I don't know why nobody does anything about your hate speech but you must be a very scared person away from your keyboard.
Handgun ban supported by majority of Canadians: Nanos survey
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
The polling process is agenda driven.Unless you know for a fact there is a flaw in the survey, you are grasping at straws and have no rational reason to doubt the results.
It is flawed because most of the public has no idea about the gun laws in Canada. Neither does Mayor Tory for that matter.
If the average lay person thinks that the sale of handguns should be banned, it's because they think that any gangbanger can walk into a gun store and walk out with heat. There was even a Toronto Liberal MP who wanted to ban the sale of 'bullets' (sic) in Toronto.... as if, again, any hoodie can walk into a store and come out with ammunition. The reality is that you have to show your firearms licence, and the restricted/handgun transfer has to be approved by the OPP in Ontario before the dealer hands it over, and it can take between one week and one month.... and only if the purchaser is also the member of a gun club.
So if you ask a simple question without stating a preamble and a context, you can engineer the answer you want.
And about the original article mentioned at the start of this thread, where a Toronto detective constable (not a PR person by any means), alledged that 47 guns were trafficked by a licensed person, he lied.... It may have happened with long-guns, but couldn't have happened legally with handguns or other restricted firearms. BTW, some of the press have been trying to get a hold of him to query him on it, but he refuses to return their calls. Fucking weasel! They also have got no answers from the Canadian Press who published it, and on which Toronto policiticans latched.
Don't believe everything you see in the media. They have an agenda. It may be political, or it may be simply to whip up popular hysteria by manufacturing news to get ratings up and sell more advertising.
Oh, and BTW, I have it from good authority that Bill Blair doesn't beleive the facts in that article either. Banning guns is a huge liability for the Liberals. Martin, Dion and Ignatieff successively lost their elections after promising to ban handguns and semi-auto guns respectively.
How about you accept that this poll said that a vast majority of Canadians want a ban on handguns.How about you educate yourself. Try living outside of Toronto as well. Canada is a large country.
That is why I asked you, what were their flaws in the polling process. You did not show any flaws in their methodology.The polling process is agenda driven.
Kind of like how the American public is ignorant about politics and elected trump.It is flawed because most of the public has no idea about the gun laws in Canada. Neither does Mayor Tory for that matter.
Just because they are ignorant, it is still their opinion and that is what polls do. They figure out opinion percentages. It is what it is, deal with it.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]That is why I asked you, what were their flaws in the polling process. You did not show any flaws in their methodology.
Kind of like how the American public is ignorant about politics and elected trump.
Just because they are ignorant, it is still their opinion and that is what polls do. They figure out opinion percentages. It is what it is, deal with it.
The American public that voted for Trump have experienced the effects of neo-liberalism and corporate control of the state, and the effect on their jobs and income, the latter that has stagnated since the 1970's, all the while the US spending trillions spreading [unsuccessfully] democracy abroad. They had enough of the establishment and it's stooge Clinton. So those who voted for Trump actually did so based on personal experience with their lives.
The overall majority of Canadians, except the 2 million who have firearms licenses, have no idea of the gun laws in Canada, and are poorly educated by the press who are mostly just as ignorant. Governments are criticized when they govern by polling instead of developing evidence based legislation. The Liberals criticized the Conservatives for that (governing by polls). So now it's ok for the Liberals to do the same? Very conveneint when it happens to suit you. Read the Liberal policy platform: EVIDENCE BASED policies. This is one situation where the government is not going to be pushed into this, because they know it's going to backfire on them. There's more to Canada than downtown Toronto and Montreal. Liberal MP's of rural areas are shitting their pants at the prospect of a gun ban, as many of those had won by very slim margins.
Canada does have a very good process, speaking from experience of going through it myself. It nicely balances education plus checks and balances against legitimate access to firearms for law abiding citizens.Quoted for truth. Canada has a very good process.
All handguns are classed as restricted firearms and as such subject to more stringent regulation. First you must obtain your restricted Possession and Acquisition license (RPAL). Two one day courses both with written and practical exams. At no point in this process do you actually fire a firearm, it is all about safe handling, storage and transport. Once your exams are passed your course transcript is sent to your provincial Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) for the first criminal record check and validation. If they see no reason for you not to possess a firearm they validate your transcript and send back to you. About a 2 week process. Only now can you send your application for your PAL to the RCMP. Once the RCMP receive your application there is a mandatory 28 day waiting period where they will not even touch your application. Only after the 28 days has elapsed will they begin to process your application, check your criminal records and contact your references. If you are very lucky the whole process from passing your exams to receiving your license will take about 6-7 weeks. Only now can you purchase a firearm or ammunition.
If you want a non-restricted firearm - most rifles or shotguns you are free to march into your local gun shop and say in a proud and happy voice 'I will take that one please'. They will take a record of your PAL and drivers license or other ID for every non-restricted firearm purchase and your PAL for ammunition purchase. You can pay your money and leave the store with your firearm and ammo. Even shoot it where you like subject to municipal bylaws and provincial laws.
Now if you want a restricted firearm - a handgun, AR-15 style rifle or whatever else the RCMP decides is restricted you can still march into your local gun store and say in a proud and happy voice "I will take that one please". They will still take the same details but once you have paid the firearm will be taken to their storage safe and you will only be able to pick it up once the registration documentation comes through from the RCMP about 2 weeks later. If you are a good customer some gun shops will let you pay when the paperwork has been processed.
Restricted firearms are subject to much more stringent storage, transport and use regulations. To transport you require an Authorisation to Transport (ATT). This used to be a pain in the arse but the Common Sense Firearms Act the Harper government introduced made it a little easier, once you register a restricted firearm against your RPAL you are automatically granted several electronic ATTs to transport firearms registered against the license by a route, that in all circumstances, is reasonably direct for the indicated purposes:
i) For the purpose of target shooting to and from all shooting clubs and ranges approved under section 29 of the firearms act.
ii) To and from any place a peace officer, firearms officer or chief firearms officer is located for verification, registration or disposal in accordance with the Firearms Act or Part III of the Criminal Code.
iii) To and from a business that holds a license authorising it to repair or appraise restricted firearms
iv) To and from a licensed gun show
v) To a port of exit in order to take them out of Canada and from a port of entry
vi) Transport of a newly acquired restricted firearm from the place of acquisition to the license holders dwelling or other place authorised by the CFO.
Anything out of those 6 categories you need to call the RCMP to ask for an ATT and justify it (I do know someone who got an ATT to take a firearm to a jewellers, long story). As for concealed or open carry...well basically not gonna happen. I you work the bullion vans, CBSA or MNR you may need to carry a handgun as part of your duties and you will get an Authorisation To Carry (ATC) only as you undertake your duties, if you keep your handgun at home you will require an ATT to get to and from work and be bound by the same storage and transport restrictions as any other restricted firearm owner. None of this strapping your sidearm on in the bedroom and driving to work. There are ATC's issued occasionally to civilians outside these areas but they are about as rare as rocking horse droppings.
As for the US concept of police officers or military personnel carrying firearms outside of their duty, again in Canada, unless in very exceptional circumstances this does not happen. If a serving or ex police officer or military person wants a private firearm they have to complete the same courses, exams and background checks as the rest of us and are subject to the same laws and restrictions.
Transport and storage of restricted firearms can be interpreted pretty similarly. The firearm needs to be 'Rendered inoperable with a secure locking device' such as a trigger lock that prevents the trigger being pulled or a cable lock through the action that prevents the action from closing. Also 'In a locked, opaque container' and 'Away from ammunition'.
Furthermore in Canada it is only legal to discharge a restricted firearm at an approved shooting range, even if you have some acres up north nowhere near anything if you discharge a restricted firearm you are breaking the law unless you have your range on your land inspected by the CFO and registered. As firearm ownership is a privilege they do take transgressions seriously and the fines and custodial sentences reflect that.
Legitimate firearms owners are not the problem here, we have gone through many hurdles and loopholes to get to the position to be able to acquire what we require for legitimate target shooting use, the vast majority are not going to endanger that for a couple of bucks. Most of us store, transport and handle our firearms to standards well in excess of what the law requires. There are hundreds of thousands of legitimately acquired handguns in Canada used within the legal requirements worth many millions of dollars. A good legitimate handgun can cost thousands. Who is going to compensate these owners in the event of a ban? Looking at yesterdays TPS release about recently seized handguns I note they are almost all Norinco.. a Chinese knock-off company. Cheap and to be quite frank pretty shoddy guns, I don't know a legit owner who owns one...
This statement shows you've failed to do any research despite being spoon fed and refuse to listen about the flaws others have pointed out about a paid survey.How about you accept that this poll said that a vast majority of Canadians want a ban on handguns.
Goes you show you really don't know anything about the issue and don't care to find out.
Easy to see who has put their money where their mouth is and who likes to jump on the bandwagon.
Their job is to get accurate results. If they are not accurate, then they lose out on future business. No one will want to use them if they are not accurate. Accuracy can only be achieved without bias.Their job is to make it cheap and repeatable. It is a business.This alone generates bias.
Oh and to add to the points the mandate given to Bill Blair was:
" You should lead an examination of a full ban on handguns and assault weapons in Canada , while not impeding the lawful use of firearms by Canadians"
So not really gonna do anything...a ban on non lawful use is for the criminals who by their job description don't really abide by bans... The current push to ban handguns impedes on the lawful use of firearms by Canadians as the lawful use of handguns is restricted to target shooting only.
" You should lead an examination of a full ban on handguns and assault weapons in Canada , while not impeding the lawful use of firearms by Canadians"
So not really gonna do anything...a ban on non lawful use is for the criminals who by their job description don't really abide by bans... The current push to ban handguns impedes on the lawful use of firearms by Canadians as the lawful use of handguns is restricted to target shooting only.
I have heard posters say why people are ignorant on the topic (which does not change the fact that that is still their opinion, which is what the poll was meant to measure) and that the polls are biased. I have yet to see anybody point out flaws in the methodology of the pollsters.This statement shows you've failed to do any research despite being spoon fed and refuse to listen about the flaws others have pointed out about a paid survey.
Until such time, I accept the results of this poll, which say that the vast majority of Canadians support a ban on handguns. BTW, I have not stated any opinion on the topic of handguns. I am simply debating on why the results of the poll should be accepted.
The public that voted in this poll have experienced reading and seeing the effects of single shootings, mass shootings, accidental gun deaths if not actually knowing someone who was killed by a gun. So those who voted for a ban on handguns did so based on personal experiences.The American public that voted for Trump have experienced the effects of neo-liberalism and corporate control of the state, and the effect on their jobs and income, the latter that has stagnated since the 1970's, all the while the US spending trillions spreading [unsuccessfully] democracy abroad. They had enough of the establishment and it's stooge Clinton. So those who voted for Trump actually did so based on personal experience with their lives.
Funny how the anti gunners seem almost proud of their willful ignorance. It's true, you don't need to be informed to have an opinion, but it also means you shouldn't be taken seriously.I have heard posters say why people are ignorant on the topic (which does not change the fact that that is still their opinion, which is what the poll was meant to measure) and that the polls are biased. I have yet to see anybody point out flaws in the methodology of the pollsters.
Until such time, I accept the results of this poll, which say that the vast majority of Canadians support a ban on handguns. BTW, I have not stated any opinion on the topic of handguns. I am simply debating on why the results of the poll should be accepted.
now I know why you don't private messages oldjonesI have to ask if your Spellcheck is defective?
I would suggest a better poll would be how many Canadians realize that handguns are categorized as a "Restricted Weapon"? It is not a simple matter to own a handgun. Most Canadians do not realize this as well as the requirements to own one. So a better poll would be to determine the level of ignorance Canadians have about current gun laws.Their job is to get accurate results. If they are not accurate, then they lose out on future business. No one will want to use them if they are not accurate. Accuracy can only be achieved without bias.
I dont remember being polled. Therefore to say MOST Canadians favor gun control is bullshit!
We dont know who and how many people were polled. What was the demographic?
Im sure if they polled the 3 territiories the results would be different. So, to say "Most" Canadians favor it is simply false!
Fuck, I thought most you people actually had brains instead of following govt paid mass media hype?
We dont know who and how many people were polled. What was the demographic?
Im sure if they polled the 3 territiories the results would be different. So, to say "Most" Canadians favor it is simply false!
Fuck, I thought most you people actually had brains instead of following govt paid mass media hype?
Fair enough. But whether people are educated or not, the poll under discussion is about their opinion and people vote based on their opinion.I would suggest a better poll would be how many Canadians realize that handguns are categorized as a "Restricted Weapon"? It is not a simple matter to own a handgun. Most Canadians do not realize this as well as the requirements to own one. So a better poll would be to determine the level of ignorance Canadians have about current gun laws.
If ignorance is a factor it will take a lot of money and a looong time until a solid majority oppose a ban on handguns.
This has to be one of the most ignorant comments I've seen in a long time....on any topic.I dont remember being polled. Therefore to say MOST Canadians favor gun control is bullshit!
As yet nobody has pointed out any flaws in their methodology of polling.
But there should be an informed debate vs polling of Canadians, many of whom don't know what the current laws are (in my opinion). It was the same (in the opposite direction) for people who were against the long-gun registry. There was a lot of ignorance and fear over it's use, scope, or even purpose and active resistance during the registration process inflated costs (i.e. multiplied the cost per registration because people were making purposeful mistakes, tying up phone lines, etc). Ironically, handgun advocates could now point to the fact that there IS a handgun registry in Canada and IT WORKS (as an aide for solving crimes). That should be enough to keep the current system of "restricted weapons" and continue to allow Canadians to legally own a handgun IF they pass the required steps to own one.Fair enough. But whether people are educated or not, the poll under discussion is about their opinion and people vote based on their opinion.
If ignorance is a factor it will take a lot of money and a looong time until a solid majority oppose a ban on handguns.
Shack is correct in his comment. And at no fault. Those polled gave their opinion and such opinion was reported. So here is the big however.I have heard posters say why people are ignorant on the topic (which does not change the fact that that is still their opinion, which is what the poll was meant to measure) and that the polls are biased. I have yet to see anybody point out flaws in the methodology of the pollsters.
These polls don't mean squat unless the pool of the polled sample is provided. Were these all grade school kids polled? I understand my example may be extreme but I think we get the picture. Unless the information of who (as a general explanation) and where the sample pool of polled patrons where taken, we can not take this as the voice of the nation.
Personally, I think our laws are as tight as they can be with the exception of all out banning fire arms. The laws need to be adjusted on punishment of crime. Right now as it stands, the true criminals that kill, shoot in public, rob at gun point etc. get less punishment than a law abiding gun owner who mistakenly stored ammo incorrectly. The reason for this is that politicians, over the years, use the law abiding as the scapegoat to show the general public that something "productive" is getting done towards the gun crime.
I believe some discussion of our current gun laws have been mentioned already, so I will not go into that. If any inquires, feel free to ask. Now here is where I know some will shift in there chairs. Where I think our guns laws here in Canada should be.
Short answer; a little more lax. Let me explain. Currently, no one is issued a concealed carry permit. That is unless you have had an attempt on your life at least 3 times and they where all fails. Even then you need to prove that these attempts where not because you are on the wrong side of the law (which if you were, you'd be carrying anyway) and still you would be denied.....if you were living in as much as a suburb. The only Canadian "citizens" that I am aware who can carry a side arm, are wilderness surveyors. Remember, cops and wilderness RANGERS are not citizens in this equation. If an attempt at your life has failed 3 times buy a lotto ticket not a gun.
I think that some citizens should be allowed a permit to carry. I am not talking about the same "freedoms" as our neighbours to the south. Before I explain further, I hope everyone understands that we are considered a sitting duck society. This means, criminals know that our laws (which they don't follow or can give a shit about) prevent us from protecting ourselves with fire power, which they carry.
I think our men and women in blue should be able to carry, on their own discretion, when technically off duty. Further to this, any one who has had there black badge certification (and is considered a private citizen) for ten years plus, WITH OUT ANY LEGAL DEFAULT IN THAT TIME, should also be able to have such permit to carry.
