You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Willing to sell a family member for a few minutes on RS
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North vancouver
Posts: 13,731
Thanked 34,425 Times in 8,224 Posts
Failed 230 Times in 178 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare
You seem to be having an issue processing what I'm saying.
When something like this happens, and the media erupts with a barrage of headlines (many of them filled with misinformation and false statistics) do you think people are less likely to feel the need to own a gun? Or more?
Canadian and American federal gun laws aren't vastly different. Yet the rates of gun ownership and gun death are. That alone should indicate it's not a control issue.
Remember what I was saying about trust? I won't bother posting any of the many articles I've come across. Instead you go ahead and Google social trust amongst Americans. See how much it's declined over the decades.
It's pretty simple; The main reason people in the states want their guns is for protection. And that's because they don't have a high level of social trust.
If they wanna change it, maybe they should start by lowering the amount of social and political animosity that their media seems to love pedaling.
Regardless of the cause, i think it's a trust issue much more than a control issue. I think control is just a knee jerk reaction to a problem that's more difficult to resolve. And since I don't think it's the problem, I don't think it would result in much change.
That's my opinion. FWIW. Hope it's clear now
A fully agree with your view that its a social issue more than a gun control issue, but being that a government can't (yet) control a populations mind to be more empathetic, trusting, and non-violent, they will need to exercise the ability to control the tools that these people are using to commit these atrocities. Magazine capacities should be drastically reduced, and the approval process should be much stricter for these weapons.
The common denominator for almost all of these massacres is that these individuals were allowed to simply walk into a store and pick up a weapon that is capable of killing multiple people in a tremendously short amount of time. It really doesn't make sense, and its not necessary.
This guy beat his wife within an inch of his life? Sure! Sell him 5 rifles with 400 bullets
This guy has tortured and killed peoples pets? Sure! A couple handguns are his RIGHT!
__________________
98 technoviolet M3/2/5
Quote:
Originally Posted by boostfever
Westopher is correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fsy82
seems like you got a dick up your ass well..get that checked
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkwax
Well.. I’d hate to be the first to say it, but Westopher is correct.
the one thing I have to say is it looks like the conversation (aside from one or 2 people on one side or the other in this thread) is slowly moving closer together.
there is also a gun control component and there is a mental health and social consciousness component and BOTH of these issues need to be addressed.
one part of the conversation would reduce the availability of the tool used in these shootings, with a law makers pen stroke, but probably wont do anything to change the core issue of the hatred that causes them.
the other part of the conversation would hopefully improve social relations and mental health issues that over the long term would unify the country and the people in it and hopefully reduce the need for people to act out by taking lives. that is a much longer road and more difficult road to navigate, but the actual fix to the core issue.
without accepting there is a common ground somewhere between the 2 sides, there is no chance for change. i think the conversation is starting to happen tho. its probably going to take more large shootings by normal people for the mental health people to see there is a gun control issue, and by crazy people for the gun grabbers to see there is a social issue
Your name is zyzzjr. You named yourself the junior of a dead internet troll, a very apt comparison to your posting habits.
By the way, I'm actually one of the "lefties" that isn't crying about Russia. They are of course complicit, but I very much think they are being used as an easy target to blame, a scapegoat of sorts.
The reality is dark money is being used by American conservatives to push this agenda online, and they are simply funding these various "bot mills" in Russia. I'm somewhat skeptical this is only the Kremlin's fault. It's easy to blame the Russians, rather than admitting it's Americans themselves who are "hacking" elections, and propagating "fake news".
Heck, go on The Province or Vancouver Sun on Facebook. You'll see countless political comments on local news with fake Facebook accounts, pushing always the same right-wing agenda. Do I really think the Kremlin gives a shit about pushing some conservative agenda on a local news site? Hardly.
There is a market for these Russian bot mills, and the money is coming from here, not the Kremlin. These mills are also located here in Canada, and the US, among other places. No one wants to admit that fact, the conclusion is far darker.
__________________
Gold is the money of kings;
Silver is the money of gentlemen;
Barter is the money of peasants;
But debt is the money of slaves.
-Norm Franz
My point of that post wasn't specifically the violent crime rates. It was that the people's perceptions were at odds with the actual data. That on average, people are much safer today than they were in say the nineties or eighties when violent crimes were double. But that they felt half as safe now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemhg
Our laws are pretty similar huh? We carry a Federal law that requires you to undertake a full background and criminal check, along with a written and practical exam. I would say the process is VERY much different from most States in the US, our laws fall Federally the same between all Provinces, in the US it does not.
I would also wager our background checks to be far more stringent than any such background check administered in the US.
You are comparing Apples to Oranges.
Here's a list from the Brady law that prohibits gun ownership. which is federal. Meaning must be upheld by all states
1. Were convicted of a crime punishable by being in prison for more than one year;
2. Are a fugitive from justice;
3. Are addicted to, or illegally use, any controlled substance;
4. Have been ruled mentally defective by a court, or are committed to a mental institution;
5. Are an illegal alien living in the United States unlawfully;
6. Received a dishonorable discharge from the U.S. Armed Forces;
7. Renounced your U.S. citizenship, if you are a U.S. citizen;
8. Are subject to a court restraining order that involves your 'intimate partner,' your partner's child, or children; or
9. Were convicted of domestic violence in any court of a misdemeanor.
States can add to the federal law, yes. Just like provinces can.
Background and criminal checks are mandatory nationwide by any licensed dealer.
And in many states, by private sellers as well.
Are Americans federal laws more lax than Canadas? Sure
Do I think they could probably implement some changes? Sure.
But I don't think it's the difference between how Americans view guns compared to Canadians.
__________________
Gold is the money of kings;
Silver is the money of gentlemen;
Barter is the money of peasants;
But debt is the money of slaves.
-Norm Franz
My point of that post wasn't specifically the violent crime rates. It was that the people's perceptions were at odds with the actual data. That on average, people are much safer today than they were in say the nineties or eighties when violent crimes were double. But that they felt half as safe now.
I see, that's a good point. The numbers reflect that American's should feel safer than they did in the 90s. Yes they don't feel safer. Could that be due to Americans taking a more defensive stance and being more vigilant? Like setting up security cameras, having safe walk programs, anti gang programs. Having less drive by shootings would not make a neighbourhood feel more safe regardless of the frequency, I would imagine. That's my guess at the current sentiment and reason for the numbers.
I see, that's a good point. The numbers reflect that American's should feel safer than they did in the 90s. Yes they don't feel safer. Could that be due to Americans taking a more defensive stance and being more vigilant? Like setting up security cameras, having safe walk programs, anti gang programs. Having less drive by shootings would not make a neighbourhood feel more safe regardless of the frequency, I would imagine. That's my guess at the current sentiment and reason for the numbers.
Another reason I found that article interesting was that, collectively, the people polled generally felt that their own neighbourhoods were safer. while their perception of the rest of the country was less safe.
So their sense of security in their own surroundings didn't transfer to their view of the country as a whole.
That implies that something had influenced their view beyond what was in front of them.
If you look at what year people's perception of safety started to drop, it's about 2001.
And what happened in 01 that would make people feel less safe?
9/11 was a catalyst that changed the way media outlets contrived news and how viewers consumed it. Since then the media has been cultivating this market of sensationalism. And why wouldn't they? Above all, they're a business. And that's what sells. And with the ability to record and edit any interaction sitting in people's pockets, there's no shortage of merchandise that can easily be spun whichever way generates the most viewers. And people are bombarded with so much information these days that likely many of them won't take the time to research it's validity. And with how polarized things have become, they probably wouldn't wanna believe it anyways. Honestly, it shouldn't even be a surprise that they don't feel safe. Even if that's not the general reality.
And I'm not saying it's some end all be all. But fuck it would probably help a lot.
As always, those are just my thoughts.
__________________
Gold is the money of kings;
Silver is the money of gentlemen;
Barter is the money of peasants;
But debt is the money of slaves.
-Norm Franz
They probably get shot by people who own guns for demonstrating. I would bet a shit ton of people will wanna unload their clips on those who supports gun restriction.
Then kill those that are obvious like this motherfucker here and those who shoots up schools and shit.
Lol. These guys usually do it themselves when they're done.
__________________
Gold is the money of kings;
Silver is the money of gentlemen;
Barter is the money of peasants;
But debt is the money of slaves.
-Norm Franz
__________________
Gold is the money of kings;
Silver is the money of gentlemen;
Barter is the money of peasants;
But debt is the money of slaves.
-Norm Franz
Anthony Borges, 15. He used his body to hold a classroom door shut, protecting 20 other students inside as the gunman fired through the door, hitting him five times.
I always hear about the 'gun show loop hole', which drives me a little bonkers. It is really just the private sale of firearms. afaik, there is no 'loophole'.. i am a little ignorant though, what are the private sale laws for firearms in canada?
__________________
I searched for truth, and all I found was You
I always hear about the 'gun show loop hole', which drives me a little bonkers. It is really just the private sale of firearms. afaik, there is no 'loophole'.. i am a little ignorant though, what are the private sale laws for firearms in canada?
It is a loophole in the states. if you buy from a store you need a background check if you buy from someone selling guns from his collection and is not a dealer there is no background check.
It is a loophole in the states. if you buy from a store you need a background check if you buy from someone selling guns from his collection and is not a dealer there is no background check.
It's not a loophole in a sense that you aren't tricking the system or anything. And it has nothing to do with gun shows.. There is just no law around private sales.
According to that link, it looks like Canada also doesn't have any rules regarding the transfer of firearms (with the exception of restricted or prohibited firearms)
__________________
I searched for truth, and all I found was You
It's not a loophole in a sense that you aren't tricking the system or anything. And it has nothing to do with gun shows.. There is just no law around private sales.
According to that link, it looks like Canada also doesn't have any rules regarding the transfer of firearms (with the exception of restricted or prohibited firearms)
If you are someone selling hundreds of guns a year and claiming they are all private sales it is a loophole. A person can buy 20 guns from a store and then sell them the next day in a private sale. That's how Mexican cartels get there guns.
In Canada you can only sell a gun to a person who has his pal.
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
For non restricted firearms in canada (most shotguns, most rifles, some semi automatic rifles, no handguns)
Dealer must verify PAL, might have to record who purchased, but I dont think the records are submitted to anywhere.
Private sale must verify PAL, SALE DOES NOT NEED TO BE RECORDED.
Gun show must verify PAL, SALE DOES NOT NEED TO BE RECORDED.
In Canada whether you buy privately or from a store they're supposed to check that you're currently licensed every time you buy a firearm or ammunition (most people just check your card, online sales get called in).
From my understanding in the US since a private sale doesn't require any sort of check all anybody needs is someone who isn't a dealer to buy the gun for them and then "sell" it to them and they can have that gun legally, even if they wouldn't be allowed to buy from a dealer. In Canada selling a gun to someone without a PAL is illegal, regardless of who is selling it.
__________________ 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC // 2007 Toyota Rav4 V6 // 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S ["sold"] \\ 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD [sold] \\ 2000 Jeep Cherokee [sold] \\ 1997 Honda Prelude [sold] \\ 1992 Jeep YJ [sold/crashed] \\ 1987 Mazda RX-7 [sold] \\ 1987 Toyota Celica GT-S [crushed]
Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
So aside from checking the PAL (which doesn't seem to be enforced in any way), you can essentially do the exact same thing as in the states for a private sale
__________________
I searched for truth, and all I found was You
So aside from checking the PAL (which doesn't seem to be enforced in any way), you can essentially do the exact same thing as in the states for a private sale
It's not the same. In Canada you have to make sure the person has a valid PAL. If the person you sold the gun to used it in a crime and he did not have his pal you would be in trouble.
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
It's not the same. In Canada you have to make sure the person has a valid PAL. If the person you sold the gun to used it in a crime and he did not have his pal you would be in trouble.
"oh no mister, you're going to be in trouble now!"
your statement is false. there is no long gun registry (registration of non restricted firearms) therefore there is no method to trace an illegally purchased firearm used in a crime back to the one person who sold it without recording the PAL.
in fact i just looked a little harder into it and a store only needs to prove that the firearm was sold, not who it was sold to. part of the scrapping of the long gun registry was specifically to remove the possibility of a 'back door registry' that could be made by forcing dealers to record purchaser info. so technically speaking once a firearm leaves the dealer, it no longer has any record attached to it.
the only obligation by a seller is to visually see a PAL number. they may optionally choose to verify it by contacting the CFO, but it is not required by law.
You need to ensure their PAL is valid, not just that they've got a number. Which is pretty easily done in person by seeing their card, or calling it in. The photos on the cards are garbage for some reason though.
There's no method to trace non-restricted firearms like before, but there are other ways they might be able to sort out who it came from. Also it still isn't legal to sell to someone without a PAL or for someone without a PAL to possess it.
That's also only for non-restricted (ie most rifles and shotguns). Anything restricted (handguns) or prohibited is registered and has paperwork that has to follow it around through each sale. So while you *could* do roughly the same thing in Canada (except it's illegal here) for a rifle, you couldn't for a pistol.
__________________ 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC // 2007 Toyota Rav4 V6 // 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S ["sold"] \\ 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD [sold] \\ 2000 Jeep Cherokee [sold] \\ 1997 Honda Prelude [sold] \\ 1992 Jeep YJ [sold/crashed] \\ 1987 Mazda RX-7 [sold] \\ 1987 Toyota Celica GT-S [crushed]
Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
