Just to clarify a bit more; It’s not that Canada “doesn’t like” guns coming into the country. It’s just that we have different laws here, seeing as we are a completely different country and all.
Hunters are more than welcome to bring rifles into Canada for sport hunting. They merely have to follow our laws. It’s not rocket science.
Protip: It’s a poor idea to try to smuggle a weapon across an international border, and then claim you have a “right” to do so in that foreign country. It will not end well for you.
Do you think people should be able to buy heavy machine guns at walmart? What about sarin gas? Mortars and mortar rounds? Where does weapons control begin and end? It isn’t a question of whether we have weapons control, its a question of how far weapons control goes.
For the most part in the US, you can buy pistols, semi auto rifles, bolt action rifles and shotguns fairly easily. You can get a class III permit to buy silencers and machine guns, but a lot of people don’t bother with that.
As for your question why would people disarm, you’re assuming gun control and disarming are the same thing. Certain forms of gun control like limiting CCW permits, universal background checks and prohibiting guns from being sold to people with violent misdemeanors reduce gun homicide rates without really affecting gun ownership as a whole.
As to your question as to why would a nation totally disarm, it depends. Guns from the US flood mexico and are helping cause death in their drug war. If semi auto rifles were illegal here maybe the Mexican death rate would go down.
There is also the fact that small arms generally aren’t too useful at fighting against a domestic oppressive government. They had a role in the civil rights era (black people using small arms to hold off the KKK and police), but for the most part it was legislation that improved civil rights in the US, not guns.
Even if the government is totalitarian, things like IEDs seem more effective than small arms at making an occupying force want to leave.
Have a look at other democratic countries that do have strict gun control.
Here in England for example, you’re not allowed a gun for home defence.
Even our beat police are not armed. :eek:
These policies are immensely popular here.
One result of this is that we don’t have school shootings.
I’m confused at some of the responses saying that nobody wants gun confiscation. President Obama and others on the left have held out Australian gun laws as good examples. That was gun confiscation. Turn them in for money, or else…
Or are we doing the same thing again where we have thirteen pages of back and forth that since some guns are still allowed in Australia then that doesn’t count as gun confiscation or a “gun ban”? If so, I would rather not do that again.
You don’t need a special permit to buy Title II firearms, there’s a $200 fee and an extensive background check (which may not be possible to get in certain jurisdictions) necessary. A Class 3 permit is required by the FFL selling it to you, but isn’t required for the buyer.
You may not have school shootings, but you have more knife attacks per capita than the US has firearms attacks. Then again, the UK also just has a much lower rate of violent crime altogether, which suggests that there are cultural issues reflected in the US’s gun violence issues more than just legalization.
He said “When Australia had a mass killing, I think it was in Tasmania about 25 years ago, it was just so shocking to the system, the entire country said, ‘We’re going to completely change our gun laws.’ They did and it hasn’t happened since.”
In the same interview, he went on to say “New laws need to respect the traditions of gun ownership in the US. The question is just, ‘Is there a way of accommodating that legitimate set of traditions with some commonsense stuff that prevents a 21-year-old who is angry about something or confused about something, or is racist, or is deranged, from going into a gun store and suddenly is packing and can do enormous harm?’”
In a subsequent interview, Obama said, “We know that other countries in response to one mass shooting have managed to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours, Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.”
Nowhere in this do I see Obama calling for gun confiscation. He’s saying we should enact some form of gun control while specifically saying he does not want to abolish gun ownership.
So I see this as yet another attempt to scare gun owners with a threat that doesn’t exist.
It sounds to me, with very little implication or reading between the lines, that he is speaking with approval of gun laws in Australia and the UK while saying that he will let you keep granddaddy’s old squirrel gun
I looked through to page 15 and still didn’t see any legit news sites. Saw a whole lot of breitbart, washingtonexaminer, and crap like www.nraila.org and www.gunconfiscation.com.
Willing to bet the “occasional news coverage” the OP was referring to was from one of these sites, but I guess we’ll never know because the OP never provided any cites at all.
**
First of all, there has never been, nor will there ever be any government effort to confiscate all the citizen owned guns in this country. That is an NRA led right wing scare tactic designed to panic people and close their minds to any and all efforts to establish sane gun control.
Why are you shaking your head in confusion? Cars are registered; drivers are trained and licensed; proper use of automobiles is required and enforced. Does that confuse you? Do you not see the need for sane control? Right now, I can drive to Indiana, attend a “gun show”, buy heavy weaponry with cash out of a suitcase, be tracked by zero paper work, and drive back to Chicago and sell them clandestinely with no way to be tracked. You see no need to close loopholes like that?
Read this and tell me if you are still “shaking your head in confusion” when you’re done:
To put a rather thick point on it, in Australia and the UK, they DID keep their granddaddy’s old squirrel guns.
Gun ownership rates are fairly high in Australia compared to other developed nations and still higher than most Asian nations in the UK. It’s not a matter of “still” owning some guns. Australians own a LOT of guns compared to most nations. But certainly not assault style rifles and a very limited number of shotguns.
The notion either nation confiscated guns in the manner feared by the loons is completely unsupported by the facts. It is totally at odds with reality.
Seems like you are fighting both letter and spirit of what Obama, for one, said on the matter.
I never thought gay marriage would legalized.
I never thought men would be allowed to use the female bathrooms.
I never thought we would have de facto open borders and sanctuary cities.
You get the picture. The unthinkable has happened.
Total gun confiscation is a certainly a possibility.
Remember first they take away your second amendment rights so they can take away your first amendment rights.
Threads like this one, and especially posts like this one, have convinced me that we SHOULD be pushing for comprehensive bans on guns, including confiscation. The pro-gun viewpoint is so detached from reality (“de facto open borders” - do you have a cite for this?) that taking their paranoid whining into account is pointless. They will fight us tooth and nail to prevent “common sense gun control” from passing; so why pander to them in the first place?
This is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read. It would be hillarious, if it wasn’t terrifying.
The US Constitution was written for very good reasons and I don’t think we should accept any infringement of our constitutional rights. The 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments are routinely violated and we should not accept that.
The second amendment is indeed very important. Every human should have the right to defend themselves. For those that argue that citizens shouldn’t own weapons the government has, the government serves the people, not the other way around. The government is of the people, by the people, and for the people. “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” “the people” is all of us. You can choose to exercise that right or not, but do not try to take that right away from other people just because of your fears or opinions.
