What's fake about it?
I looked into it. It's not fake. But my point stands that AR15 is a stupid term to use.
AR-15 is the platform. AR for short
Yeah it's not really a gun you can ban
Watch them, they will if we let them
Well if they want to ban the style... let them just get a non AR gun then
Yeah until they ban that
Can't ban what you don't understand
They do it all the time.
Then I'll get a G-36
No better reason than the people have more power than the government. Or at least be equal to.
We have a thing called democracy.The US should try it. When armed citizens with AR-15s take over a state legislature you're suddenly a third world country choosing the bullet over the ballot.
No thanks out founding fathers knew that true Democracy is evil. Because is Mob rule.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
@coffeewithcream - I've been to Canada - several times. Overall, it's a nice place. I prefer the US 2nd Ammendment over Canada's ideas about guns. And yes, I plan to continue living in the USA, where I can own, carry, and use my guns, including my AR's with 30rd mags. It's a real nice shootin' weapon.
Handguns already have oppressive restrictions already.
Oppressive restrictions... I'm talking about an outright ban
It's close in some provinces. The issue is that First Nations have hunting rights in a lot of places thus can't outright ban handguns.
They haven't said anything about what was actually used. 9 of the 22 were killed by fire.
So he needs to ban fire too with his type of thinking
Easier said than done.
@lolcraft Nah, its pretty easy. Just pack up and move. Guns are still the rage down here.
The broder is closed right now. Unless you want me to illegal cross it.
@lolcraft Dude, just take your grievances to Trump.He is the savior of trump supporters everywhere. Just bow before him and he will bless you with glorious bounty!
I pretty sure that's a criminal offence where I'm from. Also you guys spell things wrong. And use imperial.
@lolcraft How is that a criminal offense? Just take your grievances to the Trump administration. Uhm. . did you know he was President?
I was being facetious.
Liberals created the Canadian constitution. The British North America Act was repatriated by Pierre Trudeau, a Liberal. It became the Constitution Act, passed by a Liberal government.
Tyrants also come to power with the majority.
He understands all he has to about them. The New Zealand prime minister as well.
Maybe you shouldn't take a position that requires you to defend ignorance over reactionary policies based off fear.
By that logic you just said everyone who buys a gun for self protection is a fearful sissy.Also by that logic you just eliminated traffic signs, air traffic controllers, school crossing guards, armies, navies, air forces, and safety manuals, entire police departments and firefighters. Government's role is to protect people. Not according to you, however. You see protecting the public a reactionary based on fear. :) Exactly the reason pussies by big guns.
So doubling down on the ignorance I see. Way to lump numerous systems into a overly simple axiom. There's a difference between reacting and reactionary. Also who protects you from the government? And how is taking the onus of protecting yourself cowardly? Wouldn't thrusting that responsibility to an external entity be something a 'pussy' and 'sissy' would do?
Talk about doubling down on ignorance. :)Protection from government? Bullet over ballot? You mean American democracy mixed with Lenin's machine guns at the Russian leg? Assassination is appropriate? That's a good thing, is it.You say restricting guns is bad, and demonstrates fear, while gun ownership- which demonstrates fearfulness- isn't being a pussy, it's taking responsibility. I see.
Do you even know what your saying at this point?
What's backwards is your thinking on the subject
Nope. I am right and you are wrong. Now go shoot up a school.
Lol so mature of you. Funny you can joke about something so serious.
This wasn't voted in, it was dictated in
... I'll take that as a "no."
The Prime Minister put this ban in effect without Parliament. One man decided to ban over 1500 variations of semiautomatic rifles and planes on doing the same with pistols. That's not a Democratic Republic.
... Yes. It is. Executive orders are a result of the *elected executive,* elected in whatever form or fashion their country's constitution allows for. If the general public does not like executive orders of the executive, that is not a matter of "no rights," it is a matter of "I will try to get someone else elected into this position at the next available opportunity." And executive orders, while sometimes being criticized depending what they are, usually end up being considered legal when challenged in that nation's courts. Most of the time, anyway. This case is no exception.
I guess since they have no right to own firearms I guess it's in his power. Still isn't right in my mind.
If an executive doesn't take steps to prevent mass murder, then that executive is a clown who isn't doing his or her job. Trudeau is taking reasonable steps to prevent mass murder that is caused by weapons that no one needs for any legitimate reason. This isn't complicated.
The current laws did stop it why would this stop the next. It's not even confirmed what was used and if they were illegal under the current laws how would adding more stop the next one.
You need these such weapons to make sure the government doesn't become tyrannical.
... No. You don't. That's fucking stupid.
Have you ever seen a guy with a rifle beat a guy in a tank? Probably not.
Why would it be stupid to make sure your government never over reaches? Government have done it all through history
No, but doesn't mean you can't us that rifle to get one
Oh honey... you're so special. You guys always are.
Who is special are the people that think nothing can be done so I'll just bend over and let them take me. Those people are special. Like you.
I am 100% not paid
Really? Where do I sign up for that paycheck?
@Liam_Hayden you have to already be working for the government. Honestly don't know why anyone would believe any of the shit on this website. Or any website for that matter.
No, they are not.The Canadian constitution has a "POG" clause. Peace, Order and Good Government. The PMO can make decisions on behalf of Canadians for the national benefit if they follow POG.
@coffeewithcream My apologies. Missed the country of origin. Canada does have more a restrictive Constitution and its laws where it comes to personal freedom and choice than the United States. A holdover from being part of the Commonwealth, I suppose.
Probably. The RCMP, when they were the North West Mounted Police, wore red uniforms so it wouldn't show the blood if they were shot. That's the myth. The truth on how they ended up wearing red is funnier. Another bit of Canadian history. After Little Big Horn, Sitting Bull led his tribe into Canada. An American Calvary contingent followed them. A meeting with the NWCP was arranged. The Americans, after a long ride through prairie, were uniformed, on horseback, fully armed and loaded for bear. The impressive mounted army unit met a lone NWMP officer in the middle of the Canadian prairie. The American officer leading the Cavalry unit expressed concern the Mountie was alone. They all knew Sitting Bull and his warriors and families had crossed into Canada."You shouldn't be alone," the American officer warned. "Sitting Bull is dangerous.""Don't worry, I'm not alone," said the Mountie. "It's the other officer's turn to clean the tent."
More gun control = unstoppable violence.
Mmm. Doesn’t seem that violent in Europe.
Referring to a countrys that had a huge rash of stabbings (Britain) and because of them started to confiscation of anything other than a kitchen knife. Italy having Muslim gang violence and gang rapes of their women citizens, and started to give their people gun right back to protest themselves from them.Isn't helping your case!
Uhh, funny you only see that on right wing “news” sites. But stats say violent deaths per year are a fraction of US.
I wander why? Oh! I know Great Britain 66.65 million people vs USA 328.9 million.
(Sigh) you don’t know how stats work. Per 100,000 people, Europe has like 2 deaths to our 12.
Ours is actually 7.2 because that 12 accounts for suicide by firearms which doesn't count. And of course ours will be higher per 100,000 we do have more guns. But that doesn't mean more guns = more violence. It means more guns = more gun deaths, but the that's like saying more pools = more drowning. No duh!And the majority of gun deaths apart from suicide are family members or acquaintance related not mass shootings. Rifles as a whole alone only make up 13% of mass shootings where handguns make up 56% of mass shootings.Mass shootings only make up.01% of firearm homicide.
So you agree? More guns = more violence.
“Of course ours will be higher per 100,000 we have more guns.”
No more guns doesn't = more violence Nor more guns = more gundeathJust because people have guns doesn't make them more violent it just gives guns more opportunity to be used.To me less guns = more violence because there are far less people for criminals to be worked about get shot by weither the criminal has a gun or not.Like I said the more guns = more gun deaths the same as the more trampoline = more broken bones. More guns don't inherently make people violent. People are violent and will use other means of being violent with or without guns
It’s simple logic. More knives = more knife attacks. It’s just more people die from guns, bc they’re designed that way. More cars = more car wrecks. More nukes = more radiation.
I'd say the stats bear out the case that the US is the most violent compared to any European country.Perhaps you missed that part.
@OddBeMe then let's ban absolutely everything that has been used to kill a person. Its only fair.
Or regulate dangerous items. Like butterfly knives.
Why? It's a tool. Just like your hammer!
If there were 30,000 hammer deaths a year I’d say we need hammer control.
Obviously agenda driven site, but ok. Their stats are for rifles and shotguns. Majority of gun deaths are handguns. And it’s still 30,000 per year.en.wikipedia.org/.../Gun_violence_in_the_United_States
It's not 30,000 a year that 30,000 60% suicide
So only 12,000 is violent. Is that an acceptable figure?
This article talks about high gun ownership but high restrictions in Switzerland. www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-of-gun-deaths-2018-2
Yeah and they wouldn't be able to use it if they need to to defend themselves.
You didn’t read it. There’s a lot of gun ownership in Switzerland but they require lots of training.
Yeah and mandatory service in the military. I know there restrictions
Be the first girl to share an opinion and earn 1 more Xper point!