It looks like the Ontario gov't is pushing for a total handgun ban in the province, after a gun collector had his collection stolen despite proper storage.
Our ex-Prime MInister Paul Martin had made banning all handguns a big part of his election platform (he was ousted as PM).
Lately (in the past 8 months) I've been learning the sport of target shooting, using handgun & rifle, from my bf, who is an award-winning target shooter & range officer.
Quite frankly, I'm getting frustrated about thugs destroying the sport. :wall:
What are your thoughts on handgun bans?

gimme a link, whats the context? do they think this guy is a criminal straw purchaser? I think people know where I stand on this issue, I'm just wondering why this became a national issue when it sounds like they should have nailed his ass to the wall.

I'm getting my info off the newswire, not the internet- the story is not posted anywhere when I google "handgun ban Ontario".

Banning firearms, to me, is an infringement on basic human freedom. Guns are dangerous, but people who use and own them in a legal and safe (as safe as is possible) should be allowed to keep them.

For the record, I also believe that carrying handguns should be legal for citizens who have very extensive training in the handling of firearms. People should also be permitted to keep firearms in the home for self-defense if they have adequate credentials.

I think otomik's signature is brilliant.

-P

PS: I don't own any firearms, nor have I ever fired one.

Funny . . . I think getting shot is an infringement on basic human freedom.

Funny . . . I think getting shot is an infringement on basic human freedom.so is getting raped and strangled to death, maybe paul martin can cement his loss and introduce a forced castration penis control program.

the conservative party promised to get rid of the registry if they won a majority, this probably has a lot to do with the story. The registry by all accounts costs much more than it should, is opposed overwhelmingly by RCMP and hasn't been effective.

Banning firearms, to me, is an infringement on basic human freedom. Guns are dangerous, but people who use and own them in a legal and safe (as safe as is possible) should be allowed to keep them.

For the record, I also believe that carrying handguns should be legal for citizens who have very extensive training in the handling of firearms. People should also be permitted to keep firearms in the home for self-defense if they have adequate credentials.

.
I don't know if people are legally allowed to carry hand guns on their person but I don't like the idea regardless of training. People can be extensively trained but that doesn't equate emotional stability or responsibility.

I don't know if people are legally allowed to carry hand guns on their person but I don't like the idea regardless of training. People can be extensively trained but that doesn't equate emotional stability or responsibility.some places require a psych evaluation, what say you?

some places require a psych evaluation, what say you?
I was actually thinking about that on my way back to this thread. Yes, that certainly should be an aspect when acquiring a permit but I don't know what type of psych test/evaluation would be suitable.

Google Bark Bonokoski Toronto Sun January 22
This man is not a straw purchaser or anything like that.

People who care about guns as an issue (from either side) just don't get it.

People who care about guns as an issue (from either side) just don't get it.okay, maybe you'll be ready to share exactly what you're talking about with us later.

http://torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Bonokoski_Mark/2006/01/22/1405483.html
definately not a straw purchase, looks like another problem with the registry too.

the conservative party promised to get rid of the registry if they won a majority, this probably has a lot to do with the story. The registry by all accounts costs much more than it should, is opposed overwhelmingly by RCMP and hasn't been effective.

I doubt that the RCMP overwhelmingly opposes the gun registry, but I have been wrong before. While I can't say for sure about the RCMP I can say that the "Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police" and the "Canadian Police Association" have been among the biggest supporters of the gun registry and they feel that it has been very effective. A couple days ago (wednesday) when I was at a restaurant I stopped at a table to talk to 8 OPP (Ontario Provincial Police) officers as they were discussing the gun registry with someone. All eight whole heartedly supported the registry and said that they access it several times a day.

Here is a link to the police chiefs:
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/01/29/1417150-cp.html
Police chiefs signal continued support for gun registry

so is getting raped and strangled to death, maybe paul martin can cement his loss and introduce a forced castration penis control program.

the conservative party promised to get rid of the registry if they won a majority, this probably has a lot to do with the story. The registry by all accounts costs much more than it should, is opposed overwhelmingly by RCMP and hasn't been effective.


Oh and by the way, Paul Martin hardly lost the election because of the gun registry/hand gun ban. He lost it because the sponsor ship scandal. The Conservatives one a cautious majority (edit - should say: won a cautious minority), with almost half the people who voted for them stating that they were not voting for the Conservative party but against the Liberal party and its sponsorship scandal.

I live in a riding which is supposedly among the most anti-gun registry in the Country. It is filled with hunters, yet the Conservatives finished a distant 3rd, despite being the only party to oppose the registry.

Here are two posts about hand gun theft in Ontario:

Where the guns are: Secure storage urged. More than 2,000 stolen each year
Group wants owners held responsible
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1138404334854

40 guns stolen from collector - Pensioner robbed while in hospital - Largest handgun theft in memory
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1139007014727

I'm skeptical that banning handguns would have much of an effect in this case. The incident at the Eaton Center was a result of gang violence, and I'm pretty sure a group already engaging in illegal activities wouldn't let a ban stop them from getting them. It isn't long to drive to the US from most major Canadian cities. It's already very difficult to get a gun legally in Canada. Chances are, a legally purchased gun didn't kill that girl. Resources put into a ban might be better spent attacking the root of social problems that cause gun violence.

To be sure, I don't like guns and I'm glad I live in a country where it isn't an inalienable right to own one, but there's no point in putting dollars behind legislation that isn't likely to do anything.

Funny . . . I think getting shot is an infringement on basic human freedom.

So do I.

Why is it a basic human freedom to own something that can kill people? And is designed mostly for killing? I just don't get it. I know people with guns, and I'm not bent out of shape over it, but I never understood why you would need or want one. They are scary killing machines to me.

Why is it a basic human freedom to own something that can kill people?why not? tell me how I've destroyed other people's rights by owning a gun (keeping in mind, I haven't shot anybody, I haven't sold a gun to anybody shady). The US Bill of Rights does define a reason though BTW. I don't think we'd have many freedoms if we had to define reasons for every one of them.
designed mostly for killing? I just don't get it.This point always rings hollow to me, it reminds me of omni's saying veg*nism is wrong because human teeth are designed to tear flesh, yes that may be so but I won't be eating meat unless I have to, yes some guns are designed for killing but I won't unless I have to.
They are scary killing machines to me.They are inanimate, but they aren't toys either.

This point always rings hollow to me, it reminds me of omni's saying veg*nism is wrong because human teeth are designed to tear flesh, yes that may be so but I won't be eating meat unless I have to, yes some guns are designed for killing but I won't unless I have to.


I'm not sure this point really holds much water. Even if humans had sharp killing teeth, they aren't going to malfunction and accidently bite someone. Kids aren't going to be drawn to playing with them. They couldn't accidently get into the hands of someone intending to do harm. They have other important functions aside from doing damage to others.

Responsible gun ownership is extremely important, and how can you ensure it when it's so easy in some places to legally get a gun? If someone wants to own a powerful weapon that has no other purpose but to kill, I don't think it's too much to ask to make them jump some serious hoops to get it.

If the pro-gun crowd would simply defends itself by claiming the people have the right to arm themselves for the sake of defending itself from a tyrnannical government I might take them seriously. THey would still be wrong, because the government has much better weapons. Not to mention, must of the pro-gun crowd wouldn't need to be forced into obey the government. Anyhow, most pro-gun people arguing safety reasons for their position, but crime is not that bad, especially in the areas where the typical gun nut lives. The media exaggerate the level of the violence in the cities to the point that suburban and rural people think a war going on in the city. The worst srime to worry about is murder, and 1) most murder victims are involved in some kind of crime or confronatational situation, and 2) if there were no guns on the streets murders would drop, because it is a helluva lot easier to fire a bullet into someone than get up close and using your hands.

The gun control crowd seem to think that if all the guns were taken off the streets the people would all of a sudden hold hands, sing, and dance around the playground equipment built out of material made from melted down guns. The most persistant crime won't go away without eliminating poverty and ignorance.

http://www.klastv.com/Global/story.asp?S=4410080
Police say 27-year-old Ressa ran over 14 pedestrians on the Las Vegas Strip in September killing three of them. Ressa now faces three charges of murder and 11 charges of attempted murder.

According to the police report, Ressa said he believed the victims were staring at him with demon eyes and each had a gun and would kill him. Ressa's attorney Joseph Abood says Ressa still believes the victims were trying to kill him that day and that he acted in self defense.

Responsible gun ownership is extremely important, and how can you ensure it when it's so easy in some places to legally get a gun? If someone wants to own a powerful weapon that has no other purpose but to kill, I don't think it's too much to ask to make them jump some serious hoops to get it.are we really talking about responsible gun ownership or just the larger issue of untreated dangerous psychosis a.k.a. normally law abiding people "flipping out". I mean, in the US I think the background check is helpful, my understanding is that Canada has a firearms license system with safety courses that must be completed. Still, most gun deaths are suicides, it's not like everytime someone is shot a gun is allowing people to do commit violence that wouldn't have happened otherwise. People with violence in their heart have managed to kill thousands with simple tools like boxcutters and their own sick plans.

I don't think people oppose the serious hoop jumping (well, it should have a point, rather than just discouraging gun ownership) so much as that it leads to things like the total ban the Liberals are contemplating now.

If the pro-gun crowd would simply defends itself by claiming the people have the right to arm themselves for the sake of defending itself from a tyrnannical government I might take them seriously. THey would still be wrong, because the government has much better weapons.Are you so sure? the Iraqi insurgents are causing a lot of trouble and that's with the military from a nation of 270 million against the insurgents in a population of 25 million. The second amendment is relevant and a profound statement of humility from our founders.

Not to mention, must of the pro-gun crowd wouldn't need to be forced into obey the government. Anyhow, most pro-gun people arguing safety reasons for their position, but crime is not that bad, especially in the areas where the typical gun nut lives.yeah, white males get targeted less but women, elderly, gays, minorities... in the end you have to let people access the risk for themselves.

I'm all for banning guns. I think the whole american 'right to bear arms' has been misunderstood and overused. The point was you were allowed to defend yourself if someone invaded... every joe doesn't need to have a gun in his house.
In Australia we have stricter gun laws and a LOT less people dying from gun shots... hmmm...
I think if you want to use guns for sport they should be stored at the gun club and only used for that purpose.

Maybe part of the problem lies with thinking of gun ownership as a right. Personally, I don't think it should be a right (and I'm glad where I live, it isn't). As long as guns are around, it should be a priviledge that you earn, just like driving a car. A gun should be hard as hell to get, and I don't much care if it dissuades a lot of people from getting one.

In a situation like what instigated the thread, the problem was gang violence which is responsible for the brunt of deaths from gun-related crime in Canada. Gangs aren't going to care that handguns are illegal. Most of the ones they're using right now are almost certainly unregistered anyway.

I don't like guns, but the fact is that a ban probably won't prevent a lot of deaths. It's like drugs. They're illegal, but it doesn't stop people from getting them. It's already extremely difficult to get handguns legally in Canada. Something that gets to the root of the problem (like *why* those men are choosing to shoot one another up and get 15 year old girls caught in the crossfire).. poverty, lack of education, etc, is likely to be a lot more effective.

Heh, Americans and guns. Otomiki's stupid signature just goes to show the type of fear that so many Americans live in and that causes so many Americans to want guns.

Glad I don't live in a place with lots of guns.