General Gun Violence/Gun Control

[RANCH]

Firearms are vastly different from other tools as they can kill and wound with minimal effort, and that’s their sole function.

SBM

I have to disagree with this statement. I have fired thousands of rounds through my guns in my lifetime and never killed or wounded anyone.

 

[Lexiintoronto]

SBM

I have to disagree with this statement. I have fired thousands of rounds through my guns in my lifetime and never killed or wounded anyone.

I probably should have worded it differently. They are designed to kill and wound efficiently, I understand there are people who use them as a hobby and other reasons. But that doesn’t change my point.

 

[RANCH]

I probably should have worded it differently. They are designed to kill and wound efficiently, I understand there are people who use them as a hobby and other reasons. But that doesn’t change my point.

Is this rifle designed to kill and wound efficiently? I don't think so.

10 Top Precision Rimfire Rifles for Competition and the Field

The best precision rimfires on the market.

www.outdoorlife.com

 

[10ofRods]

Anything that propels a projectile toward someone or somethin and is designed to do so is a weapon.

A fork is designed to be used to eat food. A sling shot has a similar shape but is designed to propel a projectile. It's a weapon. That's its design.

Sharpshooting/competitive guns can still hurt a person (a blank can hurt a person). Their design is to propel an object at high speed toward a target. It's a weapon. Blunderbusses and muzzle loaders are inefficient by modern standards, but have killed thousands and thousands of people in past centuries. That's what they were and are designed to do (send a potentially lethal projectile toward a target).

That's why in gun competitions, everyone follows all the rules of gun safety - although Lord knows that mishaps still result in human injury and death.

Fatal neck injuries caused by blank cartridges - PubMed

We report three cases where fatal neck injuries were caused by blanks from starting pistols. The weapons were loaded with blank cartridges or tear gas cartridges. Neither live ammunition nor any form of projectile was used. All three cases involved a contact discharge. The gas pressure caused by...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Competition rifles are usually semi-automatic and fire .22 or .223 or similar caliber. My policeman friend told me to get a .22 pistol for home defense - and my dad used a .22 revolver for home protection. Competition rifles are quite sufficient to kill a person with; so is a .22

In fact, I regard a .22 (including airsoft that has a similar size) as excellent weapons for several purposes, including anti-personnel if that's what the task is. I sure hope I never have to use any of these guns for that purpose.

You can do some eye damage with a pea shooter. Even more with a sling shot. And you can kill someone with any .22 ammo, if you know how to shoot. IMO. The rifle recently posted above uses .22 LR - exactly what I have in my pistol. It is deadly at both close range and long range. No point in giving more pointers, but no one should think that those competition rim fire .22's are toys - they are weapons, they are lethal, and are treated as such by any sane person who wields one.

IMO.

 

[PrairieWind]

Is this rifle designed to kill and wound efficiently? I don't think so.

10 Top Precision Rimfire Rifles for Competition and the Field

The best precision rimfires on the market.

www.outdoorlife.com

View attachment 459175

That rifle is DESIGNED as a competition grade target rifle. COULD it kill/wound? Absolutely. My Winchester Model 12 pump shotgun that I inherited from my father was designed for bird hunting. Could it kill humans? Absolutely.

 

[RANCH]

Anything that propels a projectile toward someone or somethin and is designed to do so is a weapon.

A fork is designed to be used to eat food. A sling shot has a similar shape but is designed to propel a projectile. It's a weapon. That's its design.

Sharpshooting/competitive guns can still hurt a person (a blank can hurt a person). Their design is to propel an object at high speed toward a target. It's a weapon. Blunderbusses and muzzle loaders are inefficient by modern standards, but have killed thousands and thousands of people in past centuries. That's what they were and are designed to do (send a potentially lethal projectile toward a target).

That's why in gun competitions, everyone follows all the rules of gun safety - although Lord knows that mishaps still result in human injury and death.

Fatal neck injuries caused by blank cartridges - PubMed

We report three cases where fatal neck injuries were caused by blanks from starting pistols. The weapons were loaded with blank cartridges or tear gas cartridges. Neither live ammunition nor any form of projectile was used. All three cases involved a contact discharge. The gas pressure caused by...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Competition rifles are usually semi-automatic and fire .22 or .223 or similar caliber. My policeman friend told me to get a .22 pistol for home defense - and my dad used a .22 revolver for home protection. Competition rifles are quite sufficient to kill a person with; so is a .22

In fact, I regard a .22 (including airsoft that has a similar size) as excellent weapons for several purposes, including anti-personnel if that's what the task is. I sure hope I never have to use any of these guns for that purpose.

You can do some eye damage with a pea shooter. Even more with a sling shot. And you can kill someone with any .22 ammo, if you know how to shoot. IMO. The rifle recently posted above uses .22 LR - exactly what I have in my pistol. It is deadly at both close range and long range. No point in giving more pointers, but no one should think that those competition rim fire .22's are toys - they are weapons, they are lethal, and are treated as such by any sane person who wields one.

IMO.

Of course a .22LR firearm can wound or kill someone. JMO

 

[RANCH]

That rifle is DESIGNED as a competition grade target rifle. COULD it kill/wound? Absolutely. My Winchester Model 12 pump shotgun that I inherited from my father was designed for bird hunting. Could it kill humans? Absolutely.

I agree. I was pointing out that not all guns are designed to kill people efficiently.

A box cutter is not designed to kill people but it can do it. Especially if the victim is unarmed.

JMO.

 

[Lexiintoronto]

Is this rifle designed to kill and wound efficiently? I don't think so.

10 Top Precision Rimfire Rifles for Competition and the Field

The best precision rimfires on the market.

www.outdoorlife.com

View attachment 459175

It’s a rifle, also a restricted firearm in Canada. So by definition an object designed to kill and injure. You may use it for target practice or collect it because it looks cool, but it can kill. And that’s by design.

I agree. I was pointing out that not all guns are designed to kill people efficiently.

A box cutter is not designed to kill people but it can do it. Especially if the victim is unarmed.

JMO.

I didn’t say all firearms are designed to kill people. Firearms are designed and were invented to efficiently kill or injure. This thread is about gun violence and gun control. Of course there are other objects that can kill or injure people.

 

[RANCH]

It’s a rifle, also a restricted firearm in Canada. So by definition an object designed to kill and injure. You may use it for target practice or collect it because it looks cool, but it can kill. And that’s by design.



I didn’t say all firearms are designed to kill people. Firearms are designed and were invented to efficiently kill or injure. This thread is about gun violence and gun control. Of course there are other objects that can kill or injure people.

All rifles are restricted in Canada? So the bolt action target rifle I linked is classified as a restricted class of firearm in Canada?

I never knew that. Can you link this please?

 

[MyBelle]

SBM

I have to disagree with this statement. I have fired thousands of rounds through my guns in my lifetime and never killed or wounded anyone.

If your family feels you are emotionally unstable, should they be able to ask a judge to temporarily limit your access to your weapons so that you can't harm yourself or others?

JMO

 

[Laughing]

If your family feels you are emotionally unstable, should they be able to ask a judge to temporarily limit your access to your weapons so that you can't harm yourself or others?

JMO

Family? Maybe not. Appropriately licensed health professional, with testimony in court -- yeah.

If more families were able to obtain guardianship of their adult children, there would be less crime in the news:

Teen charged with murder in fatal shooting of St. Louis County police officer

ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI) – An 18-year-old has been charged in the shooting death of a St. Louis County Police officer. Prosecuting attorney Bob McCulloch has charged Trent Forster with first degr…

fox2now.com

The shooter's father sought guardianship after his son had a brain injury & after a few inpatient stays.

Judge wouldn't grant that.

The judge is responsible for Officer Snyder's death, imho.

Trenton Forster was convicted of first degree murder, now serving LWOP.

Enabled by a judge to create a widow & fatherless child, enabled to murder Blake Snyder.

The process is on the books -- courts need to comply for public safety.

 

[Lexiintoronto]

All rifles are restricted in Canada? So the bolt action target rifle I linked is classified as a restricted class of firearm in Canada?

I never knew that. Can you link this please?

I didn’t write that all rifles in Canada are a restricted class of firearms. You’re misquoting me. I said “it’s”, referring to the .22 lr rifle you referred to, but when I looked further that specific model is not listed, but you need a firearms license to own one (PAL).

When I googled it I found that variants of that type of weapon are restricted under new proposed legislation C-21.

“Even some of Canada’s gun experts appear to be confused. When asked during the Public Safety Committee hearing whether the Mossberg 702 Plinkster Tactical 22 would be banned, Smith said, “No.” “The model 702 Plinkster is a conventional 22-caliber hunting rifle. It's unaffected by what's in C-21,” he said.

However, the .22 LR firearm is listed among the newly prohibited firearms as a “variant or modified version” of the M16, AR-10, and AR-15.”

What Hunters Need to Know about the Canadian Rifle Ban

The Canadian parliament is considering a ban on a large category of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, including many models that critics say are widely used by hunters. The House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security is considering the ban as an amendment to...

www.themeateater.com

My quick google search grouped that .22 you highlighted as a restricted firearm, but checking further I don’t think it is, with the exception that you need a PAL

 

[RANCH]

I didn’t write that all rifles in Canada are a restricted class of firearms. You’re misquoting me. I said “it’s”, referring to the .22 lr rifle you referred to, but when I looked further that specific model is not listed, but you need a firearms license to own one (PAL).

When I googled it I found that variants of that type of weapon are restricted under new proposed legislation C-21.

“Even some of Canada’s gun experts appear to be confused. When asked during the Public Safety Committee hearing whether the Mossberg 702 Plinkster Tactical 22 would be banned, Smith said, “No.” “The model 702 Plinkster is a conventional 22-caliber hunting rifle. It's unaffected by what's in C-21,” he said.

However, the .22 LR firearm is listed among the newly prohibited firearms as a “variant or modified version” of the M16, AR-10, and AR-15.”

What Hunters Need to Know about the Canadian Rifle Ban

The Canadian parliament is considering a ban on a large category of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, including many models that critics say are widely used by hunters. The House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security is considering the ban as an amendment to...

www.themeateater.com

My quick google search grouped that .22 you highlighted as a restricted firearm, but checking further I don’t think it is, with the exception that you need a PAL

Thanks. I didn't think that all rifles in Canada were restricted firearms. You said the gun I linked was restricted in Canada because it's a rifle which is not accurate.

I'm surprised that you live in Canada and don't have a firm grasp of Canadian firearm laws. JMO.

What guns can you have in Canada?​

So what guns are legal in Canada? There are three legal classes of firearms in Canada:

1. Non-restricted firearms – which include hunting and sporting rifles, shotguns and airguns with an overall length of 660mm or greater
2. Restricted firearms – which include any non-prohibited handgun, any gun that can still be fired when folded or telescoped below a certain length, and any semi-automatic gun with a barrel shorter than 470mm and the capability of shooting centrefire bullets
3. Prohibited firearms – which includes any rifle or shotgun that is neither non-restricted nor restricted

Everything You Need to Know About Canada's New Guns Laws | Mickelson, Whysall & Moore Law Group

Canada’s new firearms laws have been recently implemented. If you own, transport or sell guns in British Columbia there are a few things you need to know. Find out more here!

www.criminallawyervancouver.com

 

[DFWNF]

I wish they would all be banned. I don't know anyone that owns a gun aside from my 1 SIL in the USA.

 

[Laughing]

I wish they would all be banned.

OK, so which of your own civil rights are you willing to give up, since you seem interested in carving up mine and the civil rights of many, many law-abiding taxpayers??

 

[DFWNF]

OK, so which of your own civil rights are you willing to give up, since you seem interested in carving up mine and the civil rights of many, many law-abiding taxpayers??

I enjoy your posts Laughing. I would think giving up rights to own a gun in any country, that right is absurd to me, would be a good start. How many countries have that "right"?

 

[Laughing]

I enjoy your posts Laughing. I would think giving up rights to own a gun in any country, that right is absurd to me, would be a good start.

So -- you're not willing to give up any of your civil rights, you just want me -- and many other law-abiding taxpayers -- to give up civil rights.

Hmm, yes there are parallels in history. Indeed.

jmho ymmv lrr

 

[Lexiintoronto]

Thanks. I didn't think that all rifles in Canada were restricted firearms. You said the gun I linked was restricted in Canada because it's rifle which is not accurate.

I'm surprised that you live in Canada and don't have a firm grasp of Canadian firearm laws. JMO.

You’re misquoting me again. I didn’t say all rifles are restricted as I have explained in my above post. I mistakenly thought that particular weapon was ‘restricted’, and I explained why. You do need a license to obtain and use it, as with all firearms here.

I understand the basics of the firearm laws here, but I’m obviously not a gun expert.

This conversation began with the argument that a firearm is a tool and was compared to a box cutter, and that the user of the tool is the issue. My point is that firearms were designed and created to kill and injure, so there’s a distinction. And this thread is about gun violence, and ideas about how to solve the issue.

 

[DFWNF]

So -- you're not willing to give up any of your civil rights, you just want me -- and many other law-abiding taxpayers -- to give up civil rights.

Hmm, yes there are parallels in history. Indeed.

jmho ymmv lrr

No. If I had a civil right to own a gun, I would gladly give it up. As asked, which countries have that right? And why? I am truly unaware

 

[RANCH]

You’re misquoting me again. I didn’t say all rifles are restricted as I have explained in my above post. I mistakenly thought that particular weapon was ‘restricted’, and I explained why. You do need a license to obtain and use it, as with all firearms here.

I understand the basics of the firearm laws here, but I’m obviously not a gun expert.

This conversation began with the argument that a firearm is a tool and was compared to a box cutter, and that the user of the tool is the issue. My point is that firearms were designed and created to kill and injure, so there’s a distinction. And this thread is about gun violence, and ideas about how to solve the issue.

Your explanation for the mistake you made is not very good.

You cite proposed law not current law and wrongly state that the target rifle in my post is a quote "variant" of the M16, AR-10, and AR-15. Nope. It is not a variant of those rifles.

JMO.