Republican Civil War....
- Thread starter Scarey
- Start date
here we have to go through the background and police checks as well as a permit course.
You would likely not get a carry permit. So as for pistols, rifles and shotguns they need to be transported separate from the ammo.
For a legal gun owner you have a ton of restrictions.
As far as using it for home defense you had better be sure your perp is armed and the wounds occur inside your house and not in their back.
Word of advice for anyone thinking they might have to use a gun in self-defense, shoot to kill and do not hesitate. If you have any doubts you could identify your target and open fire, don't get a gun.
I do not have anything against the premise of permitting and registering the weapons I would dare say a documented round from a test fire has merit also.
Realty is in most cases the legal owner of a gun will never use it to commit a crime.
Do you have any links to statistics? Provincial and rural - urban breakdowns would be nice as well as underlying offenses.
I see your logic if you are including poaching , which is a crime. But you need to add fishing gear to the weapons list when you do that.
Two words: Domestic dispute. Women are the most common victims of long gun crimes, at the hands of their husbands or boyfriends, who legally registered and bought for non-criminal purposes but then threaten their female partner with it, sometimes even fire it, sometimes even kill somebody.
This is one the #1 reasons why there is a gender divide over gun control, women are far more often victims of gun crime than men are, for exactly this reason.
Fuji, you still haven't provided a link to any statistics. Perhaps you are entirely correct, but then again perhaps you are entirly wrong. Without statistics this is merely you believe.
See the chart on page 52 of this report:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-x2009000-eng.pdf
Note that's only homicides, there are many, many more cases of crimes involving long guns that do not escalate to murder.
There's some more interesting data here:
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/res-rec/violence-eng.htm
I note that an attack by a spouse with a firearm is three times more likely to result in death than an attack with a knife, so the "they would find another way" argument fails.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-x2009000-eng.pdf
Note that's only homicides, there are many, many more cases of crimes involving long guns that do not escalate to murder.
There's some more interesting data here:
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/res-rec/violence-eng.htm
I note that an attack by a spouse with a firearm is three times more likely to result in death than an attack with a knife, so the "they would find another way" argument fails.
If your worried about the public safety of people making choices you might want to consider a pool ban or registry: http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/are-you-ready-for-swimming-pool-season/
OTB
OTB
We are much more civilized than the barbaric ME where stones are used to settle spousal issues! Here we use GUNS!....
How many times are you going to post this same simplistic article? Tell me how many people die or are critically injured from gun shots in the US as opposed to deaths in a swimming pool. Yes, people need to look after their kids when they're in the water. No, it doesn't have anything to do with death by firearms. Stupid comparison.
I would support registering pools and licensing pool operators if as your link indicates it is indeed that much of a danger to public health, and it probably is. Seems to me that before you operate a private pool in your back yard there's a basic safety standard you should meet. After all it's not only your own life that's at stake, but the lives of any guests you invite over to your pool. Public pools, such as in a hotel, should be required to meet an even higher standard and have a certified individual on hand at all times the pool is open.
It need not be too onerous, a basic pool safety course including instruction on the use of rescue devices, basic first aid, and common sense advice about having someone watch over children and such. Certification could be kept up to date by repeating every five years. Pool owners would be required to have proof of their certification posted in the area of the pool.
A course could be completed on a Saturday and no doubt it would save a lot of lives, could be run by St. John's Ambulance or any of the agencies certify life guards.
Good idea!
You doubtless notice that those numbers are per million “spouses” which of course is another example of “lies, damned lies and statistics” at work.
The last estimate that I can find of the number of families in Canada is four years old 8,651,335
while the total population is now believed to be 34,160,000. So the huge number of women being murdered by long guns is somewhere between 8 and 30 per anum for the 33 year period from 1974 to 2007. For the whole country!
While from 1998 to 2007 stabbings outnumbered shootings (from all types of firearms) Table 5.2
Indeed the nine year average of all family homicides from 1998 to 2007 was 176.2 per year. Table 5.1
In 1996 according to the RCMP 27 women were shot and killed by their spouses (no breakdown of firearm type) of 211 total homicides by firearm. From 1986 - 1997 71% of spousal homicides involved rifles and shotguns (so extrapolating to 1996 19 women in the entire country were murdered by long gun!)
I'm not sure of the logic of that statement. In the U.K. certainly enough people are stabbed to death in a state with even stricter firearms regulations than Canada.
You'll notice that long guns are the primary firearm used in domestic disputes and that the victims are primarily women. You'll also realize that for every actual homicide there would have been dozens of other offences--cases of a woman being threatened with a gun where the trigger wasn't actually pulled, or cases where a woman was wounded. Another statistic: A woman is seven times more likely to be killed in a domestic dispute in cases where there is a firearm present in the household.
In Canada we have legislation prohibiting the possession of firearms by people who show risk factors for domestic abuse: Convictions relating to abuse, restraining orders, and the like, but it takes the long gun registry to know whether or not all the guns have been turned in or not.
Also your logic of calculating rates by families is wrong: A lot of women are victimized by boyfriends. What you want to estimate is the number of couples of any form in Canada.
The logic is straight forward. In a case where a woman is attacked by her partner with a weapon she is three times more likely to survive the attack if she is attacked with a knife rather than a gun. If I were going to suffer an attack, I'd want the three times better chance of survival, wouldn't you?
Perhaps so, however, no one seems to be able to provide a link to actual numbers.
It seems fairly plain to me from what has been provided that the numbers in question are quite small.
However, that certainly doesn't support your statement
as a matter of fact it has nothing to do with it.
That's the fist time I've linked to that article but I have made that point before.
It is a stupid comparison except that it put's the risk in perspective.
Why is the murder rate highest where the gun laws are the strictest in the US? Do you think the repeal of the DC handgun ban will have an effect on homicides in the US?
Why is murder down 10%? http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel09/stats_122109.htm
OTB
