How to solve the problem of gun violence

[Argus]

Anyone found carrying a restricted firearm on their person or in their car who has no licence gets 1 year mandatory minimum jail time - no parole. If they have a record of violence it's 5 years mandatory minimum, no parole. For the first arrest. Double the second arrest.

Anyone who uses a firearm on another person for other than self defence gets 10 years in prison, minimum. On top of whatever other sentence they get for the likes of robbery, assault, attempted murder, etc.

Then we cancel the stupid gun registry and use a fraction of the money to fund police strike teams which would do sting operations in major cities trying to both buy and sell restricted weapons. Those arrested get 1 year minimum for first offence buying or selling a restricted weapon. No parole. Anyone caught smuggling a firearm into Canada for the purpose of sale gets 5 years minimum.

[Black Dog]

Off the cuff, I don't have a problem with this notion (loathe as I am ordinarily to back "get tough on crime" stances), but I always pause for aminute when I see terms like "police strike teams" used. The militirization and corresponding decrease in accountability among North American police forces is a growing problem. And I hate to think that we need to find ways to make it worse.

[Slavik44]

Anyone found carrying a restricted firearm on their person or in their car who has no licence gets 1 year mandatory minimum jail time - no parole. If they have a record of violence it's 5 years mandatory minimum, no parole. For the first arrest. Double the second arrest.

Anyone who uses a firearm on another person for other than self defence gets 10 years in prison, minimum. On top of whatever other sentence they get for the likes of robbery, assault, attempted murder, etc.

Then we cancel the stupid gun registry and use a fraction of the money to fund police strike teams which would do sting operations in major cities trying to both buy and sell restricted weapons. Those arrested get 1 year minimum for first offence buying or selling a restricted weapon. No parole. Anyone caught smuggling a firearm into Canada for the purpose of sale gets 5 years minimum.

I like your idea's however I woudl like to add tougher restriction on hand guns to the list. I mean maybe I am wrong but I have never seen someone hunt a deer with a pistol.

FACT: While handguns account for only one-third of all firearms owned in the United States, they account for more than two-thirds of all firearm-related deaths each year. A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide or unintentional shooting than to be used in self-defense.

- Kellerman AL, Lee RK, Mercy JA, et al. "The Epidemiological Basis for the Prevention of Firearm Injuries

As well when I looked at some sites I noticted that there had been 151 gun deaths by handguns and only 41 deaths by other guns which could include illegaly transported assault rifles and what not. I think the statistics speak for themselves, and they say do something more about handguns.

[August1991]

Anyone who uses a firearm on another person for other than self defence gets 10 years in prison, minimum. On top of whatever other sentence they get for the likes of robbery, assault, attempted murder, etc.

Let's say robbery gets you 5 years. So, with the gun charge, it's now 15 years. Might as well shoot the victim and be charged with murder if you're caught.

Penalties for crimes must fit within a scheme.

[Argus]

Anyone who uses a firearm on another person for other than self defence gets 10 years in prison, minimum. On top of whatever other sentence they get for the likes of robbery, assault, attempted murder, etc.

Let's say robbery gets you 5 years. So, with the gun charge, it's now 15 years. Might as well shoot the victim and be charged with murder if you're caught.

Penalties for crimes must fit within a scheme.

You didn't read properly. In order to get the ten years he would have already had to shoot the victim.

[August1991]

You didn't read properly. In order to get the ten years he would have already had to shoot the victim.

That's kind of my point, Argus. Your scheme removes the incentive not to shoot.

[Guest eureka]

I would, in general, agree with all the posts. I do not, however, see the increased penalty for having actually used a gun. In a violent crime, is a wound from a gun deserving of greater punishment than from another weapon?

I have always been puzzled about the manufacturers of weapons. Why are they allowed to produce these "implements?" Why do we allow their import?

[shackwacky]

Argus started this thread with the assumptions of licensing and restricting certain firearms. I suppose if the wound was from a gun that you were restricted from owning, then that may influence the punishment. A wound from a gun you werent' supposed to have that you weren't supposed to transport to the scene of the crime, and of course that you were not supposed to fire. These conditions may allow for greater punishment than say, just picking up a rock and bashing someone with it.

As for the manufacturers, it is a fear driven market. And the more weapons find their way onto the street, the higher the demand gets for weapons to protect yourself from those who already have them. If a law abiding citizen with a firearms license and absolutely no history of violence seeks a handgun with which to defend him/herself, then this becomes an acceptable and perhaps even laudable market. There are also gun enthusiasts, target shooters, and collectors legally importing and buying these weapons.

Unless they are made illegal, importation will continue.

[Slavik44]

As for the manufacturers, it is a fear driven market. And the more weapons find their way onto the street, the higher the demand gets for weapons to protect yourself from those who already have them. If a law abiding citizen with a firearms license and absolutely no history of violence seeks a handgun with which to defend him/herself, then this becomes an acceptable and perhaps even laudable market. There are also gun enthusiasts, target shooters, and collectors legally importing and buying these weapons.

Unless they are made illegal, importation will continue.

FACT: While handguns account for only one-third of all firearms owned in the United States, they account for more than two-thirds of all firearm-related deaths each year. A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide or unintentional shooting than to be used in self-defense.

is it really worth the self defense? Please get a Dog or an Alarm system, better yet both.

[Argus]

You didn't read properly. In order to get the ten years he would have already had to shoot the victim.

That's kind of my point, Argus. Your scheme removes the incentive not to shoot.

How so? If he is caught with the firearm he would get 1 year. If he is caught using the firearm he gets ten years. That seems like a disincentive to use a firearm to me.

[Argus]

I would, in general, agree with all the posts. I do not, however, see the increased penalty for having actually used a gun. In a violent crime, is a wound from a gun deserving of greater punishment than from another weapon?

Because it is in society's interest to discourage the use of firearms. People still get killed with knives and baseball bats, but death, esp multiple death is less likely.

I have always been puzzled about the manufacturers of weapons. Why are they allowed to produce these "implements?" Why do we allow their import?

Most of the restricted weapons used on the street are imported illegally, and, in fact, a huge number are coming through the cross-border native reserves. The police and governments are scared shitless to so much as whisper a word of protest about this for fear there will be confrontations with native thugs.