Worst Mass Shooting in Canadian History

[Jub]

We don't even know HOW he got his hands on the gun(s) yet, and as usual the kneejerk reaction is to go straight for the bans, because reasons. How did he buy the guns in the US? How did he get them across the border? Do we know any of that? No. But we gotta "do something", even if it's as useless as airport security taking away all your nailclippers and sharp objects, only to have the stewardesses hand out metal steak knives with the meals on the plane.

That's fair, but I also fail to see the need for Canadians to have access to semi-automatic weapons in the first place. Hunting and animal defense can be carried out with manual action longarms and pistols are almost 100% unnecessary for any task.

[The Romulan Republic]

Trudeau is expected to announce the government's plan for an assault rifle ban, including the AR-15, within a few days:

https://globalnews.ca/news/6887958/cana ... rifle-ban/

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the government will share details within days of its plan to ban what it has been describing since the fall election as “assault-style” firearms.

The term is not a legal classification of guns in Canada but is commonly used to refer to automatic or semi-automatic centrefire weapons capable of firing large amounts of ammunition in a very short time.

Trudeau was asked during a briefing with journalists in Ottawa on Thursday about a report published by the Globe and Mail newspaper that said the government plans to issue a new list of banned high-power firearms including the notorious AR-15 weapon used in recent mass shootings in the U.S.

“We have made a firm commitment to Canadians to ban military assault-style weapons because, in Canada, there’s no room for weapons made to kill large numbers of people,” Trudeau said.

“We were almost ready to announce measures to strengthen gun control when Parliament was suspended because of the pandemic and we will be making announcements in days to come and will give more details on this then.”

Canada has experienced several mass shootings in recent years in which the gunmen used semi-automatic weapons among their cache of firearms.

Most recently, the gunman behind a horrific shooting spree in rural Nova Scotia used two semi-automatic rifles and several semi-automatic handguns.

Nova Scotia RCMP Superintendent Darren Campbell has said one of the weapons “could be described” as a military-style assault rifle.

The gunman in that spree shot 13 people and nine others died in fires, according to RCMP.

In 2017, a gunman also opened fire in a Quebec City mosque killing six and injuring 19.

He fired 48 shots in 90 seconds in that massacre.

One of the guns he used was a semi-automatic rifle with two 30-bullet magazines, which are illegal.

And in 2014, another gunman used a semi-automatic rifle and a shotgun in a shooting spree that killed three RCMP officers and injured two others in Moncton, N.B.

It’s not yet clear whether the specific guns used in those cases would be among those banned.

In Canada, automatic weapons are already prohibited except when grandfather rights apply but a range of semi-automatic firearms can be legally bought, sold and owned.

Among those semi-automatic firearms reportedly set to be banned are the AR-15, Ruger Mini-14, CZ Scorpion, the Swiss Arms Classic Green, the Beretta Cx4 Storm, the Robinson Armament XCR and the Sig Sauer SIG MCX, along with other similar types.

A report by CBC News said 11 firearms in total will be banned.

But A.J. Somerset, a former gunnery instructor with the Canadian Forces and gun policy expert, said he’s concerned the approach the government appears to be taking won’t be the most effective route.

Rather than adding certain types of guns to the list of banned firearms, Somerset says the government should amend the Firearms Act to prohibit guns based on their features — a move he says would prevent new models of guns similar to those banned from entering the market to take their place.

“I don’t think it’s a very effective approach where if you contrast that with what’s been done in for example, in New Zealand. In New Zealand, they said any centrefire semiautomatic firearm with a detachable magazine will be banned,” he said.

“They made a very expansive definition. People might argue it was too expansive, but at least they defined the weapons to be banned in terms of their function rather than the approach that we’re taking, which is to ban specific guns.”

“And all that happens is the market then adapts.”

Following two horrific mosque shootings in Christchurch that left 51 people dead, New Zealand implemented a sweeping nationwide ban on semi-automatic weapons and launched a buyback program that saw 56,000 of the weapons turned over to authorities.

That prompted calls for a national gun registry to know what guns might be left in the country.

In Canada, the situation is different.

Firearms here are classified by three types: non-restricted, restricted and prohibited.

The federal cabinet can also ban specific guns by name via orders in council.

Automatic weapons are included in the prohibited category as are some semi-automatic guns, sawed-off rifles or shotguns and small handguns.

Restricted firearms include semi-automatic guns using centrefire ammunition, along with handguns not already covered in the prohibited category.

In the non-restricted category are rifles and shotguns that are neither restricted or prohibited.

Prohibited and restricted firearms are registered but non-restricted firearms are not.

The former Conservative government axed registration requirements for non-restricted firearms when it got rid of the long-gun registry in 2015 and destroyed the data.

But included in the list of guns set to be banned is a mix of categories.

The AR-15, for example, is restricted so the government would know who to target in any potential buy-back scheme. But the Beretta Cx4 Storm is non-restricted, so there’s no registry of owners.

Somerset said that could pose a challenge for the government

“They have no idea really where those are,” he said.

“They don’t actually even know how many there are.”

“So it’ll be difficult for them to actually confiscate those firearms, it’ll be difficult for them to compel people to give them up.“

© 2020 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

[Beowulf]

How?

If a gun is technically legal in Canada, it's possible that a border agent may simply let the weapon through without checking paperwork. In that case, having the weapon hard banned and completely barred from Canada likely stops the weapon at the border. It's entirely possible that this gun slipped past border security entirely unchecked and that no amount of strictness or bans would have caught it, but that's an issue best solved by more thorough checks at the border which can work in tandem with the new laws.

So you have a smuggler. He's going to declare that he has an illegal gun? Or just hide it in his car? It's not like a fun sniffing dog exists. You might be able to sniff out ammo, but that isn't going to be solved by this ban.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm really sick of this argument with gun control:

"Oh, these regulations aren't infallible and won't completely prevent all gun crimes!" Yeah, so? The laws against homicide won't prevent 100% of all murders. The laws against reckless driving won't stop 100% of all traffic accidents. The point of regulation is to reduce the number.

Any law can be subverted or broken. It does not follow that we should have no laws.

[aerius]

I'm really sick of this argument with gun control:

"Oh, these regulations aren't infallible and won't completely prevent all gun crimes!" Yeah, so? The laws against homicide won't prevent 100% of all murders. The laws against reckless driving won't stop 100% of all traffic accidents. The point of regulation is to reduce the number.

Any law can be subverted or broken. It does not follow that we should have no laws.

Point to the people in this thread making that argument.

[Jub]

So you have a smuggler. He's going to declare that he has an illegal gun? Or just hide it in his car? It's not like a fun sniffing dog exists. You might be able to sniff out ammo, but that isn't going to be solved by this ban.

Prove that gun smuggling is a major issue in Canada and that it was how the shooter got his weapon.

Beyond that, no shit some smuggling is going to happen and some weapons are going to slip through, mostly to gangs. That already happens, but it happens with things like pistols and compact SMGs, not long arms and it rarely happens outside of organized crime.

[Beowulf]

So you have a smuggler. He's going to declare that he has an illegal gun? Or just hide it in his car? It's not like a fun sniffing dog exists. You might be able to sniff out ammo, but that isn't going to be solved by this ban.

Prove that gun smuggling is a major issue in Canada and that it was how the shooter got his weapon.

Beyond that, no shit some smuggling is going to happen and some weapons are going to slip through, mostly to gangs. That already happens, but it happens with things like pistols and compact SMGs, not long arms and it rarely happens outside of organized crime.

Your hypothetical assumed smuggling!

We literally know nothing about how the shooter got his guns, aside from the fact that he didn't get them legally. And what the fuck are you talking about with compact SMGs? Real deal SMGs aren't a cheap thing to get legally in the US, and certainly aren't worth smuggling to Canada.

I'm really sick of this argument with gun control:

"Oh, these regulations aren't infallible and won't completely prevent all gun crimes!" Yeah, so? The laws against homicide won't prevent 100% of all murders. The laws against reckless driving won't stop 100% of all traffic accidents. The point of regulation is to reduce the number.

Any law can be subverted or broken. It does not follow that we should have no laws.

I'm really sick of this argument with gun control:

"Oh, the regulations we have didn't stop this, so obviously we need to make them more strict! Nevermind that the way we're making them more strict won't actually affect how this happened." The pro-rights side sees that the pro-control side never lets a tragedy go to waste.

[MKSheppard]

Beyond that, no shit some smuggling is going to happen and some weapons are going to slip through, mostly to gangs. That already happens, but it happens with things like pistols and compact SMGs, not long arms and it rarely happens outside of organized crime.

You know. I wonder what will happen now with the Pistol/Compact SMG market, now that ARMALYTES are banned.

Full auto 5.56 pistol/SMG conversions smuggling begins when?

[Bedlam]

So you have a smuggler. He's going to declare that he has an illegal gun? Or just hide it in his car? It's not like a fun sniffing dog exists. You might be able to sniff out ammo, but that isn't going to be solved by this ban.

This is a real shame, I'd love to have a dog that can sense fun

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm really sick of this argument with gun control:

"Oh, these regulations aren't infallible and won't completely prevent all gun crimes!" Yeah, so? The laws against homicide won't prevent 100% of all murders. The laws against reckless driving won't stop 100% of all traffic accidents. The point of regulation is to reduce the number.

Any law can be subverted or broken. It does not follow that we should have no laws.

Point to the people in this thread making that argument.

It should be obvious who I was addressing, and they've already replied with the rhetorical equivalent of "I know you are but what am I", and a manipulative implication that all gun control is an attempt to exploit tragedies to strip away basic rights. You know, the usual bog-standard "My guns are more important than your childrens' lives" rhetoric.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm really sick of this argument with gun control:

"Oh, the regulations we have didn't stop this, so obviously we need to make them more strict! Nevermind that the way we're making them more strict won't actually affect how this happened." The pro-rights side sees that the pro-control side never lets a tragedy go to waste.

1. Nobody is saying "more regulation is always the answer"- that's a strawman. However, if there are specific vulnerabilities that more regulation can close, then yes, more regulation will help reduce gun violence.

2. Spare me your copy-paste Reich-wing whinging about the Left exploiting tragedies. Maybe you think we'd be better off offering some thoughts and prayers? We wouldn't want to disrespect shooting victims by trying to prevent their being more of them.

3. There is no "right" to bear arms in Canada the way there is in the US. For which I am deeply thankful. There are property rights, of course, but the government can and should strictly regulate products which are particularly dangerous or require particular skill to use, the same way we would cars, or drugs, or industrial chemicals no radioactive material.

4. You never actually addressed my point, which is that the impossibility of totally preventing crime is not, in itself, an argument against the presence of laws.

[Ziggy Stardust]

So you have a smuggler. He's going to declare that he has an illegal gun? Or just hide it in his car? It's not like a fun sniffing dog exists. You might be able to sniff out ammo, but that isn't going to be solved by this ban.

This is a real shame, I'd love to have a dog that can sense fun

Depending on how exactly you get your kicks, there are certainly some kinds of fun that dogs are routinely used to sniff out.

[MKSheppard]

Prove that gun smuggling is a major issue in Canada and that it was how the shooter got his weapon.

Importing a gun from US to CAN is tough and vice versa.

[MKSheppard]

Ironically, TRR and such...a significant amount of smuggling takes place on...

wait for it....

indian reservations!

This article is from 10 years ago, and concerns cigarette smuggling, not guns but still:

https://nationalpost.com/health/contrab ... police-say

The church is just one of many spots that are regularly commandeered by smugglers who cross the St. Lawrence from the Akwesasne Mohawk reserve, the latest chapter in a turbulent, 20-year history of illict trade through the region, egged on originally by a brazen Big Tobacco smuggling scheme.

Police say some cottages have been taken over by the tobacco traffickers in the offseason; there are reports of Russian and other non-native, organized crime figures renting or even buying summer homes to turn them into smuggling terminals. Authorities believe tens of millions of cigarettes a year — mainly churned out by 10 factories on the American side of the reserve— pass through the area.

Straddling the U.S.-Canada border, Akwesasne is Canada’s contraband capital, and the heart of the aboriginal tobacco industry that has flourished lately on a handful of reserves, producing a flood of cheap cigarettes so vast it might have stalled the decades-long slide in smoking rates.

Police allege the cross-border conduit is being used, as well, by organized crime to smuggle marijuana back into the United States and harder drugs and firearms to Canada. Security experts have long fretted, too, about its potential for facilitating more ominous threats, like terrorism.

Authorities have mounted a growing law-enforcement campaign, complete with high-speed boats, electronic surveillance and nightly contraband search and destroy missions.

For the Mohawks of Akwesasne, though, the aura of lawlessness around them and the intense police presence are bitter pills to swallow.

Some note that only a small percentage of the community —which feels more like a tranquil country town than a pirate haven — is involved in the problem. Others lament that the appeal of easy money has slowly corrupted parts of the reserve, darkening the dream some leaders had of turning Akwesasne into a First Nations free-trade zone.

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/07/04/ ... to-border/

According to Dubro, it’s incredibly easy to obtain a gun on the streets of Toronto, and up to 50 per cent of them are smuggled across the border.

“I think the biggest threat to Canadian security vis-à-vis guns is the proximity to the United States,” he told CityNews.

“Obviously the United States is a gun happy nation as we all know…and it’s so easy to get guns, there’s hundreds of thousands of gun shops, you can buy them online.”

Dubro says criminals are “endlessly resourceful” when it comes to smuggling guns into Canada

“They look for vulnerable spots in the border and develop routes, one is through native reservations,” he said, adding that gangs are also known to rob gun collectors.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2011-04-27/ ... playground

Under darkness the smugglers head across the St. Lawrence River on snowmobiles. As the weather warms up, they’ll be out in their speedboats, darting in and out of the river’s islands in their bid to outwit patrol agents from both sides of the U.S.-Canadian border.

Ever since the days of prohibition, organized crime has used the Mohawk reservation of Akwesasne as a conduit for illicit cargo. Back then, it was alcohol. Today, according to a spokesman for U.S. Border Patrol, it’s highly lucrative cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamines, pharmaceuticals, firearms and illegal immigrants.

[The Romulan Republic]

I just love the glee with which you declared native reservations the problem- the Reich wing sure loves its racial scapegoating, don't you?

To quote one of your own sources: "I think the biggest threat to Canadian security vis-a-vis-guns is the proximity of the United States". In short, Canadians are dying just like Americans, because the US government won't get its act together and enact sane gun laws like a normal First World nation, instead of the failed state it increasingly is.

[MKSheppard]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudea ... -1.5552131

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Friday a ban on some 1,500 models of military-grade "assault-style" weapons in Canada, a ban that is effective immediately.

Starting today, licensed gun owners will no longer be allowed to sell, transport, import or use these sort of weapons in this country.

...

"As of today, the market for assault weapons in Canada is closed," Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said. "Enough is enough — banning these firearms will save Canadian lives."

Trudeau said there will be a two-year amnesty period for people who already own these firearms to comply with the ban. Trudeau promised to pass legislation in the coming months to provide "fair compensation" for people who own these firearms.

...

"These weapons were designed for one purpose and one purpose only — only to kill the largest amount of people in the shortest amount of time," Trudeau said. While he acknowledged that most firearms owners are law-abiding citizens, he said hunters don't need this sort of fire power.

"You don't need an AR-15 to bring down a deer," he said.

The department will hold a technical briefing with reporters later today on the changes, which are expected to be enacted by an order-in-council, or cabinet decree.

[MKSheppard]

I just love the glee with which you declared native reservations the problem- the Reich wing sure loves its racial scapegoating, don't you?

Look, TRR, there's fuck all the US and CAN can do about it since the TFN on both sides of the border are considered technically sovereign IIRC.

[Nicholas]

I'm really sick of this argument with gun control:

"Oh, the regulations we have didn't stop this, so obviously we need to make them more strict! Nevermind that the way we're making them more strict won't actually affect how this happened." The pro-rights side sees that the pro-control side never lets a tragedy go to waste.

1. Nobody is saying "more regulation is always the answer"- that's a strawman. However, if there are specific vulnerabilities that more regulation can close, then yes, more regulation will help reduce gun violence.

..........

4. You never actually addressed my point, which is that the impossibility of totally preventing crime is not, in itself, an argument against the presence of laws.

Nobody is saying "more regulation is always the answer" but people are saying there was a mass shooting therefor we need more regulation. As you say "if there are specific vulnerabilities that more regulation can address." The existence of such vulnerabilities needs to be shown not assumed simply because a mass shooting happened.

You can argue that these proposed new regulations are good on their own merits without regard to any specific case but that has not been done in this discussion.

Once we know what (if any) weaknesses in laws and enforcement permitted this mass shooting then you can argue for changes in law and policy but at this point we don't know enough about this crime for anyone to be able to make that argument.

The argument actually being made does seem to be a mass shooting happened therefor we need more regulation, that is not a valid argument, precisely because it is impossible to totally prevent crime.

In addition laws have costs too, a good law is one where the benefits out way the costs. That a bad thing happened is not evidence that the benefits of a law will outweigh its costs.

Nicholas

[MKSheppard]

So I managed to score a copy of the banned gun list -- it's 69 pages and it took me 5 minutes of F5 refresh, since the Canadian servers were being hammered:

Rehosted PDF

Original Link:
http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2020/2020 ... -154x3.pdf

[MKSheppard]

So I'd be worried about this in relation to the US for a few reasons:

A.) Bandwagoning. First New Zealand and now Canada. WHY CANT WE DO IT HERE?

It causes libruls to start agitating for "something" to be done, so as not to appear "nonproductive" in relation to their fellow progressives in other countries.

B.) Canada has provided a long list of firearms which can be cut and pasted into any future US bans as "receiver bans".

It may seem like pointless legalese padding to enumerate weapons by name, but doing this is a "receiver ban" and prevents you from removing an evil feature and making it legal.

Maryland has this -- the State Police seem to think that ALL Bushmaster rifles should be banned, due to them confusing the old 1980s "Bushmaster Assault Rifle" with modern Bushmaster AR-15 rifles.

So basically by saying "Aero Precision M4" it means that no matter what you do; installing a thumbhole stock, or a heavy barrel, or a bolt action upper -- it's not good enough because the rifle says "Aero Precision" and "M4" on the side -- and is thus banned.

[Jub]

So I'd be worried about this in relation to the US for a few reasons:

A.) Bandwagoning. First New Zealand and now Canada. WHY CANT WE DO IT HERE?

It causes libruls to start agitating for "something" to be done, so as not to appear "nonproductive" in relation to their fellow progressives in other countries.

B.) Canada has provided a long list of firearms which can be cut and pasted into any future US bans as "receiver bans".

It may seem like pointless legalese padding to enumerate weapons by name, but doing this is a "receiver ban" and prevents you from removing an evil feature and making it legal.

Maryland has this -- the State Police seem to think that ALL Bushmaster rifles should be banned, due to them confusing the old 1980s "Bushmaster Assault Rifle" with modern Bushmaster AR-15 rifles.

So basically by saying "Aero Precision M4" it means that no matter what you do; installing a thumbhole stock, or a heavy barrel, or a bolt action upper -- it's not good enough because the rifle says "Aero Precision" and "M4" on the side -- and is thus banned.

Aside from people losing their toys, what is the downside to removing the listed weapons from circulation in the US?

[MKSheppard]

Well now, lets turn handguns into SMGs now:

https://www.enblocpress.com/news/3d-pri ... ssion=true

Make Glocks Full Auto
The ‘Make Glocks Full Auto’ 3D printed Glock auto-sear was added to the Deterrence Dispensed LBRY Channel today. The files allow users with a 3D printer to produce the parts necessary to convert their standard Glock 17 pattern guns to fully automatic, similar to the Glock 18.

The release includes a ReadMe.txt file, renders, and 3D print files in STL, STEP, and F3D filetypes. The instructions for completing your project are included. It’s brief and straight forward. The average user who is even remotely familiar with Glocks should be able to complete the job in no time.

...

The release includes a note stating, “Thanks to the FFLs who aided in the testing and development of this device”. So, it would appear this was all developed legally.

Note: producing automatic weapons is a serious offense in the U.S. without proper licensing. Don’t be a dummy.

[MKSheppard]

Indigs get a carveout in this order:

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultation

The Amnesty Order permits the use of any of the newly prohibited firearms, if previously non-restricted, to hunt for the purposes of sustenance or to exercise a right recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution. From fall 2018 to spring 2019, the Government held extensive engagement with Indigenous groups, provinces and territories, municipalities, law enforcement agencies, academics, victim groups and other key stakeholders on limiting access to assault-style firearms and handguns.

Recognizing that some Indigenous and sustenance hunters could be using previously non-restricted firearms for their hunting and may be unable to replace these firearms immediately, the Amnesty Order includes provisions for the limited use of these firearms for such purposes. Following the publication of the Regulations, the Government will continue to engage with Indigenous groups to assess whether the prohibition of these firearms has a continued impact on the right to hunt affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution.

Everyone self identifies as a First Nation Indigenous Sustenance Hunter in 3...2...1?

[Solauren]

Would it not be ironic, after all this discussion on smuggling, if it turned out the shooter stole the weapons he was using from people in Canada that legally owned them?

[Coop D'etat]

Being a Indigenous Sustenance Hunter isn't something you can just self-identify as and have it recognized. Its a legal category.

Increasing the banned weapons list isn't likely to do anything meaningful for public safety and Shep is pretty much correct that this is political theater. Its not good policy but is good politics because the mass of voters are for the appearance of doing something and don't really have much sympathy for gun owners, while gun owners aren't very politically powerful and are concentrated in noncompetitive ridings so their's little value in courting them unless you're running for leader of the CPC. The shame of it is that the system worked for what it could do here, the shooter wasn't eligible for ownership and couldn't get the weapons legally so had to get smuggled weapons. That's about what you can do with restrictions on ownership and there's little that can be done to keep the border from being porous. The big problem with expanding Canadian legal regulations is they've pretty much already gone past the levels of diminishing returns. But generally people aren't receptive to the idea that there's only so much that can be done to stop a determined and resourceful nutcase in a free society.