Welcome to True North Outdoor Hunting Forum - British Columbia and Beyond

It looks like you haven't created an account yet. Why not take a minute to register for your own free account now? As a member you get free access to all of our forums and posts plus the ability to post your own messages, communicate directly with other members and much more.

Register Log in

The evidence simply doesn't support calls for gun bans in Canada

IronNoggin

Stone Cold
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,920
Location
Port Alberni
Opinion: The evidence simply doesn't support calls for gun bans in Canada
According to gun control advocates’ logic, Australia’s buyback should have been followed by a sudden drop in firearm homicides and suicides. After all, access to legal guns ought to have been greatly diminished

John R. Lott, Jr. and Gary Mauser

It seems obvious: ban guns and there won’t be any gun crime.
After two people were killed and 13 injured in a July shooting in Toronto’s Greektown neighbourhood, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau ordered his government to assess the idea of “a full ban on handguns and assault weapons in Canada.” They are scheduled to finish the assignment by the end of the year.

Here is a simple question for Canada to answer: has a single place, anywhere in the world, ever seen its murder rate decline after banning all handguns or all guns?
We can’t find such a place. Every single time that guns have been banned, murder rates have gone up — often several-fold.

Handgun homicides continued to rise after Canada’s 1995 ban on more than half of all legally registered handguns. Americans tried to completely ban handguns in Chicago and Washington D.C., and saw murder and violent crime soar. Gun control advocates argued that these aren’t fair test cases because criminals could bring in guns purchased outside of city limits. But that argument can’t account for why rates of violence exploded in both places.

Murder rates have increased even when all guns or all handguns are banned in entire countries, even entire island nations. Murder rates more than tripled after Ireland’s 1972 ban. In Jamaica, they went up six-fold after a 1975 ban.
The reason is simple. When guns are banned, it is law-abiding citizens rather than criminals who turn in their firearms. And criminals can continue buying arms from drug gangs. If governments can’t enforce drug bans, there’s no reason to think that they can enforce gun bans.

Australia is a favourite example of gun control advocates, but guns weren’t banned there. The country’s buyback program caused more than 700,000 firearms to be handed in and destroyed, reducing the number of legally owned guns from 3.2 to 2.5 million between 1996 and 1997. But since then, the increase in privately-owned guns has outpaced population growth by a factor of three. The number now stands at 5.8 million.

According to gun control advocates’ logic, Australia’s buyback should have been followed by a sudden drop in firearm homicides and suicides. After all, access to legal guns ought to have been greatly diminished. Gun control advocates would then have predicted a slow increase in firearm deaths as the ownership rate increased again. No such thing occurred. Firearm homicides and suicides were falling for 15 years prior to the buyback, and fell more slowly after the buyback. So there is no evidence that the buyback actually caused the fall, but it may look that way in the absence of historical context. Armed robbery rates rose after the buyback, and then slowly fell back down to pre-buyback levels as gun ownership increased. This is the exact opposite of what gun control advocates predicted.

The evidence for gun control is no more hopeful when it comes to preventing mass public shootings.
The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation defines a mass public shooting as an incident in which four or more people are shot to death in a public place, excluding gang fights and guerilla warfare. The murders also cannot have occurred in the commission of another crime such as robbery.

Compared to the average country, Canada has been pretty safe from these attacks. Canada has just half a percent of the world population, but it has had an even much smaller share of the world’s mass public shooting deaths. From 1998 to 2012, it had just 0.03 per cent of such fatalities. The same numbers for the U.S. were 4.6 per cent of the population and 1.1 per cent of the mass shootings, so it is also much safer than the average country.

Whether we look at all countries or only at developed ones, we find that nations where gun ownership is more common tend to have lower homicide rates and lower rates of death from mass public shootings. That’s because armed citizens are able to defend themselves and stop attacks in crowded, public places. Every single mass public shooting on record in Canada has occurred in areas with gun prohibitions. In the United States, that’s true of 98 per cent of attacks. It’s no wonder, since many mass killers intentionally pick targets where people can’t defend themselves.

Police are important in the fight against crime, but they almost always arrive after the crime has occurred. Depriving law-abiding citizens of firearms leaves us all more vulnerable to attacks.

National Post
John R. Lott is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and the author most recently of “The War on Guns.” Gary Mauser is professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/opinion-the-evidence-simply-doesnt-support-calls-for-gun-bans-in-canada
 

IronNoggin

Stone Cold
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,920
Location
Port Alberni
Blair was supposed to be "consulting" Canadians on the matter of these potential bans Canada wide, and taking into consideration comments from all who chose to do so. He has done anything BUT. Instead he has openly encouraged "Public Consultation by Written Invitation" ONLY. One guess who is on the "attend list". Even going so far as to reduce the so-called consultations in Alberta to a completely worthless exercise:

https://firearmrights.ca/en/minister-blair-scales-down-calgary-consulations-no-public/

Even before a good handful of these pseudo consultation meetings has occurred, Blair announces that he has collected all the information needed to formulate his opinion, and therefore recommendations to the government. Not too difficult to ascertain that he likely had his mind made up well before any such "consultations" ever occurred:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/blair-guns-ban-legislation-1.4983849

Funny, myself nor the several hundred other gun owners I know were never asked for their opinion. Guess we didn't mesh with their Agenda... :disgust:

Nog
 
Last edited:

IronNoggin

Stone Cold
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,920
Location
Port Alberni

savageone

New Member
Messages
19
Reaction score
20
Location
Chilliwack
'Experts' ignore facts when it comes to gun control in Canada

Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, Bill Blair, the minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau continue to hint at a ban on handguns and further restrictions on rifles and shotguns before this fall’s general election.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/gunter-experts-ignore-facts-when-it-comes-to-gun-control-in-canada
The Lieberals will do just that ( LIE ) to buy votes now that they need any smokescreen to bury SNC- Lavalin:stinky:
 

Bow Walker

SGT MAJOR IN DUMBELDORE'S ARMY.
Messages
37,574
Reaction score
2,386
Location
6200 km Away From Home.
Votes - it's all about getting more and more votes so they (whomever) can first get into power and then stay there.

ANYTHING goes when it comes to garnering votes.

You want a "forever" job??

Learn how to be a spin-doctor. Learn how to make the tail wag the dog......
 

Foxton Gundogs

Admin./,Cedar BC
Messages
12,074
Reaction score
3,036
Location
Cedar
Chuck Zuckerman pres. of BCWF Reg. 2, Sport Shooting Chair and candidate for Provincial President in 2019 will be speaking against C-71 to the Senate it will be televised, IF there is hope for the BCWF this is the guy that can turn the ship from the reef, I know Chuck and he may be the driving force needed to return the BCWF to its founding base. Time will tell and I'm NOT blind, if he F-s up as far as his platform goes I will not support the Fed any further. This is IMHO the last stand and the hill the Fed lives or dies on. I will post a link when I have one.
 

Foxton Gundogs

Admin./,Cedar BC
Messages
12,074
Reaction score
3,036
Location
Cedar
Here is an Email I just sent to Chuck. He wants to hear from Hunters and Shooters. Here is an email I sent to him, feel free to express your concerns. to chuck.zuckerman@gmail.com

So all through any "battle" we have regarding the G-bear hunt ban, and the upcoming battle over other predators, The board has taken the cop-out role of saying we are NOT a hunter advocacy group, we are a conservation group. Thy go on further to say that they must remain non partisan to maintain their charitable status. Well after some very serious thought I put forward this scenario.

If the BCWF is "only" a conservation group, why are they not fighting tooth and nail for SCIENCE BASED Conservation. Why are they not hammering the Provincial and Federal Government all guns on fire over the need for PROPPER SCIENCE BASED CONERVATION based on the need to keep numbers in a reasonable balance.

1.. The G-bear hunt. This was done for political reasons with NO mind paid to the biologists. The BCWF should be flexing their muscles as a conservation based society and pounding the government for ignoring the Bios in their decision to close the hunt to pander to the tree huggers who do not have science on their side. This in no way damages their status as a conservation and charitable society. It is their mandate to defend animals(leave hunters out of it) with viable science based conservation science and fact. Attack the emotion based tree huggers and the government for their lack of consideration and implementation of FACTS in their Ban of the hunt.

2.. Wolves and cats. Same thing go to war over the falsehoods being perpetrated by the groups like Raincoast when it comes to predator management. Stand up for the need to keep predators under control as they have no real natural enemies other than man where as hooved animals have a number of enemies including but not restricted to bears, wolves and big cats. The time has come to get ahead of the problem ACT don't REACT!!

The BCWF CAN have their cake and eat it too but only by ending their "milk toast" efforts to APPEAR to be doing something. The solution is simple IF someone will grow a pair and push their mandate as a conservation group to the limit. It can and should be done right away before the cats and wolves are next to be "protected"
 

IronNoggin

Stone Cold
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,920
Location
Port Alberni
“To further restrict handguns for law abiding firearms owners is like trying to prevent drunk driving by making it harder for sober drivers to own cars.”

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/do-the-results-of-government-questionnaire-on-handguns-truly-reflect-how-canadians-feel

Actually kind of funny in a way.
Socialists certainly stand firmly behind their results from openly acknowledged "vulnerable to manipulation" polls when they swing to their favor, but scream blue murder when they don't.
More of your tax dollars well wasted it would seem...

Nog
 

NAHMINT II

Moderator
Messages
2,644
Reaction score
1,709
Location
MID-ISLAND/Nanaimo area
us older guys remember bill C-68.... Remember how long it took (YEARS) for the ''head-mountie'' to admit that the facts they had PRESENTED to the govt. were very wrong !!!!!! and I read it in OUTDOOR LIFE MAG. :OH-OH::harumph:..is what he said !
 

IronNoggin

Stone Cold
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,920
Location
Port Alberni
Canadian MDs are pointing fingers at guns to divert attention from their inability to deal with medical mistakes. More people die from hospital mistakes than from guns, but the anti-gun MDs would rather politicians and the public have somebody else to blame.
Between 24,000 and 43,000 people die each year in Canada, studies estimate from medical mistakes. This is roughly 10 times as many who die from firearms.


https://www.halifaxmedicalmalpracticelawyerblog.com/2014/07/how_often_does_medical_malprac/
 

IronNoggin

Stone Cold
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,920
Location
Port Alberni
I am an emergency physician working at both academic and community emergency departments in Ontario. I was recently asked to sign a petition in support of a National Day of Action organized by the Canadian Doctors for Protection from Guns (CDPG) to ban “assault weapons” and handguns. This recently formed organization is not representative of a majority of physicians or health-care workers and I feel the need to respond with an alternative perspective.

Firearms laws in Canada are some of the most stringent and comprehensive in the world. Statistics show that we are a very safe country with low baseline crime and suicide rates that have been steadily dropping, with peaks and ebbs, over the past four decades. The recent statistics that some have used to counter those data are parsed from specific geographical areas and interval timelines with biased manipulation to suit the purposes of interest groups.


https://nationalpost.com/opinion/i-treated-victims-at-the-ecole-polytechnique-massacre-i-am-also-a-gun-enthusiast
 

IronNoggin

Stone Cold
Messages
4,462
Reaction score
2,920
Location
Port Alberni
Bill Blair, Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction Minister, refused to tell the Senate Committee on National Security and Defence if a government-initiated report on the effects of a handgun ban would be finished by the time of the election.

“Canadians expect us to take the time to do it right and I’ve been doing my very best to take that time,” Blair said.


He did the same thing FIVE times (taking lessons on how NOT to answer a question I guess) in an interview just today.

https://tnc.news/2019/04/12/trudeau-government-will-consider-handgun-ban-if-re-elected/

More vote seeking already in action...

Nog
 
Top Bottom