Shooting at the Eaton Centre

[Guest Manny]

Wow, guess you people have no respect for the dead, eh?

[Boges]

I find it interesting that this shooting story was international news because Brett Lawrie of the Blue Jays was in the mall and tweeted about it.

Back to the first page. This is exactly like the Jane Creba thing. It's OK if gangbangers kill eachother in Rexdale. The minute they do it around tourists and shoppers that's totally offside.

[Canuckistani]

Back to the first page. This is exactly like the Jane Creba thing. It's OK if gangbangers kill eachother in Rexdale. The minute they do it around tourists and shoppers that's totally offside.

That's how I see it. I'm not saying the police shouldn't investigate and catch the shooters, but I'm a lot less worried when gang bangers shoot each other. And the police make that clear when they release that it was a targeted attack - ie nothing for the average person to worry about. As long as we have gangs we'll have this sort of problem. We need policies that reduce the strength of gangs. The primary one would be drug legalization, IMO.

[Boges]

That's how I see it. I'm not saying the police shouldn't investigate and catch the shooters, but I'm a lot less worried when gang bangers shoot each other. And the police make that clear when they release that it was a targeted attack - ie nothing for the average person to worry about. As long as we have gangs we'll have this sort of problem. We need policies that reduce the strength of gangs. The primary one would be drug legalization, IMO.

I've been made to this email point before. Gangs will always want to pedal illegal things. Making certain things legal won't get rid of criminals trying to make money.

[GostHacked]

Gun laws prevent lawful citizens from having guns.

The criminal doesn't give dip shit about gun laws.

Overall that is the point that keeps going over people's heads.

[Michael Hardner]

Overall that is the point that keeps going over people's heads.

The greater the supply, the greater the ease with which criminals can obtain them.

[GostHacked]

The greater the supply, the greater the ease with which criminals can obtain them.

Criminals don't go by the rules, so what will more regulation do other than annoy the shit out of law abiding citizens?

[bleeding heart]

Criminals don't go by the rules, so what will more regulation do other than annoy the shit out of law abiding citizens?

I'm not sure if the argument put forth is correct or not, but I think you're missing it: if there are more guns easily available (lawfully) it will be easier for criminals to obtain guns.

[Michael Hardner]

Criminals don't go by the rules, so what will more regulation do other than annoy the shit out of law abiding citizens?

It will restrict the supply of guns, and make it easier to track guns I suppose.

[Guest American Woman]

Gun laws prevent lawful citizens from having guns.

The criminal doesn't give dip shit about gun laws.

Furthermore, I would guess that a criminal act is more likely to be committed with an illegal, unregistered gun that can't be traced than with one that was registered to the perpetrator of the act.

[Canuckistani]

Furthermore, I would guess that a criminal act is more likely to be committed with an illegal, unregistered gun that can't be traced than with one that was registered to the perpetrator of the act.

Yes, but many of those illegal guns are stolen. In fact where else would they get them - every gun starts off legal. So the less guns there are legally in circulation, the less guns are available to be stolen.

[GostHacked]

I'm not sure if the argument put forth is correct or not, but I think you're missing it: if there are more guns easily available (lawfully) it will be easier for criminals to obtain guns.

I understand what you are saying, and I think you are talking about the manufacturing guns. So why not go after gun manufacturers? They are the ones producing and pumping that many guns into the market. If you want to deal with that, go after the manufacturers.

And there will ALWAYS be more guns. How many gun manufacturers have gone under in the past century?

Are we going to have a gun burning at the gun store?

[GostHacked]

Yes, but many of those illegal guns are stolen. In fact where else would they get them - every gun starts off legal. So the less guns there are legally in circulation, the less guns are available to be stolen.

The Police have a lot of guns. And have you seen the kit they have these days?

[Canuckistani]

I understand what you are saying, and I think you are talking about the manufacturing guns. So why not go after gun manufacturers? They are the ones producing and pumping that many guns into the market. If you want to deal with that, go after the manufacturers.

And there will ALWAYS be more guns. How many gun manufacturers have gone under in the past century?

Are we going to have a gun burning at the gun store?

What do you mean go after? You want to deal with a proliferation of legal guns, you tighten the laws so that less legal guns can be sold. Nobody is talking about making all guns illegal, just tightening up who can buy one legally.

[GostHacked]

What do you mean go after? You want to deal with a proliferation of legal guns, you tighten the laws so that less legal guns can be sold. Nobody is talking about making all guns illegal, just tightening up who can buy one legally.

Alright, so we put more regulations in right? More restrictions, right? Maybe another gun registry, right? Which criminals DON'T GIVE A FLYING *.* ..... hopefully you will see your error here. And that is EXACTLY what people don't get. Put all the laws, regulations, restrictions, 'tighten it up' all you want. The criminals will always get what they want, because they don't play by the rules that govern the rest of us.

[Guest Peeves]

The greater the supply, the greater the ease with which criminals can obtain them.

Oh! A motherhood and apple pie homily? Platitude?

The old, " "availability cancels out rationality" argument. If someone can steal my registered car, ban cars?

I have news little buddy, there is no dearth of sources for the acquisition of any weapon wanted. Criminals don't rely on the number available in 'my' home. Acquiring one is easy for a criminal regardless the ownership by a responsible citizen.

Some countries have guns legallyin most every home and they are not cause for alarm.

Those that would deny a responsible citizen a gun is a spokesman for the criminal, not for reason.

Edited June 4, 2012 by Peeves

[Michael Hardner]

Oh! A motherhood and apple pie homily? Platitude?

The old, " "availability cancels out rationality" argument. If someone can steal my registered car, ban cars?

Uh.... it's pretty logical if there's more demand, there will be more guns. What about that isn't rational ?

I have news little buddy, there is no dearth of sources for the acquisition of any weapon wanted. Criminals don't rely on the number available in 'my' home. Acquiring one is easy for a criminal regardless the ownership by a responsible citizen.

It's harder if guns are harder to get, though. That's rational.

[Fletch 27]

Sickening... Another "Long Gun" tragedy...

[Guest Peeves]

Uh.... it's pretty logical if there's more demand, there will be more guns. What about that isn't rational ?

It's harder if guns are harder to get, though. That's rational.

Nope, it just ain't. If a criminal can use an easily acquired unregistered gun, where he gets same isn't in any way determined by those owned legally.

The criminal will take the easiest, safest route, which is to buy one illegally. Preventing a citizen from having a legally purchased gun on the off chance it will be available to a criminal is simply irrational.

It's no more rational than is denying legal cars, knives, or B.B. bats to responsible owners because they might fall into the wrong hands. If a crime is committed by a drunk driver that takes someones keys the car owner is not denied a car unless he is somehow complicit. So too the registered gun owner. That's logical. Banning gun ownership ONLY bans legal citizens from owning a gun, not the criminal. So, that's illogical it punishes the innocent and if anything, rewards the criminal as he has fewer defenses to be concerned about..

Those that say ban something from the righteous because someone will just maybe use the item for criminal purpose are irrational.

[Guest Derek L]

The greater the supply, the greater the ease with which criminals can obtain them.

In Canada alone, outside of the ¾ of a million firearms owned by all levels of Government, there’s an estimated 21 million owned by private citizens and no reliable estimate of firearms in the hands of “criminals”…..You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, no more then you can stop recreational drug use, prostitution, cheating at cards, speeding and people daydreaming.

[Guest Derek L]

I'm not sure if the argument put forth is correct or not, but I think you're missing it: if there are more guns easily available (lawfully) it will be easier for criminals to obtain guns.

Unlikely, firearms seized by police in Canada tend to be types one can't purchase legally here.

[Guest Derek L]

It will restrict the supply of guns, and make it easier to track guns I suppose.

What good would being able to track the firearm used in the OP have done, especially if it were smuggled in from China or the United States?

[Guest Derek L]

I understand what you are saying, and I think you are talking about the manufacturing guns. So why not go after gun manufacturers? They are the ones producing and pumping that many guns into the market. If you want to deal with that, go after the manufacturers.

And there will ALWAYS be more guns. How many gun manufacturers have gone under in the past century?

Are we going to have a gun burning at the gun store?

It’s been tried and failed other then force newer firearms to be ordained in lawyer speak…….If Ford minivans are the vehicle of choice of serial killers, Chevy pick-ups the pick of wife beaters and Chrysler sedans the preferred type of drug dealers, can you sue the manufacture?

Many gun makers have “gone down”, but most still standing have been around for decades, if not centuries, and ultimately one doesn’t purchase firearms from the manufacturer directly.

[Fletch 27]

Can we not just point this a poor parenting? This little SOB, simply grabbed a gun.. And shot another being! Do we blame the gun? Do we blame the bullet manufacturer? Maybe the company that made the gun-oil... Canadians are stupid.. Look at the root... The parents... They will place blame anywhere else other than themselves. Fucking sickening... This little SOB searched and found a gun... Got the lead.. And snuffed out a life.

Propper parenting would have avaoided this... Or you can blame it on the Toronto being a shithole as it is... Ok, what is it?

My neighbor hunts on a weekly basis.. Never killed anyone... And he grew up in tough times.. He raised a nice family and is responsible with his guns... Oh, he had good parents..

I say hang him, and his shitty parents from the CN tower. They were involved in raising this murderer...

[Moonlight Graham]

I didn't say jiu-jitsu was more effective lol. Just cooler.