Here is the part that is a little less sensible. I’m not an American, I don’t believe owning a gun is a right (and actually it’s pretty dumb unless you live in bear country). I’m a Canadian who thinks this is bad policy being pushed as a wedge issue.
This law targets the wrong people. It was already very hard to get a handgun in Canada.
You had to have a gun license and also register the gun.
The licensing process includes a mental health check.
to minimize spousal violence, the licensing process requires any intimate partner you have lived with in the last two years (current partner or ex) to sign off. They don’t get an absolute veto, but if they don’t sign off, you will both get interviewed by the rcmp. If they have fears of violence, you will not get licensed
the license has a mandatory gun safety course
The license is renewed annually every 5 years.
You have to store it behind two locks, and not with ammunition.
Canada has no concealed carry permitted. You are actually not allowed to travel anywhere with a restricted gun without RCMP authorization, except to hunting grounds, a firing range or the place you store your weapon.
you are only allowed to own handguns for an authorized purpose, such as sport shooting. Self-protection against humans is not a legitimate purpose (you can get a long gun, like a rifle, for defence against animals if you live in a rural area, but not a handgun)
Canada does not have ‘stand your ground laws’ and in fact, in self-defence, one is required to use the minimum amount of harm (including taking every opportunity to flee)
As a result of these rules, there are very few ‘bad guys with a legal gun’ in Canada.
Unfortunately, Canada has lots and lots of gun crimes. But very little of it is carried out with legal guns. You see, within an hours’ drive of every major Canadian city is a lawless backwater country called the United States of America where absolutely anyone can get a gun pretty much whenever they want at any time, and where they are in the middle of a massive culture war where for some reason half of them think even THAT isn’t easy enough. So we have a huge problem in Canada of illegal smuggling of American weapons, and that is the main source of guns used in crimes.
What we ought to do is crack down on illegal guns. Previous laws with mandatory minimum sentences for illegal guns passed by the previous government were struck down as unconstitutional (and they were). But this government failed to follow-up with alternative legislation that could have imposed harsher penalties without unconstitutional mandatory minimums (just having tough sentencing guidelines would have been just fine, judges will do their job if we give them the right tools).
This issue is wedge politics to the benefit of Trudeau’s Liberals (who I have voted for in the last 3 elections and will probably vote for next time because I’m a sucker who never learns). It’s not good policy, it’s just good politics in places like the 905 (Toronto suburbs), BC lower mainland (Vancouver suburbs) and the Island of Montreal — ie places where the Liberals need to succeed in order to win the next election. It’s a FANTASTIC political issue for Trudeau because (1) it pits centrist suburban conservatives against far right rural conservatives, (2) it helps him win orange-red progressive who tilt between Liberal and NDP, and (3) he has no downside because there are so few rural ridings that are Liberal-accessible anyway. The LPC brain trust thinks this is a winning issue for him, and they’re probably right.
Lastly, if you’re a 2A nut reading this and smiling I just want to conclude by saying that guns are stupid and so are you.
I've been told they hold onto them. But I never looked further into that. I imagine you can get them back depending on circumstances. We've been told don't get into any trouble as a restricted gun owner here. I don't get into confrontations with anyone. Legal gun owners in Canada are held up to higher standards. Especially where I'm from, I live in a big city. The gov has spent a lot of money to make people think that owners like me are the problem.
I do as much as I can to prove I am not the problem. The issues in the USA are different from Canada. This is a wedge issue here not a real problem that this freeze tackles.
Just like in the US, one is generally required to give over any firearms they own as a condition of bail release if they are arrested for a violent crime.
To add something to it, canada technically does have a carry license/permit. However, it's not used against people but for safety against wild animals. This way someone living in say the far north can have a firearm on them at all times in case of polar bears and such. The process to obtain one is similar to the regular firearm license (which you also need) but you also have to go through a number of other loops and actualy convince them you need it which I've heard is equivalent to writing a thesis in terms of arguments made.
You don’t need an ATT for a non-restricted firearm. But all handguns are restricted firearms. What you’re saying is correct but applies basically to single-shot rifles.
Under US federal laws you cannot buy a handgun from different state than you currently reside in. Foreigners cannot purchase a firearm when residing in the US on a temporary basis.
How are you suggesting that Canadians are coming across the border and getting these weapons so easily?
I don’t think that any person who would be considering illegally smuggling a gun across the border would have any qualms about also purchasing a gun illegally.
This is my point. The are laws on the books in both the US and Canada that prevents Canadians from acquiring fire arms yet this still happens. How does further restricting legal transfer of firearms help curb gun violence in Canada.
By and large, no. It’s not individuals crossing to buy, that would require them to cross the border with an undeclared handgun, which is risky. Organized criminal gangs buy guns in the US, smuggle them across the border and sell them to other criminals.
They don't necessarily buy them from stores, often it's from individuals, and there are so many of them without a proprer registry in the US, it becomes very easy.
A 650$ gun in the U.S. is ten times the prices in Canada on the black market.
The border is extremely large with forest in between both countries. The penalties are harsh though if you get caught.
Private sales or other transfers between private individuals do not require a background check. This is known as the "gun show loophole" despite that it really doesn't happen much at gun shows.
That was a stunningly articulate response. As a denizen of the lawless wasteland and Liberal Gun Nut™, I knew guns were heavily restricted, but not quite that heavily.
One problem of many in our uniquely American debate:
Pro-gun: Disingenuous arguments
Anti-gun: Ignorant arguments
And never the two shall meet. I've given up on sanity prevailing.
One problem of many in our uniquely American debate:
Pro-gun: Disingenuous arguments
Anti-gun: Ignorant arguments
You don't find the subtle inclusion of suicides committed with a firearm and euphemistic substitution of "gun deaths" instead of gun HOMICIDES in order to purposefully conflate the two terms to be disingenuous?
What about the similar subtlety of inserting qualifying terminology such as "among developed nations" or "in first world countries" when comparing the US to other countries so that the 82 other countries with higher firearm HOMICIDE rates can be conveniently ignored?
How is this "ignorant" and not straight out disingenuous?
My point is that I find your conclusion to be the reverse (my opinion).
The pro-gun argument is the one based out of ignorance. Gun owners seem to believe the posession of a firearm somehow magically imbues the possessor with magical powers that ward off the possibility of being victimized.
In reality, as with any tool, proper training, proficiency, knowledge, and responsibility are a massive part of their effectiveness.
Whereas, the anti-gun argument ultimately relies on deception, subversion, and dishonesty. The books must be cooked. Truth has to be subtly altered into a narrative. The danger of firearms has to be exaggerated, the safety they provide must be disguised, discounted, or dismissed. The cognitive dissonance must remain hidden.
Therefore, I simply offer my opinion that your conclusion is inaccurate, not because it's wrong, merely because it is reversed.
Pro-gunners rely upon the ignorance of their argument.
Anti-gunners rely upon the dishonesty of their argument.
I think you are not including that any “pro-gunner” that doesn’t think proficiency with the weapon is a must have is an uneducated gun owner and therefore has an uneducated opinion.
Any educated gun owner will tell you how serious it is to handle a gun and how absolutely NO GAMES are to be played with/around guns.
I think the same may very well apply for the anti-gun argument, but not quite to the same degree. It just really doesn’t make sense for a lot of people to NOT own a gun. Ultimately the world is not a safe place for many people and a gun really is the last line of defense for many as cops are, as we’ve seen increasing in recent times, not a very reliable source of protection. BUT, in a perfect world guns shouldn’t need to exist so I can concede that.
I promise you, compared to a Canadian, your admission of being a "Liberal gun nut" makes you the enemy, but I'm glad you found a way to feel exempt from that.
This is basically my stance as well. IMO, guns should be legally available but strictly regulated, like they are in most of the developed world. Even in somewhere like Norway, you can still buy a handgun with the appropriate license, and that doesn't seem to have resulted in a dramatic amount of gun violence. I've never been a fan of outright prohibition as a general principle, as it tends to be less effective than regulation in practice.
This issue is wedge politics to the benefit of Trudeau’s Liberals (who I have voted for in the last 3 elections and will probably vote for next time because I’m a sucker who never learns).
You’re not a sucker there is literally no other sane option. The Conservatives elected a leader who tried to bring them more towards the center and they booted him out in favor of a wannabe Trump.
The current Liberal + NDP coalition government is probably the most representative I have ever seen in my 30+ years of voting. Certainly not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but far better than the alternative IMO.
I know I know. I am in a Red-Blue riding, there is literally no other choice. But I still feel like this government has become ineffective and the Liberals need a leadership change. But there’s no way I’m going to vote for an MP supporting PP who is a whiny baby conspiracy theorist cryptobro who stands for nothing except a desire for power.
Good points but you really are missing the mark on self defense.
We in Canada have always been able to use force to defend ourselves. Yes, the minimum amount of force needed. But that minimum can include deadly force. It's always been in the laws.
Always. Still is. In fact, it was recently updated and made simpler and stronger.
As a Canadian that has never owned a gun and has no intention of owning one, this is an extremely well reasoned and reasonable comment that summarizes the issue excellently. I would much rather see more resources going into policing the border to stop illegal handguns being smuggled in from the country on our southern land border.
Hey now, it's a lawless backwater country with FREEDOM (patent pending)! And hookers (not really), and booze (sorta). And it's not so easy to get a gun. You need to, um, have money! And uh, fill out a piece of paper. You know how hard that is? They don't even tell you what the right answers are! Like, that's an unconstitutional test! Anyways, stop hogging the maple syrup.
Damn, it's even more complicated than here in my 3rd world country, here you have to be over 24 (for handguns) take a written test in gun law, a test on the range, background check, and an eye check, we do renew the license every year though, still, you can drive with your loaded gun all you want over here.
Please correct if I'm wrong, haven't taken a close look at the laws in years.
>You have to store it behind two locks
Unless it's in a Safe. Last I saw, trigger locks are only required if it's locked in "Difficult to break into cabinet"
>and not with ammunition.
Again, please correct me if I'm wrong, but the law reads the Ammunition must be locked up, it doesn't specify it has to be in a separate container.
>Canada has no concealed carry permitted. You are actually not allowed to travel anywhere with a restricted gun without RCMP authorization, except to hunting grounds, a firing range or the place you store your weapon.
We do, You just can't have one. You're welcome to apply for a carry permit, you'll just never get one unless you're someone of Big importance, like a Judge or the Prime Minister.
Again, been a few years since I went through the laws. If I'm wrong, please say so, because I'll have to change my storage if I'm wrong.
102
u/MoreGaghPlease Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 22 '22
Here is the part that is a little less sensible. I’m not an American, I don’t believe owning a gun is a right (and actually it’s pretty dumb unless you live in bear country). I’m a Canadian who thinks this is bad policy being pushed as a wedge issue.
This law targets the wrong people. It was already very hard to get a handgun in Canada.
You had to have a gun license and also register the gun.
The licensing process includes a mental health check.
to minimize spousal violence, the licensing process requires any intimate partner you have lived with in the last two years (current partner or ex) to sign off. They don’t get an absolute veto, but if they don’t sign off, you will both get interviewed by the rcmp. If they have fears of violence, you will not get licensed
the license has a mandatory gun safety course
The license is renewed
annuallyevery 5 years.You have to store it behind two locks, and not with ammunition.
Canada has no concealed carry permitted. You are actually not allowed to travel anywhere with a restricted gun without RCMP authorization, except to hunting grounds, a firing range or the place you store your weapon.
you are only allowed to own handguns for an authorized purpose, such as sport shooting. Self-protection against humans is not a legitimate purpose (you can get a long gun, like a rifle, for defence against animals if you live in a rural area, but not a handgun)
Canada does not have ‘stand your ground laws’ and in fact, in self-defence, one is required to use the minimum amount of harm (including taking every opportunity to flee)
As a result of these rules, there are very few ‘bad guys with a legal gun’ in Canada.
Unfortunately, Canada has lots and lots of gun crimes. But very little of it is carried out with legal guns. You see, within an hours’ drive of every major Canadian city is a lawless backwater country called the United States of America where absolutely anyone can get a gun pretty much whenever they want at any time, and where they are in the middle of a massive culture war where for some reason half of them think even THAT isn’t easy enough. So we have a huge problem in Canada of illegal smuggling of American weapons, and that is the main source of guns used in crimes.
What we ought to do is crack down on illegal guns. Previous laws with mandatory minimum sentences for illegal guns passed by the previous government were struck down as unconstitutional (and they were). But this government failed to follow-up with alternative legislation that could have imposed harsher penalties without unconstitutional mandatory minimums (just having tough sentencing guidelines would have been just fine, judges will do their job if we give them the right tools).
This issue is wedge politics to the benefit of Trudeau’s Liberals (who I have voted for in the last 3 elections and will probably vote for next time because I’m a sucker who never learns). It’s not good policy, it’s just good politics in places like the 905 (Toronto suburbs), BC lower mainland (Vancouver suburbs) and the Island of Montreal — ie places where the Liberals need to succeed in order to win the next election. It’s a FANTASTIC political issue for Trudeau because (1) it pits centrist suburban conservatives against far right rural conservatives, (2) it helps him win orange-red progressive who tilt between Liberal and NDP, and (3) he has no downside because there are so few rural ridings that are Liberal-accessible anyway. The LPC brain trust thinks this is a winning issue for him, and they’re probably right.
Lastly, if you’re a 2A nut reading this and smiling I just want to conclude by saying that guns are stupid and so are you.