Right to Bear Arms: Canada vs. US

[2aguy]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

Its no coincidence.

A fun project is to ask people a what-if; if we didn't have the 2nd Amendment, would we need to ratify an amendment allowing anyone who wants to buy one, buy a gun? The answer from any sane person is "no" given the likely millions of murders the US has suffered from having the silly thing.

It isn't a what if project.....most of the people around the world live in countries with no right to self defense....they look like this...

In other occupied countries

Jewish mass grave near Zolochiv, west Ukraine (Nazi occupied USSR). Photo was found by Soviets at former Gestapo headquarters in Zolochiv.


When Germany occupied Norway, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, and France in 1940, and Yugoslavia and Greece in 1941, antisemitic measures were also introduced into these countries, although the pace and severity varied greatly from country to country according to local political circumstances. Jews were removed from economic and cultural life and were subject to various restrictive laws, but physical deportation did not occur in most places before 1942. The Vichy regime in occupied France actively collaborated in persecuting French Jews. Germany's allies Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Finland were pressured to introduce antisemitic measures, but for the most part they did not comply until compelled to do so. During the course of the war some 900 Jews and 300Roma passed through the Banjica concentration camp in Belgrade, intended primarily for Serbian communists, royalists and others who resisted occupation. The German puppet regime in Croatia, on the other hand, began actively persecuting Jews on its own initiative, so the Legal Decree on the Nationalization of the Property of Jews and Jewish Companies w

 

[TooTall]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

You've always been in favor of the Right to Bear Arms, but do you actually know what the Right to Bear Arms is?

Do I know exactly what it says in the Bill of Rights off the top of my head? No.
I actually didn't even know Canada did not have that in their Bill of Rights until yesterday (watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire) - how's that for a confession!

So, you think it has nothing to do with crime rate? yes or no?

The Right to Bear Arms is the right to be in the militia. Nothing else.

I served in the military for 6 years. The state issued me a concealed carry permit after I got out. Is it your contention that the only people who have the right to carry a weapon have to be in the military?

 

[percysunshine]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

I know Canada has more bears than the US. So presumably they have more bear arms.

.

 

[TooTall]

...So, it's clear that the members of the House thought that "bear arms" meant "militia duty" or "render military service". The question is, why don't you understand that this is what it means?

Let's just cut through all the bullshit...

Fine.

Conceded.

However...

Constitutional Law is far more fluid and able to change with the times that some give it credit for.

Even if that was the original intention of the Founders, we must remember that the Founders were fallible mortals, and their ideas are subject to modification over time.

And so, if by some chance, you are right, and it was their intention to allow the citizenry to maintain arms, for purposes of militia service...

The times have changed, over and again since those words were first laid down, and various judicial rulings, and custom and usage, have rendered it otherwise.

The Constitution is a set of guidelines... it is neither suicide pact nor straight-jacket... it is an instrument of the Will of the People.

And it is the Will of the People to sublimate the "militia" aspect of the Second as nothing more than the rationale du jour, at the time, and that other justifications for a Right to Bear Arms have long-since overtaken and superceded any original "militia" basis for establishing that Right.

Once articulated and agreed upon and established, a Right can be a devilishly-difficult thing to take away.

You cannot have the guns.

But you CAN get a lot of support for the idea of (metaphorically) crucifying (at-law) those who commit violent crimes with guns.

Especially the lowlife inner-city thug-gangs who kill women and children for fun.

Then again, perhaps Chicago and Detroit and other ghetto shit-holes would benefit from a few public executions of such vermin.

Actually you're wrong. There hasn't been change.

All that has happened is the Supreme Court is keeping within the Constitution, but pandering to the right on guns.

Take the Heller case as a perfect example of this:

"(d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32."

It doesn't mention what the right to bear arms is. It just says the right exists. Now, if you interpret it one way or another, you can make this decision say whatever you like.

"(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 , nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252 , refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes."

Here is the part that's important. They don't say WHAT they uphold, they just mention the cases. The Presser case, simply said, shows that the 2A does NOT protect the right of citizens to walk around as they choose armed. But the Court didn't say this. They just said some case that people who want to ignore can ignore. However it's very important. They UPHELD Presser.

"
We think it clear that the sections under consideration, which only forbid bodies of men to associate together as military organizations, or to drill or parade with arms in cities [116 U.S. 252, 265] and towns unless authorized by law, do not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

Forbidding people to associate together as a military organization is NOT protected by the 2A, that means carry arms. Which means the right to bear arms is NOT "carry arms".

"All that has happened is the Supreme Court is keeping within the Constitution, but pandering to the right on guns."

The Supreme Court "panders" to the right. It doesn't get any more absurd than that!

 

[percysunshine]

.

Oops....My mistake...Canada has more beers than the US, and thus more beer arms.

.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You either want to debate, or insult. You can't do both.

I am not debating you; I am pointing out your logical flaws and heavy handed use of bullshit, Twinkle Toes.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Well it's actually not the "civil debate" forum, but, personal attacks still I don't think should be in a debate. IMO

In an ideal world sure, but then again, in an ideal world we wouldnt have all these paid Sorosbots trolling up the entire board either.

 

[Dana7360]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

Canadians do have the right to have arms.

They just have proper safety laws to own a gun. Laws we don't have here.

Gun politics in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I will say, they don't have open carry or concealed carry. Guns have to be properly stored.

Interesting, not all Canadians are armed. They have a lot less guns in Canada than we have.

They also have a small fraction of the gun crime we have too.

The answer isn't arming everyone. The answer is proper safety laws and regulations on those guns.

Safety laws and regulations isn't banning guns. It's not taking guns from anyone. It's proper laws for safety and regulations.

The gun nuts scream that they're coming for your guns! Yet that has not happened. They scream about bans and confiscation when even one word of suggesting proper safety laws for guns.

They change the subject from an adult mature discussion about safety laws to banning guns all for the purpose to make sure the only thing that's done is more guns sold.

More guns won't make anyone safer. If they did then we should be the safest nation in the world and all other nations should have the same problems with guns we have now.

America wasn't armed to the teeth until the last couple decades. America also didn't have the same mass shootings and problems with guns we have now. The difference? We had some safety laws, not everyone had guns and the guns most people had were rifles used for hunting or sport.

 

[2aguy]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

Canadians do have the right to have arms.

They just have proper safety laws to own a gun. Laws we don't have here.

Gun politics in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I will say, they don't have open carry or concealed carry. Guns have to be properly stored.

Interesting, not all Canadians are armed. They have a lot less guns in Canada than we have.

They also have a small fraction of the gun crime we have too.

The answer isn't arming everyone. The answer is proper safety laws and regulations on those guns.

Safety laws and regulations isn't banning guns. It's not taking guns from anyone. It's proper laws for safety and regulations.

The gun nuts scream that they're coming for your guns! Yet that has not happened. They scream about bans and confiscation when even one word of suggesting proper safety laws for guns.

They change the subject from an adult mature discussion about safety laws to banning guns all for the purpose to make sure the only thing that's done is more guns sold.

More guns won't make anyone safer. If they did then we should be the safest nation in the world and all other nations should have the same problems with guns we have now.

America wasn't armed to the teeth until the last couple decades. America also didn't have the same mass shootings and problems with guns we have now. The difference? We had some safety laws, not everyone had guns and the guns most people had were rifles used for hunting or sport.

their criminals get any guns they want...and their problem is getting worse, not better. The law abiding citizen is not the person doing the shooting....that is why gun control laws always fail. We don't have a gun problem in the United States, the problem we have is that our criminals are shooting each other and people assume that means all Americans are doing it.

We have 357 million guns in private hands. We have over 13 million law abiding people carrying guns every day.

We have 8,124 gun murders, the majority of which are committed by violent criminals murdering other criminals in the act of committing crimes, using guns that are illegally acquired, illegally.

357 milllion minus 8,124 = 356,991,876 million guns that are in law abiding hands and are not used to commit murder...

Can you tell the difference in the size of the numbers?

We have 13 million law abiding citizens carrying guns every day......non military, non police, normal citiznes....

13 million minus 8,124 = 13 million law abiding citizens...since the 8,124 are the criminals and they are not allowed to carry guns in our country, the same as in Canada.

As more Americans have bought, owned and now carry guns for self defense, our gun murder rate has gone down, our gun suicide rate has gone down and our accidental gun death rate has gone down.....

And we also did not murder 12 million unarmed citizens the way gun free Europe did.......

 

[2aguy]

The real issue is this...why do American criminals murder each other more often than their European, Canadian and Australian counterparts...since guns are easily acquired by all the criminals, but American criminals simply commit more murder. That is the real issue, not law abiding people owning and carrying guns...since they don't shoot people.

 

[2aguy]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

Canadians do have the right to have arms.

They just have proper safety laws to own a gun. Laws we don't have here.

Gun politics in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I will say, they don't have open carry or concealed carry. Guns have to be properly stored.

Interesting, not all Canadians are armed. They have a lot less guns in Canada than we have.

They also have a small fraction of the gun crime we have too.

The answer isn't arming everyone. The answer is proper safety laws and regulations on those guns.

Safety laws and regulations isn't banning guns. It's not taking guns from anyone. It's proper laws for safety and regulations.

The gun nuts scream that they're coming for your guns! Yet that has not happened. They scream about bans and confiscation when even one word of suggesting proper safety laws for guns.

They change the subject from an adult mature discussion about safety laws to banning guns all for the purpose to make sure the only thing that's done is more guns sold.

More guns won't make anyone safer. If they did then we should be the safest nation in the world and all other nations should have the same problems with guns we have now.

America wasn't armed to the teeth until the last couple decades. America also didn't have the same mass shootings and problems with guns we have now. The difference? We had some safety laws, not everyone had guns and the guns most people had were rifles used for hunting or sport.

No, guns were banned in France, Germany, Britain, and Australia, after they were first registered in order to make their people safer.....we know the history, and we know how it turned out....

Now...more British police are getting guns, their gun crime rate has remained the same after the confiscation, and in Australia their gun ownership rates have returned to the pre confiscation levels and their gun crime is increasing.

In Continental Europe...guns, fully automatic, select fire weapons are easily acquired by known terrorists sympathizers as well as known criminals...their gun control has done nothing to limit mass shootings....the fact that their criminals simply don't do mass shootings keeps their mass shootings from happening, not their gun laws.

 

[2aguy]

And like Europe, and Australia...as their criminals need guns, Canadian crimnals will get them and use them.......

Firearms: Making sense of Toronto’s cycle of violence

The number of people killed or injured by guns in Toronto so far this year is already higher than 2014, reversing a recent downward trend. But while gun violence appears to be going up in Ontario’s capital, criminologists say this apparent increase in gun violence doesn’t necessarily mean the city is becoming more dangerous.
This week alone, there have been seven shootings over a span of four days, two of them fatal, Toronto Police spokeswoman Caroline de Kloet said Friday.

********

Mr. Pugash said the number of shooting events this year – 162, as of Aug. 20 – is now on par with the number on the same date in 2012, the year police previously noted a spike in gun violence.


Police don’t know the reasons behind this year’s increase, Mr. Pugash said, and it’s an issue that could be impacted by an “infinite number of factors.”


Toronto's gun crime stats have spiked

TORONTO - Welcome to Toronto’s Summer of the Gun 2015.

It’s a headline neither Toronto Police nor city hall want to see.

There is no question statistics can be made to look a lot of different ways, but some statistics are just plain ugly.

Scary, actually.

For example, 36 more people have been shot so far this year in Toronto than at this point last year.

Toronto Police statistics show a 90% increase in people wounded by gunfire and a 48% increase in shootings (135 compared to 91).

And there have been 106 more shooting victims (those hit by gunfire, as well as those victimized by it).

In fact, the 227 shooting victims so far this year is 31 more than the total for all of 2014.

It’s true not all shooting victims have been hit by gunfire, but as Deputy Chief Peter Sloly points out, every gun shot, whether into the air or a tree, is one that could ricochet and strike an innocent victim like we saw in 2012 when a two-year-old was hit.

If you add the death and injury statistics, Toronto has seen 88 dead or wounded by gunfire in 2015 compared to 53 at this time last year. That’s a 66% increase.

It’s a big spike.

Shocking, horrifying numbers that seem to have just snuck up on us.

Many seem worried about the controversial carding issue, but these scary stats aren’t getting the same media attention. It doesn’t feel like a particularly violent summer, but the stats indicate otherwise.

So.....Canadians get guns easily, if they want them. The only thing then that prevents mass shootings in Canada..is that their nuts just haven't done them.....

 

[2aguy]

And more on gun crime in Canada.....

The two shootings come as Toronto is experiencing a year of increased gun violence, up 35 per cent from last year. The number of victims has also increased, up by 80 per cent over last August, according to police statistics.

Deputy Chief Peter Sloly can't say why there have been so many shootings this year, adding that he's noticed an uptick in gun violence across the country.

"It's a concerning trend we're seeing this year," Sloly told CBC News. "We've put extra resources on the street, we've got extra intelligence coming in, we have extra support from our communities."

But Mayor John Tory thinks he knows why the city is witnessing so much gun play.

"There's some level of gang activity involved," he said. "There is the illegal gun trade that continues to be a real problem especially when it comes to the Canada-U.S. border."

 

[OldLady]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

I think it has more to do with the British culture they inherited. The Brits and the Canadians just don't have the same adoration of guns that Americans do. Until America can change its gun and violence loving culture, no amount of regulations in the world will solve the problem.
I saw my first open carry by a civilian this morning at the diner. Hated it. I live in a state with a very high rate of gun ownership but one of the lowest death-by-gun rates in the country. Mr. John Q. Citizen doesn't need a gun in this community unless he's messed with someone's lobster traps. I hate it. Don't need it. Put it back in the nightstand.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

This is why it's pointless to compare the United States to other Western nations, to do so indeed fails as a fallacy.

The United States is unique in the West with regard to how it perceives violence, where American society is more inherently violent, and where violence is considered a legitimate means of conflict resolution.

Moreover, the United State's lack of comprehensive healthcare along with the cultural stigma associated with mental health treatment makes it difficult to identify mental health issues for early treatment and the prevention of more serious disorders which could likely lead to acts of criminal violence with firearms.

Consequently, the availability of firearms in the Untied States and the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment have very little to do with mass shootings and other acts of gun violence – if anything at all; mass shootings and gun violence are the result of our Nation's unwillingness to acknowledge the violent nature of American society and the unwillingness to make a meaningful, sincere effort to invest in healthcare in general and mental healthcare in particular.

 

[percysunshine]

.

Never try to take a beer away from a Canadian. They can't shoot you, because guns are illegal, but they can pummel you to death in a drunken rage. The end result is the same.

You can have my beer when you pry it out of my cold dead hand.

.

 

[Bonzi]

To clarify, the right to bear arms is not in Canada's bill of rights (as it is in ours). At least, that was my understanding....

 

[percysunshine]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

This is why it's pointless to compare the United States to other Western nations, to do so indeed fails as a fallacy.

The United States is unique in the West with regard to how it perceives violence, where American society is more inherently violent, and where violence is considered a legitimate means of conflict resolution.

Moreover, the United State's lack of comprehensive healthcare along with the cultural stigma associated with mental health treatment makes it difficult to identify mental health issues for early treatment and the prevention of more serious disorders which could likely lead to acts of criminal violence with firearms.

Consequently, the availability of firearms in the Untied States and the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment have very little to do with mass shootings and other acts of gun violence – if anything at all; mass shootings and gun violence are the result of our Nation's unwillingness to acknowledge the violent nature of American society and the unwillingness to make a meaningful, sincere effort to invest in healthcare in general and mental healthcare in particular.

.
There is an alternative theory. Some people like to hear themselves talk.

.

 

[percysunshine]

To clarify, the right to bear arms is not in Canada's bill of rights (as it is in ours). At least, that was my understanding....

Only Duddly Doright can conceal carry in Canada.

.

 

[Toro]

To clarify, the right to bear arms is not in Canada's bill of rights (as it is in ours). At least, that was my understanding....

Correct.

There is no right to bear arms in Canada.

Gun advocates like to say that the murder rate is higher in America because of more black people, urbanization and sheer population.

But the murder rate in lily-white Idaho has been 50% higher than in Canada over the past 15 years despite Canada having a lower rate of white people, more people and higher urbanization.

This isn't argument against guns per se. Rather, it's an argument against society being safer with widespread gun ownership. One can feel safer and be safer owning guns individually, but it doesn't mean everyone is safer with widespread gun ownership.