So it is working then that people have to access the black market to get guns.
So let us keep the bans, and tackle the black market problem simultaneously.
10 dead, including perpetrator in school shooting in Tumbler Ridge, BC
- Thread starter Shaquille Oatmeal
- Start date
So let us keep the bans, and tackle the black market problem simultaneously.
Criminals have always had to rely on the black market to source their firearms.
You're conflating again.
CBC says the RCMP had been to the house for mental health issues multiple times, including removing weapons.
They were returned after petition.
They were returned after petition.
- Mounties identified the suspect as Jesse Van Rootselaar, 18, a former student who dropped out of school and had an expired firearms licence.
- One teacher and five students between 12 and 13 years old were found dead at Tumbler Ridge Secondary School, police said.
- Van Rootselaar's mother, identified as Jennifer Strang, and a sibling were killed at the family home before the shooting on school grounds.
Loading…
www.cbc.ca
Checkmate, let's see how the Liberals spin this failure.
A terrible tragedy, I can't imagine the cops calling families to tell them that their dear ones have been killed
I already said we need to tackle the black market.
And yes some will always get through.
The goal is to significantly reduce, and bans serve that purpose.
No, you're conflating again. Legal and illegal streams are separate, one isn't affected by the other.
You can't explain how criminals have become even more armed, despite the bans, because your premise is flawed. Criminals are inelligible to participate in the "buy back", so their supply is unaffected.
Take a hint already.
The lessons should be:
More support for the mentally ill across Canada
More rules for removing weapons from those with mental health issues
Yes. So,
We tackle the legal route via gun bans.
We tackle the illegal route via law enforcement. Here we need improvement.
It is a two pronged approach with the goal to reduce access, and proliferation of weapons.
So no, I am not conflating.
As I said in my comment above, better law enforcement is needed to tackle the illegal route.
But the fact that illegal guns exist, or that LE isn't doing the best job in limiting them, doesn't justify repealing gun bans that seek to limit or eliminate legal access to weapons.
Both controls are needed.
Be careful, the purple-haired overlords might kick you out of the club for acknowledging that transitioning could be a mental health issue.
Holy shit, I feel like I need crayons, one more time:
Licensed gun owners aren't the ones committing the shootings, nor are they supplying criminals with guns. Another billion dollar boondoggle won't even move the needle, as again, licensed gun owners aren't the ones supplying criminals with their firearms. One supply stream is completely separated from the other; you're conflating the two, just like those ignorant cunts in Quebec.
Hate to break it to you, but the vast majority of mass shootings have been done by right-wingers. Some of the deadliest have been by white supremacists, like Dylan Roof. So, while this shooter may have been trans, the odds are that the next 30 - 50 mass shootings around the world will likely be done by white males...
That is irrelevant to the issue that gun bans are meant to tackle.
Gun bans do not care about who pulls the trigger. They are not directed at legal gun owners.
Gun bans are meant to REDUCE THE NUMBER OF LEGAL GUNS IN CIRCULATION.
Quite simply, a citizen, whether they be criminal or not, should not have an opportunity or have reduced opportunities to go purchase a weapon legally.
All illegal guns start off as legal guns, so reducing the number of legal guns to reduce the potential of them being used for illegal purposes, is justified via a gun ban.
This is why registrations are also necessary.
Holy shit. Are you daft?
I already said, both supply streams are separated, and therefore both controls are needed.
There is no conflation here.
Last edited:
Nobody believes reasonably that trans women are women.
Well except for your basic progressive leftists that is.
You're so close, just connect the final dots; you acknowledge the streams are separate but you feel both controls are still needed, even though you can't quantify the effect (or lack thereof) of one to the other.
Hint, there is no effect because once again, one isn't affected by the other. That would be as ineffective as a "buy back" on prescription drugs, to reduce the circulation of illicit drugs.
Your conflation counter must be up to at least 4 by now.
If the news said the shooter was a man who identifies as a woman...No one would object to that terminology.That about sums it up. The rest of us actually passed high school biology.
It seems to me, that Liberals like making up definitions to suit their narratives; like the multitude of new genders, or "assault-style weapon".
