Canada needs a CCW and Stand Your Ground law
Previous 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ... 33 Next
Gunnair @ Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:08 pm
Xort Xort:
Gunnair Gunnair:
You should run for parliament on that platform. You'll be a shoe in!
Little point in being elected to public office if you want to change something. After all I would only have one vote.
Much better to get currently elected people to vote how I'd like.
Well, of course they'll buy into your idea. I'm surprised none of the other 30,000,000 plus Canadians didn't come up with it!
Gunnair @ Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:10 pm
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
8O........ 
Everyone has at least one good idea...no?
EyeBrock @ Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:45 pm
From what I've seen of his posts, er no. I'm still waiting for that one, good idea.
Xort @ Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:10 pm
Gunnair Gunnair:
Well, of course they'll buy into your idea. I'm surprised none of the other 30,000,000 plus Canadians didn't come up with it!
The point of my suggestion wasn't that I want a new law, it's my way of pointing out how terrible the current system is.
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
From what I've seen of his posts, er no. I'm still waiting for that one, good idea.
I'm waiting for anyone to post a reasoned argument for anything, other than our legalize pot friend.
The core group of poster here should feel more than a little shame that it's the pot guy who has the best and most reasoned arguments.
fifeboy @ Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:22 pm
Xort Xort:
Gunnair Gunnair:
Well, of course they'll buy into your idea. I'm surprised none of the other 30,000,000 plus Canadians didn't come up with it!
The point of my suggestion wasn't that I want a new law, it's my way of pointing out how terrible the current system is.
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
From what I've seen of his posts, er no. I'm still waiting for that one, good idea.
I'm waiting for anyone to post a reasoned argument for anything, other than our legalize pot friend.
The core group of poster here should feel more than a little shame that it's the pot guy who has the best and most reasoned arguments.
The only shame I feel is for my inability to stop reading your amazingly stupid posts.
EyeBrock @ Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:41 pm
That was pretty funny Fife!
Jughead @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:27 am
Canada already has a CCW law on the books, however it is nearly impossible for a Canadian citizen to obtain a CCW permit. Nonetheless, the law is there. In order to obtain such a permit (ATC-3), the police need to demonstrate that your life is in danger, and that they would not be able to guarantee your protection. The Chief Firearms Officer or the Provincial Public Security Minister would need to approve the ATC-3 permit. Some individuals do manage however to get such permits (ex. high profile criminal lawyers). It is believed that a prominent member of the Advocacy for Gun Control owns an ATC-3 permit.
For jobs that require the use of handguns, the gun generally needs to be visible, and holstered, and an ATC permit is required (example, trappers, armoured guards, wildlife personel, gunsmith).
Logical sense indicates that we should be allowed a CCW permit simply by demonstrating proficient use of a firearm, and with no criminal background. In order to weed out potential psychos, an interview with a psychologist and/or police officer would also be a good idea. Also checking with the applicants family, employer, and neighbors would be wise as well to ensure the individual is of a sound mind. By having law abiding citizens carrying concealed weapons, we would be discouraging criminals from committing gun related crimes. Right now, armed criminals in Canada really only need to worry about the police.
Gunnair @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:35 am
Jughead Jughead:
By having law abiding citizens carrying concealed weapons, we would be discouraging criminals from committing gun related crimes. Right now, armed criminals in Canada really only need to worry about the police.
What this argument ignores, however, is what determines proficiency for a CCW permit? The idea that Joe Lunchbox with a CCW may discourage crime is a possibility only until said Joe Lunchbox pulls out his pistol and in his adrenaline filled panic, kills some innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Then Joe Lunchbox become a criminal.
Jughead @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:11 am
Gunnair Gunnair:
Jughead Jughead:
By having law abiding citizens carrying concealed weapons, we would be discouraging criminals from committing gun related crimes. Right now, armed criminals in Canada really only need to worry about the police.
What this argument ignores, however, is what determines proficiency for a CCW permit? The idea that Joe Lunchbox with a CCW may discourage crime is a possibility only until said Joe Lunchbox pulls out his pistol and in his adrenaline filled panic, kills some innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Then Joe Lunchbox become a criminal.
Good point! I would hope that being interviewed by a psychologist and police, as well as the police checking with Joe Lunchbox's family, employer and neighbors would weed out any potential trigger happy gunslingers.
In addition, since police officers undergo extensive firearms training, individuals with a CCW permit would also have to undergone similar firearms training. However, as is the case with our police officers, accidents can indeed happen and with civilians as well, and yes sometimes innocent individuals are accidently hit in the crossfire. What needs to be determined is if the deterrent factor created by opening up the CCW permits outweighs the additional risk created by having armed civilians walking the streets. Only way to know for sure is to have a trial run.
BartSimpson @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:17 am
Gunnair Gunnair:
What this argument ignores, however, is what determines proficiency for a CCW permit? The idea that Joe Lunchbox with a CCW may discourage crime is a possibility only until said Joe Lunchbox pulls out his pistol and in his adrenaline filled panic, kills some innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Then Joe Lunchbox become a criminal.
Then Joe Lunchbox become a criminal.
And what your argument ignores is that US CCW holders are statistically far less likely to wrongfully shoot someone than are law enforcement. Where you often cite Canadian culture as far more calm than US culture I fail to see why this principle would not hold true in Canada, as well.
For the vast majority of potential Canadian CCW holders I'd fathom that the only time they'll fire their pistols will be annually at the shooting range when they qualify to renew their carry permits.
DrCaleb @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:17 am
Jughead Jughead:
For jobs that require the use of handguns, the gun generally needs to be visible, and holstered, and an ATC permit is required (example, trappers, armoured guards, wildlife personel, gunsmith).
Not disagreeing with you, and just to clairfy - but those are different permits.
ATC-3 is very hard to get, and allows concealed. Trappers get an ATC-2. Wildlife (Conservation) officers are under different legislation, much like police officers. And Gunsmiths get Authorization to Transport restricted weapons, not Authorization To Carry.
Security Guards and Police are only allowed to carry while on the job, and while in uniform and *only* open carry. Never 'concealed', and they don't need a permit to do it. It's exempted under their job.
Gunnair @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:21 am
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Gunnair Gunnair:
What this argument ignores, however, is what determines proficiency for a CCW permit? The idea that Joe Lunchbox with a CCW may discourage crime is a possibility only until said Joe Lunchbox pulls out his pistol and in his adrenaline filled panic, kills some innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Then Joe Lunchbox become a criminal.
Then Joe Lunchbox become a criminal.
And what your argument ignores is that US CCW holders are statistically far less likely to wrongfully shoot someone than are law enforcement. Where you often cite Canadian culture as far more calm than US culture I fail to see why this principle would not hold true in Canada, as well.
For the vast majority of potential Canadian CCW holders I'd fathom that the only time they'll fire their pistols will be annually at the shooting range when they qualify to renew their carry permits.
You wouldn't actually have some stats for that would you?
andyt @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:22 am
Jughead Jughead:
Logical sense indicates that we should be allowed a CCW permit simply by demonstrating proficient use of a firearm, and with no criminal background. In order to weed out potential psychos, an interview with a psychologist and/or police officer would also be a good idea. Also checking with the applicants family, employer, and neighbors would be wise as well to ensure the individual is of a sound mind. By having law abiding citizens carrying concealed weapons, we would be discouraging criminals from committing gun related crimes. Right now, armed criminals in Canada really only need to worry about the police.
OK, let the CCW applicants pay the cost of all that. Interviews with a shrink (and how often have they been wrong) at $200/hr, say at least 3 sessions. Police costs of checking with family, employer, and neighbors. (Better hope your neighbor doesn't already have a CCW and doesn't want you to get one) - how much will that cost. Setting up appointment with police weapons officer to demonstrate proficiency, including rental of the gun range. We gotta be looking at at least a couple thousand bucks for all this.
Then there's the thorny problem that the argument that CCW discourages gun crime is idiotic. Just need to look south for that. More like it encourages shoot first crime.
andyt @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:24 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Police are only allowed to carry while on the job, and while in uniform and *only* open carry. Never 'concealed', and they don't need a permit to do it. It's exempted under their job.
All the plain clothes guys are ccw no? Or am i misunderstanding concealed?
Gunnair @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:25 am
Jughead Jughead:
Gunnair Gunnair:
Jughead Jughead:
By having law abiding citizens carrying concealed weapons, we would be discouraging criminals from committing gun related crimes. Right now, armed criminals in Canada really only need to worry about the police.
What this argument ignores, however, is what determines proficiency for a CCW permit? The idea that Joe Lunchbox with a CCW may discourage crime is a possibility only until said Joe Lunchbox pulls out his pistol and in his adrenaline filled panic, kills some innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Then Joe Lunchbox become a criminal.
Good point! I would hope that being interviewed by a psychologist and police, as well as the police checking with Joe Lunchbox's family, employer and neighbors would weed out any potential trigger happy gunslingers.
In addition, since police officers undergo extensive firearms training, individuals with a CCW permit would also have to undergone similar firearms training. However, as is the case with our police officers, accidents can indeed happen and with civilians as well, and yes sometimes innocent individuals are accidently hit in the crossfire. What needs to be determined is if the deterrent factor created by opening up the CCW permits outweighs the additional risk created by having armed civilians walking the streets. Only way to know for sure is to have a trial run.
Well, as long as everyone is happy about the potential for innocents being killed in that trial run... then let's begin!
Frankly, I doubt CCW holders have the extensive training that the police have though most who argue for CCW dispute that. And as we have seen recently in New York, the police can easily fuck up and increase the casualty count - and they have training at the tactical level as well as simply marksmanship. CCW holders, I doubt, generally have that level.
But I'd be thrilled with some real world figures that prove me wrong here.
Previous 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ... 33 Next