Mayor Tory calls for tightened gun controls.

[Gilroy]

The back and forth between you and J just reinforces the notion that there is no easy solutions here.

[welsh]

If someone want to prove that the registry had a big impact, well its going to take studies, of things here, and only here, in essence in a controlled environment ... If a trafficker here gets 10 years and a trafficker in (name some state) X gets 5 years. Well thats going to make a difference in the street price. Wont it?

There are obviously many variables driving the street price. But I am not arguing the registry drives the street price.

I am arguing that the regulatory environment for handguns in Canada, and in particular the existence of a registry, creates the need to smuggle. It is the risks associated with smuggling that drive up the street price.

These are not controversial or difficult ideas. Indeed, this is exactly the rationale gun owners have used for years to explain why handgun bans will be ineffective! And in further delicious irony, I first encountered the idea that gun control is primarily a market measure in an anti-control article by Matt Walsh in the libertarian Reason magazine.

You can argue all you want, but I'm not playing anymore.

Bottom line: handguns are not nearly as available to Canadian criminals as some people imagine. Handgun availability is not really a problem. Bill Blair is probably right, much as it pains me: supply side approaches are not very useful anymore. Further regulation will be unhelpful, and John Tory is fundamentally wrong.

There I go, being the enemy of all gun owners again!

[welsh]

So your saying that breaking into a collectors house stealing 10-20 guns and selling them into the back market.......Its only the registry that makes it risky.

I haven't said that anywhere. You're deliberately misrepresenting my argument.

This is why I stop playing, JBen.

[welsh]

The back and forth between you and J just reinforces the notion that there is no easy solutions here.

Right. There are no easy solutions. Unfortunately, politicians are in the business of peddling easy solutions, which is what John Tory is doing now.

Drugs created the problem, as you well know. If we really want to address the problem, we need to attack the cause.

[Gilroy]

Right. There are no easy solutions. Unfortunately, politicians are in the business of peddling easy solutions, which is what John Tory is doing now.

Drugs created the problem, as you well know. If we really want to address the problem, we need to attack the cause.

Well I do agree drugs are a big part of the story but there is more to this here and in the USA. I don,t want to get all philosophical on here but a lot has to do with power. Seems there are a lot of people out there feeling powerless in society but give them a gun and suddenly they are 6 feet tall.Some of the shootings of perfectly innocent bystanders were gang initiations, you disrespect somebody with the wrong words or even a look your getting shot.I remember back in Britain in the 70,s if you got caught with gun in the commission of a crime you got life in prison.I suspect this has changed now, but sure seemed a good deterrent.

[welsh]

There are certainly other issues in play and I don't want to be reductive in suggesting a single cause. That whole queetion of respect is a cultural problem. But it's the drug trade that created the gang problem and its drug profits that buy the guns. So in terms of where the greatest potential to reduce the problem lies, I think the target is obvious.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

[Noseyarentcha]

Bingo!
At last, somebody addresses the real issue...as much as it pains me to admit it

[terrym]

Handgun owners are a tiny portion of gun owners and a minuscule portion of voters. Politicians get very high electoral returns by attacking them. It's never about safety. It's about catering to special interests and the $support it yields.

[JBen]

Lol you beat me to it Gilroy. If it continued I was going point that out to.

The fact that there in no consensus per say. Some peoples opinions (underscore that word) may be that the registry was the greatest thing sinced sliced bread. Other people opinions may be something else...Some people may feel its this or that. As Im fond of saying the world is rarely black or white ( when there consensus, when only a few last people will say yes or no), But no-one else's opinions count.

Is said it when it started Welsh. I'm interested in results. Results that show this or that, measurable qunatifiable results that result in a near consensus. Few will argue for example that our storage laws help with suicides (not sure thats the best example, but it suffices for "on the fly").

AFAIK theres really only a couple studies. Hell even leo arent entirely sure of the causes for this and that. So again, all we have are opinions. The CFA have their opinions, theres scant studies that conclusively prove a lot. We can say fairly safely, that as far as the results go...not much has changed. And on the heels of that, violent crime and gun related crime have been trending down for decades. If Im not mistaken mostly in tandem with the US. So.....isnt it fair to ask the question. Um with all the GC we have brought in......Shouldn't there be a very oticeable deviation? Maybe there is, dont know for sure ad really immaterial.

The gun crowd if you will has for years, years argued. Leave us alone, Why dont you go after the real problem. Criminals. I also but this is just my personal opinion feel that we should be counting domestic violence in that, as well as mental health and suicide. Both of which some measures have been brought in. Its arguable if its enough, but again I would first look at why leo and the system too often are fails women and make more changes there, and while this is changing, why more research and preventative measures in suicides isnt done first ( people dont like to talk about that one).

Our gun death per capita is these days around 2.7. When its parsed down to gun death related to crime. Around 0.5.

So Im wondering just what the real problems are.
Gangs/drugs etc certainly. Well as has been mentioned they arent having trouble arming themselves. This is inarguable I would think.Should that come as any surprise. They dont have any trouble getting hard drugs either........If politicians like Tory and at the fed/provincial level want to make noise about "making the streets safer". As JT recently said "We have to balance the rights of legal gun owners against public safety.

Then go after the problem. Do things, that will produce results and as Trimmer and history has shown, half measures dont cut it. They adapt, as they are to the crackdown on smuggling. Theres all kinds of adages about treating symptoms and not the causes.

That though might entire some political will. Getting "tough on crime" isnt exactly one of our strong suits

damn iphones, phat fingers and auto spellers. Cant be bothered to edit

[Bigbear]

Handgun owners are a tiny portion of gun owners and a minuscule portion of voters. Politicians get very high electoral returns by attacking them. It's never about safety. It's about catering to special interests and the $support it yields.

Absolutely! And votes....don't forget votes.

And when the day comes that they get restrictions placed on the number of handguns a guy can own, it will be easier to make the same pitch about long guns.

They nibble away, bit by bit...progressively regressive. That's the way our government works.