|
Post by William Swiger on Jul 25, 2018 16:57:42 GMT
TORONTO — Of all the things people in Toronto are horrified by in the aftermath of the shooting that killed two people and injured 13, this stands out: The man responsible had a handgun.
To mass shooting-weary America — where there are about 300 million guns of all kinds — possession of a handgun might seem commonplace.
But in Toronto, the very idea that someone would have a handgun, much less take it out in public and fire it, is nearly incomprehensible. Now, the City Council is considering a motion urging the federal and provincial government to ban the sale of handguns and handgun ammunition in Canada's largest city.
"If anything, what's happened in the United States is what not to do," said City Councilman Joe Cressy, who proposed the motion Tuesday.
Agreed Toronto Mayor John Tory: "Why does anyone in this city need to have a gun at all?"
It's unclear how the shooter in Sunday's tragedy obtained his gun. And officials haven't discovered a motive for why 29-year-old Faisal Hussain targeted diners enjoying a warm summer night at restaurants and cafes in Toronto's popular Greektown neighborhood, killing a 10-year-old girl and 18-year-old woman. His parents said he had suffered from severe mental illness his entire life.
Cressy acknowledged that banning handguns isn't the only thing Toronto should do to combat gun violence, which is on the rise in the city. Crime prevention programs, helping those released from prison find jobs, mentoring kids and diversion programs are all initiatives that should be beefed up, along with meeting people's mental health needs, he said.
Even before Sunday's shooting, city leaders were concerned about an uptick in gun violence that had prompted the Toronto police to deploy dozens of additional officers over the weekend. The city has seen 23 gun homicides so far this year, compared to 16 fatal shootings in the first half of 2017.
Canada overhauled its laws after the country's worst mass shooting in 1989, when gunman Marc Lepine killed 14 women and himself at Montreal's Ecole Polytechnique college. It's now illegal to possess an unregistered handgun or any kind of rapid-fire weapon. Canada also requires training, a personal risk assessment, two references, spousal notification and criminal record checks to obtain a permit.
Canadians have long taken comfort in the peacefulness of their communities and are nervous about anything that might indicate they are moving closer to their American counterparts.
"There isn't a handgun culture here," said Toronto resident Alison MacLean, shaking her head and wearing a T-shirt with symbols of a peace sign, a heart and a moose. "Handguns aren't part of the common discourse."
Before 2012, about 75 percent of illegal firearms in Canada were trafficked from the United States. By 2017, however, about half originated from domestic sources, putting an end to the idea that most of Canada's illegal guns come from across the border, said Det. Rob Di Danieli of the Toronto police guns and gangs unit.
Legal Canadian gun owners are selling their weapons illegally, he said.
The allure of a quick sell at a high profit margin is one reason legal owners might sell their guns. One man sold 47 guns and made over $100,000 in a five-month period, Di Danieli said.
"They go get their license for the purpose of becoming a firearms trafficker," he said. "A lot of people are so ready to blame the big bad Americans, but we had our own little problem here."
A big difference between Canada and the U.S. is the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which grants Americans the right to bear arms. In Canada, gun ownership is not enshrined in the constitution.
"Canadians, unlike Americans, do not have a constitutional right to bear arms," Canada's high court said in a 1993 decision that upheld a ban on convertible semi-automatic weapons.
"Indeed, most Canadians prefer the peace of mind and sense of security derived from the knowledge that the possession of automatic weapons is prohibited," the court said.
Another difference is that Canadian politicians are not beholden to groups like the National Rifle Association, which donates millions of dollars to U.S. campaigns. Canada's federal elections laws put limits on contributions to political parties so that only individuals, not corporations or lobby groups, may donate.
In the wake of Sunday's shooting, many here said they were reminded of another mass shooting, one that happened 1,500 miles (2,414 km) away in Florida in February, when a former student walked into a school with an assault rifle and killed 17 students and staff members and injured 17 others.
"I was thinking about the victims in Parkland, and their strength," said 24-year-old Laila Hawrylyshyn. "And I hope the victims here in Toronto have the strength to recover from this."
She and a several dozen of her classmates in a government relations class at York University attended the City Council session on Tuesday where council members discussed gun violence with the city's police chief.
Said Cressy: "A 10-year-old and an 18-year-old dying is heartbreaking enough. I can't fathom what it's like as a parent to wake up and send your child off to school and wonder if they'll be killed. That's not a city you want to live in."
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Jul 25, 2018 20:28:17 GMT
A lot of Americans seem to be concerned about Canadian politics, I can't help but notice. Will I be banned for criticizing American politics?
I don't care for our desire to up our gun control after an isolated incident, but we can always compare the number of mass shootings if ya want
I also notice the mods only step in once trump it criticized, but will leave the thread going as long as possible if its against the left. No politics my *ss
|
|
|
Post by RaylonTheDemented on Jul 25, 2018 21:05:13 GMT
Its a sad thing, but if someone is mad enough to want to kill people, that person will find a way to do it, wether using a legally or illegally bought weapon or other weaponized object/vehicle. A ban on legally buying guns in a specific city won't stop someone to go and buy elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by William Swiger on Jul 25, 2018 21:09:59 GMT
Everyone should be concerned about the countries that border their own.
I just posted a news story from MSN. I did not criticize anything. I thought it might be of interest to our Canadian members who legally own firearms in Canada or live in that city.
Makes no sense to compare numbers as the US has a population of 325.7 million while Canada has a population of about 37 million. Different laws as well for citizens.
I don't like Trump at all but don't care for most politicians regardless of country. The mods do a fair job on this forum given they are all volunteers who donate their time here. They do not favor any certain group or individuals. If you see any unfair moderation, you should notify Adrian Jordan. As the Global Moderator, there will be no retribution on the person making a complaint. Many threads get brought to the attention of the moderation team by reporting it.
|
|
|
Post by William Swiger on Jul 25, 2018 21:15:16 GMT
Its a sad thing, but if someone is mad enough to want to kill people, that person will find a way to do it, wether using a legally or illegally bought weapon or other weaponized object/vehicle. A ban on legally buying guns in a specific city won't stop someone to go and buy elsewhere.
Very true words. Look at bombs and using airplanes........Both during WWII and modern times.
|
|
|
Post by Adrian Jordan on Jul 25, 2018 21:55:41 GMT
A lot of Americans seem to be concerned about Canadian politics, I can't help but notice. Will I be banned for criticizing American politics? I don't care for our desire to up our gun control after an isolated incident, but we can always compare the number of mass shootings if ya want I also notice the mods only step in once trump it criticized, but will leave the thread going as long as possible if its against the left. No politics my *ss
Politics as a matter of discussion is a no-no, indeed. I didn't read this as a political discussion, rather a reporting of the current state of flux concerning firearms is in Canada. I didn't detect any political leanings in it. It seemed on par with some folks who mention the knife ban in England and the such.
No, you won't be banned for criticizing American politics unless done repeatedly in a manner not consistent with the rules.
Not sure where the Trump thing came from, amigo. I've not sure I've ever even seen a really Trump-centric post on here, let alone stepped in on behalf of someone who posted about him. I personally avoid politics in my day to day life like the plague.
Also, this isn't an "American" forum, so Trump wouldn't be the resident Big Wig. The owner is actually Australian, so I'd more mind my p's and q's talking about the Turnbull, or the Queen, hahaha.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Jul 25, 2018 21:56:34 GMT
A lot of Americans seem to be concerned about Canadian politics, I can't help but notice. Will I be banned for criticizing American politics? I don't care for our desire to up our gun control after an isolated incident, but we can always compare the number of mass shootings if ya want I also notice the mods only step in once trump it criticized, but will leave the thread going as long as possible if its against the left. No politics my *ss "I also notice the mods only step in once trump it criticized, but will leave the thread going as long as possible if its against the left. No politics my *ss": Adrian's shut down conversations that went in the pro-Trump direction. Not sure where that critique comes from. Things are pretty apolitical around here with the exception of weapons laws (which are very relevant to hobbies and interests of forum members). This thread was anything but a political critique, as Swiger noted, until your rude remarks came in.
Since many Americans (myself included) are not only firm proponents of ethical firearm ownership and the responsibilities associated with it but are also extremely concerned with why these individuals choose to complete such actions. When violent offenders make up such an appreciably minimal percentage of weapon owners who jump through the proper hoops to own firearms (illegal possession, where owners ignore the laws by default, is another matter), the real question emerges as to why these few individuals engage in such horrible actions. Oftentimes this is when mental health care is brought up, and rightfully so, but that still doesn't explain what sculpts the mind to such a point. An explanation I find sensible is that toxic social dynamics among citizens (particularly among youth) lead to the nihilistic individualism conducive towards psycopathic and antisocial behaviors. Seeing how this issue is really a severe one that is multifaceted and requires serious attention due to the horrible effects it has on my country, I really find your comment "we can always compare the number of mass shootings if ya want" to be in exceptionally poor taste.
|
|
|
Post by Elrikk on Jul 25, 2018 21:57:34 GMT
And, Canada still has a queen.
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Jul 25, 2018 22:00:19 GMT
A lot of Americans seem to be concerned about Canadian politics, I can't help but notice. Will I be banned for criticizing American politics? I don't care for our desire to up our gun control after an isolated incident, but we can always compare the number of mass shootings if ya want I also notice the mods only step in once trump it criticized, but will leave the thread going as long as possible if its against the left. No politics my *ss
Politics as a matter of discussion is a no-no, indeed. I didn't read this as a political discussion, rather a reporting of the current state of flux concerning firearms is in Canada. I didn't detect any political leanings in it. It seemed on par with some folks who mention the knife ban in England and the such.
No, you won't be banned for criticizing American politics unless done repeatedly in a manner not consistent with the rules.
Not sure where the Trump thing came from, amigo. I've not sure I've ever even seen a really Trump-centric post on here, let alone stepped in on behalf of someone who posted about him. I personally avoid politics in my day to day life like the plague.
Also, this isn't an "American" forum, so Trump wouldn't be the resident Big Wig. The owner is actually Australian, so I'd more mind my p's and q's talking about the Turnbull, or the Queen, hahaha.
Oh, the Queen, where to begin...lol
If you feel my above post is too political (not sure it was, just felt the need to respond to something I perceived as fairly disrespectful), feel free to render it to oblivion.
|
|
|
Post by bebut on Jul 25, 2018 22:05:09 GMT
And once they outlaw the guns somebody will kill with a knife, so then knives will be outlawed. Look at Britain. Metal ball point pens will be next. Who in this city needs a metal pen, plastic ones will do!
|
|
|
Post by nerdthenord on Jul 26, 2018 0:04:59 GMT
I’m known in person as being something of a political radical, so I try to avoid anything remotely political on social media and forums. That being said, weapon ban laws seem to be to always be like banning cars because someone can hit you with one. They are absurd and have been repeatedly shown to have zero impact on violent crime rates, only having some impact on violent crime death rates. It’s usually either a knee jerk stopgap written by politicians too stupid to even contemplate the root causes of violence, or a deliberate attempt to control the population. I will stop there before getting too heated.
|
|
harrybeck
Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 999
|
Post by harrybeck on Jul 26, 2018 0:17:39 GMT
Bans make cowards feel like they did something without having to man up in any meaningful way.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Jul 26, 2018 0:18:16 GMT
Violent crime rate and violent crime death rate makes a big difference for the violent crime victim!
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jul 26, 2018 1:08:11 GMT
I can't help but feel mandatory psychological screening as a gun buying prerequisite would satisfy the camp blaming mental health and the camp blaming the availability of guns.
Provided of course that the screenings are set up in such a way that doesn't discriminate among citizens for factors other than mental health.
|
|
|
Post by nerdthenord on Jul 26, 2018 1:27:41 GMT
I completely agree in theory Elbrit. Only issue is that politicians don’t have a clue about real mental health vs pop culture mental health. If done correctly it SHOULD greatly lower violent crime. Odds are it wouldn’t be done correctly though. Ok. I’m staying away from this thread before I get in trouble.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jul 26, 2018 1:45:26 GMT
I completely agree in theory Elbrit. Only issue is that politicians don’t have a clue about real mental health vs pop culture mental health. If done correctly it SHOULD greatly lower violent crime. Odds are it wouldn’t be done correctly though. Ok. I’m staying away from this thread before I get in trouble. Implementation would absolutely be key, but thats true of all policy as far as I'm concerned. It can be the best bill on paper, but if its given the wrong resources and management, the result will be less than useless. Bureaucratic misinterpretation of the legislators intent probably causes more problems than actually bad legislation.
|
|
|
Post by Croccifixio on Jul 26, 2018 4:40:11 GMT
Actually I've gotten political, but almost no other Filipino posts here so I don't think the mods have minded. Also, I think there's a universal acceptance everywhere except the Philippines that killing people without due process/trial that is not in self-defense is a crappy thing to do (so is selling out to a foreign nation, enabling corruption, degrading the rule of law, and interfering with independent institutions, but those are murkier puddles). That said, my concept of "political" is really quite different - it's more of communal morality to me, than anything. In Western parlance, I'm a mix of right and left and wouldn't have it any other way, really. However, I think news on weapon laws (as opposed to opinion pieces) should be fertile ground for discussion here - though carefully moderated - due to its effect on our hobby. For instance, Matt Easton's crusade against those absurd UK regulations on mailing swords and knives should be something we all rally behind. I can contemplate no instance where a sword-loving collector/owner would agree with those laws. But I am open to hearing someone who does, so long as he/she is willing to have a logical and non-hostile discussion (no sniping or passive aggressive stuff, just a healthy debate). Also, the Americans here (whom I respect greatly) should also be aware that few, if any, other country has the 2nd Amendment enshrined in our fundamental laws/constitutions. The context is vastly different. In the same vein, it would be difficult to compare mass shootings per country and use it as evidence against gun control/gun rights because there are distinct cultural, legal, and societal norms we live in. Just as an example, and without going into the merits of legislation, you have the gun laws of the Philippines (which are just as strict as Canada's) in place to purportedly help curb crime. And yet gun crime statistics are incredibly high here, and most of these incidents involve illegal guns. We have an entire cottage industry of illegal/ghost guns, some of which are even exported to other countries all over the world. Why is that? Well we could spend the whole day pointing out all the differences between the Philippines and Canada (developing country/developed country, different colonial influences, different war experiences, cultural quirks, physical differences in territory, ethnography, political system, related laws/regulations, and climate, etc etc.) but the point is there are at least 27,000 people dead here in the past 2 years due to guns and Canada has, what, less than 2000? And yet it has a ratio of 30 out of 100 legal gun owners, whereas we have a ratio of 5 out of 100 legal gun owners. So there are far more variables than gun numbers out there. Oh and our gun homicide rates per 100,000 people are higher than that of the US. Double in fact (and if we take the past 2 years into account we've probably tripled our rate). Honduras dwarfs us with a 7-fold ratio. The unique thing about the statistics is the guns per 100 inhabitants (which better correlates to looser gun laws/regulations, meaning of the countries mentioned in this paragraph we have the most restrictive laws). We have 5. Honduras has 10. The US has 90. Heck, Serbia has 40 but has a gun homicide rate of 0.61. So numbers, yeah. What are they good for? Absolutely nothing (not really, I just really miss Rush Hour with Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker, what a great movie).
|
|
tonystark
Member
“I told you, I don’t want to join your super secret boy band!”
Posts: 816
|
Post by tonystark on Jul 26, 2018 5:29:37 GMT
Actually I've gotten political, but almost no other Filipino posts here so I don't think the mods have minded. Also, I think there's a universal acceptance everywhere except the Philippines that killing people without due process/trial that is not in self-defense is a crappy thing to do (so is selling out to a foreign nation, enabling corruption, degrading the rule of law, and interfering with independent institutions, but those are murkier puddles). That said, my concept of "political" is really quite different - it's more of communal morality to me, than anything. In Western parlance, I'm a mix of right and left and wouldn't have it any other way, really. However, I think news on weapon laws (as opposed to opinion pieces) should be fertile ground for discussion here - though carefully moderated - due to its effect on our hobby. For instance, Matt Easton's crusade against those absurd UK regulations on mailing swords and knives should be something we all rally behind. I can contemplate no instance where a sword-loving collector/owner would agree with those laws. But I am open to hearing someone who does, so long as he/she is willing to have a logical and non-hostile discussion (no sniping or passive aggressive stuff, just a healthy debate). Also, the Americans here (whom I respect greatly) should also be aware that few, if any, other country has the 2nd Amendment enshrined in our fundamental laws/constitutions. The context is vastly different. In the same vein, it would be difficult to compare mass shootings per country and use it as evidence against gun control/gun rights because there are distinct cultural, legal, and societal norms we live in. Just as an example, and without going into the merits of legislation, you have the gun laws of the Philippines (which are just as strict as Canada's) in place to purportedly help curb crime. And yet gun crime statistics are incredibly high here, and most of these incidents involve illegal guns. We have an entire cottage industry of illegal/ghost guns, some of which are even exported to other countries all over the world. Why is that? Well we could spend the whole day pointing out all the differences between the Philippines and Canada (developing country/developed country, different colonial influences, different war experiences, cultural quirks, physical differences in territory, ethnography, political system, related laws/regulations, and climate, etc etc.) but the point is there are at least 27,000 people dead here in the past 2 years due to guns and Canada has, what, less than 2000? And yet it has a ratio of 30 out of 100 legal gun owners, whereas we have a ratio of 5 out of 100 legal gun owners. So there are far more variables than gun numbers out there. Oh and our gun homicide rates per 100,000 people are higher than that of the US. Double in fact (and if we take the past 2 years into account we've probably tripled our rate). Honduras dwarfs us with a 7-fold ratio. The unique thing about the statistics is the guns per 100 inhabitants (which better correlates to looser gun laws/regulations, meaning of the countries mentioned in this paragraph we have the most restrictive laws). We have 5. Honduras has 10. The US has 90. Heck, Serbia has 40 but has a gun homicide rate of 0.61. So numbers, yeah. What are they good for? Absolutely nothing (not really, I just really miss Rush Hour with Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker, what a great movie). Well said!
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Jul 26, 2018 7:51:40 GMT
Actually I've gotten political, but almost no other Filipino posts here so I don't think the mods have minded. Also, I think there's a universal acceptance everywhere except the Philippines that killing people without due process/trial that is not in self-defense is a crappy thing to do (so is selling out to a foreign nation, enabling corruption, degrading the rule of law, and interfering with independent institutions, but those are murkier puddles). That said, my concept of "political" is really quite different - it's more of communal morality to me, than anything. In Western parlance, I'm a mix of right and left and wouldn't have it any other way, really. However, I think news on weapon laws (as opposed to opinion pieces) should be fertile ground for discussion here - though carefully moderated - due to its effect on our hobby. For instance, Matt Easton's crusade against those absurd UK regulations on mailing swords and knives should be something we all rally behind. I can contemplate no instance where a sword-loving collector/owner would agree with those laws. But I am open to hearing someone who does, so long as he/she is willing to have a logical and non-hostile discussion (no sniping or passive aggressive stuff, just a healthy debate). Also, the Americans here (whom I respect greatly) should also be aware that few, if any, other country has the 2nd Amendment enshrined in our fundamental laws/constitutions. The context is vastly different. In the same vein, it would be difficult to compare mass shootings per country and use it as evidence against gun control/gun rights because there are distinct cultural, legal, and societal norms we live in. Just as an example, and without going into the merits of legislation, you have the gun laws of the Philippines (which are just as strict as Canada's) in place to purportedly help curb crime. And yet gun crime statistics are incredibly high here, and most of these incidents involve illegal guns. We have an entire cottage industry of illegal/ghost guns, some of which are even exported to other countries all over the world. Why is that? Well we could spend the whole day pointing out all the differences between the Philippines and Canada (developing country/developed country, different colonial influences, different war experiences, cultural quirks, physical differences in territory, ethnography, political system, related laws/regulations, and climate, etc etc.) but the point is there are at least 27,000 people dead here in the past 2 years due to guns and Canada has, what, less than 2000? And yet it has a ratio of 30 out of 100 legal gun owners, whereas we have a ratio of 5 out of 100 legal gun owners. So there are far more variables than gun numbers out there. Oh and our gun homicide rates per 100,000 people are higher than that of the US. Double in fact (and if we take the past 2 years into account we've probably tripled our rate). Honduras dwarfs us with a 7-fold ratio. The unique thing about the statistics is the guns per 100 inhabitants (which better correlates to looser gun laws/regulations, meaning of the countries mentioned in this paragraph we have the most restrictive laws). We have 5. Honduras has 10. The US has 90. Heck, Serbia has 40 but has a gun homicide rate of 0.61. So numbers, yeah. What are they good for? Absolutely nothing (not really, I just really miss Rush Hour with Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker, what a great movie). Well spoken (er-typed?), as always. Base rate neglect and other statistical/logistical oversights are often why political discourse derails and deadends. Context is key and investigating why a situation is conducive towards destructive behaviors is arguably the most efficacious option for assessment and improvement.
I find your anecdotes about the situation in the Philippines particularly worthwhile to the discussion of firearms. There are a variety of pertinent points that are worth discussion, especially the disparity between regulation and actualization and the myriad cultural factors. Could be fun to continue this conversation, although I wonder if that's appropriate for this particular thread... your call William Swiger , don't want to send your thread too far off the rails
|
|
|
Post by William Swiger on Jul 26, 2018 9:02:44 GMT
Good conversation to keep going.
|
|