Latest Toronto shootout underlines need for tougher gun law

[Rockie]

Well, here's an idea to help reduce crime in Toronto:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2IDImv83rs

I'm not about to give my name on here

Why the fear? Like many others here, I make no attempt to conceal my identity.

Like many more others here, I value my privacy. It's as simple as that. I think it was CID who said he has given nothing away on this forum regarding his identity or background. I have a great deal of respect for that decision because it requires discipline and a strong sense of privacy to maintain that, and his desire for anonymity in no way detracts from the value of what he says. I also respect your willingness to put your real name under what you write, but knowing your name would not effect my opinion of the things you write here any more than knowing CID's would.

[corporate joe]

Corp jo. Your stance that guns are made for killing is wrong. Guns are made for shooting, which can includes killing. But there are far more rounds fired with no intention to kill than those intended to kill.

I respectfully disgress. Shooting is how you get a gun to kill. That fact that hunters, soldiers or gangsters can't aim and do more shooting than killing does not change the primary purpose of the gun. I recognize the difference between the types of uses a gun has, and I also recognize the difference between killing a deer and killing a human being and shooting random objects to see how they come apart. The fact that shooting bottles in your backyard is great fun, especially if they're empty whisky bottles that were full before you put them on the fence (which makes it even more fun) does not change the primary reason why the gun was conceived and built.

What you are referring to is a secondary purpose of the gun. There are guns made for shooting, not killing, and they are BB guns (including all their derivatives). The fact of the matter remains, that compared to everything else that kills because of misuse, weapons set themselves apart because of their primary purpose: killing. I was trying to point out that using the argument "object x" kills but we don't ban it, is ridiculous in this debate.

[Rockie]

You want to send a message? Round up the gang leaders. Put a bullet through their heads on the eleven o'clock news....you would only have to do that once! A bullet costs about a buck. Think of the savings to the tax payers!

I don't want to comment on your opinion Doc, but these words beside a thoughtful and pensive John F. Kennedy cracks me up.

[Hedley]

People who obsess about guns are like people who obsess about runny noses. Yes, you can give someone who is sick an antihistamine and treat the symptom of the runny nose, but they are still sick.

And that's what the anti-gun crowd doesn't understand. The misuse of guns is just a symptom of a much greater societal illness. Getting rid of the guns will not cure the illness.

Guns don't worry me. People worry me, because people are dangerous.

Over in Britain, they are trying to ban kitchen knives. Hm. Are kitchen knives dangerous? Only if there are dangerous people around.

Same goes for fertlizer.

[Rockie]

People who obsess about guns are like people who obsess about runny noses. Yes, you can give someone who is sick an antihistamine and treat the symptom of the runny nose, but they are still sick.

And that's what the anti-gun crowd doesn't understand. The misuse of guns is just a symptom of a much greater societal illness. Getting rid of the guns will not cure the illness.

I agree, but does that mean you shouldn't take cold medicine? How about just pain killers because they don't actually cure anything either? How many times do you let your child burn his hand on the stove before you just keep him away from it until he learns for himself?

If you can come up with a cure for the "illness" then I'll vote for you myself. Until then treating the "symptoms" is the next best thing don't you think?

By the way, I don't support banning guns even if it were possible. But I do support restricting their access and registering them and their owners.

[the_professor]

Gun laws definitely prevent gun crime, just like the Income Tax Act stops people from cheating on their taxes. Tightening up the gun laws will certainly fix the gun problem.

[Dex]

People use automobiles, trains, and even rivers to support their argument that banning guns because of a few deaths is ridiculous. But not one person brought up banning aircraft; in an aviation board no less. You would think........

[corporate joe]

Gun laws definitely prevent gun crime, just like the Income Tax Act stops people from cheating on their taxes. Tightening up the gun laws will certainly fix the gun problem.

Let's continue to apply the same logic. Some people drive through red lights, so red lights don't work. Let's stop enforcing traffic laws. As a matter of fact let's get rid of all laws that some people break, including all air regs.

Please, enough with the ridiculous arguments.

The bottom line is that this debate has no hard evidence to support the outcome of a tighter gun law registry (one that actually works) or the effects on society of having unrestricted gun access. We're all guessing.

[grimey]

Gun laws definitely prevent gun crime, just like the Income Tax Act stops people from cheating on their taxes. Tightening up the gun laws will certainly fix the gun problem.

Really? Please list the gun control measure put into place in Canada since 1985, and show the effect they've had on gun crimes. C-17 (put in place in 1991) and C-68 (1995) haven't had any demonstable effect on the murder rate. The last bill you could say had a noticable effect on the gun crime rate was C-51 (1977), which placed controls on the sale of ammunition, and required FACs, but you'd still have to demonstrate causation, rather than a corrolation.

[grimey]

People who obsess about guns are like people who obsess about runny noses. Yes, you can give someone who is sick an antihistamine and treat the symptom of the runny nose, but they are still sick.

And that's what the anti-gun crowd doesn't understand. The misuse of guns is just a symptom of a much greater societal illness. Getting rid of the guns will not cure the illness.

I agree, but does that mean you shouldn't take cold medicine? How about just pain killers because they don't actually cure anything either? How many times do you let your child burn his hand on the stove before you just keep him away from it until he learns for himself?

Dunno about you, but I learned pretty quick after getting burned once. Maybe your kid is just slow? Anyone who lets their 3 year old play with a rifle is a fool, but this has nothing to do with the law, it has to do with idiot parents.

If you can come up with a cure for the "illness" then I'll vote for you myself. Until then treating the "symptoms" is the next best thing don't you think?

Demonstrate that an increased crime rate is a symptom of widespread lawful gun ownership.

[corporate joe]

Gun laws definitely prevent gun crime, just like the Income Tax Act stops people from cheating on their taxes. Tightening up the gun laws will certainly fix the gun problem.

Really? Please list the gun control measure put into place in Canada since 1985, and show the effect they've had on gun crimes. C-17 (put in place in 1991) and C-68 (1995) haven't had any demonstable effect on the murder rate. The last bill you could say had a noticable effect on the gun crime rate was C-51 (1977), which placed controls on the sale of ammunition, and required FACs, but you'd still have to demonstrate causation, rather than a corrolation.

Another big problem with trying to link gun crimes with passed bills is that there are too many outside factors that can influence a crime rate. It's almost impossible to draw any conclusion unless you isolate for, or take into account those outside factors. It can not be demonstrated that gun control reduces crime, just as it can not be demonstrated that it doesn't.

PS: I think he was being sarcastic. You have to read the opposite of what he said.

[grimey]

PS: I think he was being sarcastic. You have to read the opposite of what he said.

Stupid internets.

[Rockie]

Demonstrate that an increased crime rate is a symptom of widespread lawful gun ownership.

I don't need to because I didn't say that, and statistics are useless anyway. I was merely expanding on Hedley's analogy about not treating symptoms because they don't actually cure the sickness. As I stated in several previous posts, I am not in favour of a firearms ban. What I am in favour of is restricting access to them so they don't become so prevalent that you can buy them from the 10 year old down the street, and registering each weapon and owner. I don't see what the problem with that is aside from the breathtaking incompetence in implementing the registry. The registry is accessed some 5000 times daily by police departments in Canada so they must see some usefulness in it. The registry itself is not evil, but like everything else the government touches it was badly implemented and cost hundreds of times more than it should have.

[2R]

There is absolutly no requirements for any NEW laws .Just a great need to enforce the existing rules of law.
More cops on the beat would do more to stop violence than all the fancy computers in the limo's that patrol .Bring back the meat wagon's with improved brakes so they can stop and pick up all the garbage on the way to the coffee shop.
A police officer on the walk around can tell you more about who lives on that street and can bring peace and order to a street better than any computer game.That is why the drug pushers in Toronto wanted the police off the streets and limit the patrols in the areas where their best customers live.The drug pushers used certain political lobby groups to achieve this end .They created NO-GO areas for police just like other major cities .
Put more police on the street in the communities then the people will feel protected .The security provided will reduce the need for people to arm themselves for protection against criminals.
They is no data base that tells the police if a criminal has a gun so why waste money on peaceful lawabiding citizens.

[LH]

I often wonder what Canadians consider to be appropriate sentences for the misuse of a firearm. What would they like to see for just plain old misuse of a firearm, with no harm done to anybody or anything? What penalty for using a firearm in the commission of a crime, such as robbing a person or place? What penalty for wounding or killing someone with a firearm? Should any sentences meted-out be served "consecutively" or "concurrently"?

Also bear in mind concerning all of the above that as it stands right now if someone commits a crime in Canada with a firearm of ANY type, the person will be charged with the crime committed ONLY. The criminal and improper use of the firearm will always be "Plea Bargained" away by the various Crown Attorneys in the various Provinces or forgotten about altogether.

[2R]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070613/ap_ ... un_control

A consensus of common sense is building .Why even the National Rifle Association does not want everyone to have a gun.

As for the use of a firearm in the commision of a crime the laws are on the books and only need to be enforced to ensure a peacful society.It is the lack of political will to provide the means for enforcement to do a more effective job of enforcing the existing rules of law .
A suspicious man might think that a person involved in the shipping trade who done away with all the protections that a port police might offer a state .May just be involved in more than just the ownership of the shipping company .Especially when taken in light of the loosening of offshore banking rules at the same time .The ports of Canada being used in the illegal drugs and arms business .We will never know with any absolute certainty as the tools to check for such activity were removed by the owner of one of the largest shipping companies while he was in a position of public trust.
It is a shame that the tools to succesfully investigate such a person were removed .And those who could have investigated such a person were replaced by incompetant corrupt idiots in fancy boots .
There are indeed worse crimes than if some silly bugger kills his drug competition or some wanna be gansta kills another wannabe.Who really cares so long as they are just killing each other ???

[the_professor]

Gun laws definitely prevent gun crime, just like the Income Tax Act stops people from cheating on their taxes. Tightening up the gun laws will certainly fix the gun problem.

Really? Please list the gun control measure put into place in Canada since 1985, and show the effect they've had on gun crimes. C-17 (put in place in 1991) and C-68 (1995) haven't had any demonstable effect on the murder rate. The last bill you could say had a noticable effect on the gun crime rate was C-51 (1977), which placed controls on the sale of ammunition, and required FACs, but you'd still have to demonstrate causation, rather than a corrolation.

I was being facetious. Got you hook, line & sinker. Boo-yah!!

[xsbank]

Last night some scumsucker came into my driveway and punched the lock out of my car and ransacked the interior. Nothing was stolen because I don't keep anything in the car. When will drugs be legalized?

I have to go to ICBC and then take the car to the dealer and I have a deductable of $300 so I will be paying for it even though the little f*ck didn't get anything.

That, to my way of thinking, is a bigger problem than one mindless gang yahoo shooting another. In fact, I encourage the distribution of more guns to the gang morons if they promised to only shoot each other. If they shoot someone else, see below.

We need a prison on Baffin Island where people who break the law go, forever. Steal a car, shoot someone - gone.

Give away the drugs to whoever wants them (no more profits, no more gangs) and free treatment for whoever wishes to stop using. If you want to be a drug addict, fill your boots. I don't give a R.A. how you live your life, just as long as you keep it all to yourself.

[2R]

Prince Rupert might be better as at least the people who worked in those jails would have a life.
Although i still favour the road gangs to build a road from Yellowknife to Churchill .We feed them we might as well get some work out of them.

[goates]

We feed them we might as well get some work out of them.

How about mine clearing around the world for the worst offenders? First time offenders get to stay 5 years and get a mask and probe. Repeat offenders have to use their bare hands and spend 10-20 years at it. Rapists and serial killers are sent for life.

On a more serious note, more cops and enforcing the laws we already have would probably be better than trying to come up with another government run program. We need to stop the slap-on-the-wrist punishments that are given out for virtually everything in the country. And if the person committing the crime immigrated here, send them back.

[North Shore]

And if the person committing the crime immigrated here, send them back.

I think that it was LH who mentioned this a few pages ago, with something about some Somali who just got deported for having a huge rap sheet. In this case, he'd come here when he was 14. At what point do we consider him to be our problem, as opposed to shipping him back there? If he came here when he was 2, say, then isn't he 'Canadian' and thus any criminal behaviour here would/should be our problem - deporting him to Somalia is hardly fair to the Somalis...likewise if he was an adult, then back you go, as the criminality was probably well-developed prior to getting here. 14 years old falls neatly into what I see as being a grey area - one with no neat solution.

[goates]

I think that it was LH who mentioned this a few pages ago, with something about some Somali who just got deported for having a huge rap sheet. In this case, he'd come here when he was 14. At what point do we consider him to be our problem, as opposed to shipping him back there? If he came here when he was 2, say, then isn't he 'Canadian' and thus any criminal behaviour here would/should be our problem - deporting him to Somalia is hardly fair to the Somalis...likewise if he was an adult, then back you go, as the criminality was probably well-developed prior to getting here. 14 years old falls neatly into what I see as being a grey area - one with no neat solution.

Okay, well maybe just outright deporting isn't the best answer (nothing is ever black and white). For 14 to 18 year olds, maybe have some cutoff point like 5-10 years as a probationary period. Commit a serious crime like murder or rape in that time frame and off you go, after that we treat them as Canadians. If they just stole a chocolate bar, sending them packing might be a little much.

And if they came here as a young kid, then yeah, they probably should be our problem.

Of course everyone will just start claiming that they will be persecuted in their old country and we will still be stuck with them anyways...

[Flybaby]

For example, cars are made for driving, guns for killing. Killing prey, killing people, killing bad guys, but still killing. Guns are a weapon and weapons have a main purpose completely different than all the other things we can name that also kill.

Have you seen Death Race 2000

[LH]

Tougher gun laws? How about tougher penalties for the gun laws already in place? How about 24 years, no chance of parole, for ANY crime committed with a firearm? Commit two crimes using a firearm and you then spend the next 48 years as "a guest of the Canadian taxpayer" with all Rights to vote taken away from you for the same time period.

[No Brakes]

How about prisons on the reserves? The prospect of being constantly harrassed by infinite amounts of black flies in the summer and the bitter cold and nothingness of winter for years and years would certainly make me think twice about pointing a gun at that minimum-wage cashier. Plus, it would give people over there something else to do besides commiting suicide. I envision ad panels with a heavily magnified, big, fat black fly on it that says "Use a gun to commit a crime and you're mine".

"They call me the Wolf. I solve problems." You're welcome.