bullshit

Guess what the public says , ya ok whatever.

It's a no lose proposition.

You'd have to be out of your fucking mind to disagree with the intention
or a citizen of the united fucked up states

glory to you and your nationalism although it has nothing to do with a nation
its just about personal greed etc, etc, etc,

[lol wow]

no one gives a shit about canada

[limitles]

Where are all the smart people of the world or the U.S. cause that's all that matters
Is everyone getting their grade ten on-line or at some long line up for an Orangutan
rally? Is there a 24 hour sale on pork rinds at WallMart?

Don't send this little deformed midget my way when you have nothing to say

[GrenadaRoger]

you know Les, I wish you would translate into Spanish your glowing reports on life in Canada and post them on webpages read by latin americans…

right now we have about 8,000 people camped along our southern border that would be much better off, in your opinion, if they were welcomed into your country...so please use your significant influence with Justin to get those people up to your wonderland...i'm sure the USA can be prevailed upon to provide the transportation across our country

[limitles]

you know Les, I wish you would translate into Spanish your glowing reports on life in Canada and post them on webpages read by latin americans…

right now we have about 8,000 people camped along our southern border that would be much better off, in your opinion, if they were welcomed into your country...so please use your significant influence with Justin to get those people up to your wonderland...i'm sure the USA can be prevailed upon to provide the transportation across our country

It's funny that you mentioned that, and btw, thanks for responding. I said the exact thing in the caravan thread early on when Trump decided to send troops to the border. I back our government fully if they decided to bring in each and every caravan traveller.

Maybe it's just me, but I am not afraid of anyone taking anything away from me.
If you don't know by now that materialism is not what you need in life, and that every little thing you own is simply on rental then you're just not an aware individual. Not you Mr. G. but anyone in general
And strangely enough, the more you give of yourself etc., the more comes back to you
Sounds like a fairy tale don't it?

Who is more grateful than someone plucked from a life they were scared to live in? To raise their children in? These are not the criminals. These are the products of a broken society.

Criminals are typically the laziest, stupid people of all. Do you think a criminal, making his/her money by extorting average people is going to walk thousands of miles only to have greater scrutiny place on them by the U.S. government? Why? They have much better ways to spend their time

ha ha ha everyone just logs off conveniently
you'd think some braniac like the duped samaritan could at least come up with a two lined response apparently not

And this all comes back to Tony fucking piece of shit doughnuts and the like who imbrace the Republican party and it's ways. How many lives have they fucked up at home and abroad.
How much of this planet do they use to their own profit regardless of the long term effects.
Fuck you Republicans....I used to say America but I now realize the greatest disease on this planet is in the United States Republican Party or anyone not aware of today's issues.
Donuts, you are a complete failure and I would not have a drink with you before or after any game.

Thanks mr g...that was useless....

[Dan Druff]

How are these gun laws going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

The worst combination possible is a well-armed criminal element and a non-armed citizenry.

Not only will citizens lack the ability to defend themselves, but criminals will KNOW that citizens can't defend themselves, and will become more brazen with their crimes.

There was an interesting study involving burglary/robbery rates in the US and UK.

It was found that the US had a surprisingly low home invasion robbery rate -- that the vast majority of home break-ins were committed when the occupants weren't home. On the flip side, the percentage of home break-ins with people home was substantially HIGHER in the UK.

This makes sense, as criminals in the US fear a homeowner with a gun inside, whereas in the UK they do not fear this (due to gun control).

As I like to say, "You may not own a gun, but the fact that you COULD own one is already creating a deterrent regarding breaking into your home while you're in it."

Gun control would never work in the US.

And the sad thing is that there's a lack of understanding about firearms in general. People talk about banning "semi-automatic" weapons, not realizing that most handguns are semi-automatic, as you can fire more than once without taking any further action besides pulling the trigger. Like this gun:

[splitthis]

I am enjoying the sparring of limitles and lolwow. Keep going....

[Ryback_feed_me_more]

Here's a good example of a politician doubling down.
Canada hates gun crimes already
They see the ignorance south of the border
So the Prime Minister decides to make it even harder to own handguns
or semi automatic bullshit

Guess what the public says , ya ok whatever.

It's a no lose proposition.

You'd have to be out of your fucking mind to disagree with the intention
or a citizen of the united fucked up states

glory to you and your nationalism although it has nothing to do with a nation
its just about personal greed etc, etc, etc,

Hell in Canada they just call out the Strategic Response Unit with Sgt Greg Parker..

[Ryback_feed_me_more]

How are these gun laws going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

The worst combination possible is a well-armed criminal element and a non-armed citizenry.

Not only will citizens lack the ability to defend themselves, but criminals will KNOW that citizens can't defend themselves, and will become more brazen with their crimes.

There was an interesting study involving burglary/robbery rates in the US and UK.

It was found that the US had a surprisingly low home invasion robbery rate -- that the vast majority of home break-ins were committed when the occupants weren't home. On the flip side, the percentage of home break-ins with people home was substantially HIGHER in the UK.

This makes sense, as criminals in the US fear a homeowner with a gun inside, whereas in the UK they do not fear this (due to gun control).

As I like to say, "You may not own a gun, but the fact that you COULD own one is already creating a deterrent regarding breaking into your home while you're in it."

Gun control would never work in the US.

And the sad thing is that there's a lack of understanding about firearms in general. People talk about banning "semi-automatic" weapons, not realizing that most handguns are semi-automatic, as you can fire more than once without taking any further action besides pulling the trigger. Like this gun:

The real reason for the 2nd Amendment has nothign to do with crime though Druff and had and remains has everything to do with why we fought the Revolutionary War to begin with.. Ironic places with high gun control h ave ridiculous violent crime rates and extremist socialist/control freak governments.. (hence why the 2A exists to stop by extreme measures if need by the totalitarian regime that could come to power)

[Mintjewlips]

I'd rather live in a community where criminals think twice about committing a crime. Here in Texas we have a saying, "We dont call 911", there are even signs that you can buy with that motto....




Suffice to say that the country areas are the safest parts of texas...

[Mintjewlips]

Oh and fuck canada...

WHO THE FUCK PUTS GRAVY ON THEIR FRENCH FRIES....LIKE WTF....

[lol wow]

Canada may be a country of trash people and hamburgers but you will not besmirch the good name of gravy on fries

[Mintjewlips]

Next you're gonna tell me you dip your hot wings in ranch.......or that you put potatoe chips on your hotdog....

[limitles]

How are these gun laws going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

The worst combination possible is a well-armed criminal element and a non-armed citizenry.

Not only will citizens lack the ability to defend themselves, but criminals will KNOW that citizens can't defend themselves, and will become more brazen with their crimes.

There was an interesting study involving burglary/robbery rates in the US and UK.

It was found that the US had a surprisingly low home invasion robbery rate -- that the vast majority of home break-ins were committed when the occupants weren't home. On the flip side, the percentage of home break-ins with people home was substantially HIGHER in the UK.

This makes sense, as criminals in the US fear a homeowner with a gun inside, whereas in the UK they do not fear this (due to gun control).

As I like to say, "You may not own a gun, but the fact that you COULD own one is already creating a deterrent regarding breaking into your home while you're in it."

Gun control would never work in the US.

And the sad thing is that there's a lack of understanding about firearms in general. People talk about banning "semi-automatic" weapons, not realizing that most handguns are semi-automatic, as you can fire more than once without taking any further action besides pulling the trigger. Like this gun:

The idea is to keep guns, handguns whatever out of the hands of the most people possible. Do you think criminals are the one's producing the guns? No, they get there handguns by breaking and entering when you're not home.

And keeping these misunderstood pseudo machine guns out of the hands of the mentally ill would drop the horrible monthly mass shootings in the U.S. by half hopefully.

Saying gun control would never work in the U.S. is like saying gay marriage will never become legal in the U.S. 15 years ago.
You don't know that. It is not a fact.

[GambleBotsSatire]

I bet the gum laws are stricter in canada as well

[JohnCommode]

How are these gun laws going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

The worst combination possible is a well-armed criminal element and a non-armed citizenry.

Not only will citizens lack the ability to defend themselves, but criminals will KNOW that citizens can't defend themselves, and will become more brazen with their crimes.

There was an interesting study involving burglary/robbery rates in the US and UK.

It was found that the US had a surprisingly low home invasion robbery rate -- that the vast majority of home break-ins were committed when the occupants weren't home. On the flip side, the percentage of home break-ins with people home was substantially HIGHER in the UK.

This makes sense, as criminals in the US fear a homeowner with a gun inside, whereas in the UK they do not fear this (due to gun control).

As I like to say, "You may not own a gun, but the fact that you COULD own one is already creating a deterrent regarding breaking into your home while you're in it."

Gun control would never work in the US.

And the sad thing is that there's a lack of understanding about firearms in general. People talk about banning "semi-automatic" weapons, not realizing that most handguns are semi-automatic, as you can fire more than once without taking any further action besides pulling the trigger. Like this gun:

While I support the right of any American non-felon who doesn't have a restraining order out against him and has no serious psychiatric history to own a reasonable amount of firearms, I am in no way going to criticize the UK or Canada for their approach to gun control. You cited the higher rate of home invasions in the UK, but I find the disparity in homicide rates to be more revealing and ultimately more important:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._homicide_rate

The U.S. homicide rate for 2016 was 5.35/100,000 inhabitants.

Canada was 1.68.

The UK was 1.20.

Having viewed the video, i am advising all Jehovah's Witnesses not to ring Druff's doorbell.

[limitles]

"Research shows that countries with fewer guns have lower homicide rates. Even US states with fewer guns have fewer homicides; in a landmark 2002 study, analysis of data from 1988 to 1997 showed that states with “high” gun ownership had three times the rate of homicide than states with few guns. A decade later, a 2013 study found that every percentage point increase in gun ownership corresponded to a 0.9% higher risk of gun homicide. Countries and states that legally limit overall gun ownership simply have fewer gun deaths.

The United States stands out among countries for the frequency with which its mass shootings occur. But last year, after the US witnessed its most fatal mass shooting in history at Las Vegas, the Trump administration made it easier—not harder—for people with mental illness to buy guns. (That decision rolled back Obama-era restrictions that had been passed in the wake of Sandy Hook.)
Back in 1996, it took only 12 days after a mass shooting for Australia to pass the National Firearms Agreement, which banned automatic and semi-automatic weapon for “personal defense.” The country created a temporary buyback program for guns that had become illegal. Stricter background checks were enforced. As Zeif pointed out yesterday, there have been no school shootings in Australia since."

I understand there are a lot of words here but do your best.


https://qz.com/1212809/compare-us-ma...and-australia/

[Gordman]

"Research shows that countries with fewer guns have lower homicide rates. Even US states with fewer guns have fewer homicides; in a landmark 2002 study, analysis of data from 1988 to 1997 showed that states with “high” gun ownership had three times the rate of homicide than states with few guns. A decade later, a 2013 study found that every percentage point increase in gun ownership corresponded to a 0.9% higher risk of gun homicide. Countries and states that legally limit overall gun ownership simply have fewer gun deaths.

The United States stands out among countries for the frequency with which its mass shootings occur. But last year, after the US witnessed its most fatal mass shooting in history at Las Vegas, the Trump administration made it easier—not harder—for people with mental illness to buy guns. (That decision rolled back Obama-era restrictions that had been passed in the wake of Sandy Hook.)
Back in 1996, it took only 12 days after a mass shooting for Australia to pass the National Firearms Agreement, which banned automatic and semi-automatic weapon for “personal defense.” The country created a temporary buyback program for guns that had become illegal. Stricter background checks were enforced. As Zeif pointed out yesterday, there have been no school shootings in Australia since."

I understand there are a lot of words here but do your best.


https://qz.com/1212809/compare-us-ma...and-australia/

Ive only looked at your misguided post (while drunk i might add) for approximately 10 seconds to notice you have posted a graph of firearm death rates...while you are trying to argue fireaarm homicide rates in the rest of your post.


And you, just like the UK, conveniently leave out suicide rates, which are a large part of those firearm death rates. And lets not forget about gang gun deaths....

Furthermore, you're trying to compare mass shooting rates, which no matter where you live, are are a ridiculously low percentage of the whole actual homicide rates in the given area.

When im sober and have less to do, ill come back to the rest of your post and discuss for example how in the UK you cant defend yourself worth a shit...but hey, lets splash some acid!

[limitles]

"Research shows that countries with fewer guns have lower homicide rates. Even US states with fewer guns have fewer homicides; in a landmark 2002 study, analysis of data from 1988 to 1997 showed that states with “high” gun ownership had three times the rate of homicide than states with few guns. A decade later, a 2013 study found that every percentage point increase in gun ownership corresponded to a 0.9% higher risk of gun homicide. Countries and states that legally limit overall gun ownership simply have fewer gun deaths.

The United States stands out among countries for the frequency with which its mass shootings occur. But last year, after the US witnessed its most fatal mass shooting in history at Las Vegas, the Trump administration made it easier—not harder—for people with mental illness to buy guns. (That decision rolled back Obama-era restrictions that had been passed in the wake of Sandy Hook.)
Back in 1996, it took only 12 days after a mass shooting for Australia to pass the National Firearms Agreement, which banned automatic and semi-automatic weapon for “personal defense.” The country created a temporary buyback program for guns that had become illegal. Stricter background checks were enforced. As Zeif pointed out yesterday, there have been no school shootings in Australia since."

I understand there are a lot of words here but do your best.


https://qz.com/1212809/compare-us-ma...and-australia/

Ive only looked at your misguided post (while drunk i might add) for approximately 10 seconds to notice you have posted a graph of firearm death rates...while you are trying to argue fireaarm homicide rates in the rest of your post.


And you, just like the UK, conveniently leave out suicide rates, which are a large part of those firearm death rates. And lets not forget about gang gun deaths....

Furthermore, you're trying to compare mass shooting rates, which no matter where you live, are are a ridiculously low percentage of the whole actual homicide rates in the given area.

When im sober and have less to do, ill come back to the rest of your post and discuss for example how in the UK you cant defend yourself worth a shit...but hey, lets splash some acid!

I'm not sure about suicide "rates" related to gun ownership. To be honest I don't care if anyone kills themselves by any means. I'm more concerned with others killing others, intentionally or not and that is really the definition of homicide.



If you're not too out of it you might notice the relationship to number of guns and death.

[limitles]

"At least 26,000 children and teenagers younger than 18 were killed by gunfire in the United States between 1999 and 2016, according to mortality data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Firearm injuries are the third leading cause of death among children age 1 through 17 in the United States, according to a 2017 study published in the journal Pediatrics.
Among the world's wealthy nations, the United States accounts for 91 percent of all firearm deaths of children younger than 15, according to a 2010 study published in the American Journal of Medicine."

Do you see how your supposed freedoms/privileges sometimes come at a terrible cost? A loaded pistol could be related to a land mine. Too many innocents are lost because of them
No parent who had their child taken away from them by a gunman can understand lax gun laws to say the very least.

And I'll say it one more time, criminals are not the real issue. Criminals are capitalists. They want your money not headlines that report how many innocent people they took out. Take out the weapon. You're in the U.K. and you're a criminal. Do you not become one because of a lack of a firearm? There's you're foolish argument for you Druff
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/23/more-than-26000-children-and-teens-have-been-killed-in-gun-violence-since-1999/?utm_term=.dece1d495610