Canada introduces bill to freeze sales and imports of handguns

[b][c=BF0080]Chapeau, Premier Ministre Trudeau![/c][/b]

The Canadian government introduced a new bill today that proposes stricter laws controlling handguns just days after more than a dozen students and a teacher were gunned down in a Texas elementary school.

The proposed legislation would immediately stop the sale, transfer, and import of handguns across the country. It stops short of an outright ban on handguns but would reduce the number of them in legal circulation.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called the bill a “national freeze” on handgun ownership during a news conference in Ottawa just after 5 pm local time.

“Other than using firearms for sport shooting and hunting, there is no reason anyone in Canada should need guns in their everyday lives,” Trudeau said. “Canadians are united in wanting to do more to keep communities safe and prevent suicides and gender-based violence.”

“[b]This is about freedom. People should be free to go to school, the supermarket, their place of worship without fear,[/b]” Trudeau continued. “[b]Gun violence is a complex problem, but at the end of the day, the math is quite simple: [c=BF0080]the fewer guns in communities, the safer everyone will be[/c].[/b]”

Present at the announcement were survivors of several Canadian mass shootings, including Ecole Polytechnique, the Quebec Mosque shooting, the Danforth shooting, and the Portapique rampage.

Public Safety Minister Marco Mendocino called the bill the most significant action on gun violence in a generation.

The bill also includes stiffer sentences for illegally owning a gun and gives more resources to law enforcement to intercept smuggled guns. In addition, it prevents people with a prior or current restraining order from getting a firearms licence. Courts could also suspend gun licences for people deemed to pose a danger to themselves or others.

The proposed legislation needs to be approved in a vote in the House of Commons before it becomes law.

(stolen from: https://dailyhive.com/calgary/canada-handgun-freeze-bill)

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

Pretzel · 61-69, M

when you outlaw guns
only outlaws will have guns

and that includes the normally law abiding that want them for protection.

I have a limited viewpoint obviously - but looking at the way alcohol and drugs have been outlawed...I think people will possess what they want to possess, laws notwithstanding.

We went through a period of enlightenment in the 70s when mental illness was treated with more humanity - and the pendulum swung in the other direction - we don't house the dangerous as we used to - and forcing them to take medications was considered a violation of their rights...

so now we have the mentally disturbed walking around armed.

seems like a rethink on mental health might help. not stigmatizing those with disorders but more closely monitoring them and institutionalizing people that exhibit signs of potentially dangerous behavior

(might end up locking up a few radio hosts and politicians in the process...cost of doing business I guess)

therighttothink50 · 56-60, M

Addressing Mass Shootings And Guns In America: A Time To Take A Deep Breath And A Collective Pause - A Time For Calm And A Time To Analyze All The Factors Which Contribute To Such Tragedies
http://allnewspipeline.com/A_Time_To_Analyze_All_Factors_Which_Contribute_To_Such_Tragedies.php@Pretzel

windinhishair · 61-69, M

@Pretzel Since the US has far more mass shootings than any other country, does this mean that far more Americans are mentally ill than in any other country on earth?

Pretzel · 61-69, M

@windinhishair Fair question and having lived here for as long as I have - I can't answer no.

But when you look at the world's population we are up there in sheer numbers too. So you would expect more people, more violence, more muders.

we'll leave out the good things since Americans are trash (we've earned some of that reputation or the past couple of hundred years).

I'm not a flag waver. I enjoy the freedoms I have here. But I would probably be happy in most countries I could have been born into.

windinhishair · 61-69, M

@Pretzel You are correct about the absolute numbers, but I am talking about the RATE of gun murders and mass killings, which are also much higher in the US. If people believe that mental illness is the primary problem, then they have to accept that the rate of mental illness in the US dwarves that in other nations. And, not only that, but they have to accept that the rate of mental illness among gun owners is way out of proportion with other countries.

I ask this question somewhat facetiously, because I do not believe that Americans are inherently more prone to mental illness than in other countries. It does, however, point to the easy access to weapons of mass killing as the primary cause of mass killings, not mental illness, even if they are committed by individuals that have underlying mental illness issues.

The US should have a much better mental health care system as one of the richest nations on earth. It should be a national priority. And with a significantly improved mental health care system AND restricted access to weapons designed to kill large numbers of people quickly and efficiently, perhaps we can reverse the gun violence trend.

You are probably correct that you would be happy in most countries with what you have. That's an admirable trait.

Pretzel · 61-69, M

@windinhishair
I think it boils down to a "genie out of the bottle" situation.

you won't prevent gun ownership with laws - just drive it undercover

guns are pervasive and people won't give them up because of the fear that "some other guys has one"

and honestly they would be right, criminals would have guns - they won't turn them in. and having a population that is known to be unarmed - won't reduce the rate of violent crime.

so we are hoisted on our own pitard (or gun barrels)

windinhishair · 61-69, M

@Pretzel I take a long view of the situation. It took decades for us to get into this mess, and it will take decades for us to get out of it. We should ban assault weapons and other weapons that are intended for mass killing. We don't need to confiscate those already out there, but have generous buy-back programs and work to reduce the number out there over time. Ban large clips and magazines, institute universal background checks, raise the age to own weapons to 21, ban ghost guns, increase criminal penalties, and other controls will gradually reduce the number of gun deaths.

We have to start somewhere. Let's start now.

Kudos to Canada for doing what they need to for their own citizenry. The US should take note.

Pretzel · 61-69, M

@windinhishair I'm all for looking at other countries and see what works and doesn't work

and I agree that if it is to be done it will have to be done over the long term

the frog in the pot of water type thing

and that might work except it was tried during the Clinton administration

and then got reversed with the Bush administration

people are fickle as hell.

windinhishair · 61-69, M

@Pretzel The assault weapons ban worked. Unfortunately, it ended in 2004, and Republicans are loathe to renew it. Just think how many mass killings could have been prevented? Unfortunately, the rest of us are hostage to Republican legislators who believe the killings of children is but a small price to pay for their gun worship.

Pretzel · 61-69, M

@windinhishairbut hasn't there been a period where the dems were in the majority and could have passed it?
(seriously asking - not snarking)

I'm living in the southern US where the good ole boys would rather vote for a dead democrat than a live republican...can't imagine them giving up their firearms without a fight

(maybe a promise of beer for life and crossbow lessons? - that was said facetiously because I tend to joke about things inapprorpirately)

windinhishair · 61-69, M

@Pretzel The Democrats are in the majority now, and have passed gun control legislation many times in the House. The problem is that legislation cannot pass the Senate due to the filibuster rules. Even with a majority in the Senate, Democrats cannot pass anything unless 60 Senators vote for it. That means 10 Republicans have to agree, and that almost never happens. Until Republicans embrace gun control, nothing will get done on a federal level.

Pretzel · 61-69, M

@windinhishair ahh. thanks. I don't follow politics and didn't know that.

I suspect that real action won't happen unless and until the 2nd amendment is repealed or at least modified greatly.

I never say never - except when I used it in that sense.

Imagine if people could sue gun manufacturers like they did tobacco companies....(sorry to go John Lennon on you) ......or tax guns and ammunition heavily. Not totally out of the question - you CAN legally own a fully automatic machine gun - if you pass background and pay a tax to do it.

I find people more motivated by monetary concerns.

Of course that will make people say "then only the rich will have guns" - well there are a seperate set of rules for the rich...always have been...always will be.

windinhishair · 61-69, M

@Pretzel Permitting lawsuits against gun manufacturers would have a big impact. I would be in favor of that.

Fully automatic weapons are not legal. Semi-automatic weapons are, and they can be modified to be fully automatic.

Pretzel · 61-69, M

@windinhishair I believe they can as long as they meet the requirements (in the US)
https://rocketffl.com/who-can-own-a-full-auto-machine-gun/

now I think that is perfectly crazy and hope I'm wrong

and you're right, all they have to do with a semi auto is change a cam or two and it continues to fire until it's empty