Gun ban talks back after a sad weekend in NS

Fear mongering is happening.

The public fears alot so much so the world health organization didnt tell the the truth because of panic..... it feared the public would panic if it was told the truth.

They fear over an airsoft gun that looks militarily and scary could barely kill a mouse but ban it "IT LOOKS SCARY " lol.

Why did we have turn this way


I have seen people with multiple bullet wounds. I know of people who have fell down from a step and die . 1 ft fall hit his head and died walking into the back yard.



If they wanted to save likes this was a failure. You can't ban the guns that have caused the least amount of deaths and say your protecting the people.

The ar 15 has only killed 1 Canadian in almost 50 years. Why ban it because it looks scary it certainly isn't to save lives that they promised to do.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

So we have RCMP officers murdered in Mayerthorpe, then Moncton,and now Nova Scotia, and as a result of these tragic loses where it was recognized they were under gunned,they bring in carbines into the scout cars.
So my first observation is that the misuse of guns by individuals lead's the police to militarize their officers.Hardly a need here for the boys in blue to carry out some sort of PR campaign.There is no need to the police to sell anything to the public, if the public wants protection the police need better guns than the bad guys.
But who is the bad guy and when does he become a bad guy.The shooter in Moncton has acquired his firearms legally but had let his license expire.The Mayerthorpe shooter managed to borrow a few guns from licensed owners to kill his victims.
Between 2014 and 2018 over 12,000 licensed firearms owners lost their privilege to possess firearms.

---

Did the NS shooter have a licience to own or acquire?. Did he possess illegal firearms?
And how many of those 12000 killed people with their firearms?..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Excellent post Gilroy. Greatest in a very long time. In your own words an assault rifle is based on looks alone. Both AR-15 and Remmy are the same functioning rifle, different hardware is all. Different cartridge, but hey the AR-10 is 308 just like Remmy Semi hunting rifle.

---

You can say its based on looks,you can say its what the public associates with mass shootings here and in the USA,you can say it looks like a weapon of war,any way you want to put it. Perception is everything hunters,target shooters,snipers, all perceive any particular gun differently.

"In psychology and the cognitive sciences, perception is the process of getting, interpreting, selecting, and organizing sensory information. It includes the collection of data from sense organs through to the interpretation made by the brain. ... Perception is a lot more than just "information coming in".

If the general public perceives an assault rifle as a different threat level to them as let's say a generally recognized hunting rifle they will be inclined to support a ban.

I suppose the opposition must overcome that bad perception.

And that’s what happened to Vu Pham as well.

Differences between your carbine, and “ours”. Magazine capacity and I’m sure kinetic energy/foot pounds.

No-one has ever said .223s arent lethal. Especially against unarmed, and unarmored civilians. But you still have to hit them in the right places.

Not that I’d ever want to be hit myself. But if I had to choose between eating a.223 or slug to the arm/shoulder/gut/leg. Or with body armour. You have a chance vs a .223 Gilroy. Any of the above. Your done.

I can’t remember the shooters name that jumped Vu Pham, and then a prolonged shootout with the 2nd Opp officer. Fred something. He was 70 years old, got hit 6 times by I’m guessing a glock or sig. The 7th, and final shot was a lucky ricochet off pavement that hit him in the head.

Point being.
Well a few.
And yes, carbines. Is the name Leo use for them. Funny, when they want to ban them, the name changes to oh so scary “assault weapon”

“Kill the most the fastest.” Is what Blair and JT say in the media....please.

They all carry 5. I think, No I know, I can cause far more havoc and carnage with a high powered rifle, or my slugs...far more, far faster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

You can say its based on looks,you can say its what the public associates with mass shootings here and in the USA,you can say it looks like a weapon of war,any way you want to put it. Perception is everything hunters,target shooters,snipers, all perceive any particular gun differently.

"In psychology and the cognitive sciences, perception is the process of getting, interpreting, selecting, and organizing sensory information. It includes the collection of data from sense organs through to the interpretation made by the brain. ... Perception is a lot more than just "information coming in".

If the general public perceives an assault rifle as a different threat level to them as let's say a generally recognized hunting rifle they will be inclined to support a ban.

I suppose the opposition must overcome that bad perception.

---

Your first sentence is incorrect.

First off our laws are not the same as the USA cant base it on that. We are Canada, Canadians not American citizens.

Secondly the ar15 they keep referring to has never ever been involved in a mass shooting in Canadian history.


So the public is being lied to ? To vote on these bans? On looks not what kills more .

They are all racist if you judge a book by the cover. And you wonder why society if fallen to poop .

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Did the NS shooter have a licience to own or acquire?. Did he possess illegal firearms?
And how many of those 12000 killed people with their firearms?..

---

I do not know if the NS shooter ever had a license to own or acquire a firearms. It would make no difference on this forum because if he had a license you would say the system failed and if he did not have a license you would say he is just a criminal.

The 12,000 who lost their licenses, there is no stat,s I can see on how many people they killed.But you miss the whole point of prevention of crime,so maybe you should ask "how many crimes were prevented by these licenses being revoked".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I do not now if the NS shooter ever had a license to own or acquire a firearms.It would make no difference on this forum because if he had a license you would say the system failed and if he did not have a license you would say he is just a criminal.

The 12,000 who lost their licenses, there is no stat,s I can see on how many people they killed.But you miss the whole point of prevention of crime,so maybe you should ask "how many crimes were prevented by these licenses being revoked".

---

Prevention of crimes???mm

You mean like tackle the problem seems the most common place for these guns coming in to prevent them is getting the least amount of funding.

The boarders our government speak so freely of .

Prevention of a crime that only hits law abiding citizens is not the right route.


If I was them I would be more concerned about why 90 percent of the guns used on the streets are linked back to the usa .

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

Your first sentence is incorrect.

First off our laws are not the same as the USA cant base it on that. We are Canada, Canadians not American citizens.

Secondly the ar15 they keep referring to has never ever been involved in a mass shooting in Canadian history.


So the public is being lied to ? To vote on these bans? On looks not what kills more .

They are all racist if you judge a book by the cover.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

---

I think its fairly safe to say that the Canadian exposure to American gun violence has its effect on their feelings of safety.The Canadian public have been told exactly what is banned,I do not think they care if the gun fires 5 bullets their way or 30 bullets.

If the protesters of this ban want to base a public relations campaign with the general public on how many shot's a gun will fire or what caliber of bullet is heading for their noggins, .223..... fire away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I do not now if the NS shooter ever had a license to own or acquire a firearms.It would make no difference on this forum because if he had a license you would say the system failed and if he did not have a license you would say he is just a criminal.

The 12,000 who lost their licenses, there is no stat,s I can see on how many people they killed.But you miss the whole point of prevention of crime,so maybe you should ask "how many crimes were prevented by these licenses being revoked".

---

ohh so now we are speculating.......well then if its how much crime could be prevented and we tie that to human lives then you and I both know we shouldn't be talking about guns. Alcohol is far deadlier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

Prevention of crimes???mm

You mean like tackle the problem seems the most common place for these guns coming in to prevent them is getting the least amount of funding.

The boarders our government speak so freely of .

Prevention of a crime that only hits law abiding citizens is not the right route.


If I was them I would be more concerned about why 90 percent of the guns used on the streets are linked back to the usa .

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

---

Your chasing your tail, you want free and unfettered access to guns,thanks to the gun manufacturers in the USA who see no problem with the carnage down there AND at the same time you demand that magically the police and border security intercept illegal guns on the biggest undefended boarder.

How exactly would you achieve this if you were the boss.