Gun Control - Let's Shed Some Light on This Polarizing Topic


I have been considering writing this take for some time now, but a recent ridiculous manipulation of the laws by the RCMP combined with the constant demonization of this segment of society has pushed me to get off my ass and write it. Going to split this into a couple parts, I have a lot to cover and a lot of venting to do. I will include basic facts debunking some popular anti-gun myths and a bit of personal opinion and ranting.

I take points from both sides of the argument, not trying to insult anyone, so lets keep this calm and respectful, please and thank you.

A Canadians take on gun control-

I firmly believe there can be a reasonable middle ground on this debate. Measures do need to be taken to keep guns out of the wrong hands, but banning them is not the solution.

I'm am a firm believer in licensing. Basic training and background checks seem very reasonable to me. To get a license here involves a 2 day course with written and hands on tests, references and thorough background checks. Processing time is typically a couple months and once you receive your license you are run through mental health watchlists, and criminal record checks daily. I will probably get some shit from other pro gun guys for this, but I like it this way. It seems to do very well at weeding out the nutjobs and idiots.

Another issue that I'm likely to piss off the pro gun crown is on carrying. In a nutshell, I am very happy it is illegal here. The concept is sound, and in a really ban area I can see the appeal. But honestly there is just no need here, and quite frankly, people are too stupid. I do not trust the average Joe walking around with a loaded gun.

Where I start to leaning to the other side of the argument is on the banning, or proposed banning, of particular firearms based on uninformed, meaningless, usually incorrect assumptions about functions or capability. It is utterly ridiculous for people to condemn guns based on appearance alone when they know nothing about them.

I always laugh at the people using terms like "military grade" or calling ARs and other semi autos "assault weapons". The military has always been the driving force in the advancement of firearms technology. Every major advance in firearms ever was brought on by military demands, of yes, killing people more efficiently than the other guy. There is no denying why guns were invented, but no one is more guilty than the other. Just different stages of technology.

People that know guns can sit this next part out, trying to prove a point.

What makes these 2 guns different and one "more deadly" than the other?

Gun control - Lets shed some light on this polarizing topic.

Answer? Not a damn thing.

Exact same gun, different stocks. Yes, one has a bigger magazine - not a clip, those are two very different things. But in reality, reloading is a negligible factor and the rate of fire with a 5, 10, 40 round mag is basically the same.

Or how about this one, it looks super scary and must be banned, right?

Gun Control - Let's Shed Some Light on This Polarizing Topic

Wrong. This gun fires a .22lr round, shown on left below, next to a standard AR round (.223, 5.56mm) in the middle and a common hunting round on the right. See why so called "assault rifles really aren't very powerful? The .223 round is used, outside of law enforcement and military, to hunt rabbits and gophers.

Gun Control - Let's Shed Some Light on This Polarizing Topic

I am tired of people acting like they have an informed opinion to offer and arguing strictly off emotion and preconceptions.

I welcome opinions, but like I said, lets keep it respectful.

Gun Control - Let's Shed Some Light on This Polarizing Topic
Add Opinion
2Girl Opinion
2Guy Opinion

Most Helpful Guy

  • Ironlak282
    Interesting, Is this directed towards the United States as most gun control rants online usually are? I'm from Australia and have argued for gun control on here before ( I don't have a strong knowledge on different types of firearms) but have recently come to the conclusion that if someone wants to cause a mass casuality it can be done without a gun and no I'm not talking knives or maybe I'm just creative.
    Is this still revelant?
    • Redstang88

      Not really, just kid of a generic rant. Just thinking about a balance between the freedom the US has and the excessive restriction everyone else is subjected to.

Most Helpful Girl

  • Lexiblair420
    In america it is so easy to get illegal access to guns, so it would only take them away from the law abiding. I'm half French Canadian and lived in Singapore. I have seen it work all over the world except a handful of countries. America, is one of them. Shipments of guns and drugs flow through America daily. Gun control would be a mess here.
    Is this still revelant?
    • Ironlak282

      I'm guessing because of Mexico that's something a lot of us Aussies seem to forget.

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

  • JenSCDC
    There are indications -but in my opinion nothing conclusive- that magazine capacity may make mass shootings more deadly:
  • Dred1614returns
    The people that talk down to gun owners and criticize guns usually know nothing about them.
    • Redstang88

      Yeah definitely. It just bugs me that people judge on something they don't understand