DeBoom DeBoom:
bootlegga bootlegga:
Yes, but to own a car, you need insurance, REGISTRATION, a driver's license...why is that okay but gun registration is evil? Or do you propose that none of that should be necessary either?
Not once have I ever called for deregulating firearms. For the record I support training, background checks and licensing. My objection to the firearms registration is that it is ineffective and a waste of resources. The billions spend on registration in this country could have been much better spent on more police officers and anti-smuggling efforts. That would have had a much better effect on gun crime.
Considering you only responded to this one sentence shall I take it you agree with the rest of the paragraph?
Not at all. I simply picked out what I thought was your counterpoint to the ban DVD players because they are as dangerous as guns argument. All the other items you talk about weren't designed to kill people, except maybe knives (even that is debatable given that they were developed tens of thousands of years ago).
Guns were designed for use on the battlefield to kill soldiers, period. Any other uses that people came up with afterwards is another discussion. DVD players were designed for you to watch movies, not to bludgeon other people with. Baseball bats were designed to play a game. Lead pipes were designed for plumbing uses.
I didn't think you wanted a discussion about registering everything that can kill a person if thrown at them. If that's the case, we'd pretty much have to register almost everything we own, from telephone books to pens to frying pans to you name it. Likewise, if we're going to talk about a registry for everything that could be used to commit a crime, then I'd guess that we'd spend 24 hours a day dealing with the bureaucracy of it.
Do you now get why I didn't bother to address anything else in that paragraph?
DeBoom DeBoom:
bootlegga bootlegga:
In Canada, it would be incredibly difficult to obtain such weapons simply because they are already prohibited weapons and have been so for a long, long time. Perhaps in Canada, if they had mob ties, knew some Asian gang members or black marketeers it might have been barely possible, but because all of those sorts of weapons have been banned for a long time, it is still highly unlikely that they could have obtained them in the first place.
Really? We have a long and open border with country that has the most guns in the world and you think it would be hard to acquire an illegal gun? The drug dealers don't seem to have a problem and their product can be smelt by dogs. That might also be a surprise to the gangs who seem to have no trouble getting illegal guns from the states. Most crime guns come from the US.
Yes, and most smuggled weapons from the US are PISTOLS, not assault rifles.
The point is that nowadays, unless you are well connected in the criminal world, you aren't going to be able to buy an automatic weapon, which most people who use guns in the heat of the moment (like for school shootings - Dawson College, Taber, etc) do not have access to and/or aren't familiar with.
Prove me wrong and go buy yourself a Tec 9 or an AK-47.
DeBoom DeBoom:
bootlegga bootlegga:
Wrong. Given that he entered the school with hundreds of rounds for his rifle, the intent was there, just not the ability to carry it out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._R._Myer ... l_shooting He got taken down by a gym teacher after shooting at 3 people. Hardly a stunning display of skill. The real reason few people got hurt was he let the teacher get the drop on him. Him only having a semi-auto wouldn't have made one bit of difference if the teacher didn't get the drop on him. And Virgina Tech was done with semi-auto and had a much higher death toll than Columbine. It matters much more
how the weapon is used than
what the weapon is.
I never said anything about his skill, just his intent.
Had he been better armed, Taber could easily have been much worse. If he had a Tec 9 like those douchebags in Columbine, maybe that teacher would have been killed trying to stop him. Or maybe he would have killed/wounded more people than the one he did, simply by spraying and praying.
DeBoom DeBoom:
$1:
And I'm sure that pyschotic teenaged kids who got their firearms training playing Doom (or some other FPS) have the same level of fire discipline as trained soldiers and police officers.
Talk about specious reasoning...
A video game has never had a realistic depiction of automatic fire.
But seriously its not that hard to reason this one out on your own. Its not out of the question for a potential shooter to practice with the gun before (the columbine shooters did so) or even read a book or website about guns. But more to the point if the shooter is spraying on auto that means he is wasting lots of ammo with out much result. Lets say the shooter brought 3 30 round mags. He could pick people off one by one on semi by either firing one round per target or double tapping or he could spray bullets hoping to hit something. With the bullets he brought he could kill 45 people by double taping or 18 if he manages to limit his fire to sort aimed bursts of 5 round on auto (something your average school shooter probably wont have the disciple to do). Furthermore do you think most psychotic shooters/criminals are going to lay down several several grand for an automatic assault rifle when they could buy a semi auto rifle or pistol for a few hundred buck? There just doesn't seem to be enough benefit to make autos illegal.
And right there you show you don't know squat about gun control in Canada.
High capacity magazines (more than 5 rounds) are illegal in Canada, and have been since the Lepine massacre at Ecole Polytechinque.
And double taping magazines? All that usually accomplishes are bent feed mechanisms on the mags. Ask anyone real soldier how many double taped mags they've used. Everyone I've ever talked to laughs when they see someone do something that stupid in a movie.
CKA Uber 
CKA Moderator 
![[B-o]](./images/smilies/drinkup.gif "Drink up")
