|
|
|
|
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 7/27/2007 9:19:11 AM |
However; we are not talking about hunting. We are talking about handguns. The only place they belong is museums. No matter how responsible owners are, there is still no reason to have them. Having a gun law that makes it illegal to possess a hand gun makes it cut and dry to process, prosecute and detain a criminal. If it were an automatic minimum jail sentence, then kids would be less likely to put one in their hands. As a former teen delinquent, I can assure you that no kid wants to go to jail.
It's already illegal to possess a hand gun outside of any registered venue, or permit to travel situation. Get it? Registered handgun owners have to get a permit to travel even to get to a shooting range. Travel must be direct, no detours, no overnight stops unless specified in the permit. It is all dictated and regulated.
How is banning them from the registered owners going to influence kids in any way?
Nobody said it would get them out of the hands of criminals.
Then what's the point of banning them? You want them banned because YOU see no use for them?
Kids don't get guns because they see law abiding citizens with registered guns locked up in theirs safes, or out at a licensed range target shooting. Kids get guns because they have no respect for the law or people around them. The justice system is a joke and they know it. They have little fear of being caught, and even if they are, a slap on the wrist and they are out again. Many of the recent gun crimes have been committed by people who should have already been behind bars.
A good percentage of the guns come across the border. How is banning them here going to stop that?
So again, how is banning handguns going to do anything toward eliminating gun crime by people who will find a way to get a gun if they want one. Using a gun for the commission of a crime is already illegal. How about enforcing the laws that are already in place, and provide for longer detention more suitable for violent crimes. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 7/27/2007 9:41:06 AM | | I think anyone who commits a crime that affects someone elses life.. Should just rot in jail forever... Meh ... we should split the world up in two .. the good side and the evil side.. let them fight each other and eventually their world will be gone.. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 7/27/2007 9:51:14 AM | ^^^^ That's how Australia was populated with Europeans. :) ^^^^
To 2tall:
Properly registered handguns are used in crime. Stolen from owners with permits. Not all handgun crime is from is from illegal handguns.
Here is an example since you aren't quite understanding how getting rid of citizens owning handguns may help.
Johnny the criminal knows someone who knows someone who has guns. Johnny gets drunk and decides someone has to pay for his shitty life. Johnny goes and steals a gun. Johnny shoots someone then ditches the gun he stole. Now we have a legal firearm in the hands of an unknown.
The argument that people who want a gun will find one is flimsy too. If you restrict access further, it becomes more difficult to obtain a gun, making illegal ones more expensive and perhaps out of the price range of some who would otherwise be able to afford it. No it won't remove supply, but it will further restrict access.
Your argument that banning them doesn't do anything only holds wash if all handgun crime were done by illegal handguns. That isn't the case.
Yes, the justice system needs to be worked on as well. The whole system needs work.
I ask you, since you seem to be pro handgun, tell me what benefit they have in Canadian society. Also, what is the detriment to society by banning them? | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 7/27/2007 10:05:57 AM |
Then what's the point of banning them? You want them banned because YOU see no use for them?
Exactly! I don't see why ppl have this urge to boost their testosterone by shooting a weapon ...so much so they go out of their way to obtain their FAC, follow the rules etc etc to go hoot it up, shoot off a few rounds and stroke their egos & further empower themselves!
I'm fully aware of the rules & regulations to obtain a hand gun & carry one to the shooting range. I'm also well aware of the fact that typically they are responsible gun owners..HOwever don't be so blind that NONE of these psycho ppl have an FAC or Kn0w someone else well enough to obtain their gun with or without their consent or that None of these gun owners ever use their weapon to intimidate
No psychological testing is required to obtain a WEAPON...the crimes committed are committed by ppl who are SICK....yesterday they may not have been or 10 yrs ago when they received their acquisition to carry a firearm but today they could be, are sick or tomorrow could be their day ( see my point?)
Kids? It's not just Kids but fully grown adults who commit these hideous crimes ALL should be prosecuted more harshly! ( Heck let the Drunk Driver chase them down for target practice! )
yes> many many weapons filter into Canada from several different countries NOT just the United States. I fully agree the slaps on the wrist are disgusting & more severe penalties should take affect
Notice I say weapons > NOT just Hand guns! & ppl not just MEN
fyi> I've been around guns my whole life, hunters etc.....I understand the sport & why ppl enjoy & I also agree it's sad that the bad apple spoils the bunch>
it it's jmho , I hope you can see my perspective as I can see yours | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 7/27/2007 10:33:07 AM | Nascar, I'm neither pro or anti handgun. I see the bigger issue, and that is our lax justice system. The idea that banning handguns is going to fix the problem is naive. Current laws are not being enforced and sentencing is a joke.
What benefit to Canadians? None, unless you are a legitimate sportsman or, local, national, international or Olympic competitor.
Detriment? False security or hope that billions more dollars spent confiscating legally owned handguns is going to eliminate the risk of handgun crime. Another privilege lost.
Overall crime is down, yet because of a few violent crimes of late, the issue is again brought to the forefront by gutless politicians and the media who blow it out of proportion. Guess what, they are looking for votes. Elections are coming and they can say, 'look what I wanted to do.' You've bought into the media hype and politicians who won't do anything to enforce the laws that are already exist, let alone strengthen them.
It's the bigger picture. Why do law abiding citizens again have to pay for the wrongs of the criminals? I would rather have my tax dollars going to something that is actually going to work.
Ban handguns, then ban long guns. Guess what? Guns will still be available. Can't get a gun, use a knife. How many people are assaulted, injured or killed with knives every year?
Check into crime in Britain. Guess what happened after they banned handguns? Handgun crime increased.
Guess it just comes down to being realistic instead of idealistic. In an ideal world, we could ban them and that would solve the problem. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 7/27/2007 12:37:25 PM | and for nascar... drunk johnny shouldn't be able to just walk into buddy's home and steal a handgun that easily... like I stated before for storage requirements, no drunk will be able to remove it from the home.
And honestly... banning handguns entirely to make the black market cost increase so criminals can't afford it? Doesn't sound that clear of an idea to me.
and HK, you apparently don't know enough because it hasn't been called an FAC for at least 10 years now... I don't feel my balls get any heavier whenever I go out and shoot a C-6 on the range, or blast some clays with my 12 gauge... I laugh, smile, yes... because I am a guy and I like stuff that goes boom and breaks stuff lol and so do a bunch of my other well educated, down to earth friends.
I had a research project on this issue, and I used britain as an examble, the criminals knew people wouldn't have a way to protect themselves in their own homes.
soon enough, I won't be able to race motocross anymore due to people get hurt and some die in the sport... or maybe because we are suddenly a huge part of the greenhouse gas production, or we are too noisy... or maybe its just because we are having fun outdoors wich seems to be harder and harder to do. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/7/2007 5:08:41 PM | Banning won't change anything. Criminals will get them no matter what is done. They will find a way. Most of the handguns available on the blackmarket are not local(some are) but are smuggled in from elsewhere.
For those that say handguns are only for killing, well hand gun shooting is an olympic medal sport. As is long rifle and trap shooting. Its harmless. It is how they are used that is the problem. Tell me, once the guns are all gone what do we ban? You can be killed by other things pretty easily so we better ban all those while we are at it too! | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/7/2007 6:34:03 PM | CrossBow,Pitchfork,Axe,Bat??It's an ongoing battle.I'm not sure who said it.............clear out the gang areas..........thats a start.
WildFlowers | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/7/2007 6:37:05 PM | GoofyBrunette!You must have read "The Stand" by Stephen King.Good against evil is what it came down to.And look who won.
WF | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/23/2007 2:24:44 AM | cndrednk
Are you that dense
I am also in the Canadian military
Her Majesty's Finest the QUEENS OWN RIFLES whoa!!!!
Yuo chat and act like a big shot with your combat fatigues on
Get a real life other that shining garrison boots lol.
What are you a weekend warrior
You had a great time in the bush i am sure like deliverance
Yuo prob have your head on your shoulders joining the reserves but get it out of your ass about the topic | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/23/2007 3:10:52 AM |
The truth of the matter is, in Canada ~ it just doesn't happen...In the United States, yes - But not in Canada...Simply because the Canadian Judicial System is disgusting! Go Dalton! Pardon the sarcasm...
Are you kidding?
Have you ever read a US paper?
Their judicial system is just as fed up as Canada's!
In the US drunk driving gets you nothing but a slap on the wrist......just ask Paris after her 1st charge!!
Ban handguns! they are of little use for anything but killing people..
sadly the only waqy it would ever work is if our gun toting neighbors to the south also tried controlling handguns.....But then again they can't seem to pass the "right to bare arms BS" (But thats another topic)
Mandatory sentences, is what we need....get caught with a handgun, get 10 years just for posession!
Use a hand gun in a crime, 20 years
Murder, 1st or 2nd degree, with a gun..life! | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/23/2007 6:15:52 AM | ^^ Evidently, you failed to do two things...
1) Read my entire response, simply because if you did read it and not assume, like you have done so ~ you would have realized my quote was in reference to the previous quote of
If he had walked up to them and shot them with a handgun he'd be a murderer and get life. ...And
2) You forgot to add a key phrase to your
In the US drunk driving gets you nothing but a slap on the wrist......just ask Paris after her 1st charge!!
Here, let me help you ~ In the US drunk driving gets you nothing but a slap on the wrist...UNLESS YOU HAVE MONEY...just ask Paris after her 1st charge!!
There we go...Now, its applies...
Have a good day! | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/23/2007 8:15:45 PM | Guns dont kill people stupid people with guns kill people and for that reason we really need to do something about hand guns in our country. I find it very interesting, one day in class my students who are grades 9-10 told me the specifics of getting a gun in the Toronto area.
Color me surprised when they thought I knew how easy it was to get a gun...."oh miss all you need is $200 and just go down to ________ st and you can get one in two hours!"
These days getting a gun seems to be easier to acquire than a library card. As for drunk driving well we need to start penalizing drunk drivers more severly. It is afterall a priviledge to drive here in Canada. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/23/2007 8:34:36 PM | If they permanently take away the vehicles that have drivers who are caught driving impaired or over .08, I believe it would put a big dent in this practice. The only problem is if it is a rental or work vehicle etc. But I know from personal experience that some companies knew they had an employee with a drinking problem and they ignored it.
I believe they already permanently impound vehicles of anyone caught driving while their license is suspended because of a criminal code violation. I knew a lady who made it very clear to her suspended husband that she will call the police and say he stole one of her vehicles if he takes them so impounding is a deterrent.
My opinions on the gun issue ?
There is no need for most of these guns in society. Leave all the animals alone. Nobody is out to get you. You might pull a****Cheney and shoot your buddy or your spouse or your children or yourself in the head.
If people want to play with guns, go join the ARMY. I was reg force ARMY. I played with all kinds of stuff. Since I got out, I have not used a firearm. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/24/2007 8:43:32 AM | It's almost a month since I posted but I thought I'd rejoin the conversation since more thoughts have been added.
To cdnredneck. I still don't see you justifying the NEED for handguns. Could you please explain without an excuse such as "where do we draw the line," next is my dirtbike...butter knives can kill.
Your argument that Britain has more gun violence now because handguns are illegal is frankly bullshit. There are lots of countries where handgun ownership is illegal and deaths are rare. The criminals are bolder because they know citizens won't be armed? Did you get that directly from NRA propaganda?
As far as our justice system needing help I agree. Our justice system could be super, but if you have these guns, people will still be killed by them. No amount of legal legislation can prevent people being killed.
What is the detriment to society in banning handguns while still allowing long guns? | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/27/2007 3:50:59 PM | nascar3fan
You still haven't explained how banning handguns will change or help the situation. The criminal element will still be able to obtain them without issue. As they always have, through the black market. Banning will change nothing. I have also noticed lately that there have been a number of fatal stabbings in Toronto over the last few weeks. Using your logic should we not ban them too? | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 8/28/2007 10:51:32 AM | Both these topics are once again deceptions of truth.
Ultimately to blame is the person who pulls the trigger or drinks the beer.
Society however wants to put the onus on the vice rather than the person who choose to drink the beer get in the car and drive, or the person who decided to pull the trigger.
Face it people you got a gun, your pointing the gun at someone you choose to pull the trigger knowing the bullet is going to project out of the barrel and a good chance its going to kill that person.
Same as with drinking and driving, you know that you are drunk, you know your senses, reflexes, etc are not upto measure, yet you decide to get behind the wheel and drive.
The problem is the consequences for our actions is not as critical as the harm our actions cause.
Think about it, a lawyer sitting in the court room to a jury or judge saying yes Joe Blow pulled the trigger, yes he killed him, but because winchester made the gun, he is not guilty, its winchesters fault.
All we are doing is transfering the blame from the person to something, and a brilliant person will realize this and utilize this. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/6/2007 9:41:11 PM | Nascar3fan,
It is unfortunate to see another casualty of the Liberal media machine. You are clearly uneducated when it comes to any legislation or statistics related to firearms, or else you would see that banning them is a futile attamept to combat an ''. Criminals don't buy their guns at LeBaron or BassPro, they buy them illegally. Now let's look at this logically.... if guns are banned here in Canada... who will that affect? Who will be the ones turning in their guns? If you took the time to get educated before trying to push a law that will result in law abiding Canadian citizens having their property unrightfully confiscated with no reimbursement, you would see that you pretty much have the same chance of being hit by lightning as you do getting shot by a gun in Canada. Yes, that is the way the goverment has always done it, confiscation without reimbursement, whether you have $100 dollars invested in equipment, or $10,000. It's just like if you listen to those who work animal control they will tell you that pitbulls do not account for the majority of bites and attacks. Yet thousands were ordered to be euthanized after the law was passed. Does the government care? No. All they care about is getting votes.
If more canadians used logic and common sense like a lot of the people posting in this thread, this country would make a lot more sense. | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/7/2007 4:01:14 AM | drunk driving can be stopped, more or less. install breathalyzers in the ignitions of all cars. make it the law that you have to blow under to physically be able to drive. the number you have to blow under should be carefully considered, as people's degree of drunkenness at .08 or .1 or .05 are going to differ. we just have to come up with a number that allows people the freedom to have a drink or two at a pub or restaurant, but not too much that they stand a chance of being significantly impaired at the wheel.
points of contention: a designated blower in the car, well then that's who should be driving. a random blower off the street to get your car started for you, make that an offence. and i don't think decent people would volunteer to abet someone's driving impaired. same with forcing your kids or other unlicenced people to blow for you, they shouldn't want to, and make it illegal for them to do so.
problem solved.
now on to gun violence. responsible gun owners are not who we need to worry about. registries and permits are just a load of bureaucratic bull. criminals or gang members don't get their permits and don't buy their guns conventionally. banning guns will do nothing. as well, banning guns prevents those dead-set on having one in the home "for protection" from having the defence they feel they need.
i'm going to throw it out there. aside from formal target shooting, hunting, antiques/heirlooms/collections, and police/military applications, anyone who wishes to own and possibly use a gun is a big wuss. you really need to launch a slug of metal at someone through a controlled explosion in order to feel tough or safe? pansies.
ideally, no one would ever think of using a gun on another, and it wouldn't be a problem. but those who want to, will find a way. drugs are illegal/banned, but it's easy enough to get and use them, and even to get away with it. only time any of it matters is when you get caught. own guns all you want, just don't wave them around or shoot anyone with them, and if that's the case then why bother owning one?
i think taunting would be a good way to discourage handguns being carried in public. mock the guy, tell him he must have penis envy to need to pack a weapon, tell him you could take him and that his gun just shows you how wimpy and lame he truly is. then, he'll either get the message, or he'll shoot you and go to jail. if it wasn't cool, people wouldn't do it. i don't mean this as serious advice, but it would certainly help if it was circulated that carrying a gun makes one weak. gangs might try to one-up each other by carrying fewer weapons and relying on their true toughness to solve disputes.
guns make it too easy to take a life, even a small child can use a gun and commit a culpable homicide or an unfortunate accident. i agree with the responsible storage of firearms apart from ammunition, because it keeps guns away from unintended users, and it keeps the rightful owners from doing something irrational in a moment of weakness. but these regulations don't apply to criminals who keep their guns loaded in their waistband every time they leave the house. you can't stop them, no matter what you put in place. these people don't listen, they're criminals, they don't abide by the law, even if you change it.
i agree with tougher penalties for gun-related offences, but the threat of a severe penalty won't effectively deter the behaviour. you can get "life" for having an ounce of bud on you, even if you're not dealing. doesn't stop dealers or consumers from selling/buying quantity. the penalties for other psychoactive substances can be less severe, but those drugs do not prevail in society even though it's less bad according to the laws of our land to be trafficking in LSD compared to pot.
the tougher penalties just put the already-criminals in a place where they can't harm society, which is good. but anyone on the outside, ex-con or clean-as-a-whistle, is going to commit a crime regardless of the potential penalty involved. people receive the death penalty in jurisdictions where it is enforced, but how could any sane person do a thing he knew would cause him to lose his life? only a crazy person or an irrational person who obviously scoffs at or ignores the potential ramifications.
so, in summation, there is no easy answer to gun violence. people that are going to do it are going to do it, and it's just a shame that the world is the way it is that these kinds of activities happen. why would anyone want to shoot at and possibly kill another human being? it disgusts me that someone could wish to or be indifferent to ending the life of another, even an enemy (and even in war, it's still got to be tough to take an otherwise decent person out because of what team they dress up and play for). even a criminal; someone does not deserve to die for what could have been a mistake or something that the person couldn't couldn't help or was deluded/delirious while doing. remove them from society for an indefinite period, but not from consciousness on earth altogether. why does anyone (excepting police in their duty of protecting society) ever shoot/kill anybody? it's sickening, really.
perhaps require everyone to sign a document stating they will never fire any gun at another human being unless they are working as a police officer or in a very imminent danger of 99% certain death at the hands/weapon of an assailant? even that leaves room for interpretation loopholing. it can't be easily solved without an overwhelming shift in our values as a human race. or a revolution in technology rendering guns somehow useless.
and finally (i mean it this time) i leave you with chris rock's take on it: make bullets $5000 apiece. if it cost you five grand to shoot a gun, people would be more selective and careful before they just go around shooting anyone they don't like. (paraphrased)
 | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/7/2007 12:53:03 PM | Want to cut back on drunk driving? Here's a simple way to reduce it at least. At the bar I regularly go to, (in a plaza) you can leave your car overnight. I go there by car. I decide if I want to have a few extra drinks or as in a few cases, I meet a group with a non-drinker going my way, I pool with them. Go get my car the next day and it's still there.
However, that's not the case at a lot of bars. See those signs in the parking lots (and most apartments)
"No Parking after 2AM. Cars will be ticketed and or towed"
Great, so now if my car is left there it WILL cost me money. If I have a drink or two too many I'm going to be thinking. Hmmmm$20 for a ticket. $200 for the tow, $160 a day from the pound., or do I drive it home?
This is a serious issue. I've known people who have done the right thing and ended up paying through the nose for it. In one case, it cost the couple $500 by the time it was all said and done.
I know in my case, it's a very big part of the reason I go to the bar I go to. But a lot of places don't care.
Sure there will be some that say well just leave the car at home then. Great but that's not always an option. Tell that to a guy who works until 11pm, goes home and has a shower, changes, and wants to get to the bar before it closes. Take a taxi. Sure. Add another $20 each way to the evening. It's bad enough the cost of cabs going home.
Even if bars issued a "Do not Tow - Responsible driver" tag to people who want to leave their car overnight it would help. How about a discount card for taxi's? A percentage of the drinks on my bill goes to a discount on my cab home.
I was walking along the street one night drinking a large can of beer. A cop rolled up to me and told me it was illegal to do that. I told him, "It's a nice night so I thought I'd walk to the pub, rather than driving and this beer is my reward to myself for not driving." The cop looked at me for a moment, said "Have a nice night." and drove off... | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/8/2007 3:11:31 AM | I agree with you nascar...Why do we need handguns in Canada???? I dont believe we do.
and drunk driving...throw the book at them.. throw them in Jail... there is no excuse anymore for it,,, leave the car at home, call a cab, call a friend, walk,,, or dont go out and drink, there are so many choices to make........ | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/8/2007 10:45:43 PM | I think people really need to plan ahead and be responsible when it comes to drinking and driving. First leave the car at home and arrange your ride to and from the bar, What some some are saying is I'm too stupid to do this, I going to be inconvenient by stopping at the home and arrange a ride, there should be no alcohol levels at all when your driving. I find that people on improper equipped cell phones are sometimes almost equal to drunk drivers
Driving should be a right, not a privilege. for one most jobs require you to have your own transportation in this county its not a privilege to go work and be employed and a privilege to pay taxes. there are rights under the constitution of Canada. They are rights not privileges. That is a difference in intelligence, you abuse the laws under the rights, you loose your rights under society. its a contradiction to say driving is a privilege, and a privilege to follow and obey the law. and a privilege for the laws to protect you.
next you will be saying its a privilege to break the law and a privilege to go to jail.
Its your right to live anywhere in this country, and your right to have transportation your right to have job and your right to pay taxes and your right to be part of society
to say privilege is rude in intelligence when they are rights, the government wants to get around discrimination, sometimes people in government are the worst offenders in discrimination and it costs them when someone in there office decides to break a right of constitution. You have fallen for the check in mail vote for me scam, there was a surplus
lol yea like they just started to figure out how to make a budget. greedy has its price | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/9/2007 10:57:34 PM | So what you're saying is that people who live out in the boonies where there are no taxis should not be allowed to drink?
I've been at places that were over an hours drive from town. No taxi's and I didn't know anyone within 300 miles. Should I then automatically be denied a drink? | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/9/2007 11:35:53 PM | Banning hand guns is an insane idea. Any sort of gun control is foolish to begin with, but a complete prohibition on hand guns is a very bad idea. Why? Well, of course it only takes guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens leaving criminals armed but it also leaves all power in the hands of the state. A well armed citizenry is the premier deterrence to a tyrannical government. Some blindly assume that we will always live in a free society - it is my view that without constant vigilance our freedom is never safe.
Even drunk driving doesn't really make much sense as a crime. You are criminalizing people based on them having a higher likely-hood of committing a crime. That's not how the justice system should work... | |
|
| Gun violence Vs. Drunk Driving
Posted: 12/10/2007 10:15:04 AM |
A well armed citizenry is the premier deterrence to a tyrannical government. Some blindly assume that we will always live in a free society - it is my view that without constant vigilance our freedom is never safe.
We don't live in a free society already.
Oddly enough, where some of our freedoms are being eroded is in regard to drunk driving.
The government has passed laws making stop and seizure a a part of policy towards drinking and driving. You can be stopped and or detained by police as a result of random spot checks.
Mandatory licences suspension and vehicle impound when the police say you're too drunk to drive. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Now the government here has gotten away with that, we now have similar rules for "street racing". What's going to be the next "crime" to be used to erode our freedom?
BTW, statistics on "alcohol related accidents" are flawed too. An accident is counted as alcohol related if one or more participants (not occupants) have a blood alcohol level.
Note: Not necessarily that the accident is caused by the person who was consuming alcohol. Just that someone involved in the acident was under the influence. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
