Stance on gun control

[Nyles]

Gonna stir the pot a little here, just keep in mind I'm coming at this from a non-American perspective. I'm 30, I've been in the Canadian army reserve for 10 years (including a tour to Afghanistan), I ran the gun counter at a Cabelas for 5 years, I'm now an investigator for an insurance company (which incidentally involves a lot more contact with organised crime than you'd think). I've been a shooter and gun collector since I was a young teenager and I'd wager that I own more guns than anyone here except the armorers.

I find the older I get, and the more time I spend around "gun people", the more moderate I get. Working 5 years at the gun counter did a lot to open my eyes about how many idiots and yahoos out there own guns, and 9 months in Kandahar showed me what a society that has NO gun control really looks like.

Is there any reason an intelligent, responsible gun owner shouldn't be able to own whatever they want? Not really, no. But the reality is there's no real legal way to distinguish the responsible people for the irresponsible ones - just because you've never been convicted of a criminal offense does not mean you're responsible enough to own a machine gun.

There are plenty of things I don't like about our gun laws, but I'm actually very in favor of licensing firearms owners. Guns aren't the problem, the people who have them can be. I know that it would never fly in the States, but the fact that in Canada you need to have a license to buy or possess a firearm or ammunition is, I think, the main reason we don't have nearly the same problem with mass shootings as you do. If you're unable to pass a 6 hour safety course and unwilling to fill out a background check form, I don't want you to have a gun.

We used to have registration of long guns, which I think was a waste of time and money. It never really bothered me on a personal level, it took 5 minutes on the RCMP website to register a rifle, but I'm glad we got rid of it as a cost-saving measure. We still register handguns, which I'm still pretty indifferent to - it's not that much of a hassle on me personally and the rate of handgun ownership here is low enough that I doubt it costs much.

We don't have handgun carry in Canada, which frankly doesn't bother me. I've carried a gun enough that it doesn't hold much excitement for me anymore. I've spent all of my life living and working downtown in one of our most violent cities and never felt the need for a gun on my person, and sold plenty of guns to people I've very glad AREN'T able to carry one on my bus to work.

I don't like that we can't own .25s, .32s or short barreled handguns, I think that's foolish and arbitrary. I don't like that I can only shoot handguns on a range (or some tactical rifles if I actually owned any), I think it's way safer to be shooting 9mm in the bush than .30-06. Our laws relating to tactical rifles in general are also arbitrary and convoluted to the point of being unenforceable. I'm glad we don't have your destructive devices law - I own a 14.5mm anti-tank rifle that qualifies as such in the States and I think it's the last gun in my collection a criminal would want. We can ship guns across the country without involving a dealer, I never understood the point behind that one.

But mostly I don't like the loud and aggressive gun culture that's becoming more and more prominent here and from what I can see in the States. Guns are my hobby, you might even say my passion, but they're not my identity. I don't like that more and more being a gun owner seems to come packaged with a whole set of unrelated conservative social and political viewpoints. I think the loud "no compromise", "from my cold dead hands" rhetoric is completely unproductive and mostly just scares people who might not care about gun control into thinking we're all a bunch of irrational aggressive rednecks who probably shouldn't have guns.

[Excalibur]

No offense to Canadian gun owners, but there is a distinction between the "gun culture" of America compared to Canada. I don't believe the mentalities are the same on a fundamental level. With the US, its very founding was partly over the problems of government oversight without representation, and even involving confiscation of arms from the people. A permanent point on the Constitution was made solely for this situation. It's designed to be very clear cut.

To a lot of people, having guns is mostly a hobby, but people tend to forget that your right to own guns is guaranteed by the Constitution and shouldn't be taken for granted. The protection of our rights has to be loud and aggressive because the opposition are just as loud and aggressive in how they want to paint guns being evil things and think that somehow they can just be wished away with fairy dust. The people who seek more strict gun controls don't know guns, don't own guns, nor do they want to understand guns. They just see "Oh that looks scary", let's ban it.


Also to compare western countries like the US and Canada to the Stan and Iraq is like comparing the Ming Dynasty to the Zulu. We're talking about completely different environments, cultures, history and people with almost nothing alike. We're talking about a people that's still heavily influenced by their ass backwards religion that it goes deep into any form of government.

The middle east has mostly been a shit hole for a long time. Sure, spots of civilization and great culture has popped up in the ancient past, but other than the Persian Empire and the following golden age that has brought things like coffee and the number ZERO, the middle east never been a place of evolving moral standards and civilization.

It's not gun control that solves the crime problems of America. If it does work, LA, Chicago and New York City would be some of the safest cities in America, but they are not. Just this passed week, over 50 people were killed as a result of crime in Chicago and that city has some of the strictest gun laws in America.

[commando552]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

A permanent point on the Constitution was made solely for this situation. It's designed to be very clear cut.

The problem that I have with the 2nd amendment, is that it is really not very clear cut at all. In fact, to me at least, it is very ambiguous to whom the right is being bestowed. To me the wording "a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" would seem that the right to bear arms is only protected if you are part of a regulated Militia. This was also the opinion of the US Supreme Court until 2008 when they ruled that it also applied to individuals (in a split 5-4 decision).

Having said this I am against any additional forms of gun control in the US. This isn't because I think gun control is in and of itself a bad thing, but it just wouldn't work due to the history/culture of the USA and the huge amount of firearms that are already in circulation.

[Excalibur]

Most of the people of the period went into great details on what the 2A actually meant and all of them say it's the people's rights to protect themselves, be it from anyone who wish you harm or a government that wishes to oppress you.

The 2A is in 2 parts. The first is establishment of a militia which is different from an actual state controlled military and it needs to be regulated to protect a free state. The second part specifically mentions people, their right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

To keep, meaning to have - to own, possess.
To bear, meaning to carry around, open or otherwise.


I think that is the point established that whoever is the people is, they have the right to keep and bear arms.

That seems pretty clear to me.


What I think should be set into law is harsh consequences for being irresponsible.

[MT2008]

I know that this topic has been dead for over 6 years, but in light of recent developments in both the U.S. and Canada (i.e., handgun sales freeze/ban), I found myself reflecting again on this old post that Nyles wrote:

Originally Posted by Nyles

Gonna stir the pot a little here, just keep in mind I'm coming at this from a non-American perspective. I'm 30, I've been in the Canadian army reserve for 10 years (including a tour to Afghanistan), I ran the gun counter at a Cabelas for 5 years, I'm now an investigator for an insurance company (which incidentally involves a lot more contact with organised crime than you'd think). I've been a shooter and gun collector since I was a young teenager and I'd wager that I own more guns than anyone here except the armorers.

I find the older I get, and the more time I spend around "gun people", the more moderate I get. Working 5 years at the gun counter did a lot to open my eyes about how many idiots and yahoos out there own guns, and 9 months in Kandahar showed me what a society that has NO gun control really looks like.

Is there any reason an intelligent, responsible gun owner shouldn't be able to own whatever they want? Not really, no. But the reality is there's no real legal way to distinguish the responsible people for the irresponsible ones - just because you've never been convicted of a criminal offense does not mean you're responsible enough to own a machine gun.

There are plenty of things I don't like about our gun laws, but I'm actually very in favor of licensing firearms owners. Guns aren't the problem, the people who have them can be. I know that it would never fly in the States, but the fact that in Canada you need to have a license to buy or possess a firearm or ammunition is, I think, the main reason we don't have nearly the same problem with mass shootings as you do. If you're unable to pass a 6 hour safety course and unwilling to fill out a background check form, I don't want you to have a gun.

We used to have registration of long guns, which I think was a waste of time and money. It never really bothered me on a personal level, it took 5 minutes on the RCMP website to register a rifle, but I'm glad we got rid of it as a cost-saving measure. We still register handguns, which I'm still pretty indifferent to - it's not that much of a hassle on me personally and the rate of handgun ownership here is low enough that I doubt it costs much.

We don't have handgun carry in Canada, which frankly doesn't bother me. I've carried a gun enough that it doesn't hold much excitement for me anymore. I've spent all of my life living and working downtown in one of our most violent cities and never felt the need for a gun on my person, and sold plenty of guns to people I've very glad AREN'T able to carry one on my bus to work.

I don't like that we can't own .25s, .32s or short barreled handguns, I think that's foolish and arbitrary. I don't like that I can only shoot handguns on a range (or some tactical rifles if I actually owned any), I think it's way safer to be shooting 9mm in the bush than .30-06. Our laws relating to tactical rifles in general are also arbitrary and convoluted to the point of being unenforceable. I'm glad we don't have your destructive devices law - I own a 14.5mm anti-tank rifle that qualifies as such in the States and I think it's the last gun in my collection a criminal would want. We can ship guns across the country without involving a dealer, I never understood the point behind that one.

But mostly I don't like the loud and aggressive gun culture that's becoming more and more prominent here and from what I can see in the States. Guns are my hobby, you might even say my passion, but they're not my identity. I don't like that more and more being a gun owner seems to come packaged with a whole set of unrelated conservative social and political viewpoints. I think the loud "no compromise", "from my cold dead hands" rhetoric is completely unproductive and mostly just scares people who might not care about gun control into thinking we're all a bunch of irrational aggressive rednecks who probably shouldn't have guns.

Not sure if Nyles is still active, but curious to hear his thoughts in 2022, since 2016 was almost another era ago at this point.

(For the record: I also agree with about 80% of what Nyles wrote in this post, though I never weighed in at the time.)

[funkychinaman]

I found myself nodding a lot. Getting older does moderate your views, and now sending kids into schools with lockdown drills sticks in the back in my mind.

I'm also curious, what violent Canadian city is he referring to?

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

I found myself nodding a lot. Getting older does moderate your views, and now sending kids into schools with lockdown drills sticks in the back in my mind.

I'm also curious, what violent Canadian city is he referring to?

At 37, I don't have kids yet, but that's next on the agenda for me. (I just got engaged - again - last year.) I'm curious to see how parenthood will shape me. Certainly, I expect that it means I'll take gun storage particularly seriously.

I certainly have had my frustrations with many on the pro-RKBA right for many years now, but that's not a new thing (even 20 years ago, I had my annoyances with them, some of which I've expressed on this forum). For almost my entire life, my politics have never been a perfect fit for the community.

I also think Stan raised another good point in 2016: Some of the "gun culture" attitudes in this country do have roots in a siege mindset that comes from treatment by the left. For my part: I do find it disgusting that liberals who will vehemently oppose stereotyping of their favorite "protected classes" (race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) as the highest evil have precisely zero guilt about doing the same to gun owners.

[Spartan198]

It was unpopular with some here last time I said this, but I still believe trigger locks of some type, even just the bike chain type that you loop through the action, are a reasonable legal requirement. Are they foolproof? No, no security system of any kind is, but they're not priced out the ass like a multi-gun safe and it at least shows a concerted effort to prevent a firearm from being used if taken by an unauthorized party.

Agree about the siege mentality. Plus, the whole "my way or the highway" attitude that both sides have these days is going to get them nowhere fast, regardless of the agenda.

[Jcordell]

In the past few months in my city, we've had two road rage incidents in which two sixty something white guys with big guts, mountain man beards and even bigger tempers have opened fire on cars next to them. Fortunately, they didn't kill or hurt the other occupants. We found them in a relatively short time, and they surrendered peacefully. Both are now in jail (or out on bond) and awaiting their day in court. Why did they do this? Because the cars had California plates on them, and our two heroes don't like the large number of Californians moving into Idaho. The occupants of the two victim vehicles were not armed and one of the cars was a rental with California plates. The driver of the rental was a native of Idaho for crying out loud!

Christmas morning, we had two guys get in an argument at a party and one shot the other one in the chest. The victim died from his injury about a week later.

We've had numerous incidents lately in which folks are waving around their legally owned and carried guns at bars, restaurants, sporting events and other social occasions. Usually when they are drunk or high and in a bad mood.

There have been many other occasions in which piss poor judgement and firearms have come together. It's only been the grace of God that I haven't had to shoot anyone. Eighteen months to my retirement. I'm crossing my fingers.

There are some folks who just shouldn't be gun owners. There was a time I wouldn't have said that, but time, age and 22 years as a police officer can change one's beliefs - or at least modify them.

No, I am not in favor of gun banning etc. But there are some who should not own or have access to firearms.

[Spartan198]

Sadly I think incidents like that, for just as petty or even pettier reasons, are going to rise before they go decrease and it's going to turn out badly for gun owners who don't seek to use their 2A rights to intimidate political and social opposites. I can only hope I live long enough to see some semblance of sanity reestablished within both sides. I'm not optimistic.