The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2020 AFPCanada bans assault weapons after deadliest shooting
By Jacques LEMIEUX OTTAWA©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2020 AFP
32 Comments
Login to comment
oldman_13
Good! There's absolutely no reason for any individual outside of the military and police forces to possess assault weapons.
PTownsend
Echo what oldman13 said. I'd add no reason for anyone outside the military and police to have semi-automatic weapons and large capacity magazines.
Strangerland
The sixteen extreme-right trump-supporting Canadians have stated their extreme disgust in the tyranny of the state. 35 million other Canadians have told them to go live in trumps America.
Ah_so
An appeal to leaders everywhere - why not ban these weapons before the massacre happens. It is just a matter of time before it happens in your backyard and on your watch.
The Avenger
A leader with some guts and a brain.
A ban on assault rifles on the heels of a mass shooting where assault style weapons were used to kill 22 people. Imagine that.
MarkX
Having grown up in rural Canada, and frequently went hunting with my Dad, I know that Canadians like, and need guns. But not these! The only reason people have these is in my opinion is that they want to play soldier and pretend to be fighting some imaginary villain.
Chip Star
Reasonable.
It worked in the US until Bush II let it expire I’m 2004. There were fewer mass shootings between 1994 and 2004 than before or after. (Accepting correlation doesn’t mean causation.)
Noliving
Question - if no one in the civilian world is going to have these weapons then why should the police?
On a personal note:
This is not going to accomplish much of anything. The ones Canada sold only had five rounds. The guns used were from the USA and not only that he was never licensed to even own the ones that were legal in Canada to begin with. Does anyone really honestly think that banning these will really amount to much of anything in Canada?
This guy drove around for over 12 hours shooting at people. The primary reason for why he killed so many people was because he had 12 hours and he was impersonating law enforcement. Does anyone here really honestly think this could not be done with a muzzle loader if you had 12 hours and looked like law enforcement?
Chip Star - The assault weapon ban of 1994-2004 still allowed semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines.
These were what was banned:
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash hider or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher
In other other words if you had an AR-15 with detachable magazines and a grenade launcher but none of the other attachments it was legal. You tell me how important bayonet mounts, pistol grip, flash higher/threaded barrel, pistol grip or a telescoping stock is to commit a mass shooting.
bass4funk
Looks like the underground black market sales have just opened for business. Canada can do what it wants to do, not my care or concern, but this law won’t stop the gun enthusiasts from purchasing guns in the black market.
PTownsend
I agree. Gun thugs recognize no nation, no boundaries; they say laws are for the weak, for those who expect the police to protect them.
That makes gun thugs criminals, doesn't it.
Or because many of them want guns so they can overthrow their government, would that make them subversives or terrorists.
Noliving
So how does that make them a thug for recognizing that law enforcement is not really capable of defending your life? If they, law enforcement, were then rapes, aggravated assaults, and homicide wouldn't exist if law enforcement was capable of doing those things. It just makes a person naive to think law enforcement is really that effective when you need them the most. There are real estate agents, especially women, who carry firearms, illegally, on them while showing houses, does it make them a gun thug for violating a states conceal carry laws?
I don't think so.
PTownsend
I understand there are people who live their lives in fear, people who think they're likely to be assaulted in some way and for protection need guns; no doubt for many reasons. I'm not one of them. I'm probably naive, maybe lucky. I have lived in some rough places as a civilian but never once felt the need to get a gun.
Re laws, if people knowingly break them, then I'd say they're committing crimes. Call them thugs, criminals, at minimum scoff-laws.
Mocheake
Bravo Canada! I am all for making it harder for terrorists and murderers to do their dirty deeds.
Laguna
Guns in general are bad. I remember taking my kids to visit my father, and there was a pistol next to a box of ammunition in an area accessible to my kids - apparently, he had inherited it from his wife's father and just stuck it there. I gave him a piece of my mind.
If you want to hunt, use a rifle. That is a tool, not a killing machine.
Attilathehungry
If you look at the cold hard facts, you will see that so-called "assault rifles" are used in very few crimes, either in Canada or the United States. They are, however, a great symbol for uneducated people to use when trying to change gun laws.
In Canada, only about 50-60 people per year are killed with ALL types of long guns, including shotguns and non-assault rifles. This law will have very limited impact on crime, but WILL enable the Liberal Party to crow and preen.
Wolfpack
You may live in a nice and relatively safe neighborhood. Many other people do not. You may not have an abusive spouse who is threatening to kill you. Other people do. You may live in a place without a gang problem. Some people do. That’s great for you.
You are obviously a very confident person who knows how to handle himself. I have never been so fearful that I felt I had to have a gun to protect myself. But I understand that not all people are like me. The police are not personal the bodyguards for every law abiding citizen. Rich people have bodyguards. Most people aren’t Mike Bloomberg.
The vast majority of gun owners agree with you. I personally don’t think a rifle outfitted as a machine gun is necessary for self defense. The Canadians will decide that for themselves. Whatever they decide is fine with me.
Attilathehungry
Fully automatic weapons are ALREADY banned in Canada, and are used only in a literal handful of crimes. I believe only 2 or 3 killings per year. Banning "assault weapons" is just a trope used by people who really don't know much about firearms. There are really no differences (beyond cosmetic) between so-called "assault rifles" and run-of-the-mill semiautomatic rifles. Military grade weapons are NOT available to the public.
Stop!Hammertime.
Nothing about handguns, which account for 58 percent of shooting homicides in Canada?
I believe handguns were used in this case, too.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/canada-gun-facts-crime-accidental-shootings-suicides-1.4803378
kaksak
Should they go ahead and completely ban these guns? I don't know about Canada, but in the US, the 2nd amendment was created for this reason exactly. That the federal government should not have too much power. A country must have an active army to protect itself, but said country can also use said army to oppress its people - thus, the citizens must be able to bear arms to resist a government that tries to oppress them. By removing the rights for people to arm themselves with weapons that are at least close to or at the same level that the army uses, you remove their ability to resist. Now, in the event you do get oppressed, you're left with your handguns against semi-automatic and automatic weapons. As Hitler once wrote: "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms."
kaksak
If you outlaw guns, the only people with guns will be the outlaws, and the federal government. And often times, it's hard to tell who's who.
kaksak
@Strangerland
If a government wants to oppress its citizens, and these citizens stand up against the army (many in the army would defend the citizens - it's not like the army is going to be at full force - it's a civil war that's going to break out - use your head).
Secondly, to win, they're going to have to kill a HUGE amount of people, stand the risk of being ostracized by other countries, have sanctions against them put in place and other extreme measures. All of these factors combined makes this a VERY unprofitable venture, wouldn't you say?
They'd win the battle, but at what cost?
Strangerland
And if wishes were horses, beggers would ride.
Once again, it's silly you think that the people armed with guns could stand up against the military.
kaksak
@stophammertime
Much better, that's how.
"Nothing about handguns, which account for 58 percent of shooting homicides in Canada?"
That was also you, in an earlier comment. So I guess you're one of those very few who would be in favor of handgun bans as well?
Strangerland
Bane of humanity. At least hunting rifles serve a purpose (getting food for your family). Handguns are purely for killing people.
arrestpaul
Assault weapon is an arbitrary term that elected Democrats in the US., or anti-2nd zealots, or the oddball internet poster can use as a catch-all phrase in order to blame an inanimate object for the monstrous actions of a human being. Any weapon can be identified as an assault weapon. All it takes is an act by a legislature. And once a list of so-called "assault weapons" is created, it can be added to as the government sees fit to do so.
Stop!Hammertime.
kaksak,
I said very few people support a ban on ALL gun ownership. Handguns are not all guns. And the percentage of people who would support a ban on handguns is about 30%.
news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
proxy
Typical Canadian attitude; make rules for other people that have no benefit. Not one expert in Canada thinks Trudeau's new rules he is imposing will make a lick of difference. The RCMP really screwed up on this last killing spree and are trying to cover their butts and Trudeau is helping them.
arrestpaul
Exactly. "Canada has his own definition of what are assault weapons". Anyone can create their own arbitrary list of "assault weapons", and later add any weapon they wish to that list. These arbitrary lists are even more questionable when they are passed into law by legislators who prefer to blame inanimate objects for the actions of human beings.
douglas snyde
@chip star
The AWB was utterly useless. Per the NCJRs study on it.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf
All rifles of any type in the US (not just ARs) kill less than hammers, fists and knives.