Can we do more to prevent gun violence?




Browse

Can we do more to prevent gun violence?

  1. cracking down on guns leaves most people as victims because criminals don’t follow laws, since guns are the modern day sword everyone should have the ability to defend themselves… If we had no guns at all it’d be better…

  2. There was one question conspicuously absent from this poll: “clean up the immigration system.” Prior to 1977, Canadians could buy MACHINE GUNS without permits, yet these sorts of bystander-popping shootings were unheard of. What changed? Trudeau and his successors threw the doors open to the third world, and the Jamaican, East African, Vietnamese, and other gangs followed. Am I being too un-PC, or ‘racist’? Well, look what even the CBC admits:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/01/18/shower-posse-jamaica-gang-toronto.html

    We need to improve immigration screening, and start deporting criminals. Stripping these people of Canadian citizenship should also be on the table–we did it with old Nazis who sneaked into Canada, and we can do this with foreign-born thugs.

    • Do you think you are a true-blooded Canadian? Be careful with your words, you might end up telling yourself that your roots were just immigrants too like the majority of the so called present “Canadians.”
      And please stop being a racist, you are creating more troubles than solving the violence problem itself.

      • you are so wrong.zinman is correct.we never had these problems when immigrants were educated healthy and ready to work and to earn canadian citizenship.

        • only a racist would make this about immigration

          • another misuse of the label Racist. It is within our rights and our obligations to fight back against violent sub cultures coming from messed up countries. Try calling me a racist and then lets compare the colour spectrum in our individual families.

    • The truth of the matter is that with less guns in the hands of RESPONSIBLE citizens, criminals are almost 100% certain that no matter what they want to do, or who they plan to do it to, that their victims are completely unarmed.

      Guns in the hands of honest citizens will be fought not because it protects citizens to be unarmed–common sense tells you that this is the opposite of reality–but because guns in the hands of citizens means “a hostile work environment” for the criminals, and the governments and police who rely on crime and fraud for their incomes.

      There is no easier way to see who is profiting from any form of fraud or crime than to see whose income relies on them NEVER admitting to the truth…

      • This is just a recipe to end up like the Americans. More guns more death.

        • Not true… I vehemently believe that the good citizens of Canada are simply tired of being held hostage by the criminal element that pervades our communities. The justice system, for some bizarre reason, seems to forget that the people committing crimes are THE BAD GUYS!! Yet hard working, law abiding citizens live not only in fear of violence and crimes against their person and property – but also the fear of imprisonment for defending themselves and their loved ones. I find it impossible to believe that any rational person, hearing the sounds of a degenerate creeping into their toddler’s room, will not take that shot… and they should never have to feel the need to hesitate IMHO.

        • Fortunately that’s not true. American gun ownership has risen steadily over 10 years, and the murder rate gone down. Wiki states the current rate has dropped to 1968 levels. FBI says 60% of murders occur by gunfire Every state that allows concealed carry watches they murder rate drop considerably immediately. Countries that have instituted bans, especially handgun, have watched their crime rates go up. Britain & Australia come to mind. Most Canadians, especially <35 Canadians (myself included) simply want to believe Canada is immune to gun violence because of our strict laws regarding them. But fact is gun violence in this country is growing with the increased population and drug profits from more users.

          Facts; Police can't be everywhere, so that deterrent is ineffective. Legal system throws shooters back on the streets in days or weeks, so perpetrators who don't have jobs or homes to lose, don't care. Charges are dropped against gang bangers, yet vigorously pressed against law abiding citizens (search Ian Thompson), and even APPEALED by the crown (What?!). There is no solution. We can reduce crime by getting young men out of gangs and into good jobs. Construction trades for example. What are they going to do, steal bricks? These trades pay decently, are respected and can be transferred anywhere if they decide to move.

    • If you look at data on crime (look at any UCR time series), the homicide rate in Canada peaked in the late 70s, and has consistently declined since. This, despite millions of *gasp* foreigners moving to this land, and generally tougher gun laws. I agree that we should prevent criminals from immigrating to Canada, but the problem is nowhere near the magnitude you suggest it is.

      • i don’t argue with the stats — generalized violence in society was worse when baby boomer young men were in their 20s in the 70s. But you look at these regular, recent outrages in the Jamaican and Somali communities in Toronto and DON’T see a specific problem that needs addressing right now? There is no “magnitude” to the problem, absolutely, 22 dead and injured or whatever in a 5 million person city is not very many people on a relative basis, but many of us don’t recognize the people involved in these atrocities as our Canada anymore. Why should we put up with superviolent subcultures in our midst from superviolent nations?

      • You’re quite correct on your stats. The vast majority of Immigrants are good people and can contribute to Canadian society. But the vast majority of violent crime is perpetrated by immigrants or descendants of two or three countries. This should not be ignored.

    • agree!

    • Agree with your conclusions about guns not being the issue. Issue is these gangs are used to using guns. They’ve just expanded into Canada. They have no issue using a gun because they’ve Never had an issue. Native born Canadians and immigrants from Eastern Europe don’t use guns to settle their issues. We have one established culture watching the immigrant culture play out on our soil.

  3. Wanna know the best way to “crack down on guns”? Minimum sentences for anybody using a firearm in a crime. And make them LONG minimum sentences.

    • And then you’ll see “possession statutes” popping up to make sure that more people are “criminals on paper.”

      Take a look at the plans that Emperor Harperius Mandatorius Minimus has already put in place…we can’t afford to keep locking up larger and larger percentages of the Canadian people, just so that he can create a private prison system in Canada that we can’t afford any better than the TEN TIMES LARGER economy to our south can…and even Texas admits that private prisons don’t work!

      And Texas regularly kills people to show people that killing people is wrong!

      • So, we shouldn’t lock up violent criminals who use guns, because it might lead to locking up people who are just carrying around illegal guns? That’s some flawed logic. It seems you don’t think anything is worthy of locking someone up.

        Texas doesn’t kill execute criminals to show people that killing is wrong. They execute criminals because they’re the worst of the worst, and there’s no reason for taxpayers to foot the bill to keep them alive for decades on end.

        I’m not even going to address your delusional claims about private prisons, American Style, Texas, Emperor Harper, etc. because there’s really nothing to address other than that you’re making all that up.

      • Violent people should be in Jail and I am willing to pay more taxes for it. The US problem is the jails of full of three strikes, and petty drug offenses. We should be executing select murderers in Canada

        • Canada needs to adopt the policy ” three strikes and you’re out” keep the repeat offenders in jail and crime rates will go down – PERIOD. I will pay my taxes to keep these criminals behind bars forever. If a criminal is in jail, they cannot commit crimes against the public.

          Whatever happened to the “Dangerous Offender ” designation. or – How about getting out on bail after breaking bail 4 or 5 times for other crimes already committed. Get the crap off the streets so law abiding citizens don’t have to fear for their lives every day.
          But also lets not make it so cushy for them to be there. If these neanderthals do not know how to cope in society, then lets teach them. Have working jails where the inmates get up at 7 am, have breakfast, work at some kind of manufacturing job producing something for society. (Licence plates, recycling car tires and pop bottles and producing something useful) They end their day at 5pm and have supper. If they choose not to get out of bed to work, then they stay in their cell and eat a very Minor Meal. Once they choose to be productive again, then they can join the working crew and eat better meals too.
          The John Howard Society does little other that to pamper criminals.

          • 3 strikes and your out rules caused an increase in homicides in California when they were brought in.

            Why? Because when you’re on your second strike, there’s no incentive to not killing potential witnesses.

          • how about we just put them on a plane to somewhere else. I don’t care where. Babysitting a grown man for the rest of his life because he can’t act nice on your dime and mine seems easily fixed.

          • Because we rely on those somewhere elses for various goods and services, and they probably wouldn’t take kindly to us shipping our criminals to them.

    • agree

  4. I agree with “Ira Zinman” . Get rid of the illegals in the country and watch the crime rate go down. They are not only sucking down our economy they are taking job away that legal citizens would be able to have.

  5. What abyssmal answers to choose from – showing how polls can be manipulated to speak for all, without asking the real questions – or giving any creative answers to choose from.
    Gun smuggling laws with teeth
    drugs/ gang crime violence studies to pin-point connections in certain areas
    community socialization programs
    proper enforcement of city by-laws
    support for frontline police fighting drug and gang crime/murder: and a provincial judicial system, with judges on the side of law abiding citizens – yes even in ghettoes..all come to my mind !!!
    To say the murdered, are in the wrong place at the wrong time, or that mandatory minumums for possesion and sale of illegal guns – is cruel and unusual punishment- just shows the enormity of the job facing the people we pay, to deal with the downward spiral in Toronto.

  6. harper stopped the long gun registry because he knew with the UN’s international firearms treaty was on its way know you will see massive anti gun propaganda more shooting in the news and the debate about firearm saftey the news will lull us canadians into us thinking leagal guns are bad trust me ! criminals dont buy guns at the local guns shop !

  7. Our jails are a cushy joke full of buddies, entertainment and leisure activities for these guys. Its an acceptable part of their lifestyle. These guys understand fear when it comes to threats from each other but they don’t perceive there is much threat to them from the law.

  8. So how is cracking down on guns going to change anything? Criminals are always going to be able to get hold of guns whether they are illegal or not, or whether the laws are tougher or not. Frankly, criminals DO NOT CARE what the penalty is for having an illegal firearm (or using a firearm improperly), because they are either not planning on getting caught, or they are off their rocker.

    We are a soceity of human beings. There are always going to be people who misuse deadly instruments. It happens with knives, poison, vehicles, and anything else you can think of.

    There is no way to completely eradicate gun violence. Even if you ban guns altogether criminals will still be able to get them.

    Frankly, I feel safer being a registered gun owner and having them at my dispoal in my house. The cops can’t protect me if a homocidal maniac breaks into my house. To be honest, I think I’d feel safer living in some of the states where you can carry your own gun on your person. If someone opens fire in a public place, you just shoot them to disarm. That’s an effective way to prevent gun violence – have everyone armed.

    • Please move to one of those states and have your gunfight there. We don’t need another one here – have you not just seen what that does?

    • Like Bill Good said, when a prolific car thief is in jail, he is not steeling cars. We need to put gangsters that carry and use guns in Jail, and keep them there. I also agree the HMCSE statement below.

    • You are right that criminals will still obtain guns, if there are legal penalties to doing so. The question is what kind of criminals can obtain guns, and what sort of guns can they acquire. Those with connections to the underworld, sure, can probably obtain guns under any circumstances. But mentally ill, anti-social folks without criminal connections like James Holmes or Breivik or Klebold will have difficulties doing so.
      Then there is the question of what guns they acquire. If you make it particularly difficult for criminals to obtain weapons of high lethality – grenade launchers, assault weapons, etc., they will tend to acquire weapons of lower lethality. That makes a huge difference in mass-killings like the one that transpired recently in the states. An AR-15 has a magazine of 30, and is semi-automatic. That is a world of difference from a pump action gun, or one with a magazine in the single-digits. I’m not opposed to all guns, but I think there is a level of lethality that no civilian should be able to wield.
      As for having a gun for your own self-defense, that’s your prerogative. I don’t see it that way. The majority of the time somebody would enter my house, it would be to rob me. I have insurance, so I’m not that worried about what they steal. Drawing a gun would create an unnecessary flashpoint in which either myself or the perpetrator would die (or at least get shot). Moreover, simply having a gun in the household creates a risk of accidental death. So at least on my end, I don’t see the benefit from a personal security standpoint.

      • Your reasoning and knowledge in firearms is lacking. An Ar-15 can accept a mag that holds from 1 to 100 rounds. Just depends on where it is pinned. Criminals will ALWAYS get what ever firearm they please. They are criminals you know. If people can gets drugs readily they can get any kind of firearm they want. Banning certain “leathal” weapons only disarms the law abiding. It does nothing to disarm the criminal element. Time after time, study after study it has been proven that if you ban the law abiding from owning and carrying guns for their own protection, crime goes up. Just look at Britan, Austrailia, Washington DC, Chicago, NY, etc, etc.
        If I am a law abiding citizen, and I pass the screens and security clearance for a firearms possession license I should be able to obtain any firearm I please and carry one with me (anywhere) should I deem the need. End of story. If I break the law then all my “rights” should be taken away. So, you don’t see the benefit of having a firearm when confronted by a wingnut terrorist trying to harm you or a mugger with a knife trying to steal your shoes or wallet, all hyped up on meth with ZERO thought or care for your life? I hope, for your nieve sake, you never have to experience that. Based on your Progressive comments, it is obvious you have not. Go talk to someone who has been raped or had their peace shattered by a home invasion or robbery. You might very well eat your words. Chew on the following for a while.
        “To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow… For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.”
        – Jeff Snyder, Oct 20, 1994

      • Not sure which is sillier, your naivete or faux-elitism. “Unnecessary flashpoint?” You got it, Jack. The flashpoint’s gonna get the perp 128 grains in the middle of his chest, not me. So choose victimhood if you want, that’s your choice. But in the real world I want a chance to stand up to the threat of anybody breaking into my home (which by the way occurred twice when I lived in Toronto and never in 15 years in the States), and I don’t want elites (many who have guns secreted in their homes while telling the rest of us not to; they’re called liberals) telling me I don’t have the right to defend my person, family and home.

    • 1. If guns are illegal, it’s harder for criminals to get guns. That means the price of illegal guns goes up. That means that most criminals will not have guns because they’re too broke to afford them — which is why they’re criminals in the first place.

      2. If guns are legal, then if the homicidal maniac breaks into your house, he *will* have a gun, and you *still* won’t have one unless you sleep with it under your pillow, loaded. And if you do.. well.. I hope your partner sleeps in another room for safety. So unless you’re a direct descendant of Annie Oakley, it’s better for guns to be harder for criminals to get.

      3. Your logic applies equally to every law. Criminals will murder no matter what the law, so we might as well make it legal to murder so that the playing field is even. Criminals will steal stuff no matter what the law, so we might as well make it legal so that we can steal stuff back from them. Quite simply, there’s a huge range between perfect enforcement and legalization. You might want to think on that a little.

      • I will start off by saying,

        lets be honest about the “GUN VIOLENCE” we are talking about here. We are not talking about average, everyday, law abiding Canadians shooting each other in the streets with shotguns, hunting rifles, or ar-15′s with pinned magazines, or fully automatic, belt fed M-60′s like you could probably buy 30 years ago if you were rich (I’m sure something like that would have cost a fortune).

        We are talking about CRIMINALS OR CRAZY PEOPLE having guns and using them to kill or threaten the rest of us.

        1. If we can solve this through supply, then we need to address where the guns are coming from. Almost without exception, the gun violence that is happening here in Canada is not happening with legally registered guns, or guns that are being stolen from legally licensed owners (you will always be able to find an exception to this but the cases are few and far between.) It is happening with non-registered handguns smuggled across the border by the gangs. Until we focus our efforts on stopping this flow of ILLEGAL GUNS, a gang member will always be able to get a gun (the price point will be determined by how easy it is to get across the border). Keeping me from being able to legally buy a gun will only keep a LEGAL gun out of MY hands. It will have no effect on the gang bangers ability to get one. Ask yourself, if they banned all the guns tomorrow and I decided I wanted one… where would I go?

        2. It has NEVER BEEN LEGAL for a homicidal maniac (or convicted criminal, or someone with a history of violent behavior/ mental instability) to have a firearms license. This is the most basic form of gun control, and something no-one disagrees with. For you to suggest that I should not be ALLOWED to own a gun for the purpose of defending myself and my family, in order to make it only slightly harder for the criminal to get a gun is worse than absurd… It is insulting. Maybe I’m not Annie Oakley, but I sure would like a fighting chance if that’s OK with you.

        3. If a person steals something from me, and I take it back… THAT’S NOT STEALING! IT’S MINE! If someones intent is to break into my home and possibly kill me or my family, and I see they have the means to do so (they have a gun, knife, bat) , and I find them kicking in my back door in the middle of the night, WHAT EXACTLY WOULD YOU DO? I’m sorry but it’s not a matter of the law at that point, it’s a matter of morality. And I determine my own morality, I don’t need someone in the House of Commons to tell me right from wrong.

        At the end of the day we all just want innocent people to stop getting killed. Until it is IMPOSSIBLE for a criminal or lunatic to threaten me or my family, with a gun or otherwise,

        I believe it is only right that I be legally able to own/carry the means to protect my own life if the need should arise. Background checks, safety exams, Licenses, whatever if it takes to convince all the other law abiding Canadians that I can be trusted. I’ll jump through all the hoops because I have nothing to hide, I am not a criminal. But until I am able to LEGALLY do so, I don’t own a fully automatic rifle, or walk around armed in public, or own a rifle magazine able to hold more than 5 rounds, or firing a handgun safely in the woods, or hunting with a handgun, or even driving to the range without first phoning the chief firearms officer for my province and getting a permission slip, or any of the other things I feel I should be allowed to do because I AM NOT A CRIMINAL.

        Firearms laws only affect the ones you don’t need to worry about anyway

        Matt,
        Responsible Firearms Owner

        • Wait.. you’re trying to justify lax gun control by saying that even under those circumstances, homicidal maniacs have never been allowed to have guns, while at the same time saying that criminals don’t care about whether they’re allowed to have guns or not? Do you perhaps see why your logic here is completely asinine? If criminals don’t care about the legality, then they don’t care about the legality, and all that matters is the availability.

          You then go on to claim that most gun crime is done with guns smuggled into Canada, not those stolen from legit owners or sellers. Fair enough. I don’t have the stats to argue that — and while I wager you’re just pulling that out of your ass, I’ll let it stand for now. However, you seem to not grasp how much easier it would for criminals to smuggle guns in if the importation of them was entirely legal. I’ll pose a question for you to ponder: which do you think is more difficult: getting a gun in undetected, or getting some paper-work on a shipping crate full of them modified slightly?

          The point as to whether you can be trusted or are responsible is irrelevant. I’m sure you can be. Nobody gives a shit. What we care about is how many criminals are able to have guns. If they’re legal, more criminals can have them. That’s pretty damned simple logic, and I don’t see how you can deny that unless you’re being willfully stupid.

          Also, it’s very nice you determine your own morality. Perhaps you should consider moving to the Sudan then where you can do so without all the burdens of living in a society filled with other people, where your actions have an effect on them.

          • Do you even read your posts man?
            “you seem to not grasp how much easier it would for criminals to smuggle guns in if the importation of them was entirely legal.”
            News flash of intelligence here. If it were legal to import guns, which it is, criminals would not have to “smuggle” them into Canada.
            “if they are legal, more criminals will haev them”? what are you smoking man? Guns are legal! Criminals just can’t possess them legally.
            “Nice to determine your own morality now move to Sudan”?? What are you talking about? LOL!
            This is a debate about legal and illegal gun ownership. You will never stop illegal gun ownership. Ever. The fact that you can’t see that shows your level of intelligence. Subpar.
            You are completely unintelligable. Go back to sleep and quit wasting valuable binary.

          • I’m really sorry *HUG*.
            Lets be friends and work together on this (so I don’t have to move to Sudan).

            If i understand the framework of this discussion it goes a little like this.

            If we get rid of all the legal guns in Canada (Cops’ guns too?), and make it illegal for people to buy more…

            It will be slightly harder for criminals to find a source for their guns (agreed). But, they will still be able to get the illegal guns from the states (not legally of course but that don’t matter, they’re criminals!)
            so in the end…

            Citizens= no illegal guns and no legal guns
            Police= no illegal guns and lots of legal guns
            Military= no illegal guns and lots of legal guns
            Criminals= still have illegal guns and no legal guns

            So now that the criminals can’t steal MY guns, where does that leave us? I certainly don’t feel safer now, do you?. But, if you think this will work maybe we could give it a go.

            or how about this…

            LET’S DEAL WITH THE CRIMINALS FIRST! Can we agree on that? But how?

            more police? or redistribution if “more” sounds too expensive.
            longer sentences?
            community outreach programs or whatever you call keeping kids busy these days?
            Reduction of Welfare benefits?
            more distribution of community housing around the city? Keep the trouble makers away from each other?

            I think that we are taking the right first step by working TOGETHER to find a solution. Now some of these might sound like good or bad ideas but that’s why we discuss them.

            I just don’t think its fair for me not to be able to own a gun when I think a criminal will always be able to get one.

            I could be wrong. Will you admit that as well?

            Matt
            Responsible Firearms Owner

      • LOL! And you have enough brain power to hold a job? Breathe?
        1) Pot is illegal, alcohol is not. Kids everywhere report that it is wasier to obtain pot than alcohol.
        2)I won’t even touch this point of your. Way too many assumptions and false arguements.
        3)This point of your is simply retarded. I’ll consider the source on this one.
        ;-)

    • I hope you are being sarcastic here. An armed population does not prevent gun violence. Just look south of the border. There are more guns per capita than any other developed country and way more gun crimes than any other country as well!

      • Not true. Russia has 1/10th the guns and 3x the gun crimes. Think about that. And Honduras leads the world (that also means the US) in murder rates, despite having 1/80th the amount of registered guns the US has.
        ….and the comment about an armed population does not prevent gun violence doesn’t stand up to the statistics: Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Cyprus and Switzerland – all bastions of socialism and examples the left always points to when talking about peaceful, just societies – have MORE GUNS PER CAPITA THAN CANADA DOES, but we have more violent crimes than they do. So, they have more guns, they have less crime. We have less crime, we have more violent crime. There might not be a correlation, but it certainly blows up your statement.

  9. wonder why you thought the shooters were illegial ?? the problem stems from a general lack of respect.. for life,, for others,, for themselves !!! We don’t need more jail time to coach more criminals. We need society in general to start taking responsiblity for what they do !! look at us ,, we can’t disipline our kids,, they learn at school that it really doesn’t matter who was really responsible,, everyone gets in trouble. Even our Insurance ,, NO FAULT >> are you kidding me !! We lack morals and we lack respect and responsibility,, and it wouldn’t hurt to get say half the cops off the damn roads and on the streets again !!

    • I haven’t seen a foot patrol in well over 30 years…but every day, I see a half dozen cops cars whipping by my front door at WELL in excess of 80 mph…in a 50kph zone…in at least one direction.

      EVERY day. And I’m not in Toronto, either…or within an hour of ANY “major metropolitan area.”

      Of course, it’s good to ENFORCE statutes…because that means that they don’t apply to you.

      One gang with one uniform chasing another non-gang withut uniforms…but “our gang” are the people who pay “their gang’s” salaries…and buy them cars to cruise around in 24 hours a day.

      Agreed…get them back onto the streets, working their feet, and actually helping THE PEOPLE instead of spending the majority of their time trying to find new ways to take our money and make themselves feel morally superior because they wrote something down on paper that completely nullifies your humanity in their eyes.

  10. How can one chose any of these responses which avoid the REAL ANSWER –
    “Yes, by cracking down on those who use guns for criminal acts”.
    I might add: “as the Conservatives are trying to do”.

    • Well, yeah, but look at how successful they are! Not very.

  11. Setting: The lead-up to a drive-by shooting, in the eyes of a politician.

    Crim 1: “Yo, boy…gonna go shoot up them muddafukkas dat dun shot up Bobby?”

    Crim 2: “Naw, man…my gun license expired…I’ll have to pass on this particular event…”

    Crim 1: “Well, maybe next time…now you just run along and get that gun license renewed!”

    Crim 2: “Yeah…I wouldn’t want to break the law in the process of a drive-by shooting, no…that would be wrong.”

    Of course, in REALITY, the only purpose that is served by disarming the public is to make them subject to both the criminals, and the politicians who “tell us” that they’re taking all of our money and our freedoms “to protect us from ourselves.”

    Ask yourself an honest question: If everyone REALLY needed to be protecteed from themself, how does the population of the entire planet keep rising?

    It’s time we stopped buying into the drivel that corrupt politicians and wilfully ignorant statute enforcement gangs want us to believe…it’s not real.

  12. Violent crimes are a product of poverty. Find ways to stop exporting our manufacturing jobs, increase the employment rate and much of violent crime and desperate acts will disappear.

    • what a bunch of BS

    • I am not sure that is true. Often violent crimes are commited during the commission of a robbery, drug sale, etc. So actually these people are trying to make alot of cash really fast. They are trying to expend the least amount of effort to make the most amount of dough. They are living in big houses driving really expensive cars. I don’t think they really want to work at a manufacturing job. It would not sustain the kind of lifestyle they have become accustom to.

      • You really think most violent crime is committed by people living in big houses driving really expensive cars?

        You do know Miami Vice was fiction, right?

      • how many liquor stores do i have to rob to buy a $400,000 townhouse and have 2 new cars in the driveway? When a thug on a street corner sells a $20 bag of dope how much of that is really profit in his hands? I’d be willing to bet that they would have a better standard of living being a unionized garbage man. There has to be more too it than that.

    • Oh I’m sure they would give up the lucrative drug trade if they could only get a minimum wage factory job.

    • Then Fort McMurray must have no violent crime then. Oh wait, it might have something to do with the proceeds from the sale of hard drugs. And a general lack of morals in the individuals themselves.

  13. On a personal basis I truly
    feel sorry for the victims in the handgun events that took place this week in
    Scarborough.

    As a result of Canada’s lax
    and lenient immigration/refugee policy along with the sociological traits by
    many of these groups causes so many single mother and absentee fatherless
    families breeding gangbangers with any and all associated crime activities
    including possession and usage of illegal handguns.

    For such a deadly serious
    ongoing situation it is pathetic when the likes of Toronto Police Chief Bill
    Blair and Ontario Attorney General John Gerretson call for a ban on handguns in
    response to this event when the well known facts are that all these handguns
    are illegally smuggled into Canada.

    When 2 of our top lawmakers
    make challenges and statements like this they are either showing their complete
    ignorance of the situation or trying to be politically correct.

    What Toronto needs is a
    police chief and an attorney general with the courage and guts to call a spade
    a spade, go after and recommend the real root causes of this cancer in Toronto
    and do something about it.

    The mayor of Toronto and
    the Premier of Ontario should dismiss these two men and hire a new chief and
    new attorney general with fortitude and truthfulness that are unafraid of
    defining the real problem(s) and really doing something about it.

    The media should also
    follow suit…or this will happen again and again.

    We need men/women of brains
    and courage not fluff to declare war on these sociological problems and enforce
    and inform all Canadians with the truth. Only then will progress be made.

  14. With so many comments NOT in favor of “cracking down on guns” may I ask who the butt sucking morons (34% of the people) who voted to “crack down on guns” are? My guess is that these are a combination of criminals or stupid little “L” liberals, which makes me very scared for my safety and well being.
    However in all fairness this poll is very poorly done (likely made by some left-wing hack, but what can you expect from “Macleans”), as the poll does not allow for a response in regards to; Yes, we can do more to prevent gun violence by any number of ways other then “cracking down on guns” (such as harsher penalties for gun violence)………. Up Yours Macleans for being bias as usual.

  15. If you discover the answer to preventing “GUN VIOLENCE” then you should get a “NOBEL PEACE PRIZE” for discovering “WORLD PEACE”.
    Good luck on that!

  16. How many people who have answered this pole have been affected by violence with guns in Canada? I lived in London my whole life and I moved out to the country recently. I have never seen a gun misused in Canada first hand.

  17. Not every gun owner is a killer and not every killer is a gun owner ~ anonymous

    • ……but it’s a lot easier to kill someone when you have a gun.

  18. Our family has never owned a gun so how did this gun culture get established? Violent movies, television fed to children as young as two years old normalizes such violence. Then the USA began to sell into the Canadian market. These are the two areas we need to control. Change the culture of violence right at the root. Stop thinking what we put into children’s and adult’s minds has no impact. Then stop the importation (smuggling) of GUNS from the US into Canada.

    To wlitig please take a look at the murder by gun stats for the USA compared to Canada. Carrying a gun for protection is clearly not the way to go. I also personally know of two separate incidents in my rural area where children have died because there was a gun in the household.

    Stiffer penalties for violent crimes is too little, too late. Prevention has to be the solution.

    • “how did this gun culture get established”

      Since the time when disputes between gentleman were solved by pistols at dawn. When Europeans arrived, shooting beavers for their pelts. In the war of 1812 when Canada was under siege from the south. Since the days of Billy the Kid and the OK corral. In WWI when Canada fought in Europe. In WWII when Canada fought against fascism. Guns have always been around for a while, and for most of human history since guns were invented, they have been in every household.

      It’s only since pampered socialist lefties arrived in the latter 20th century, people who would be unable to pluck a chicken or skin a fish, that some people have tried to remove guns from our culture. However, the problem with that is that you can tell people to stop using guns, and even pass laws against them, but only the law-abiding citizens will pay any attention. That will leave us all at the mercy of the Marc Lepines, Kimveer Gills, Todd Cameron Smiths, the party-goers of Danzig st in Toronto, the psychos in the Eaton Centre food court, the Toronto boxing day shooters, and all the other gun lunatics in Canada.

      By the way, it’s ridiculous that you would make a comment about US vs Canada when Canada clearly has its fair share of mass shootings.

      Guns will always have a place in our culture. They always have and they always will.

  19. It seems to me the answer lies in our immigration policies. Why are immigrants allowed in our country if they have a history of gun violence or come from a country where guns are the norm??!

  20. Organized crime factions need guns to protect their provision of illegal products. It should surprise no one that the use of gun violence is employed to secure and maintain dominance in the provision of those illegal products. The execution of all competition is a natural consequence of such a hierarchy that is paid multi-millions for providing illegal but much desired products.

    An enormous percentage of citizens want and pay for drugs. The enormous requests for and the enormous amount of dollars paid for this drug ritual insure that organized crime factions will shoot guns with abandon.

    The citizenry of Toronto blames the organized crime factions; in doing so, the citizenry of Toronto do not acknowledge their role in this multi-million dollar ritual. If you have ever purchased or used street drugs, no matter the source, you are part the chorus that will have spent bodies beside spent bullet shells.

  21. Yes, let’s tighten up the gun laws. Why shouldn’t it be entirely up to the government to decide when, where and IF i should be able to defend my right to life? Sounds reasonable. Apparently those who choose not to go to all the trouble to get a gun licence have a greater right to life than those who do not. Still making sense? I’m sure the “bad guys” with guns will hear about the new laws and turn their firearms in then we will all be much safer. How is it than nobody ever considers taking the guns away from the police? We can somehow justify that the police need guns for their own safety however other safety-trained law abiding citizens do not deserve that consideration. What have those people done to deserve your hostility? And please…evidence to support would be fabulous.

    • correction – “right to life than those who do.”

  22. Cracking down on drugs certainly got rid of that problem. Prohibition of alcohol worked so well they ended up taking it off the books because everybody became teetotallers and it didn’t need to be enforced anymore. Let’s crack down on guns, its sure to work too!

    The abject ignorance of history, context and human nature that most people demonstrate truly boggles the mind.

  23. How to stop a massacre in 5 seconds.

    This remarkable solution:

    • Requires no police.

    • Costs the taxpayers no money.

    • Requires no up-front paperwork.

    • Protects innocent lives.

    • Is deployed in as little as FIVE seconds.

    • Works everywhere.

    • Deters violent crime.

    • Makes bad guys flee immediately.

    • Is easy to learn.

    • Functions at the local level.

    • Does not require control or intervention by the United Nations or
    any government entity.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epZod2qyyN4&feature=player_embedded

  24. lets put a whole bunch of violent people in small confined spaces and hope they have the decency to rehabilitate. lmao prisons dont work its just like a dump, all we do is bury the garbage ” out of sight out of mind.” We need to get to these people before they need guns. Because the fact of the matter is, most of those people ‘need’ these weapons. and we need to reduce the need.

  25. If you believe we should be locking people up and throwing away the keys, you may need to be locked up. Noone who has any insight into criminals would suggest harsher punishments because in most cases these are young men who other alternative to jail is death. And when things hit the fan where would you rather be. Harsher punishments didnt phase the guy in Colorado who opened fire in a theatre. Wake up.

  26. I should’ve read more comments before I posted you people are crazy. People owning legal guns has nothing to do with criminals owning illegal ones. being able to shoot your gun at gangbangers and “somolians” is not going to help anyone and will probably equal more kids dying in the crossfire. I believe in guns at home, I believe you should be able to walk around naked and smoke crack while illegally downloading copyrighted music brandishing your ar- 15 or whatever. However. . . enough people are dying because of criminals carrying weapons in public and shooting at eachother. How many more people would’ve been shot at the eaton centre if fifteen other people were shooting at someone they thought posed a threat to their families? legally. Really?!?! it would’ve been a masacre. With everyone shooting at the immigrants. imagine. solve the problem of the people who get themselves in a position where they would need a gun. then less criminals will need to become criminals or need to aquire guns. Beacause that’s what we want. . . less criminals with guns, not less guns for criminals. It sucks because everyone hates retarded street thugs or who ever is doing these shootings but stats clearly show the bfigger the gap in society the more crime. Or we could build a wall to the states I like that idea just as well, because cleary their messed up views about society are seeping in up here, and that’s more dangerous than a kids shooting at eachother. Because it’s suburban schools primarily with white students that get shot up by white people. not somalian criminals. iven never heard of a theatre getting shot up in compton.

  27. Stop the job’s from leaving canada. Fix the imbalanced trade and give youth hope of employment early so drug trade is not their only option.

  28. Getti9ng rid of the guns would help; but we first must make any new immigrants feel safe and also feel protected by the police, the people they need to fins approachable.

  29. right on Ira Zinman

  30. Forget longer or minimum sentence for use of a gun during a crime. – Simple solution is mandatory amputation of the dominant ARM. If one bullet fired then both arms. if 2 bullets fired then 2 arms and a leg etc.
    You can be sure that they will not offend again – they will also have remorse for their crimes – this with absolute certainty.

  31. You Liberal asshats should rephrase the questions to having a crackdown on gun crime as an answer since that is the most viable otion rather than going after an inanimate object.

  32. he that hath no sword let him sell his garment and buy one.

  33. I wish that solving these problems were as simple as banning an inanimate object, but it is not. Yet those who think it is that simple rail against the suggestions of let’s ban cars, knives, or household chemicals because they too can be used to kill. Time and again the fact that a firearm is only a tool when committing a murder is forgotten. Yes, sadly it can make accomplishing the task of taking a life easier, but only when in the wrong hands. The answer does not lie in arming everyone, I am an avid shooter myself, but, I don’t feel that giving carte blanche to carry a firearm is necessarily a good idea. However I also do not agree with the excessive restrictions placed on someone who desires to protect their family and home. I mean the society we have created and the laws governing home and self-protection are so useless that if my dog bites a burglar I am more likely to have my dog destroyed and to face criminal and civil charges than the perpetrator is. That is not right.
    We now go out of our way to find excuses for illegal acts so we do not have to punish criminals, or at least so we can minimize said punishments. We would rather blame a comic book read when the perpetrator was 12, or a movie that they saw, than to blame the person themselves. As a result we have generations growing up thinking that there are no consequences for their behaviour. We need to end this. We need to get back to teaching people what actually is a right and what is a privilege. We need to teach people that they will be held responsible and punished if they break our laws, no matter what age or race.
    We also need to stop the media frenzies over people who commit horrendous crimes. No more 24/7 coverage, no more books written about them. Erase them from history, do not give them a place of infamy in history. Perhaps we can halt what seems to be an unofficial race to be the worst killer in history. I think there are already a few names that can claim that title and are unassailable i.e. Hitler.
    We need to start teaching, once more that life is precious, that breaking the law is not something to be proud of, and that respect for your elders (in age and social position i.e. teachers, police etc.) is not abuse. We have taken away a parent’s right and ability to discipline their kids, teacher’s rights to discipline students and to be treated with respect, and the ability of police to enforce most of the laws. Corporal/capitol punishment is not perfect, but once upon a time if a police officer pulled up and said “Hey you!” you filled your pants, today, people, especially youth, just laugh.
    I read an article which showed the timeline of mass killings/shootings in the USA, and the first recorded is 1946, I think, then the next is about 20 years later in the mid 1960′s, then almost 20 years again in the 1980′s and since then they have become more and more frequent. What has changed? Weapons with large capacity magazines have existed since the first world war, semi-automatic weapons really began to spread after world war two, but in the late 1960′s and through the 1970′s we began to embrace and expand human rights, and also to question how harshly we punished people for their transgressions. Now human rights are not a bad thing in a lot of cases, but when the suspect of a crime has more rights than the victim, I think we have gone overboard. Also the increased influence of the media and the decreased influence of the parent began to happen. Once upon a time you did not have children unless you were prepared to spend the time with them that was needed to raise them properly, with supervision and discipline. Now if you suggest this, you infringing on a person’s right to procreate. No need to be home with your kids, we have MTV, PS3, and DVDs to baby-sit. No fear if they start to show behavioural problems, we have diagnoses and meds for that. No fear of them failing in school, teachers cannot hold someone back, it might traumatize a kid if he were failed and held back. No fear of them not getting into college, an amnesty will get rid of that police record, or usually it is juvenile and ‘doesn’t count’, and money can overcome poor grades. Then when they graduate and can’t find a job willing to pay them 6 figures, no fear, they were never taught about working their way up from the bottom, so we will just put them on assistance.
    But banning firearms will solve all this, just like making cocaine and heroin illegal has stopped their effects on society, just like banning alcohol did during prohibition helped society so much.
    Sorry but I don’t see it. I think the first step involves some very painful admissions by society as a whole, and by the same people who think a firearm ban will fix things. We need to work together to fix these problems, and banning firearms is not the first step. Putting the blame for criminal actions on the criminals and making the punishments a deterrent is a first step. Then we can move on from there. But, until we admit that human beings are responsible for their actions not the implements used, we will just sit here spinning our wheels.

    • Great comment!

  34. Frank, it is “liberal” not Liberal”….that is how us asshats do it….

  35. more restrictions just makes legal gun owners criminals. These gang bangers will always have guns and will always get them.
    More armed citizens = less violence.
    these criminals will think about it if there is a chance someone will shoot back.
    We need to be able to protect ourselves from these thugs.
    banning guns does nothing, just look how england is right now, gun crime did not go down when they took guns away from legal gun owners.

  36. ALL 3 of the last options. Canada is already pretty safe, but when one persons does something with a gun that is negative it is all over the news for 20 years or more. Yes talk to the communities, find out the cause of VIOLENCE (not gun violence)- social, cultural, economic. Yes criminals will find a way. So long as there is demand for weapons the illegal market will supply. “Cracking down on guns” will not work. It is already illegal to shoot people, carry guns, shoot handguns anywhere but a gun club, or even transport the firearm to anywhere but a gun club. Everything these criminals do is already criminal, making it “more” criminal wont work.

Sign in to comment.