It’s always funny seeing how stories like this get the gun nuts out of the woodwork to start complaining about local gun control. The problem will always be twofold. Local guns need to be controlled, and the traffic of contraband needs to be controlled. The end result we want is to avoid becoming a gun infested shithole like the US. NRA talking points can go take a hike off a cliff.
No one is saying that local guns must not be controlled. The disagreement is to the extent and the method.
These people can’t conceive the idea that people own firearms safely, and will do anything to bury their heads in the sand.
They don’t understand that this is ultimately an erosion of property rights and the just rule of law, and they don’t want to. It’ll only be when something they love is arbitrarily banned without justification or compensation that they’ll finally realize it wasn’t really about the guns.
That’s why they’re running around down voting all of our posts like the mature adults they are.
I can’t wait for the government to announce a ban on ICE vehicles and only offer $2 in compensation to the first unlucky sucker who finds out that the FOMO money pool wasn’t big enough to provide fair market value for their once-lawfully owned property.
They can’t argue without demanding we fuck off to a foreign nation or without churlish mockery.
Edit: It only took 4 minutes for those down votes! 🙄
That guy I responded to (I blocked him now) said the measures of Bill C-21 are too lenient and the OIC ban (which has been expanded many times over) in 2020 is is also too weak. He didn’t say OIC or C-21, because I don’t think he knows what they are. Most people who claim we need more gun control have no fucking idea what the laws are. Like I said before in other posts. I remember talking to people in the mid-90s as a kid (before I immigrated to Canada and became naturalized) and their assumption was ALWAYS measuring the US the only country where private firearms ownership is a thing, and that the sole cause of violence is firearm ownership. In 1996 I had someone tell me that Toronto fully banned firearms and only has 30 murders, and was the murder capital of Canada, while New York City had 2000 (in the late 80s and early 90s, NYC really was that violent. Now NYC is one of the safest cities in the country despite a massive amount of loosening of firearms laws throughout most of the US).
The assumption was that Canada was a gun control haven with zero handguns, only bolt-action rifles (and stored centrally), and extremely tight controls on everything, with major cities banning firearms within limits. They were saying this in the 90s. Nothing could have been farther than the truth.
Truth of the matter is, the PAL system didn’t come online until 2000 or so, meaning before then there was no license required to own any long-gun and ammunition was uncontrolled as well.
Even with their obsessions of ‘assault weapons’ or ‘assault style weapons’ or ‘military style weapons’ their shit was never true. That term was invented in the 80s when the first ever civilian rifles and shotguns with polymer parts and adjustable stocks and such started becoming a thing. Their definition is stupid. A threaded barrel? They put in muzzle breaks and flash hiders so you don’t blind yourself. Suppressors have been illegal in Canada since 1969. Even in the US were regulations regarding suppressors have been loosened up considerably, you almost never see them in happen in crime. You know the Brian Thompson shooting in 2024? NYC’s police chief said that in the decades of his police service in the city this was the FIRST time he actually saw a confirmed case of a silence being used in a firearms related murder.
it is really fucking expensive, and despite their own claims of ‘we need to monitor things coming in from the US’ they really aren’t proposing anything other than the one time they raised the maximum penalty for arms trafficking from 10 years to 14 years. this is stupid and highly ineffective. Why? I am going to use Saudi Arabia as an example. Saudi Arabia has the highest rate of executions on Earth, and most of their death penalties are given to drug smugglers and traffickers. Despite the sheer rate of executions, they haven’t deterred any dealer from trying. You think just making the penalty a few years more (and there’s no guarantee they will be given the maximum) is going to deter them from smuggling firearms? Especially no additional detection equipment and a massive diversion onto local guns and local gun owners.
I could go on forever about how they look at other country’s gun laws wrong, too. For example the UK does not allow semi-auto centerfire rifles, but they do get those models and make them manually operated. There is no mention of ‘assault weapon’ in their laws either. I saw a video of a British target shooter with a manually operated AR-15 with a 100 round drum firing at a range. This is legal. Also the bans do not effect rimfire rifles. when the OIC gave the list of 15,000 rifle models, they did not care if they were rimfire or centralfire. They just banned them. Those rifles are legal in the UK. not easy to get, but they’re not treated as anything special.
Basically they would have a harsher regime than Japan at this point and still say it is not good enough.
Nothing wrong with the methods. If anything they are not harsh enough.
Tell me you have no idea what you are talking about without telling me you don’t know what you are talking about other than ‘I do not like firearms as a principle and nothing more’.
They have had every opportunity to outright ban firearms via Act of Parliament, but didn’t. Why is that? They still went ahead with the OIC, but when they passed C-21, did they ban firearms? No, they just made up more rules to de-facto ban new ones, and that didn’t even work because “new” semi-auto rifles have recently entered the market as non-restricted like the IWI Carmel and the Makasi.
That was all done under the Trudeau admin, but Carney’s government didn’t even hold debates for their assault on strong cryptography, so they could’ve banned them at any time before leaving for summer break, but they didn’t. Why?
If it’s really such a problem, why can’t they do things the legally appropriate way and come right out to ban all firearms?
- Shooter claims to want to destroy the West.
- Kills an Arab policeman
- Police try to respond
- They kill a Jew standing nearby
The entire situation is emblematic of the wreck this country is.
That’ll teach us to send them all that fentanyl or whatever
This is bullshit astroturfing from the Liberal government trying to twist gun crime statistics to fit their narrative in preparation for the Supreme Court case regarding their use of the Order-in-Council power to ban firearms.
They’ve decided to generously (read: absurdly) redefine what it means for a gun to be involved in crime.
If a lawfully owned firearm is recovered from a crime scene, even if that firearm was sitting in a safe unrelated to the crime, it’s still counted in their new interpretation of the existing statistics.
Most gun crime in Canada that meets the sensible and reasonable definition is committed with illegally smuggled firearms, no matter what special interest groups like PolySeSouvient would happily lie to get you to believe.
To quote a previous post of mine:
to quote someone (u/panjaab) from reddit (r/onguardforthee):This article is a prime example of the diminished journalistic integrity within this country and here are the following reasons as to why. Air rifles/pellet guns, BB guns, and other immitation rifles are also considered firearms under canadian law. How many immitation rifles are considered in this quota? No one knows and that fact was conveniently left out. Nothing is said about how many were stollen and how many were used by licensed PAL holders during a crime. All that is said, is that they were traced back to canadian origin, but this is a broad term. If a police officer witnesses a firearm at a crime scene, they will attempt to trace the firearm using the serial number, even if the firearm was not used in the crime itself. This also counts towards traces. If a firearm that was actually used in a crime, does not have a serial number, it will not count towards the trace quota. What is a “crime gun”. Is it a firearm used in a murder, a theft, firearms that were improperly stored, or firearms which were stored in a safe and confiscated due to the death of the PAL holder? What is a crime gun? Is it a gun that was used in a murder, robbery, improperly stored, or confiscated from a household where the PAL holder died? They excluded Ontario and Quebec from the data. 2 provinces with close proximity to smuggling networks. TLDR: article is worded to mislead people and is likely an attempt to use a falsely trumped up wedge issue to divide voters. Who is paying for these articles?
And if I can say something, this is a likely a political stunt done very close to a Supreme Court hearing on the gun grabs in Canada that haven't yielded any results. Also the exclusion of Ontario and Quebec is HUGE. These are the more populous provenances in addition to them being closest to firearm smuggling rings.“I don’t like it so it’s bullshit.”
The methodology of the article (and many others like it) is highly questionable and is intensely flawed. So no it is not ‘I do not like it therefore it is wrong.’ I will quote a previous comment I made (and there have been tons of others since pointing out more flaws in it, but I can’t be arsed to look them up now).
to quote someone (u/panjaab) from reddit (r/onguardforthee):This article is a prime example of the diminished journalistic integrity within this country and here are the following reasons as to why. Air rifles/pellet guns, BB guns, and other immitation rifles are also considered firearms under canadian law. How many immitation rifles are considered in this quota? No one knows and that fact was conveniently left out. Nothing is said about how many were stollen and how many were used by licensed PAL holders during a crime. All that is said, is that they were traced back to canadian origin, but this is a broad term. If a police officer witnesses a firearm at a crime scene, they will attempt to trace the firearm using the serial number, even if the firearm was not used in the crime itself. This also counts towards traces. If a firearm that was actually used in a crime, does not have a serial number, it will not count towards the trace quota. What is a “crime gun”. Is it a firearm used in a murder, a theft, firearms that were improperly stored, or firearms which were stored in a safe and confiscated due to the death of the PAL holder? What is a crime gun? Is it a gun that was used in a murder, robbery, improperly stored, or confiscated from a household where the PAL holder died? They excluded Ontario and Quebec from the data. 2 provinces with close proximity to smuggling networks. TLDR: article is worded to mislead people and is likely an attempt to use a falsely trumped up wedge issue to divide voters. Who is paying for these articles?
And if I can say something, this is a likely a political stunt done very close to a Supreme Court hearing on the gun grabs in Canada that haven't yielded any results. Also the exclusion of Ontario and Quebec is HUGE. These are the more populous provenances in addition to them being closest to firearm smuggling rings.It’s factually untrue, which is what makes it bullshit.
https://torontosun.com/news/national/zero-evidence-available-federal-gun-grab
Yes, I know it’s the Toronto Sun, but there are multiple sources for this out there.
Many police services came out to contest this “buyback” saying it would do nothing to help, and that the money should be spent on border enforcement.
How many x-ray scanners could we have installed at the border for $750 million?
Revenge for beiber.
How about revenge for Ted Cruz?
But let’s keep the expensive and ineffective gun laws and propose more. After all polytechnique and whatever.
Note: I do not oppose all gun laws or gun licensing. I am in favor of the basic licensing scheme (with some modifications). I am not in favor of banning handguns (which have grandfathered by bill c-21 and the previous freeze in 2022) nor am I in favor of banning any firearm by model or action. As they are doing.
It is a massive money sink and it serves no more than expensive security theater and assuaging the fears of the rich so there are fewer potential Canadian Luigis.
I said it. The gun laws along with every other bullshit surveillance law are basically validating every nutcase conspiracy theorists views.
Note: I do not oppose all gun laws or gun licensing. I am in favor of the basic licensing scheme (with some modifications). I am not in favor of banning handguns (which have grandfathered by bill c-21 and the previous freeze in 2022) nor am I in favor of banning any firearm by model or action. As they are doing.
Actually, the law was surprisingly effective
About 30% of crime handguns used to come from Canadian stores. Some citizens with a valid possession and acquisition licence used to buy guns and sell them illegally :
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/guns-domestic-danforth-shooting-toronto-1.4759159
Now this source of handguns has practically disapeared.
They now exclusively come from the United States.
Also if you want quote those people here is another one like them from a few years ago.
https://crimecanada.ca/rcmp-report-most-crime-guns-domestically-sourced-in-canada/
This article is flawed as fuck, but apparently handguns still make up 9+% of domestic crime handguns despite sales having been halted fully since November 2022. Before the most I could find was roughly 15%. Which was in the same ballpark it has been for decades. Straw purchases for Canadian handguns have been impossible for a long time and with people unable to buy new ones unless those straw purchases were the only ones buying your assumption is impossible.
And again, that specific article I mentioned is bullshit. It purposely excluded Ontario and Québec.
None of those say anything about handguns and how many were handguns. Many rifles (arbitrarily) were restricted, too.
Edit: also police have their handguns lost or stolen a lot more often than you think.
Either way it does not justify this law.
Edit2: I looked for your claim that domestic sources disappeared and haven’t found anything supporting your claim.
So do the same thing as the USA and expect something different to happen. I don’t understand why you people don’t just fuck off to a trailer park in Orlando.
Canada is not, never has, and never will be the united States. I remember in the mid 90s talking to some Canadians who thought Canadian gun laws were ultra strict and fully banned firearms and said ‘look New York City had 2K murders while Toronto had 30 and they don’t allow firearms anywhere near the city. Less guns and more control is the reason’.
This was in 1996. Canadian gun laws were nonexistent back then. Yet the rate still vastely lower (and both NYC and New York state had far, far more gun control than Canada at the time). They didn’t even need a permit to own most guns back then and ammunition was entirely uncontrolled. Yet for some reason he acted like guns were a purely American thing and vastly overestimated the gun laws in Canada. Also Toronto does not have any laws forbidding gun ownership in the city now, let alone in 1996.
I also looked through a Playboy magazine (for the articles!) From 1981 that had a poster comparing gun violence in the US to Canada, Australia, the UK, and Japan. In 1981 there was so little gun laws in both Canada (even less than the 90s) and barely any in Australia. The UK had strict laws but almost no type of firearm banned. Japan’s shown rate was significantly higher than today for some reason.
Even in Australia there were still mass shootings before Bondi Beach and from 1996 to 2010 the rate of mass murder in general remained consistent and more lethal per incident, with arson sharply rising in deadliness and incident at the same time firearms became less prevalent.
The line of thinking and talking has not changed despite the physical and legal reality being vastly different. Canada and the UK will not now nor would they ever be the US.
So fuck Florida, fuck the US, and everyone who acts like it is a benchmark for anything.
Every fucking incel rightwing jackass that has inspired to do their shit by right wing influencers and the only reaction is never to silence them but instead amplify their voices while passing internet restrictions and surveillance that only stop people from doing anything about it.
We have been seeing a militant, international murderous rise of incel motherfuckers and not a singular damn thing done about them. If your mentality is ‘as long as they don’t do it with a gun I am fine’ then there is something deeply wrong with you.
Cop at around 2:30 of the video talks about “straw purhcases”, where people who have gone through the system to be eligible to buy guns are passing them on to people who are not eligible.
Those are already illegal as fuck.
Edit: he was also talking about straw purchases in the US. Not Canada. You are implying that Canadians are straw purchasing for unqualified Canadians. This a lot harder than you think to do without being crushed immediately over here for non-restricted firearms and is impossible to do with restricted.
Got a real source not YouTube slop?
What “slop” are you talking about? France 24 is the French public broadcaster, like our CBC. When CBC puts stuff on Youtube, we don’t call it “slop”. Anyway, here is the same video on their website: https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/focus/20260619-gun-violence-soars-in-canada-as-illegal-weapons-from-the-us-flow-in
Non video content.
In that case, no, I don’t have a non-video source.
