Republicans always say we should focus on "mental illness" after a mass shooting

But republicans never do or propose any solutions for mental illness. In fact, they seem to block anything that is proposed. So if they don't want to do anything about the guns, and they won't do anything about the mental illness, does that say they are OK with elementary school kids being killed?

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

ElwoodBlues · M

Canada has the same proportion of "mentally ill" as the US. Nope, it's the guns.

[sep][sep] [center]UPDATE[/center] [sep][sep]

Canada assault weapons ban
[quote][b]Prohibition on assault-style firearms[/b]
As of May 1, 2020 the Government of Canada has prohibited over 1,500 models of assault-style firearms and certain components of some newly prohibited firearms (the upper receivers of M16, AR-10, AR-15, and M4 patterns of firearms). New maximum thresholds for muzzle energy (greater than 10,000 Joules) and bore diameter (20 mm bore or greater) are also in place. Any firearm that exceeds them is now prohibited.[/quote]

Canada large magazine ban
[quote]As a general rule, the maximum magazine capacity is:
* 5 cartridges for most magazines designed for a semi-automatic, centre-fire long gun
* 10 cartridges for most handgun magazines[/quote]

Canadian licensing
[quote]Starting in 1979, people who wished to acquire firearms were required to obtain a firearms acquisition certificate (FAC) from their local police agency. From 1995 to 2012, all firearms owners were required to possess a firearms licence—either a possession and acquisition licence (PAL), a possession-only licence (POL), an FAC, or a minor's licence—and all firearms were required to be registered.[/quote]

Guns like the AR-15 and the Ruger Mini-14 (used to kill 14 women in Montreal in 1989) have been moved on and off Canada's restricted list since 1977. [b]https://rsc-src.ca/en/node/4117[/b]

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

ElwoodBlues · M

@MethDozer I have updated my top post with Canada's assault weapon ban and their magazine limits. For the most part, guns and magazines used in US mass killings are banned in Canada.

It's the guns, dude.

MethDozer · M

@ElwoodBlues No they aren't banned really. They just have to be pinned to ten rounds. They also have "assault weapons " there as well. I know Canadian gun laws very, very well. For the most part they have the very similar access to the same weapons. Even some WE aren't allowed to.
It's the culture and screening.

ElwoodBlues · M

@MethDozer Sorry, I forgot to click "save." It's up there now with source link. I'll put it here too:

[quote][b]Prohibition on assault-style firearms[/b]
As of May 1, 2020 the Government of Canada has prohibited over 1,500 models of assault-style firearms and certain components of some newly prohibited firearms (the upper receivers of M16, AR-10, AR-15, and M4 patterns of firearms). New maximum thresholds for muzzle energy (greater than 10,000 Joules) and bore diameter (20 mm bore or greater) are also in place. Any firearm that exceeds them is now prohibited.[/quote]

MethDozer · M

@ElwoodBlues You have to look deeper into their law's details. The magazine cap for long guns is that, the rhing is though that rhey allow "pinned" magazines for many long arms. Take fir example a Norinco SKS or AK. The mags are the regular magazines, but they are pinned to 5 rounds. Meaning they installed a rivet that doesnt allow more than 5 rounds. Yet any nutjob could just pry it out or drill it and bam, full capaciry. The handgun cap is tricky too, the magazine only has to be marked as 10 rounds for certain caliber. It is perfe tly legal to load more smaller caliber rounds and use in a smaller caliber handgun that will except it. Which many over there do.

Magazine caps don't explain the almost non existence of mass shootings there either. It isn't like some nutob who wants to do so is going to say " darn, only if I could get 15 round mags instead if these 5 and pinned mags.

It's culture and screening that explains it.

MethDozer · M

@ElwoodBlues also, the Ar-15 and such wasn't banned until a few weeks ago. So um yeah. That doesn't explain anything.

ElwoodBlues · M

@MethDozer So basically you're telling me that because people can break a magazine size law, the law has no effect. Extending that logic, you're saying all laws are useless because people can break them; i.e. there's no such thing as law and order. But Canada has had more restrictive gun laws than the US for a long time:

[quote]Starting in 1979, people who wished to acquire firearms were required to obtain a firearms acquisition certificate (FAC) from their local police agency. From 1995 to 2012, all firearms owners were required to possess a firearms licence—either a possession and acquisition licence (PAL), a possession-only licence (POL), an FAC, or a minor's licence—and all firearms were required to be registered.[/quote]

Translation: the local police had to OK every gun purchase. Plus, the AR-15 was often placed on the RCMP's restricted list. If the locals cops said no to an AR-15, you didn't get one. I think it' s fair to call this a strong partial ban on assault rifles going back to at least 1979.

MethDozer · M

@ElwoodBlues Yes, if the same 10,15, and 20 round magazines are available, just mandated to have a little hole drilled in them with a pop rivet to stop the follower at 5 rounds. Then yes, that law doesn't explain things.

No, no I am not saying laws are useless and that the legal system is helpless on the issue.
Do you not read the word " screening".

And no, the restricted catagory isn't nor counts as any kind of ban.

[quote]Starting in 1979, people who wished to acquire firearms were required to obtain a firearms acquisition certificate (FAC) from their local police agency. From 1995 to 2012, all firearms owners were required to possess a firearms licence—either a possession and acquisition licence (PAL), a possession-only licence (POL), an FAC, or a minor's licence—and all firearms were [/quote]

Translation, a more mature culture and proper screening.

MethDozer · M

@ElwoodBlues The resitrcted list doesn't mean banned. It means you can't walk around or hunt with them and can only shoot them at approved ranges and are legally only allowed to transport them to ans from approved situations with storage requirements.

Fun fact, a sawed off shitgun wich is a destructive device here is a completely unregulated sporting firearm in Canada.

There's a lot of nuance to Canadian firearm laws. But it hasn't limited availabilty much there. I actually think they had a good balance there and have long said we should model from them.

However, we can't ignore the glaring fact that there is another problem in the US with culture and mental health that drives exponentially more people to nut up and go on killing sprees in schools and malls here. They not only don't happen where firearms are completely banned, they don't happen at near the same rate were weapons are closely avaialable. I'm not against better fireame screening measures and requirments at all. But thinking that is the bulk problem ain't going to solve our killing problem if we ignore the deeper issues that is going on.