Current Events > Canada just banned all assault guns

(+) Yeah! (+)

I didn't read the article but "Assault Rifles" are also banned in the US so what's the big deal.

I'm not a gun expert but aren't the military "assault" weapons just cosmetically altered regular ol hunting rifles?

---

Gotta love Canada's immediate response and action vs the U.S. where we'll argue about it for months and then almost nothing gets done

---

Hairistotle posted...

it's my GOD gIVEN right to own instruments solely for DEATH

If I want a TOOL that is capable of killing 500 people in MINUTES then bah gawd I should be Able to buy that TOOL

CE, my dick is absolutely puny

This is the first time I see you since you were warned and that's how you barge in?

---

This will of course stop all those gun crimes committed by those law abiding mass shooters.

Every country except for the US acts appropriately after a mass shooting.

Fuck the second amendment, literally a relic designed to help slave owners hunt down those who have escaped.

---

Time_Rider posted...

Every country except for the US acts appropriately after a mass shooting.

Fuck the second amendment, literally a relic designed to help slave owners hunt down those who have escaped.

I WANT TO OWN A GUN, IS THAT SO WRONG?

---

Hairistotle posted...

Yea! If we can't stop ALL crime why try to stop ANY??

God my puny dick is throbbing!

carrying and buying a gun is more of a passive crime. You're just carrying the item. It doesn't actually do anything until you use it. Sure you can say lets make that illegal, but the only reason people want to ban guns is because of the shooting and killing people part, and that is the part that not one single criminal gives two shits about.

So you effectively ban the buying and carrying of gun, the passive part, but then that does jack shit to stop the shooting part and the only people that actually obey the no carrying and buying part are the legal citizens who aren't going to gangs and black markets to buy their weapons in the first place.

meaning, it does jack shit. This is one of those crimes where banning guns feels good, but it actually does nothing to stop the crime.

But liberals refuse to admit this.

I absolutely agree you have solid and well-founded reasons for wanting very firm weapon restrictions.

BUT I WANT TO OWN A GUN. It's that fucking simple.

---

kayoticdreamz posted...

carrying and buying a gun is more of a passive crime. You're just carrying the item. It doesn't actually do anything until you use it. Sure you can say lets make that illegal, but the only reason people want to ban guns is because of the shooting and killing people part, and that is the part that not one single criminal gives two shits about.

So you effectively ban the buying and carrying of gun, the passive part, but then that does jack shit to stop the shooting part and the only people that actually obey the no carrying and buying part are the legal citizens who aren't going to gangs and black markets to buy their weapons in the first place.

meaning, it does jack shit. This is one of those crimes where banning guns feels good, but it actually does nothing to stop the crime.

But liberals refuse to admit this.

100%. It's basically a virtue-signalling law, and it goes over about as well as the "War on Drugs" in regards to reducing drug use and drug motivated crimes. People that want a gram of weed to smoke for relaxation or pain relief get thrown in jail while others still ship massive amounts of fentanyl and other nasty shit underground.

After this move, there will be no hesitation from any world government to implement whatever unjust laws they feel like implementing.. because what are the people gonna do about it? Peacefully protest? Lol. As a Canadian, I'm already lubing my asshole up for the future fucking.

---

Solid Sonic posted...

I WANT TO OWN A GUN, IS THAT SO WRONG?

An assault rifle? Yes, it is. A non-automatic hunting rifle? Whatever, knock yourself out

In before someone says "tHe aR15 iSnT aN aSsAuLt rIfLe!"

My response to that is STFU, nobody cares about the exact terminology.

---

Time_Rider posted...

In before someone says "tHe aR15 iSnT aN aSsAuLt rIfLe!"

My response to that is STFU, nobody cares about the exact terminology.

by all definitions you can find, yes an AR15 is not an assault rifle.

Dark_Spiret posted...

by all definitions you can find, yes an AR15 is not an assault rifle.

Uhh, I know, that was my point. I don't care if it is or not

---

Hairistotle posted...

Oh shit don't shoot me!

---

Good, no one needs assault rifles.

---

If you can't legally buy or own a type of weapon, there will be less of those in circulation. That's common sense.

Besides, even if organized crime and street gangs can still find ways to get them, most mass shootings are done by "ordinary" citizens with no criminal history and who likely don't have a handy contact for buying them. They're more likely to act without that weapon or be noticed while looking for one.

lol people in gated communities surrounded by security telling people in rural areas they dont need guns of a certain type. Thank god America has enough common sense not to pass sweeping feel good shit like this.

---

scorpion41 posted...

lol people in gated communities surrounded by security telling people in rural areas they dont need guns of a certain type. Thank god America has enough common sense not to pass sweeping feel good shit like this.

The US first did this in 1994.

Proto_Spark posted...

The US first did this in 1994.

You really think facts are going to dissuade them?

---

Proto_Spark posted...

The US first did this in 1994.

And we let it expire because no evidence of it actually doing anything.

---

Daily reminder that only cops should have guns.

---

scorpion41 posted...

And we let it expire because no evidence of it actually doing anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effects

Kind of. There was an immediate spike in assault weapon deaths in Mexico and along the Southern border almost immediately after the ban ended, and mass shooting fatalities during the ban ere 70% less likely to occur.

It didn't have an effect on reducing overall gun violence, but it did reduce gun violence with assault weapons by 17-78% It didn't do much, but it clearly did something.

Also trying to re-institute the ban was entirely partisan, and them republicans really hated Obama.

Hairistotle posted...

^^Fuck yeah man bring the whole system down! I'm glad we got freedom fighters like you and me fighting the good fight, keeping my small dick up

You keep mentioning dicks. What does that have to do with rights and why are you obsessed with dicks?

---

Lorenzo_2003 posted...

You keep mentioning dicks. What does that have to do with rights and why are you obsessed with dicks?

What rights are you talking about? Because clearly something that is illegal is not a right.

scorpion41 posted...

And we let it expire because no evidence of it actually doing anything.

Wrong.

"The report found that the share of gun crimes involving assault weapons had declined by 17 to 72 percent in the studied localities."

But don't let facts get in your way

---

Time_Rider posted...

Every country except for the US acts appropriately after a mass shooting.

Fuck the second amendment, literally a relic designed to help slave owners hunt down those who have escaped.

Remember, when an argument isn't going your way

just resort to historical revisionism lol

---

FL81 posted...

Remember, when an argument isn't going your way

just resort to historical revisionism lol

Nothing I said here is false. The facts always "go my way", literally all that guides me. You're the dishonest one.

You should try it sometime, debating with facts.

---

Time_Rider posted...

Wrong.

"The report found that the share of gun crimes involving assault weapons had declined by 17 to 72 percent in the studied localities."

But don't let facts get in your way

But, in overall homicides committed by firearms the change was negligible. Reminder that the Colombine HS shooting happened during the ban period as well. Dont let your bias distract you from the actual facts.

---

scorpion41 posted...

But, in overall homicides committed by firearms the change was negligible. Reminder that the Colombine HS shooting happened during the ban period as well. Dont let your bias distract you from the actual facts.

Were lives saved? Yes, according to this study.

But don't let that stand in your way imagine thinking literal lives being lost are "negligible".

This is why your side won't exist in the future. How fucking out of touch.

---

ChuckSDeuces posted...

Probably cause we have more sense

I guess having both your presidential candidates be rapists is the most sense any country could have.

---

I've cultivated a list of all the valid points anti-gun/pro-control people have made so far in this topic.

---

Time_Rider posted...

Were lives saved? Yes, according to this study.

But don't let that stand in your way imagine thinking literal lives being lost are "negligible".

This is why your side won't exist in the future. How fucking out of touch.

He only has feelings, if he actually understood the facts he'd not be on the side he is

---

gunplagirl posted...

He only has feelings, if he actually understood the facts he'd not be on the side he is

For real. Imagine living your entire life thinking things are a certain way, when they are literally the opposite.

---

Time_Rider posted...

Were lives saved? Yes, according to this study.

But don't let that stand in your way imagine thinking literal lives being lost are "negligible".

This is why your side won't exist in the future. How fucking out of touch.

My side consists of 100 million other gun owners who own a variety of firearms and have not broken any of the 200+ firearm laws in existence. Banning certain types doesnt do squat to curb gun violence and thats a fact. Thats like banning Ferraris because they look fast. Fun fact: the Ruger Mini-14 has the same functionality as the AR-15, but the AR is the one constantly on the chopping block.

---

scorpion41 posted...

My side consists of 100 million other gun owners who own a variety of firearms and have not broken any of the 200+ firearm laws in existence. Banning certain types doesnt do squat to curb gun violence and thats a fact. Thats like banning Ferraris because they look fast. Fun fact: the Ruger Mini-14 has the same functionality as the AR-15, but the AR is the one constantly on the chopping block.

Spoiler alert: most of those gun owners are not on your side. You don't even realize how small the minority you belong to really is.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/22/facts-about-guns-in-united-states/

Banning assault weapons led to a reduction of homicides. Are you going to claim the study is incorrect?

Don't let facts get in the way of your extreme minority viewpoint that's dying out, though.

---

Good thing America is here. Well protect them

---

Time_Rider posted...

Spoiler alert: most of those gun owners are not on your side. You don't even realize how small the minority you belong to really is. (11% lol)

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/22/facts-about-guns-in-united-states/

Banning assault weapons led to a reduction of homicides. Are you going to claim the study is incorrect?

Don't let facts get in the way of your extreme minority viewpoint that's dying out, though.

Thats cute you think I want regulations relaxed...Im more in the percentage that thinks were fine right where were at.

And as far as this research data goes, where did the sample come from? Did the majority surveyed come from cities, surburban, or rural households? People who dwell in cities are more likely to want more gun control. They are also more likely to be Democrats. You can skew a survey to get desired results if you know who to ask and how to ask them. I bet if they ask more rural living people than urban what they thought theyd get a much different result.

And again: the Ruger Mini-14 is identical to the AR-15, but the latter is always up for ban. Why is that?

---

scorpion41 posted...

Thats cute you think I want regulations relaxed...Im more in the percentage that thinks were fine right where were at.

So you're the 28% instead of the 11% got it. Still a bad minority opinion.

And as far as this research data goes, where did the sample come from? Did the majority surveyed come from cities, surburban, or rural households? People who dwell in cities are more likely to want more gun control. They are also more likely to be Democrats. You can skew a survey to get desired results if you know who to ask and how to ask them. I bet if they ask more rural living people than urban what they thought theyd get a much different result.

"People who dwell in urban areas", aka the majority of people.

Yes, the average person is more likely to be a democrat. The average American citizen does not live in a rural area.

Face it dude, nobody shares your opinion, and certainly no reasonable person. It's on the way out and it shrinks every single year.

And again: the Ruger Mini-14 is identical to the AR-15, but the latter is always up for ban. Why is that?

I don't give *a fuck*. Ban them both.

---

Time_Rider posted...

I don't give *a fuck*. Ban them both.

Lol I rest my case. You dont know shit about firearms, but want a say in how they should be regulated.

---

ChuckSDeuces posted...

Probably cause we have more sense

I lol'd.

---

scorpion41 posted...

Lol I rest my case. You dont know shit about firearms, but want a say in how they should be regulated.

You are right. I don't give a fuck about your nuance, and it doesn't require expertise on my part. Like.. what a ridiculous retort lol. You got nothing. How dare a legislator regulate driving laws! They aren't car experts!

The fact is that the vast majority of American citizens are not like you, they completely disagree with your bad take(s). But totally avoid this fact, lol. Because you know it's true.

Hone up those debate skills homeboy.

---

Yeah..guns are already regulated in Canada. The problem IMO are illegal guns thats are smuggled over to Canada. Most of the scumbags caught with firearms have unregistered guns which means there are two possibilities:

1. The serial nums were scrubbed off after either being given a gun by a legal gun owner or a gun stolen from a legal gun owner.
2. The guns were illegally smuggled to Canada from the States.

Not sure how banning more models of guns will fix this. At most youll only be able to increase the level of criminality.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Gotta love Canada's immediate response and action vs the U.S. where we'll argue about it for months and then almost nothing gets done

the US has an unhealthy obsession with guns i havent heard of any other country where gun stores are considered essential business during the pandemic

something else i just found out
in the US is way easier to get a gun than adopt a dog >_<

---

Colorahdo posted...

I'm not a gun expert but aren't the military "assault" weapons just cosmetically altered regular ol hunting rifles?

Depends on how they're defined, which is the problem with a lot of these bans and restrictions.

Sometimes it can come down to having a pistol grip and an accessory rail. If it looks "scary" then they'll try and quieten the public screeching by going for things that look like they could be used by police or military, meanwhile a higher calibre weapon with a higher ballistic performance [as long as it has a walnut stock and is either semi-automatic or bolt action] is fine.

They shit the bed panicking here and banned pistols/revolvers with a minimum length barrel and then did the same with semi-automatic centrefire weapons over .22LR. Meanwhile you can still legally own a .50 rifle [as long as you have your paperwork and it is bolt action]. There really needs to be a reflection and rewriting of firearm law here, connect it into education and establish that sport, competition and agriculture areas have use or need for firearms. If someone wants a pistol in 9mm or .40, they'll find someone in a pub on the dodgy side of town that'll sell them one.

---

Time_Rider posted...

You are right. I don't give a fuck about your nuance, and it doesn't require expertise on my part. Like.. what a ridiculous retort lol. You got nothing. How dare a legislator regulate driving laws! They aren't car experts!

The fact is that the vast majority of American citizens are not like you, they completely disagree with your bad take(s). But totally avoid this fact, lol. Because you know it's true.

Hone up those debate skills homeboy.

My debate skills are fine. You cant prove that any gun bans drove down homicides significantly, so you point to a highly skewed survey that doesnt even reflect the views of Americans living in rural areas. All you have left is wanting regulation because of muh feelingz. So go back to living in your bubble and watch the world go on without your shitty views.

---