2 years ago, Canada announced ban on 1,500 types of 'assault-style' firearms

[Sparagmos]

My point was if a person wants another person dead badly enough they will use anything and people who do not have that mindset will not do harm just because they can.

If a car or other weapon is just as effective, why would you need guns? I think you know that a gun is far more efficient of a killer.

 

[dogs4thewin]

If a car or other weapon is just as effective, why would you need guns? I think you know that a gun is far more efficient of a killer.

In the wrong hands it can be, but just like anything it is the person not the tool. I could have ten guns in my room and until I took action they would just sit there.

 

[Sparagmos]

In the wrong hands it can be, but just like anything it is the person not the tool. I could have ten guns in my room and until I took action they would just sit there.

It can be efficient? It is efficient whether you or a criminal is using it. But you’ve tried to argue that the criminal would kill just as many people without it. That can’t be true because nothing is quite that precise, efficient, easy to use and easy to acquire.

 

[dogs4thewin]

It can be efficient? It is efficient whether you or a criminal is using it. But you’ve tried to argue that the criminal would kill just as many people without it. That can’t be true because nothing is quite that precise, efficient, easy to use and easy to acquire.

Nope I said that if a criminal wanted to badly enough they would find a way not that all methods would result in the same numbers although a car probably could if driven into a crowded enough area.

 

[Jamdoc]

And all of those differences apply to criminals as well. You can’t carjack someone with a car, or rob someone with a car. Your car isn’t with you when you are in buildings. A gun goes everywhere with you and can be used pretty much anywhere. If your intended victim never walks in front of your car, how to you murder them? The logistics of killing 19 kids at once with a car are pretty complex. So many factors need to be lined up.

Criminals don't follow laws. Criminals will rob you with a gun whether you can legally have one or not, and if they don't have a gun, they'll have a knife or other weapon they can get ahold of, and you're limiting someone's right to self defense to their physical condition and capability vs their attacker. If you are weak, disabled, or have a small stature and your attacker is big and powerful? I guess you just think they need to die because they were too weak to fisticuffs their attacker to defend themselves. A rather Darwinist outlook on self defense I guess.

 

[tall73]

If a car or other weapon is just as effective, why would you need guns? I think you know that a gun is far more efficient of a killer.

Yes, guns are more efficient in a greater number of scenarios. But if folks just want to kill a lot of people, unfortunately vehicle attacks can be very deadly, and also tend to injure a lot.


Nice
2016 Nice truck attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 86
Injuries 434

Hebei tractor rampage
2010 Hebei tractor rampage - Wikipedia
Deaths 17
Injuries 20+

Barcelona
2017 Barcelona attacks - Wikipedia
Deaths 15
Injuries 131

2018 Mishui vehicle attack (Also used a shovel and knife)
2018 Mishui vehicle attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 15
Injuries 43

Berlin Christmas Market
2016 Berlin truck attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 12
Injuries 56

Toronto van incel attack
Toronto van attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 10
Injuries 16

New York Truck Attack
2017 New York City truck attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 8
Injuries 12

2009 attack on the Dutch royal family
2009 attack on the Dutch royal family - Wikipedia
Deaths 7
Injured 10

Waukesha Christmas Parade Attack
Waukesha Christmas parade attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 6
Injuries 62

January 2017 Melbourne car attack
January 2017 Melbourne car attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 6
Injuries 27

Huludao Pre-schooler ramming attack
Man speeds car into group of preschoolers, kills five and drives off
Deaths 5
injuries 18

 

[ottawak]

...people like you want to take their guns anyway, because they don't 'need" them.

That's false, and if you have been reading my posts in this thread you know if for a bald-faced lie. But there are people who want to take your guns away and the reason that they do is that they are of the opinion that saving America from left-wing tyranny with pretend army guns is a fantasy indicative of being quite a few cards short of a full deck.

 

[essentialsaltes]

16% were with an "assault weapon".
81% were with a handgun.

Alrighty then!

Handguns: Canada proposes complete freeze on ownership

 

[RDKirk]

What percentage of mass shootings?

If we consider "mass shooting" to be "4+ killed, excluding the shooter," then the percentage of mass shootings involving an "assault weapon" is sixteen percent.
Mass Shootings in America | Everytown Research & Policy | Everytown Research & Policy

 

[Sparagmos]

Nope I said that if a criminal wanted to badly enough they would find a way not that all methods would result in the same numbers although a car probably could if driven into a crowded enough area.

But if it’s more work to "find a way," and it wouldn’t result in the same numbers, that means it would be better and less people would be killed if these people didn’t have easy access to guns. Few targeted murders can be accomplished with a car. I don’t think these mass shooters want to use a car, it’s more thrilling to use guns. Take that away and it will be harder for them to carry out their plans.

 

[Sparagmos]

Criminals don't follow laws. Criminals will rob you with a gun whether you can legally have one or not, and if they don't have a gun, they'll have a knife or other weapon they can get ahold of, and you're limiting someone's right to self defense to their physical condition and capability vs their attacker. If you are weak, disabled, or have a small stature and your attacker is big and powerful? I guess you just think they need to die because they were too weak to fisticuffs their attacker to defend themselves. A rather Darwinist outlook on self defense I guess.

Criminals in countries with strict gun control laws can’t easily get guns. Just the extra work to obtain one on the black market would prevent countless murders and even more suicides. The number of cases where someone prevents their own murder by using a gun is far lower than the numbers of gun homicides and murders, so it’s a moot point. I’ve lived my whole life in big cities and have never had my life threatened, so I’m sorry I just don’t feel any affinity with this "right" to self defense with a gun. People all over the world in countries with gun control are safer and less likely to be murdered than we are, so that argument falls flat. The people I’ve known who carry guns everywhere have issues. They are generally a bit paranoid and want to seem more ‘tough." They aren’t very educated and seem to need the gun to feel important. So I don’t think they are carrying out of any kind of better wisdom than I have.

 

[Sparagmos]

Yes, guns are more efficient in a greater number of scenarios. But if folks just want to kill a lot of people, unfortunately vehicle attacks can be very deadly, and also tend to injure a lot.


Nice
2016 Nice truck attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 86
Injuries 434

Hebei tractor rampage
2010 Hebei tractor rampage - Wikipedia
Deaths 17
Injuries 20+

Barcelona
2017 Barcelona attacks - Wikipedia
Deaths 15
Injuries 131

2018 Mishui vehicle attack (Also used a shovel and knife)
2018 Mishui vehicle attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 15
Injuries 43

Berlin Christmas Market
2016 Berlin truck attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 12
Injuries 56

Toronto van incel attack
Toronto van attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 10
Injuries 16

New York Truck Attack
2017 New York City truck attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 8
Injuries 12

2009 attack on the Dutch royal family
2009 attack on the Dutch royal family - Wikipedia
Deaths 7
Injured 10

Waukesha Christmas Parade Attack
Waukesha Christmas parade attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 6
Injuries 62

January 2017 Melbourne car attack
January 2017 Melbourne car attack - Wikipedia
Deaths 6
Injuries 27

Huludao Pre-schooler ramming attack
Man speeds car into group of preschoolers, kills five and drives off
Deaths 5
injuries 18

Like I said, far less efficient and can only be used in very limited scenarios. Really only good for killing random people. If these school shooters had the desire and ability to take kids out with cars, why are they using guns?

 

[tall73]

Like I said, far less efficient and can only be used in very limited scenarios. Really only good for killing random people. If these school shooters had the desire and ability to take kids out with cars, why are they using guns?

Yes, it can only be used in limited scenarios.

No, it is not less efficient, only a few mass shootings are as large as the recent one, and the Nice attack, for instance, dwarfs that. As with mass shootings some result in only a few deaths, and some result in many.

And arson attacks, bomb attack etc., have also been quite deadly.

I think the bigger issue is that so many people have a desire to kill lots of people, whether they use guns or vehicles. They are still dead. We need to figure that part out.

I would propose in this case modifying Section 230 to require internet platforms to report known threats. His account was temp banned on a social network after threats of school shootings, threats of rape of particular people, etc. and he had a video on the platform of him holding two bloody dead cats in a clear plastic bag and laughing, saying he did this often.

That should be reported. And some of these interactions were a number of days before the incident.

They already still require platforms to deal with sexual exploitation of children content when it is known about.

 

[RDKirk]

Criminals in countries with strict gun control laws can’t easily get guns. Just the extra work to obtain one on the black market would prevent countless murders and even more suicides. The number of cases where someone prevents their own murder by using a gun is far lower than the numbers of gun homicides and murders, so it’s a moot point. I’ve lived my whole life in big cities and have never had my life threatened, so I’m sorry I just don’t feel any affinity with this "right" to self defense with a gun. People all over the world in countries with gun control are safer and less likely to be murdered than we are, so that argument falls flat. The people I’ve known who carry guns everywhere have issues. They are generally a bit paranoid and want to seem more ‘tough." They aren’t very educated and seem to need the gun to feel important. So I don’t think they are carrying out of any kind of better wisdom than I have.

Countries that have successful strict gun control are countries that were already safer. Gun control did not make them safer, they accepted gun control because they were already safe.

 

[Aldebaran]

This can be done with a regular gun or rifle. No hunter needs triple-digits rounds per minute to kill a deer.

AR15s don't do that, nor does any other gun we're talking about, so your argument is strawman material.

How many dozen home invaders does one get at a time?

It doesn't take dozens, but anytime there's multiple invaders, multiple shots may be needed. Here's a case where 4 home invaders were stopped by an armed homeowner:

These groups are not subject to these types of bans.

Of course not! They're part of the government--those who don't trust the people, but demand trust from the people.

There is no need for a competitive shooter to keep these guns in their home. They can be kept securely in shooting grounds, and they can provided at competitions.

Well, just because you may not trust the owners with their own property doesn't make them untrustworthy. "Keep and bear arms" doesn't mean having to allow someone else to keep them for you.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Why do we need 1,500 types of 'assault-style' firearms?

 

[Jamdoc]

Criminals in countries with strict gun control laws can’t easily get guns. Just the extra work to obtain one on the black market would prevent countless murders and even more suicides. The number of cases where someone prevents their own murder by using a gun is far lower than the numbers of gun homicides and murders, so it’s a moot point. I’ve lived my whole life in big cities and have never had my life threatened, so I’m sorry I just don’t feel any affinity with this "right" to self defense with a gun. People all over the world in countries with gun control are safer and less likely to be murdered than we are, so that argument falls flat. The people I’ve known who carry guns everywhere have issues. They are generally a bit paranoid and want to seem more ‘tough." They aren’t very educated and seem to need the gun to feel important. So I don’t think they are carrying out of any kind of better wisdom than I have.

Many of those other countries don't have porous borders. 1 of our borders is practically open, the other one is leaky.
We've had all manner of intoxicating drugs banned for 50 years.
People have no problem getting those if they want them, we're the largest market for illicit drugs on the planet, and we have one of the more strict "war on drugs" mentality than most the west. Only Islamic, and South East Asian countries that punish possession of drugs by firing squad have more penalizing systems than the US.
In fact that's one of the reasons the cartels are so violent.. because they know they can get life imprisonment for possession in large quantities with intent to distribute. When the punishment for a crime approaches the same as the punishment for murder.. well, the criminals are more willing to engage in Murder to eliminate witnesses to reduce their chances of being caught. Because when punishment is severe, their only hope is not being caught.

so excuse me if I have oh.... 0 faith in laws being much of an impediment to criminals having guns.
*I* might have problems getting guns, they sure won't.

 

[Aldebaran]

"We're not coming for your guns we just want to ban only assault weapons" they said..

well
the disarmament of Canada continues
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/handguns-liberal-bill-1.6470554

Now they're coming after handguns, the most common self defense firearm.

Now the people who were saying, "You don't need a high capacity semiauto handgun that can rapidly kill 17 people anyway. All you need is a revolver!" will need to make up a new argument. Their accusations of "slippery slope fallacy" have just gone down in flames.
First, Trudeau just wanted to ban military-style rifles.
Then, he bans all semiauto rifles.
Now, he bans all handguns.
We saw it coming, but they didn't want to listen.

 

[TLK Valentine]

"We're not coming for your guns we just want to ban only assault weapons" they said..

well
the disarmament of Canada continues
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/handguns-liberal-bill-1.6470554

Now they're coming after handguns, the most common self defense firearm.

Has it already been mentioned that the Canadian Supreme Court confirmed back in 1993 that there is no legal right to bear arms of any kind?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/is-gun-ownership-a-legal-right-in-canada-1.2723893

 

[TLK Valentine]

Now the people who were saying, "You don't need a high capacity semiauto handgun that can rapidly kill 17 people anyway. All you need is a revolver!" will need to make up a new argument. Their accusations of "slippery slope fallacy" have just gone down in flames.
First, Trudeau just wanted to ban military-style rifles.
Then, he bans all semiauto rifles.
Now, he bans all handguns.
We saw it coming, but they didn't want to listen.

If you were Canadian, you should probably be grateful that the privilege lasted as long as it did.