You must be part of the moron group that doesn’t know what a “majority of Canadians” means. 33% of Canadians that voted, did so for Libtards. Cons got 35%. You’ve been sniffing too much gas at work sonny boy.

The NDP and Greens are also on the left.

i had a discussion with some friends about his gun ban on friday night (they're in favor, I'm not)

they said why are the guns necessary, i asked why are cars that can go 300km/h hour necessary?

people like those cars for show, sport, the feeling driving etc. i like the guns for sport, skill and enjoyment as well

my argument should have been as mentioned above. WAY more people are killed year by drunk drivers. why doesn't the government ban alcohol or make the penalty for drinking and driving min 1 year sentence or force every car to come fitted with a breathalyzer

i guarantee that would have more of these "gun hatters" out protesting against the government and their loss of rights

Why do we have hobbies at all, why is anything necessary? Lets all sit at home cocooned in bubbles forever so on the off chance we don't die from something random.

gUnS aRe dESiGneD tO kiLl pEoPle

The penalties for drinking and driving should absolutely be more stiff, especially to someone who actually kills a person by it. Why not ban alcohol? Because it's sole purpose isn't to kill something.

Guns are in a class of their own, everything else you list wasn't made for the purpose of harming people. Getting enjoyment out of a gun is just a byproduct of it, no one invented a gun thinking "this is going to be fun as fuck to shoot, and I guess if you really wanted you could probably kill someone with it too." It's always the other way around.

What was the knife created for?
The vast majority of gun use in canada is hunting animals and target shooting, not killing humans. Many guns on that list are created for those specific purposes. Can they be used to kill people? Sure. And so can knives, cars, screwdrivers, baseball bats, etc. That doesn't mean that's what their specific purpose is, why they were purchased, and what they almost certainly are going to be used for.

It doesn't matter what the average joe buys a weapon for (self defense/killing animals)

You can't expect a weapon to get the same treatment a vehicle, or beverage gets, due to its inherent nature

You want it to be treated the same? You'll have to move the opinions of society, gl with that, it's not impossible

I remember a few years ago on RS, we had a conversation about pitbulls

I (young and dumb) agreed with the "ban on dangerous breeds" in BC
A lot of RS people stood up for pitbulls and their owners
I recognize I was wrong then, in agreeing with banning "dangerous dog breeds"

In a way, it's a similar situation right now, just with guns.
I don't own any guns, and I don't agree with this blanket ban of "assault style" guns. The term is so broad, and they are doing a knee-jerk ban, because "the gun looks scary"

Many of the rifles/guns, as mentioned, can be outfitted to look "scary" but they're the same rifle. This ban of "assault style" guns is pretty uneducated, and is a slippery slope for government enforcement.

A knife has multiple uses, and the longer it's been around the more useful it has become among many industries and our daily lives. How have guns evolved over the years other than just getting better at shooting things? Pretty much everyone uses a knife multiple times in a week. Unless you're in a specific industry how often do you need a gun to accomplish a task?

You're right, they aren't banning all guns. But they have said they plan on banning even more. I believe hand guns are next. But the guns they are banning are the ones they have said are the ones responsible for killing people.

I'm willing to bet that 99 out of 100 of all drunk driving related deaths (maybe even more) in this country can be attributed to the alcohol that is still legally sold and purchased by consumers today. And yet, those all remain on the shelves of stores across the country.

It's interesting that you posted a link about an underage teen who made a choice to consume a beverage illegally to try and build up your argument. Earlier you pointed out that a choice that someone makes that results in their own death and/or hardships doesn't deserve as much sympathy as people who are killed by guns.

Bottom line, she broke the law and choose to get her hands on something that she was not legally allowed to have, much like people who illegally obtain weapons.

How have knives evolved? They got better at cutting. Because that's what they're supposed to do.
The point i was making is that the guns now being restricted in canada had rarely to never been used to kill people.
They've been used for their intention which is hunting and target shooting.
Fast cars kill people. Lots of them. Even though that's not what they were intended for. It could easily be argued that the harm they cause outweighs any enjoyment people derive from them. Because those that would argue that have no affinity for the hobby/sport/culture.

The point has been beaten to death, the facts are everything else you list has a better function than killing something. You STILL HAVE your guns for hunting, no one is taking them away. You still have your targets that you can use your hunting guns to practice on. What have you lost?

The question is how much longer will you have those guns you can legally use for hunting

How much longer before the govt. essentially makes your possessions worthless proactively.

I haven't lost anything. I've never even fired a gun in my life let alone owned one. I really don't even have much interest to.
I just think it's pretty shitty that people who've done nothing wrong are having privileges taken away from them without any facts or logic behind it. I think it's unreasonable. And i don't think it's going to result to much of anything that it's intended to do.

If they want to do something that will make a difference, it's pretty simple. enforce the laws that are already in place with stiffer penalties.
Penalize the criminals who commit 95+% of the gun homicides in this country. Not the people who are statistically more likely to obey laws.

If the supporters and authors of this gun ban, with their understanding of firearms, were cops:

HoW MuCh LoNgEr BeFoRe CaNaDa BeCoMeS a CoMmUnIsT DiCtAtOrShIp!?@@>!?@# :lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

I agree with him, problem with the logic is this order does absolutely nothing to reduce the ability of criminals to get illegal firearms and keep them 'off the streets'. Law enforcement agencies across the country have told the federal government this repeatedly. We should be targeting criminals and their networks, not law-abiding citizens.


So you're OK with your elected officials copy and pasting a list off the internet with no proofreading and enacting that in to law with no democratic process? Would you accept that for any law related to any property or industry? Is that how low people's bar is for their elected officials these days?

Because they've already budgeted a paltry 87 million for border security for the next five years. Meanwhile actual subject matter experts say the cost of buying back all the newly outlawed firearms will be around a billion dollars, not 250 million. Now that's asinine

False hyperbole. No Canadian regardless of political stripe should accept a government copy and pasting laws with no democratic process. It's flat out wrong, not what this country stands for, and the exact opposite of what liberalism preaches: "philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law".

By the way Mike I'm not targeting you, you make clear arguments for your side that are repeated everywhere and I respect your position. I'm just trying to make you understand the other side. This whole situation goes well beyond firearms.

Yup, and by this logic I shouldn't be able to privately own an airplane either.

They're going to ban more, they're going after almost everything. Word has already leaked that sidearms are next as are magazines and even optics. Word is anything over 3x power will be prohibited - which is outrageous and affects everyone who hunts. Unless you're indigenous then you're exempt. Indefensible hypocrisy and racism from our federal government.

The law is here and the Liberal government is not going to change it. 5 out of the 6 parties with MP's in parliament support it. The conservatives can try to fight it in the next election but is this the hill they want to die on with all the problems we will be having because of cov19? Peter McKay being from Nova Scotia is going to have a hard time trying to push for looser gun laws.

Unless you are native, then you can keep your traditional way of life, hunting elk with an assault rifle with a 10x scope, like their forefathers before them.

Poor natives, everything has gone their way for centuries BabyRage

^^another beauty liberal viewpoint. Trillions of dollars down the drain and nobody is any better off.
That's liberal solutions for ya.

God damn lib tards

Swinging the pendulum in the other direction does not bring equality or justice.

I agree, they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps and live just like everyone else!

The soft bigotry of low expectations.
because 'requiring' preferential treatment couldn't possibly infer being less than others.
Let the results to these social policies speak for themselves.
More money, more poverty, more social tension...More lofty liberal solutions
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...scind-approval