How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

General Law Enforcement discussion which does not fit into other channels. Post your thoughts and feelings about anything you want (LE related), or just vent those fumes about whatever is on your chest.
remote
Rookie Member
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:05 pm
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby remote » Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:40 am

Sumo_CPO wrote:
remote wrote:The topic is CCW (or ATC) for civilians.
You can't poop out a statement like that and not justify it.
I apologize, sincerely, if I"m missing something.
Please explain.


What you're missing is Section 34 of the Criminal Code of Canada, genius.


Section 34 of the Criminal Code of Canada does not make allowance for a civilian to carry a concealed weapon and it only provides for self defense, not for defense of loved ones, as Bitterman outlined in his original post.
You have missed the point all together. You should re-read this thread then re-read section 34 (1) and (2).
:offtopic:

User avatar
Minimum Wage Warrior
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:46 pm
Location: My work queue
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby Minimum Wage Warrior » Wed Feb 24, 2010 4:45 am

In my opinion and background (9mm to 84mm) pistols should be reserved for police / military only. There is no reason for a civilian to use one. Too bad so sad for the small group of enthusiasts who can't live life without plinking away at paper targets. If it's really that important to them, maybe some compromise could be reached for licenced, certified and trained individuals.

I think a mandatory 15 years tacked on to a sentence would be great for any offences committed with or while in possession of a firearm. I think that's a good idea and would probably reduce gun crime more effectively than the remote possibility that Suzie So-and-So might be packing. The only thing left in that equation would be judges and crown's that would actually take shit to trial.

User avatar
RGW
Grand Poobah
Posts: 974
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:52 pm
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby RGW » Wed Feb 24, 2010 5:12 am

Horatio wrote:
"What I'm concerned about is the "average" person, who passes all his training and such and appears to be the model CCW holder, but then gets drunk one night and does something stupid? A lot of people's personalities change SIGNIFICANTLY when they've been drinking. Or what about people who find themselves in emotionally charged situations? Someone may be relatively sane and normal, but then they have a really bad day, and get cut off in traffic on the way home. In todays society this may result in not much more then shouting/swearing/bird flipping, maybe at WORST a fist fight at the side of the road. What would happen if this person just happened to have access to a firearm at the time? I'm not talking about the gangster sh!tbag who already has a "nine" in his glove box, I mean the middle aged business man who doesn't carry now - but would if he could legally.

Don't label me a hippie burn out just yet, I'm just playing the devils advocate on this matter. :boxer:"



If I may quote "Gunfacts.info" to address your first concern:

Fact: In Texas, citizens with concealed carry permits are 14 times less likely to commit a crime. They are also five times less likely to commit a violent crime.
Fact: People with concealed carry permits are:
• 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent offenses than the general public
• 13.5 times less likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than the general public

So, while there may be very rare circumstances when an ""average" person, who passes all his training and such and appears to be the model CCW holder, but then gets drunk one night and does something stupid", they are highly unlikely to do so, and if they are that type of person, they likely have a history of such behaviour, which would eliminate them in a background check. I recommend you read the full discussion regarding CCW from that website. Also feel free to review the violence policy center's (Brady Campaign) website for an opposing view.

Jim Street wrote:
"Thanks but no thanks, it's bad enough you have to worry about Clayton Shitrat carrying, I'd rather not have to factor in some wannabe good samaritan with a Glock who decides that he should start taking matters into their own hands or God forbid assume he's helping and pull it at an inappropriate or dangerous time.

I'd love to live in a world that there was a clear cut black and white view of what's right and what's wrong. However, there are far too many human factors and flaws in allowing just anyone to carry a lethal weapon."



I don't think anyone here wants or is proposing that "just anyone" should carry a lethal weapon. Only mentally competent, trained, law-abiding persons should be able to do so. That person's training should include a discussion of when and where it is appropriate for him/her to involve his firearm, just like armed money carriers in Canada are trained - the firearm is carried to protect you from death or serious harm. There have been no rashes of armed money carriers who decided to jump into the action of a police incident, and with the same training applied to private citizens, the result would likely be the same.

VanB wrote:
So for argument's sake let's say we authorize CCW in this country. Those people wishing to use firearms to defend themselves are being held to the same standard the police are in terms of how and when they can use them, correct? I mean, we're talking instances of death or grievous bodily harm, aren't we?

Did I miss the bulletin that announced that these situations are so commonplace for the average citizen to encounter that this measure would even be worth the inherent risks? I mean, I have a few years of policing under my belt, but I haven't seen this to really be the case at all. Sure occasionally you'll hear about some gang member capping another gang member, but is a law abiding citizen carrying a 9mm really going to be faced with a death or grievous bodily harm situation in the average course of their day? By that same logic we should all be building bomb shelters in our backyards in case South Korea FINALLY gets that long range nuclear program on track.

You say we've had our independence bred out of us, I say we've just simply not reached the level of fear-mongering "what-if" that seems to always come out every time this topic gets started, over, and over again.



I would ask then - what is the tipping point? What level of violent crime rate in your opinion would justify when it is appropriate for a citizen to be able to carry a concealed weapon? If you knew that there was a certain percent of risk that your or my spouse were to be seriously assaulted, what number would that have to be to make you consider allowing her/him to carry concealed? 20%? 100%? And when would it be appropriate to begin seriously preparing for that? When it is imminent? Isn't that too late? As I've said before, we don't carry first aid or fire equipment only after an incident, we prepare beforehand and keep those tools at hand when a situation does arise. That is precisely what we do as police officers, we train from the beginning, and have tools on hand to deal with incidents as they arise.

Columbo wrote:
While I agree wholeheartedly with Bitterman's philosophy and reasoning to a tee, why is this even being debated? Again. CCW will never happen in this country, and certainly not in the lifetime of any living generation. Handgun ownership and CCW in Canada are akin to jai alai in Alabama: it's so emphatically far-off the average Canadian's radar and foreign to the vast majority of their upbringing and culture, that it would take a Liberal squadron of cultural diversity experts and human rights arbiters to beat us into agreement and comfort with the idea through proselytism.



The laws in Canada already allows non-law enforcement to obtain permits to carry handguns. It is relatively straight-forward for trappers and money-carriers, and they are the most commonly issued permits. But the law also allows issuance to persons for self defense. The provincial CFO's simply refuse to issue them based on their arbitrary definition of what an imminent threat is. The bar is set so high that it is almost never issued.

There is already an association devoted to changing these rules: http://www.casd.ca

My 2 cents..

User avatar
RGW
Grand Poobah
Posts: 974
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:52 pm
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby RGW » Wed Feb 24, 2010 5:30 am

Minimum Wage Warrior wrote:In my opinion and background (9mm to 84mm) pistols should be reserved for police / military only. There is no reason for a civilian to use one. Too bad so sad for the small group of enthusiasts who can't live life without plinking away at paper targets. If it's really that important to them, maybe some compromise could be reached for licenced, certified and trained individuals.

I think a mandatory 15 years tacked on to a sentence would be great for any offences committed with or while in possession of a firearm. I think that's a good idea and would probably reduce gun crime more effectively than the remote possibility that Suzie So-and-So might be packing. The only thing left in that equation would be judges and crown's that would actually take shit to trial.


There is a far more important reason to own a pistol than "plinking away at paper targets". What about self defense? Last time I checked it was still legal.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columb ... ooter.html

User avatar
tpspastin#9
Rookie Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:56 am
Location: Behind you!
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby tpspastin#9 » Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:11 am

CCW is not going to happen in Canada. The carrying of a concealed firearm for protection in a country that is supposed to be civilized and leading the way in peace and cultural unity is a huge contradiction. We can't provide the proper equipment to our police services/military but hey lets arm our citizens? WTF? The best thing to come from this thread is the fact that our penalties for posession of a firearm during an offence blows. I would love to see Canada's balls grow a little bit and get a penalty similar to the 15yrs present in the states.

User avatar
Sumo_CPO
Seasoned Member
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:25 am
Location: Alberta
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby Sumo_CPO » Wed Feb 24, 2010 8:22 am

remote wrote:
Sumo_CPO wrote:
remote wrote:The topic is CCW (or ATC) for civilians.
You can't poop out a statement like that and not justify it.
I apologize, sincerely, if I"m missing something.
Please explain.


What you're missing is Section 34 of the Criminal Code of Canada, genius.


Section 34 of the Criminal Code of Canada does not make allowance for a civilian to carry a concealed weapon and it only provides for self defense, not for defense of loved ones, as Bitterman outlined in his original post.
You have missed the point all together. You should re-read this thread then re-read section 34 (1) and (2).
:offtopic:


Actually, I understood the point that was being made. You're one of those people who think that just because you've taken an 4 hour course about "firearms" you're somehow an expert on the subject. You think that the only way that you and your "loved ones" are going to be safe is if you get to carry a gun around with you while you buy your groceries or put gas in your car. You think that every time you set foot outside your front door that some bad guy is going to have nothing better to do than hassle you to the point that you have to bust a cap in his ass. In other words, the point is that you're a paranoid American wannabe.

I have met, worked with, and trained a number of law enforcement professionals who have no business carrying a weapon, concealed or otherwise. If people who have passed rigorous LE background checks don't make me believe that they should carry weapons, there's no way in hell that you're going to convince me that average citizens are going to be responsible enough to do so.

I will, however, admit that you are somewhat correct in your argument - the C.C.C may not make an allowance for carrying a concealed weapon, but if you understood what reasonable force means, then you would know that an argument could possibly be made in your favor if you were (moronically) toting a weapon around and had to use it to defend yourself from an assailant in a lethal force scenario.
Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and f**k the prom queen.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Cogito, ergo armatum sum

User avatar
Delley
Regular Member
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby Delley » Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:55 am

tpspastin#9 wrote:CCW is not going to happen in Canada. The carrying of a concealed firearm for protection in a country that is supposed to be civilized and leading the way in peace and cultural unity is a huge contradiction. We can't provide the proper equipment to our police services/military but hey lets arm our citizens? WTF? The best thing to come from this thread is the fact that our penalties for posession of a firearm during an offence blows. I would love to see Canada's balls grow a little bit and get a penalty similar to the 15yrs present in the states.
.

Your search for a Culturally peaceful Country is laudable, But the fact remains the same. We are a North American Country with North American Problems living with British Common Law. Concealed Carry Permitted States in the USA are safer places to live then in areas where they dont have this. In Nevada everyone owns a gun and alot carry with CCP's I recently rode with LVMPD, The officer told me that they treat people they meet with CCP's with respect and actually treat them better then others. Why, becasue the people who do carry with a permit are law abiding and have passed the clearance to carry. They appreciate that the general public have the abilty to have this. Having a carry concealed permitting system in Canada would be a benifit to our society not a hinderance.

User avatar
tpspastin#9
Rookie Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:56 am
Location: Behind you!
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby tpspastin#9 » Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:24 am

Delley wrote:
tpspastin#9 wrote:CCW is not going to happen in Canada. The carrying of a concealed firearm for protection in a country that is supposed to be civilized and leading the way in peace and cultural unity is a huge contradiction. We can't provide the proper equipment to our police services/military but hey lets arm our citizens? WTF? The best thing to come from this thread is the fact that our penalties for posession of a firearm during an offence blows. I would love to see Canada's balls grow a little bit and get a penalty similar to the 15yrs present in the states.
.

Your search for a Culturally peaceful Country is laudable, But the fact remains the same. We are a North American Country with North American Problems living with British Common Law. Concealed Carry Permitted States in the USA are safer places to live then in areas where they dont have this. In Nevada everyone owns a gun and alot carry with CCP's I recently rode with LVMPD, The officer told me that they treat people they meet with CCP's with respect and actually treat them better then others. Why, becasue the people who do carry with a permit are law abiding and have passed the clearance to carry. They appreciate that the general public have the abilty to have this. Having a carry concealed permitting system in Canada would be a benifit to our society not a hinderance.


Citizens/general public should not carry firearm period. It's great that we have some good examples of people who respect the destructive force that they weild but I just do not feel the average person should carry a concealed weapon. Sure they might find themselves in a situation where they need to use a gun but will they have the restraint to stop shooting or the forthought to check the background for innocents before plugging away at a moving target which they have zero skill to hit? Statistics cannot be your only judge of this issue. I am pretty sure your idea of this will change if your mother, father, brother, sister, huband, wife, or son/daughter were hit by the stray fire of a scared idiot.

All of the places you speak of that have a CCW in effect are states that have incorperated firearms into their society for the past 200 years and they have been bred to respect the gun for the most part. Throw that law into effect in a place like GTA Ontario and watch the death rate climb. No matter how similar we are we are NOT Americans and just because it works their does not mean it works everywhere. The only places the CCW law may work well is in a place like Saskatchawan or Manitoba because the use of guns is more previlant and the respect has been put into place.

"Having a carry concealed permitting system in Canada would be a benifit to our society not a hinderance."
Where are your facts to support such a statement?

User avatar
Bald Man
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1238
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:12 am

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby Bald Man » Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:41 pm

And where are yours? This thread is nothing more than a bunch of different people voicing their opinions cause that's what we do on internet forums. Yours is no different. carry on....

User avatar
tpspastin#9
Rookie Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:56 am
Location: Behind you!
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby tpspastin#9 » Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:53 pm

Bald Man wrote:And where are yours? This thread is nothing more than a bunch of different people voicing their opinions cause that's what we do on internet forums. Yours is no different. carry on....


:thumbsup: Way to sit on that fence.

remote
Rookie Member
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:05 pm
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby remote » Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:01 pm

Sumo_CPO wrote:In other words, the point is that you're a paranoid American wannabe.
No. If I was a "paranoid American wannabe" then I'd be arguing in favour of more restrictive firearms legislation.
Sumo_CPO wrote:I will, however, admit that you are somewhat correct in your argument - the C.C.C may not make an allowance for carrying a concealed weapon, but if you understood what reasonable force means, then you would know that an argument could possibly be made in your favor if you were (moronically) toting a weapon around and had to use it to defend yourself from an assailant in a lethal force scenario.

Your first two fallacious ad hominem attack paragraphs seem to be smoke and mirrors meant to obscure your final weak submission in the third paragraph.
I do not advocate "(moronically) toting a weapon around".
The whole point of this entire discussion revolves around introducing CCW laws; laws which will protect law abiding citizens.
There's no loopholes, no grey area in S.34 (1) or (2). It's very explicit.
I'm not interested in your musings about how to weasel out of a charge; musings that are only dubious, at best.
If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.
Last edited by remote on Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Minimum Wage Warrior
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:46 pm
Location: My work queue
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby Minimum Wage Warrior » Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:08 pm

RGW wrote:
Minimum Wage Warrior wrote:In my opinion and background (9mm to 84mm) pistols should be reserved for police / military only. There is no reason for a civilian to use one. Too bad so sad for the small group of enthusiasts who can't live life without plinking away at paper targets. If it's really that important to them, maybe some compromise could be reached for licenced, certified and trained individuals.

I think a mandatory 15 years tacked on to a sentence would be great for any offences committed with or while in possession of a firearm. I think that's a good idea and would probably reduce gun crime more effectively than the remote possibility that Suzie So-and-So might be packing. The only thing left in that equation would be judges and crown's that would actually take shit to trial.


There is a far more important reason to own a pistol than "plinking away at paper targets". What about self defense? Last time I checked it was still legal.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columb ... ooter.html


Not the greatest example: "There was no time to contemplate on what was morally right and wrong. It happened so fast. Once I started shooting, he turned and he ran." Galloway said he kept firing until the magazine in his gun was empty.

That's the kind of crap we don't need. Get a Judge who will put a guy away for a few years then add 15 for using a gun and now we'll be talking.

User avatar
tpspastin#9
Rookie Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:56 am
Location: Behind you!
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby tpspastin#9 » Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:12 pm

Minimum Wage Warrior wrote:
RGW wrote:
Minimum Wage Warrior wrote:In my opinion and background (9mm to 84mm) pistols should be reserved for police / military only. There is no reason for a civilian to use one. Too bad so sad for the small group of enthusiasts who can't live life without plinking away at paper targets. If it's really that important to them, maybe some compromise could be reached for licenced, certified and trained individuals.

I think a mandatory 15 years tacked on to a sentence would be great for any offences committed with or while in possession of a firearm. I think that's a good idea and would probably reduce gun crime more effectively than the remote possibility that Suzie So-and-So might be packing. The only thing left in that equation would be judges and crown's that would actually take shit to trial.


There is a far more important reason to own a pistol than "plinking away at paper targets". What about self defense? Last time I checked it was still legal.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columb ... ooter.html

:thumbsup:

Not the greatest example: "There was no time to contemplate on what was morally right and wrong. It happened so fast. Once I started shooting, he turned and he ran." Galloway said he kept firing until the magazine in his gun was empty.

That's the kind of crap we don't need. Get a Judge who will put a guy away for a few years then add 15 for using a gun and now we'll be talking.

User avatar
Delley
Regular Member
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby Delley » Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:40 pm

tpspastin#9 wrote:
Delley wrote:
tpspastin#9 wrote:CCW is not going to happen in Canada. The carrying of a concealed firearm for protection in a country that is supposed to be civilized and leading the way in peace and cultural unity is a huge contradiction. We can't provide the proper equipment to our police services/military but hey lets arm our citizens? WTF? The best thing to come from this thread is the fact that our penalties for posession of a firearm during an offence blows. I would love to see Canada's balls grow a little bit and get a penalty similar to the 15yrs present in the states.
.

Your search for a Culturally peaceful Country is laudable, But the fact remains the same. We are a North American Country with North American Problems living with British Common Law. Concealed Carry Permitted States in the USA are safer places to live then in areas where they dont have this. In Nevada everyone owns a gun and alot carry with CCP's I recently rode with LVMPD, The officer told me that they treat people they meet with CCP's with respect and actually treat them better then others. Why, becasue the people who do carry with a permit are law abiding and have passed the clearance to carry. They appreciate that the general public have the abilty to have this. Having a carry concealed permitting system in Canada would be a benifit to our society not a hinderance.


Citizens/general public should not carry firearm period. It's great that we have some good examples of people who respect the destructive force that they weild but I just do not feel the average person should carry a concealed weapon. Sure they might find themselves in a situation where they need to use a gun but will they have the restraint to stop shooting or the forthought to check the background for innocents before plugging away at a moving target which they have zero skill to hit? Statistics cannot be your only judge of this issue. I am pretty sure your idea of this will change if your mother, father, brother, sister, huband, wife, or son/daughter were hit by the stray fire of a scared idiot.

All of the places you speak of that have a CCW in effect are states that have incorperated firearms into their society for the past 200 years and they have been bred to respect the gun for the most part. Throw that law into effect in a place like GTA Ontario and watch the death rate climb. No matter how similar we are we are NOT Americans and just because it works their does not mean it works everywhere. The only places the CCW law may work well is in a place like Saskatchawan or Manitoba because the use of guns is more previlant and the respect has been put into place.

"Having a carry concealed permitting system in Canada would be a benifit to our society not a hinderance."
Where are your facts to support such a statement?



" Citizens/general public should not carry firearm period. " Where are your facts to support your statement? You might not agree with my opinions and that is fine as they are my opinons. But I believe in the right to protect myself. I have been on the end of that Idiot spraying down a block with a MAC 10 Machine gun with bullets landing within one foot of a young sleeping boys head. What we need is tougher laws dealing with these criminals doing such a thing. What we also need is our rights as Lawful citizens to protect our selves from these Criminals and the like. The Gov't of the past have fought to remove these rights with wasteful spending on registries that criminalize the Lawful citizen and allow the Criminal to walk free. We are closer to an american society then you realize, thus my first statement about British Common Law, but I guess you missed that. As for your area, you might be right. Larger cities in some states do not have carry and conceal permits due to the population, And I am sure that is what would happen in Canada as well.

User avatar
tpspastin#9
Rookie Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:56 am
Location: Behind you!
Contact:

Re: How arming citizens with guns might cut crime

Postby tpspastin#9 » Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:51 pm

Delley wrote:Where are your facts to support your statement? You might not agree with my opinions and that is fine as they are my opinons. But I believe in the right to protect myself. I have been on the end of that Idiot spraying down a block with a MAC 10 Machine gun with bullets landing within one foot of a young sleeping boys head.


And if you had a gun what? You'd run a block down, start firing back? Then we'd have another parent on here ranting about how you nearly hit their kids or did hit their kids. If it was a "Mac 10" :roll: what hardware are you gonna get to compete?


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot and 2 guests