America's Gun Violence

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

mcgruff10 said:

oftenreading said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Do these 7 count in your tally or just the estranged wife of the gunman?

https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/12/us/texas-plano-mass-shooting-at-cowboys-watch-party/index.html

No, they were all responsible people looking for a P tape...

Sorry, but it’s more than only 600 or so women. It’s telling that you “responsible” gun owners minimize and ridicule the carnage from gun violence.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/11/domestic-violence-shooting-deaths-women-husbands-boyfriends

Dude, its clear you have no clue what you're talking about. Please stop jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about me. You don't know anything about what I believe or do. Just stop.

Should I quote your “facts” of only 50 women a month for 600? It’s a pretty insensitive view point. Stop minimizing the carnage of gun violence and I’ll stop calling you out on it.

He never used "only" so please stop misquoting him.

The “facts” he used to back up his number of domestic violence victims only referenced women and appeared to dismiss the number of 600 victims as insinificant.
 

I don't know why, but I'll try one last time then I'll just have to give up on getting through to some people.
I never minimized anything. I'll try to break it down as much as I can one last time.
It was stated that ammo should be stored separately to allow victims of domestic violence an extra 15 seconds to escape a heated argument before getting shot. I did not agree with that logic, if a gun is stored and locked properly I don't think it is going to make a difference.
Then I added why make laws that to protect only a small group, why not make laws that protect everyone against guns, including those 600 women killed every year? Make laws that make it easier to take guns away from those in a violent relationship, support the abused more, strict background checks. registration and accountability for guns. All of which would not only protect those victims better than having a separate box to open, but also help protect thousands more as well. 
Since then others have said it is to prevent kids from getting both guns and ammo. And while I still believe the safest place in my house is my gun safe, and therefore no one is getting guns or ammo, I can at least recognize the logic in that.  The reality is if someone gets ammo because it was stored with a gun, then the guns weren't properly stored to begin with. SO making separate laws on ammo isn't going to save a singe life. If someone stores their guns so a kid and access it, are they really going to make their ammo more secure? If they lock their guns up properly, no kid is getting to it. As someone else already said, it would just be a "feel good" law, and a tally mark for another victory that has no real impact.

Now explain how that is minimizing anything?  Actually, on second thought,  please don't.

And yet, requirind ammunition to be stored separately from guns is used effectively elsewhere, so there’s that. 

The easier it is for people to make the wrong decision in a moment of anger, the more likely they are to make that decision. The harder it is to make it, the more road blocks in the way, the more likely they are to rethink during that time. 

1. How do you measure whether or not it is effective?
2.  How do you enforce that law?

Evidently Canada doesn’t even enforce this and it isn’t even law...so this whole conversation is pointless...:
“Store the ammunition separately or lock it up. It can be stored in the same locked container as the firearms”
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-98-209/index.html

so all gun laws should be the same no matter the culture or country?

Not following?  This whole thing started because someone said that the US needs to have laws like Canada that requires people to store ammunition and guns separately...which isn’t even the case in Canada.

mace1229 said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

mcgruff10 said:

oftenreading said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Do these 7 count in your tally or just the estranged wife of the gunman?

https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/12/us/texas-plano-mass-shooting-at-cowboys-watch-party/index.html

No, they were all responsible people looking for a P tape...

Sorry, but it’s more than only 600 or so women. It’s telling that you “responsible” gun owners minimize and ridicule the carnage from gun violence.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/11/domestic-violence-shooting-deaths-women-husbands-boyfriends

Dude, its clear you have no clue what you're talking about. Please stop jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about me. You don't know anything about what I believe or do. Just stop.

Should I quote your “facts” of only 50 women a month for 600? It’s a pretty insensitive view point. Stop minimizing the carnage of gun violence and I’ll stop calling you out on it.

He never used "only" so please stop misquoting him.

The “facts” he used to back up his number of domestic violence victims only referenced women and appeared to dismiss the number of 600 victims as insinificant.
 

I don't know why, but I'll try one last time then I'll just have to give up on getting through to some people.
I never minimized anything. I'll try to break it down as much as I can one last time.
It was stated that ammo should be stored separately to allow victims of domestic violence an extra 15 seconds to escape a heated argument before getting shot. I did not agree with that logic, if a gun is stored and locked properly I don't think it is going to make a difference.
Then I added why make laws that to protect only a small group, why not make laws that protect everyone against guns, including those 600 women killed every year? Make laws that make it easier to take guns away from those in a violent relationship, support the abused more, strict background checks. registration and accountability for guns. All of which would not only protect those victims better than having a separate box to open, but also help protect thousands more as well. 
Since then others have said it is to prevent kids from getting both guns and ammo. And while I still believe the safest place in my house is my gun safe, and therefore no one is getting guns or ammo, I can at least recognize the logic in that.  The reality is if someone gets ammo because it was stored with a gun, then the guns weren't properly stored to begin with. SO making separate laws on ammo isn't going to save a singe life. If someone stores their guns so a kid and access it, are they really going to make their ammo more secure? If they lock their guns up properly, no kid is getting to it. As someone else already said, it would just be a "feel good" law, and a tally mark for another victory that has no real impact.

Now explain how that is minimizing anything?  Actually, on second thought,  please don't.

And yet, requirind ammunition to be stored separately from guns is used effectively elsewhere, so there’s that. 

The easier it is for people to make the wrong decision in a moment of anger, the more likely they are to make that decision. The harder it is to make it, the more road blocks in the way, the more likely they are to rethink during that time. 

1. How do you measure whether or not it is effective?
2.  How do you enforce that law?

Evidently Canada doesn’t even enforce this and it isn’t even law...so this whole conversation is pointless...:
“Store the ammunition separately or lock it up. It can be stored in the same locked container as the firearms”
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-98-209/index.html

so all gun laws should be the same no matter the culture or country?

Not following?  This whole thing started because someone said that the US needs to have laws like Canada that requires people to store ammunition and guns separately...which isn’t even the case in Canada.

Exactly. Not only that, but it seems like a few times a page on this thread we are compared to other countries and told "why don't you have laws like them?" And I remember the one time I tried to explain the difference between USA and Canada, and the roots of our gun culture you would think I was supporting the Nazi party or something with the crazy ridiculous responses. 
If anything, this supports exactly what I've been saying for 2 days. You don't need the ammo-gun storage law to have effective gun control. 

PJPOWER said:

mcgruff10 said:

Meltdown is fake news!

Not to mention that Canada seems to think it is okay to lock them unattended in a car (look at the paragraph below the one you circled)...which was a topic of conversation recently too, lol

PJ_Soul said:

Well let's not get too excited. Canada DOES have more restrictive firearm laws by far, and that question is still valid. Meltdown's mistake changes nothing when it comes to America having an out-of-control gun violence problem resulting from an extreme gun culture and a lack of restrictions.

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Yes, they are restricted weapons here.

But what... so now all of a sudden Canada and America are looking fairly equal in terms of gun laws to you? That isn't the case at all.

Explain to me the restricted weapon access.  Do you need a certain level of background checks to get one?  
Maybe i should research since you Canadians can not
And I do think we are more similar than you think, big difference is the training and mag limits imo. 

I don't think we are even close to similar in either way, but like I always say, it's the American gun culture that really makes the most difference by far, and in that way we are worlds apart.

Anyway, here is a link to the RCMP website where it defines these things:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/clas-eng.htm

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Yes, they are restricted weapons here.

But what... so now all of a sudden Canada and America are looking fairly equal in terms of gun laws to you? That isn't the case at all.

Explain to me the restricted weapon access.  Do you need a certain level of background checks to get one?  
Maybe i should research since you Canadians can not
And I do think we are more similar than you think, big difference is the training and mag limits imo. 

I don't think we are even close to similar in either way, but like I always say, it's the American gun culture that really makes the most difference by far, and in that way we are worlds apart.

Anyway, here is a link to the RCMP website where it defines these things:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/clas-eng.htm

you guys and the god damn metric system.  ugh. what the hell is 470 mm?!

PJPOWER said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJPOWER said:

mcgruff10 said:

Meltdown is fake news!

Not to mention that Canada seems to think it is okay to lock them unattended in a car (look at the paragraph below the one you circled)...which was a topic of conversation recently too, lol

Responsible until they aren’t. 

I’m not aware whether or not you can store an #Ptape with them, though, lol 

PJ_Soul said:

PJPOWER said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Yes, they are restricted weapons here.

But what... so now all of a sudden Canada and America are looking fairly equal in terms of gun laws to you? That isn't the case at all.

Explain to me the restricted weapon access.  Do you need a certain level of background checks to get one?  
Maybe i should research since you Canadians can not
And I do think we are more similar than you think, big difference is the training and mag limits imo. 

I don't think we are even close to similar in either way, but like I always say, it's the American gun culture that really makes the most difference by far, and in that way we are worlds apart.

Anyway, here is a link to the RCMP website where it defines these things:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/clas-eng.htm

you guys and the god damn metric system.  ugh. what the hell is 470 mm?!

In the US, we measure in inches. In Canada, they measure in centimeters.  (Yes, this is a dick joke)

No no, we still measure dicks in inches.

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJPOWER said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Yes, they are restricted weapons here.

But what... so now all of a sudden Canada and America are looking fairly equal in terms of gun laws to you? That isn't the case at all.

Explain to me the restricted weapon access.  Do you need a certain level of background checks to get one?  
Maybe i should research since you Canadians can not
And I do think we are more similar than you think, big difference is the training and mag limits imo. 

I don't think we are even close to similar in either way, but like I always say, it's the American gun culture that really makes the most difference by far, and in that way we are worlds apart.

Anyway, here is a link to the RCMP website where it defines these things:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/clas-eng.htm

you guys and the god damn metric system.  ugh. what the hell is 470 mm?!

In the US, we measure in inches. In Canada, they measure in centimeters.  (Yes, this is a dick joke)

30 centimetres baby. No wait... 36 centimetres baby!