Looks like some whack job shot and killed 3 people in Toronto with a crossbow today. What's next.
Printable View
Looks like some whack job shot and killed 3 people in Toronto with a crossbow today. What's next.
SPEARS....
Reclassification of crossbows. Wait for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklab
I see them trying it. My wife doesn’t think so. I told her to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
the police on the radio said it could be a accidental shooting ... killing 3 people with cross bow.... wow
https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...-east-end.html
Here is the story or a version of it............
Yea....."I was cleaning it Officer and it went off".Quote:
Originally Posted by mark270wsm
Could happen.....if the were standing in line behind each other 1" apart. :silly:Quote:
Originally Posted by mark270wsm
I've heard nothing about it being an accident. Homicide detectives are involved and it's linked to a bomb call in another part of the city? Who said it was an accident?
Did the Liberals try and reclassify Crossbow back in the early 2000's? I remember my PAL at one time saying some about crossbows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by smallgamer
Originally, crossbows were included in the regulations that pertained to licensing and registration. However, they backed away from those sections and they were not enacted. That's why our original PALs indicated crossbows as well.
Unfortunately I have been thinking the same thing when it came on the news tonight. I will give it until tomorrow or Monday at the latest until we hear exactly what you have mentioned terrym!!! It's not a matter of if but when!!! Any guesses on who will be the first to propose it??? I have three in mind!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Here ya go. Didn't even take 24hrs.
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/08/25...s-to-crossbows
Something is really bizarre in this story. How does one person kill three others with a crossbow? After the first shot did they not think to run away or otherwise try and tackle the shooter as hes reloading? Its not like this is a high speed process.
Regardless, RIP to those murdered.
Just wondering if he used a crossbow or did he stab all three with a arrow like blasted_Saber said how do you load 3 times and stand there to be shot there's more to this then the police are letting the public know I'm sorry to hear about the loss of life may their souls rest in peace
What make you think they were all in the same room at the same time?!
at least the author explain that the intent use of crossbow; legal hunting purposes and prohibition of use within the city limitsQuote:
Originally Posted by terrym
This is a possibility. It is also possible that one or more of the victims was killed or incapacitated with some other weapon and then shot with the crossbow after the fact, or that initial reports are wrong and not all were shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishgurru
Bear in mind that cause of death is not confirmed yet, and that media reports are based on initial cryptic info from police.
Police in Canada do not share many details because it can prejudice a trial.
A guy was shot with a crossbow back in 2010 and they did not change the regulations, I do not expect it to happen overnight but it is possible.
I hope that they realize that they should be restricting sharpened sticks though too while they are at it.
....hammers,screwdrivers,chainsaws.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
You will get a hysterical editorial or two but the law won't change.
Forks, butter knives, pencils (3 guys were stabbed with pencils outside a bar when I was in Uni), ban them all.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Don't bet the farm on it. The Toronto media is already banging that drum.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
ah, we are just to backwards thinking here. look over the pond and you'd realize that they already have a licence requirement for operating a chainsaw!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Okay, as far as I could gather, it is only mandatory for commercial operation, state forestry, voluntary firefighters and to get some forests certified in Germany, but wait a few years and they'll have to show a licence when you purchase a saw.
And don't forget the Brits (never famous for great food) who are giving away their kitchen knifes...
We live in an age of absurdity, where reasoning is not a prerequisite for actions.
Can't help, but the entire thing (especially the bomb squat involvement) makes me think about pope Innocent 2nd (you know the one who banned using crossbows based on the religion of the target).
we can only hope these dead bodies are somehow linked to religious terrorism (you know the stuff the media does not report more than they have to), otherwise we'll hear a lot about crossbow restrictions soon.
The only problem is anyone can buy a crossbow that is over 18. In two mins you can shoot it at 50 yards dead on... Great for hunting, and any responsible weapon owner will have no problem showing a gun lic to buy and use a crossbow.
We just can't let any whack job buy one who should not own one. It hurts us all as hunters...
The last info I read, indicate the victims were not shot, but stabbed with a bolt.....
Whats the difference between the crossbow and a knife ? Given your logic, our hunting knives should be licenced as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklab
I just read that as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
try killing someone at 50 yards with a hunting knife.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
you got it!Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
look down south, the NRA does not give in on ANYTHING. that has nothing to do with the argument at hand, but with the fact that when you start giving in, they spin the same logic ad absurdum like the "give a knife, save a life" nonsense or whatever firearm bans/re-classifications we see lately here.
in the end of the day, we have lots of red tape, costs and nothing to show for, because the criminals will still have lots the weapons (look at the handgun scenario; how much burden to own legally, and no impact on crimes)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
And it doesn't sound as much fun either....Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklab
As I said, a hysterical editorial or two.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Actually changing the law? Not likely.
Happens more that you'd think...
Homicides with crossbows are rare but not unknown in Canada. This list was compiled by the Canadian Press:
- In December 2010, 24-year-old Zhou Fang shot his father in the back with a crossbow then crushed his skull with a hammer, at a public library in Toronto’s east end.
- In July, a Mission, B.C., father was charged with attacking his son who was shot in the forearm with a crossbow.
- In November 2007, a 26-year-old man was charged with murder and attempted murder after his mother was killed and father was injured by a crossbow in St-Cesaire, Que.
- In October 2002, a dairy farmer was shot in the back and injured with a crossbow in St.-Bonaventure.
- In August 1998, a man asleep in his Hamilton home was shot in the head and injured by a man who fired a crossbow.
- In 1998, Edward Stuart Walker shot a pregnant Stephanie Celestine Thomas with a crossbow, then stabbed her 46 times in Central Saanich on Vancouver Island.
- In September 1994, Yvon Gosselin was driven to a gravel pit near Terrace, B.C., where he was killed with two bolts from a crossbow.
- In May 1995, a man armed with a crossbow entered the Winnipeg Convention Centre shortly before then-prime minister Jean Chretien arrived to deliver a speech. The suspect was arrested.
- In January 1993, B.C. Institute of Technology student Silvia Leung, 22, bled to death in the campus parking lot in Burnaby after being hit in the shoulder by a crossbow.
- In November 1991, Ottawa lawyer Patricia Allen was killed with a crossbow by her estranged husband Colin McGregor.
There was also one in Kitchener in 2015.
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/k...eath-1.3280232
Not a bad idea...considering the alternatives.
Quote:
Retailers should screen crossbow buyers for court-ordered weapons prohibitions, an Ottawa lawyer says.
The comments come after three people were found dead Thursday in a Scarborough, Ont. house with injures from crossbow ‘bolts,’ or arrows. Thirty-five-year-old Brett Ryan faces three counts of first-degree murder in their deaths.
“When a weapons prohibition is ordered by courts, they give a long list of things, and they include crossbows on that list, always,” Solomon Friedman, a firearms law expert, explains. “It’s required by the wording of the Criminal Code.”
However, stores selling crossbows have no way of knowing about a court order. Unlike firearms, a licence isn’t needed to buy a crossbow.
In New Brunswick, the provincial chief firearms officer gives gun retailers lists of people who are under weapons prohibitions, Friedman says. It should be practical to scale that up to a searchable database, and open it to crossbow sellers, he says.
“I don’t think it would be a big deal to have a prohibited persons registry,” he argues. “It shouldn’t cost all that much money and shouldn’t take all that much time.”
Ryan had previously been charged with numerous offences related to robberies in the Greater Toronto Area. He was dubbed the “Fake Beard Bandit” after a disguise he wore.
Court documents reveal Ryan was charged in 2008 and convicted in 2009 of robbery and disguise with intent.
When he was sentenced in 2009, the judge imposed a lifetime weapons possession ban that covered both firearms and crossbows.
Under Canadian law, crossbows that are less than 50 centimeters long, or that can be fired with one hand, are prohibited. But crossbows longer than that, that need both hands to fire, aren’t regulated.
That means that crossbow owners don’t get the scrutiny that gun owners do.
http://globalnews.ca/news/2905269/af...s-lawyer-says/
My significant other just came up to me and swears the news just said that crossbows kill instantly. I tried to explain that the target dies from blood loss, but she wouldn't listen and walked away. It was on tv news so it's gospel.
John
That's some kind of a cold-blooded killer that can take the time to re-load a crossbow and shoot three people. Just think about that for a minute. Shivvers,man,shivvers......
Apparently, there is some question now whether the victims were actually shot, or stabbed by a bolt. Still, cold blooded for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I heard some victims had CB bolt in them. Not likely to happen unless stabbed with the bolt as even a compund bow usually goes thru a deer.
3 years and nine months for 8 counts of bank robbery......what a joke of a justice system. Now a murderer times 3.
For sure.....we called that "job security".!Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
I heard on the news today that it was a bolt or possible several bolts that were used, the crossbow itself was not used...either way not a good way to go...
Condolences to the family (families?)
Ya judging by the wording in the last article I read. Said he was covered in blood when apprehended. That makes me think he stabbed them.
Sent from my SM-G925W8 using Tapatalk
True but still a joke. I had a judge turn a significant heroin dealer loose and I had him back in front of the same judge in less than 24 hrs.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
He pretty much had to stick it to him that time but I got invited to visit the chambers for a performance evaluation. Glad when that judge left the bench.
Yes, but if that crossbow had been proper trigger locked, and the bolts stored separately from it. This whole incident might have been prevented. The trouble is you don’t need a licence to buy a crossbow or the bolts to use with it. This means individuals do not receive any training in how to use them safety. Nor are they given any knowledge on their responsible uses. Perhaps law enforcement does feel particularly threaten by them. Silencers stack up as prohibited devices, but you can’t get a weapon much more silence than a crossbow. Pistol ammunition that is capable of piercing body armour is prohibited, but a bolt from a crossbow that does spin like a bullet and doesn’t become knurled in its fabric, can slices right through body armour, even if the bow is of low poundage. I recall that a number of low poundage crossbows were banned at one point, I believe for use in hunting. However, I can imagine they’re still out there. I wonder how much this guy practiced before he unleashed his attack. For those who wouldn’t like seeing anyone handing a rifle or shotgun without proper training, why wouldn’t you have the same problem with anyone with a crossbow?
You don’t stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
Wait....I am going to get some popcorn !!!!
Maybe you missed it, but the crossbow was not part of the attack. The guy stabbed those poor souls with arrows/bolts, it could have very easily have been a knife.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
This has nothing to do with hunting or learning how (being trained) how to use a crossbow... Learning how to shoot and using a crossbow belongs in a hunting thread, not here....
Your right, so why was this thread posted on a hunting forum in the first place? It could be that every time something involving a hunting tool hits the headline, the hunting community becomes paranoid as to what impact it might have on their hunting activity.
Maybe instead of being speculative and passive, we should become proactive, and mandate the government to put some safe guards in place, that would prevent some wing-nut from getting a hold of the tools we use to hunt with and doing mischief with them. It doesn't real matter that he actually fired the crossbow or used a bolt like a knife, he shouldn't have been able to get access to either if the proper safeguard had of been in place. He did have a criminal record, which would have prevented him from obtaining a firearms licence and access to a long-gun and ammunition. If similar safe guards had been in place for archery equipment, then this wouldn't have been an issue on this hunting forum. And he would have had to come up with a different type of instrument to do his deed. Leaving our past-time alone.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
There is no possible way to introduce legislation against such happenings as this !Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
We as hunters also use knives, do you want to be prevented from using one while hunting ?
I think the gun community becomes paranoid with good reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
I know all that legislation in the world can't stop such wing-nuts. I want the legislation in place to protect us from shouldering the heat, from such incidents. With legislation in place it becomes the government responsibility to ensure such individuals are appropriately screen. Meanwhile we don't have to go running for cover every time something like this goes down. Nor can we be held accountable just because we demand such tools to hunt with. If the screening doesn't get properly done let the blame rest on the bureaucrats in the government. Right now such tools are available, because we who put them to legitimate use, demand them, so we the hunting community become the target. Why should we be made the patsy, when something like this happens? Let government really prove the value of their legislative capability and keep the wing-nuts away from the tools, which we have to enjoy our past time.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
I disagree if we don't keep our backs up Gun ownership and hunting will be pretty much gone in 20 years. I'm not sure how old you are but I'm 47 since that time there have been many changes in Canadians owning guns and none of them good. When I was 16 I could buy my own gun I applied 3 months before my 16'th birthday and received my FAC on Friday Oct 11 and bought a 20 gauge. Back then it was legal to own a gun an FAC was just used to buy them. Before 1999 you could still target shoot with a handgun in a gravel pit and sometime before the 1980's you could hunt with a handgun.
Handguns have been registered since the 1970's yet it is easy to get one down town Toronto. So far every new gun law put in place has not even put in a dent in the criminal use. The Long Gun registry was originally put in place to eventually take away guns from Canadians (Liberals admitted that).
Today Guns are actually ILLEGAL for any Canadian to OWN unless you have a PAL.
Mark my word you will see even bigger changes in 20 - 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
Like all the firearms legislation has cut down on gun crime in Toronto ! Your first sentence was right, you went off the rails from there!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
God help us.
Wait until the new Registry 2.0 from the UN kicks in sometime. It will be a while at first but at some point it will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
Wynne and pretty boy will eventually need something to change the channel from their track record and they know gun owners are too spread out to swing an election. Alberta that bastion of conservatism has an NDP Majority government. They can attack legal gun owners and probably gain seats over it. Enjoy what you have now, will only get worse.
Trudough is about to change our electoral system to guarantee Liberal rule forever. Wynne owns the civil service and OPP. Liberals and police hate gun owners, just do the math.
The wesrt will go back Conservative. None of the East Eoasters can afford to hang around the oil patch currently with no income and will return home.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Then, would you agree with the premise that we should not need to have a licence in order to own and possess firearms? In other words licencing should only be an issue in regard to gun use, and the need to have a licence to own and possess a firearm should be repealed.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
-Gun Nut
Firearms ...yes, however crossbows are not firearms. You say the bow in question should have been trigger locked and bolts stored away from the bow, that is not required, nor is a licence to buy or own. Where do you suggest the government stop? Crossbows, then what....long bows, compound bows? Then what, hunting knives, then heck while they are at it, kitchen knives!!! Knives are used as weapons now, more than firearms after all ! Handguns have been registered since 1934....has that stopped the criminal use of handguns?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
Actually.
If anything, this event should demonstrate why it might be worth considering having to have a PAL to buy bows.
Fact is, bows today are so much more advanced than they were 40 years ago. I personally have never understood why there was virtually no "restriction" on them. We are quick to remind the public that here in Canada we have background checks and balances to help ensure the unstable and criminals can't get firearms through legal means. Do we not in fact, always argue, the problem isn't "guns", it criminals. Aka if we would just focus on stopping them from getting guns......so easily...
there are reasons why this guy had a crossbow, and while it's true in this case a knife/hatchet/golf club would have worked just as well.
why did he A) want a x-bow and B) able to get one.
obviously with his rap sheet, not someone who should be able to buy weapons.
I'm not being funny here but I could fashion a crude bow and some arrows in about an hour, we would also have to make a requirement that it is illegal to posses tree branches capable of being used to fashion a bow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
And criminals can fashion Zip guns, etc etc.
You could fashion a crude bow. I wonder what the draw weight would be and how accurate it would be. You could also fashion a crude spear. Or simply use a baseball bat.
You could alsobe a convicted career criminal with weapon bans. You could be a stalker with peace bonds against you, or very disgruntled ex whose guns have been taken for and with good reasons.
And walk into a bass pro, and walk out with a cross bow, with a scope that's capable of pin point accuracy at 50 yards with enough effiecency to kill a Moose at those ranges.
Do "you" (not you specifically) agree with the PAL and reasons for it? And if so, what arguement is there against needing our PALs to buy bows.
not saying it should be done. It's worth considering. for all we talk about back ground checks, criminals or the unstable being the problem......would be fairly discrediting to our arguements "IF" it's proposed and we put up stiff resistance. Aka we talk the talk, but don't want to walk it.
I guess we will start having to create Chainsaw license and register them...I've seen way to many movies where they were used to maim, mutilate and kill..and not for what they were designed for...:)
Silly rebuttal.
chainsaws while brutal if used. Aren't designed to kill, I'm pretty sure more people are strangled with bare hands, than have been killed by chainsaws. Nor are they capable of ranged attacks. By all means try to kill a bear/moose/Wt with one. Let us know how you make out.
fact is.
many towns rightfully or wrongly ( no need to discuss this) do consider bows firearms. And there are no discharge by laws. pellet guns, in excess of 500 fpS with less killing force/capability than a x-bow require a PAL. How many people hunt big game with pellet guns......
So the question has merit. If we as gun owners agree or argue that keeping firearms out of the hands of icriminals and the unstable is not only a good idea, that's the biggest problem....That the PAL is a good idea because it helps address those specific problems.......
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Actually I was being a bit facetious, parroting the rule for crossbows and bolts, that are suppose to keep long-guns out of the hands of those who would misused them. As for crossbows under federal law they are not as yet considered to be firearm under the Firearms Act. This it seems is what everyone worries about might come to pass. This would mean taking the same safety precautions with crossbows as we now do with long-guns. For the record I put a trigger lock on my crossbow. Provincially you see crossbows are considered firearms, check the definition of firearms in your hunting regulation, which summarize the Wildlife Fish and Game Act. In my case I have to live with provincial policies that require me to trigger lock my crossbow when on display. Having been doing it with long-guns, it does really stack up as a big imposition to do it with my crossbow. I know, if you keep conceding ground to them, it will mean they will eventually have it all. Unfortunately its a human failing, appetite grows on what it feeds. Public safety is paramount. In the name of public safety politician can seem to get away with passing any piece of legislation they please. Here's the thing, regulated hunting was not the brain child of government, it came from the hunting community, watching the demise of the passenger pigeon and the lost of the great buffalo herd. It was becoming apparent if market hunting was stopped there would soon be no game to hunt. Hence no more hunting, and so hunting groups put pressure on the government to introduce regulated hunting to conserve the wildlife resource. So maybe its time for us to mandate the government add crossbows to the Firearms Act, instead of running for cover every time some wing-nut misuses one. What would this say to the population at large, if it was the hunting community, who were the ones promoting the cause of public safety rather than the government. If we don't start turning the tables on public safety concerns, the future of hunting doesn't look to promising.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting
- Gun Nut
A crossbow wasn't even used as said a couple times all ready. Initially that was the report but wasn't the case.
Sent from my SM-G925W8 using Tapatalk
We know that rippen.
Why do you think he had one? Could it be due to his record, a revolving door justice system and they are the next best thing to a gun? Willing to bet, his reason for having one, were nothing good.
and getting one was as easy as proving he was 18. He may not even have been asked for ID. I've never been asked for ID when buying one.
Humour JBen..right over your head..:)Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
I think you're on the right track, but I think Mr Friedman has a cleaner approach...make it mandatory that people who AREN"T legally allowed to be in possession of one are blocked from buying them....why make those who are legal to own one make the concession.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
Quote:
“When a weapons prohibition is ordered by courts, they give a long list of things, and they include crossbows on that list, always,” Solomon Friedman, a firearms law expert, explains. “It’s required by the wording of the Criminal Code.”
However, stores selling crossbows have no way of knowing about a court order. Unlike firearms, a licence isn’t needed to buy a crossbow.
In New Brunswick, the provincial chief firearms officer gives gun retailers lists of people who are under weapons prohibitions, Friedman says. It should be practical to scale that up to a searchable database, and open it to crossbow sellers, he says.
“I don’t think it would be a big deal to have a prohibited persons registry,” he argues. “It shouldn’t cost all that much money and shouldn’t take all that much time.”
That's all you really ever have anymore Mike. Snide comments and insults. Shame because you used to be able to discuss/debate w/o. If inclined I could add a snide comment about age. ;).
And the easiest, most cost effective, and "sure" way to help keep them out of the hands.
1) add their names to a data base, and more beuracracy along with all the other John Does with the same name that no clerk will be able to ascertain if John Smith in front of him, is the same John Smith with a weapons ban or restraining order.
2) add them to the list of things a person needs a valid PAL to acquire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
Seriously...take a look in the mirror... JBen...Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
I vividly remember my first crossbow - I made it myself, incl. a bolt, as part of a school project in grade 7. I bet those days are long gone. Not powerful to kill at 50m, but 20m. That's farther than most people get shot with handguns on average.
So again, if a criminal wants something they will get it.
Have we started to talk about banning trucks, because someone killed 86 and insured 307 innocent people in Nice? Aside from that attack, there are many mentally unstable and reckless people driven cars every day that pose a real risk to the general public. Perhaps we should discuss that instead of making up a hypothetical case against crossbows.
Additionally, don't forget that there are hunters that are not allowed to own firearms. By regulating crossbows like firearms you would take away their opportunity to hunt.
Justin will probably make wood illegal.
https://youtu.be/ywTydm0qecs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waftrudnir
That's a VERY good point..thanks for making it...Quote:
Originally Posted by Waftrudnir
Those arguements, while not innacurate. Don't really carry a lot of weight.
l.If we want to trot out well cars kill way more. They do, that's true.
get nailed for DUI and guess what...you lose your liscence.
make a career out speeding and getting caught.....you...
The next time there's a mass shooting and the public screams to ban black semi autos. And everyone here says "typical liberal knee jerk reaction. Once again it's the criminals ( or unstable)". And we all scream " we already have systems in place to help keep them out of criminals hands, it's called a PAL and it Works.
well, we shoul probably be prepared for the " told you so's, gun owners really aren't in favor of things that make sense". Or accusations of hypocrites and talking a good game".
They are weapons. Designed to kill and as things stand, anyone can get one, no matter their "mental state", or criminal history.
"if", push comes to shove. Needing a PAL to buy them cost us next to nothing, would do what we always scream is the actual problem, and it wouldn't discredit our arguments with respect to controls. In fact, the opposite.
this discussion just shows that we are our worst enemies.
why do politicians and media go after the tool and not the real cause? not only is it is so much easier, but we also even invite them to do so.
if the discussion will ever come up for real, many will be for more regulation (thinking as we are law abiding that this won't hurt us). but it has; think of those who faced criminal charges for minor paper issues and lapses.
Remember? http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/17...class-citizens
Shamefully, we rather welcome bureaucracy and costs, than to think of fellow hunters and shooters.
The RCMP used to revoke hundreds if not thousands of PALs every year! It could be any of us; e.g. disgruntled ex-wife, depression, anonymous call, etc. You don't have to be proven to be a dangerous criminal in order to get your PAL and guns taken away or not get one.
Favorited quote
freedom was hammered out on the anvil of dissent, debate and discussion"
I've never really been one who takes to being told what to do, how to think. I prefer being my own individual, and not part of a mindless collective that goes along with something. Just because. Ultimately what that approach advocates is the opposite of individual freedoms. If communism works for you....
And we really only need look south to see how much good it's doing. The States is a powder keg that's about to blow thanks in no small part to the NRA and the out of my cold deads hands, untied we stand divided we fall.
but also, as a result the off the charts gun deaths per capita, cops being executed and more. while a gun owner myself, who is strongly against more and uneccessry GC.
good job NRA. I'm more than happy to live in Canada.
......
for or the time being, this is nothing more than some journalist and editors selling copy. In the future though, should it become more imminent. The "arguement" to include them on the list of things requiring a PaL not only has merit. A strong case can be made.
[COLOR=#333333]Originally Posted by Waftrudnir http://www.oodmag.com/community/imag...post-right.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
[COLOR=#333333]Additionally, don't forget that there are hunters that are not allowed to own firearms. By regulating crossbows like firearms you would take away their opportunity to hunt.
Perhaps some more insight may clarify this statement for me. If they are hunters why wouldn't they be allowed to own firearm. It sounds like they have done something that has earn them a prohibition order against having a long-gun. If they're viewed as that dangerous, why would we want them to have access to a crossbow? But maybe there is some other point that I'm missing. Oh, I just though of something, there are those who do not want to take the firearm course and write the exam. I knew of someone like that, because of his age he feared the prospect of being trained and tested. But there maybe yet other situations. What are they?
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
-Gun Nut
Word is no crossbow was used. Moot point, he would have killed anyway, with or without a registered "weapon" and with or without law/ regulation, etc.
We've been killing one another since Cain invented murder and used it on Abel with fist, feet, teeth, rocks, clubs, fire, bows, spears, knives, swords, catapults, yada yada in spite of any law.
It ain't the object. Never was, never will be. It's the heart of man.
Lol R. :)
just makes me "chuckle". Anytime the public or media go nuts over some gun incident. We (or most of us) when talking with friends will in effect point to the U.S and problems there. How often has uninformed media gone on about how easy it to acquire guns? Our first rebuttal? Um no, we have PALs that........
One reason ( not the only) we don't have the same kinds of problems here, as there I s we do have measures and GC. It works. And the fact of the matter is the NRA is as much to blame as anything.
We really should just look at 2 things anytime something comes up.
1) does it make sense ?(problem here is too much doesn't make sense)
2) is there a need?
in this case (cross bows and possibly requiring a PAL)
1) yes
2) no
Isolated incidents ( what a total of 10 people killed by them according to Mike earlier post) do not equate to a need. That doesn't negate the "validity" of #1. Just means it's not needed.
It is culture or societal "thang." When Canada has the population and Gangs the US does, it will have the same issues.
47000+ died from DRUG OVERDOSES in the US in 2014 per the liberal CDC report.
I have empathy but as long as people have free will and no morals it will be as it will be. Why limit a prescription to me because 47000 killed themselves with illegal drugs and abusing prescription drugs? Limiting my prescription won't stop them from killing themselves.
Same with guns, bows, etc.
So if you and I know that, surely the idiots in government know that so......what really is their agenda?
I'm totally clear on it, the liberals stated it, Hilary confirmed it.
Want to really "control" the masses? Teach them morality and moral responsibility, just desserts.
Then and only then will they stop taking the liberal's morality and "my" guns/bows/cars/trucks/knives/baseball bats/golf clubs/etc. and killing people.
How about guys who aren't old enough to have a PAL and are Bow hunting now ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
It's a lot of things R. From differences in social values ( socioeconomic) to GC and likely a few more. The world is rarely straight forward and more. I don't know that "population numbers" come into it. Certainly when expressed as per capita despite our many similarities, this topic anyways stands out like a sore thumb. Neither Baltimore, DC or Chicago are as large as Toronto, (Toronto is larger than Chicago for sure) yet all 3 far out pace the gun deaths if I'm not mistaken. Regardless, pinning the tail on a single factor is never going to provide "solutions". Be that as it may, the NRA and most of the "pro" crowd share some of the blame because it is part of it. Had there been more willingness to identify actual/real problems and find things that make sense ( #1 ) then admit a need (#2) maybe the per capita wouldn't be off the charts.
Not unlike that community we talked about, except in that case it's the opposite. Before things could get better, the "residents" had to admit the problem and want change.
How do we know it was even his? Could have been a brother's.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
There are no provincial policies that make it necessary to trigger lock a crossbow.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Nut
Toronto and Chicago populations are almost identical by numbers.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The FBI UCR spells it out clearly. Down to the Population Area size, Gender, Race, Age, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
That's the other kicker. We know WHERE and WHO yet we do nothing but blame anyone but the doer.
lol, yep....you missed the elephant in the room too.Quote:
Originally Posted by stragglelake
Haha I didn't miss it.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
I was going to post the Chicago demographics in comparison to Toronto but chose not to.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
Wouldn't they fall into the apprenticeship program it starts at age 12, if they successfully pass, and get the A1 Outdoor Card they can be mentor to the age of 15 sharing a firearm with their mentor, or if they get the A2 Outdoor Card and share archery equipment with their mentor. After 15 if they have successful passed the firearm course, they qualify for a Minors Permit which is good up until their 18th birthday, and while 15 with parental consent they can get the H1 Outdoor Card and be pretty much on their own. At 16 they no longer need parental consent. I suspect these are the individual you're thinking of, who beg off doing a firearm course and would only qualify for the H2 Outdoors Card. Actually I'm aware of someone who fits into this niche and will probably continue in archery for the rest of his life. Whether up grading the crossbow to a firearm, would prove a hardship to them, it hard to say. Maybe it would be an incentive for them to upgrade to an H1. But my point still remains it would look better for us to be proactive and do the pushing, rather than sitting back and having it done to us. I have a feeling that at some point in the not too distance future it will unavoidably get done.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
_ Gun Nut
So,it's now official from Toronto Police. The first victim,a female,was killed with a wire garrot (a garrot,ffs). The second victim,a male,was stabbed in the throat with a crossbow bolt. The third victim,another male was stabbed with an arrow. No crossbow was used in the commission of these offences......which is of ZERO consolation. Who the he** is that crazy bas**rd,anyway?
Up close and personal. Must be money for drugs or relationship issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I've listen to a few of the news reports, there was apparently a crossbow at the scene. The police report seemed a bit ambiguous like they were not sure that it had or hadn't been used. Maybe the kid didn't bring the crossbow with him and found at the site after he garroted the female. This might mean he would have lack the ability to use it effectively in the normal way, opting instead to use the bolts as an instrument to stab. In which case, one would think, that one or both of the two male victims would have attempted to fend him off, and would have had defense wounds, its unlikely he would have caught both totally by surprise. Maybe that was the case with the second male victim that managed to make it out to the driveway. The kid apparently had future wedding plans, you have to wonder what might have drawn him in to such an encounter. Perhaps he was attempting to shed a bit of his past.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
The provincial policy, I was referring to is vocational and related to public safety.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
So the guy garroted the first victim...That speaks volumes..........aka what kind of person chooses them and why.
Oh I know R, plus you and I have talked privately about some things, and in this case because to me it's very pertinent. A certain community we spoke about.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
What I was/am pointing out is that the per capita's are wildly different. And while suicides make up the bulk of that, our suicide rates are likewise very similar. With respect to populations, we can look at Toronto which is slightly larger than Chicago (and I think fairly larger than both DC and Baltimore). And yet, rates are vastly different. So what is "different". If we look at "mass shootings". While we have had a few, we aren't even in the same universe, even when accounting for populations. Now does anyone think the US has something in the air or food, that causes more people to be born sociopaths or prone to snapping?
Yep, theres more to it than just GC, but it's certainly part of it.
I read yesterday claims that are similar to the numbers touted by Bell in their Let's Talk mental health tv commercial. Now US says 1 in 5 have MH issues there, same as Canada.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
Look at gun murders per 100k from FBI UCR. IIRC there were 8124 in US. So 2.6/100k
Pretty good actually. If you took the demograpghics out, it would be much better.
However if we add suicides, etc we get somewhere like 4 times as many firearm related deaths.
So in reality we have a MH and Gang problem. Knowing is half the solution right?
However, apparently we must not really care or we would fix it rather than hype it in order to beat legal gun owners over the head and fool people into the disarmament agenda.
Knowing where the problem is and being able to admit it openly seems to be two different things. We certainly can't upset the politically correct.
So true. If we can see it, why can't they or why won't they?Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
I suppose it serves those whom agenda is nefarious. Odd that our Cops are Pro gun and our politicians anti gun....hmmm
Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
so trueQuote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
but we don't even try - we discuss here and in real life the merits of restrictions and always seem to be on the defensive. so we should not wonder why we feel the heat - it is the politically simplest solution.
perhaps we should very actively lobby to remind everyone that mental health and gangs are the main cause instead of being on the defensive
Gun deaths (all inclusive) Canada: 2.7ish
Cdn per capita suicide middle aged men. 22.x
So middle aged men are offing themselves at a rate that's 10times the GD per capita, yet what gets all the attention, press and more?
They were all related MOM and brothers
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ther-1.3740496
I suspected as much or similar.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodbender
God rest her soul. What she must have thought in her final moments.
Very sad indeed....Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
The media is still bent on reporting that the victims were shot. I heard it from a newscaster again this morning....I guess a stabbing isn't as sensational !
I have said many times "that the media is the base of a lot of problems , as they are great at distorting actual facts " , and as you have said , to sensationalize the news.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
I listened to a newscast yesterday, it appeared that the police are in fact leaning towards the crossbow shooting one bolt, and the other victims were possibly stabbed with another bolt.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Why would they say that when according to this released by police; [COLOR=#333333]Police allege Ryan strangled his mother Susan Ryan, 66, with a ligature.[COLOR=#333333]His brothers, Alexander, 29, and Chris, 42, died of neck wounds from a crossbow bolt or arrowhead, according to autopsy results released by the police Monday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
from this news release posted by Rodbender;http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ther-1.3740496
Again is it the news media distorting facts ?
Over the years , I have been involved with the news media and their reporting , Give them a statement and when you see it in the newspaper , you wonder where that came from , as it is not what you have originally said to that reporter.
They take what you have said, distort it , take statements out of context , print them, to sway people in believing things "their way" . When they are done it makes you wonder why you have even spoken with them .
Haha, very true. I recall seeing the story about the strangling as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
It kind of reminds of the events in a song my father use to sing to us, called, "The Pictures From Life's Other Side," I think it was an old Hank Williams song.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
My guess is the crossbow wasn't even used. Likely stabbed them with a bolt. Very easy to differentiate between a stab and a shot. But like already said a "crossbow" is sexier.
I saw a release today that in essence said
1) ligature strangulation
2) bolt to the neck
3) arrow to the neck
both the bolt and arrow they said "stabbing wounds". But made it clear that with the arrow he was stabbed. Have to wonder why they wouldn't clarify that, with respect to the bolt, and instead are choosing to leave it unspecified. They also said they wouldn't release much more due to the pending court case.
pure speculation on my part but seems clear to me this was planned at least a little.
1) go for mom
2) grab loaded and readied x-bow for the first brother
3) grab whatever is handy/ready. Maybe a compound but no chance to draw so....
Id have planned it better but if I was going strangle mom ( physically weakest) and then deal with my brothers. Yep, x-bow would be loaded and the bow or arrows nearby I guess
well here we go with the right answer
http://www.cknw.com/syn/60/167930/ma...s-due-in-court
stabbed with crossbow bolts
Real story! Crossbow was so slow he just stuck the arrows into his victims by hand.
update...
bit of a Zombie thread..but still of interest to some who like to know how it played out;
How the crossbow played into the crime;Quote:
TORONTO - A desperate, deceitful groom admitted Friday he murdered his mother and two brothers to prevent his mom from revealing his web of lies to his fiancee a month before their wedding.
Brett Ryan, 36, pleaded guilty Friday to two counts of second-degree murder in the Aug. 25, 2016 killings of his mother, Susan, 66, and his brother, Alexander, 29, and first-degree murder in the crossbow slaying of his oldest brother, Christopher, 42, a TTC fare collector. He also pleaded guilty to attempting to murder another brother, Leigh, 38.
The judge sentenced Ryan to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years for first-degree murder and two concurrent life sentences for the killings of the man’s mother and younger brother. Ryan received a 10-year concurrent sentence for the attempted murder.
Crown attorney Dihim Emami and senior Crown attorney Tom Pittman negotiated the plea bargain deal with defence lawyers John Rosen and Lindsay Daviau. If Ryan had been convicted of three counts of first-degree murder — as initially charged — he could have faced the daunting prospect of consecutive parole eligibility periods, meaning he would have to wait 75 years for his first chance at parole.
http://www.ottawasun.com/2017/07/28/...de-his-deceiptQuote:
He confronted his mother. When their argument became heated, she phoned his older brother, Christopher, for help.
Brett retrieved the crossbow, stabbed his mom with a bolt, then strangled her to death with a yellow nylon rope.
Brett ambushed Christopher by shooting a bolt through the back of his head when he appeared.
Brett hid both bodies under a tarp in the garage. His younger brother, Alexander, was fatally stabbed with a bolt when he confronted Brett.
Apparently,he had quite a history of robbery and was a pathological liar. He committed the murders to stop his family from exposing his deceit and lies to his fiance......who just happens to be the luckiest woman on the face of this Earth not to be marrying that psychopathic cut-throat. I hope she went out and bought Lottery tickets. On another note,he was sentenced to "concurrent" prison terms. The SOB should never see the light of day......ever.
dress him up like a 12pt buck and leave in an open field for october 1st!
Crazy story.
Why did the Crown concede to his plea deal for concurrent life sentence? It seems like a fairly easy case to win
If there was any person who doesnt deserve parole its this guy.
One of the "inequities " of our so called " justice system".Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
Cost & court time, I should think.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk