• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
813
Points
1,060
IIRC, most officers, unless they own their own firearms, do not require an RPAL for their service pistol. IIRC, if an officer only has his service arm and no RPAL, he does not fall under the rules of the CFC and the Firearms Act. For that matter, most LEOs, IIRC, only have to follow the rules set down by their precinct for their jurisdiction, regarding storage, carry, etc. If they only have their service pistol, the whole PAL system and CFC rules are total foriegn and do not include them. If their jurisdiction allows off duty carry, they can do so, without and ATT 3, because they are not part of the system and the rules for LEO and their jurisdiction allows it.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
813
Points
1,060
QV said:
Fry (not a police officer) telling a police officer what is and what is not a police tool... lol.  Usually people get told to "stay in their lane" around here when they do stuff like that. 

It's already been proven that police officer's are not completely versed in everything either. They don't even know what all their tools are. A civvie outside the 'community' is entitled to his opinion of said tools, if the 'holders' of the box don't even know what's in it or how it works.
 

Fry

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
QV said:
Fry (not a police officer) telling a police officer what is and what is not a police tool... lol.  Usually people get told to "stay in their lane" around here when they do stuff like that. 

In one post, prove to me how it's a useful tool for police. I know many officers who think it isn't. Because you don the badge and I do not, doesn't mean you are right and I am wrong.

Prove to army.ca how the registry is a useful tool for police.
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
715
Points
1,010
Over the last 10 pages I have explained a lot of stuff to you Fry, including briefly why it is a tool for police.  You don't agree with what I said earlier, so why don't you prove that it is not?  You can't though, because what would you know about police investigations and the tools they use?  Right? 

Same reason why I wouldn't comment on anything about a tank... right recceguy? 

It's already been proven that police officer's are not completely versed in everything either. They don't even know what all their tools are. A civvie outside the 'community' is entitled to his opinion of said tools, if the 'holders' of the box don't even know what's in it or how it works.

Generally a police officer won't just act on something they don't know much about.  But they will look it up in a matter of minutes so that they can act.  Kind of like when you refer yourself to the various PAMs .... or the service manual for your tank.

Can you guys move on from the "police don't know anything" argument already? 
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
813
Points
1,060
QV said:
Over the last 10 pages I have explained a lot of stuff to you Fry, including briefly why it is a tool for police.  You don't agree with what I said earlier, so why don't you prove that it is not?  You can't though, because what would you know about police investigations and the tools they use?  Right? 

Same reason why I wouldn't comment on anything about a tank... right Frank? 

Generally a police officer won't just act on something they don't know much about.  But they will look it up in a matter of minutes so that they can act.  Kind of like when you refer yourself to the various PAMs .... or the service manual for your tank.

Can you guys move on from the "police don't know anything" argument already? 

Not exactly true. Many act on what THEY PERCIEVE is the law, without looking for reference. Not picking on them, no matter how much it bothers or galls you. Just saying they are as fallable as the rest of us, and don't have a lock on superior knowledge of firearms matters and law.

I don't believe anyone said LEOs don't know anything, just you trying to spin it again.
 

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
34
Points
530
I thought police investigated criminals?? This tool for police won't help catch any criminals now will it? The criminals aren't going to use it. What part of that concept is so hard to grasp?

How is it a police tool if only law abiding citizens are going to be the ones complying with it as has already been pointed out numerous times?? Too many to count actually.

I've been following this thread, and I HATE guns; but, we're talking law abiding citizens here.

This thread is running around in it's small little circle; made especially smaller when one can't realize the difference between a criminal and a law-abiding citizen.
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,296
Points
1,060
QV, what's with all the implied " I know who you are" crap from you? It's real neato that you can use your super sweet detective skills to uncover all our secret identities on here.  And you wonder why people here are mistrusting of you guys?  Using spytec to make thinly veiled violations of peoples privacy is pretty unprofessional, I'd say.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
813
Points
1,060
QV said:
We will have to agree to disagree on that point.

You can agree to disagree with my viewpoint all you want. If you think my above statement is wrong, say so and prove it.

 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
715
Points
1,010
Kat Stevens you are jumping to conclusions.  You guys probably know more about me then I about you.  If you are referring to recceguy's previous handle being Frank, doesn't everyone know that here?  I was thinking about something else when I typed that and promptly edited after submitting it. 

Since I make everyone so uncomfortable here how about I bow out now... :salute:
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
813
Points
1,060
QV said:
Kat Stevens you are jumping to conclusions.  You guys probably know more about me then I about you.  If you are referring to recceguy's previous handle being Frank, doesn't everyone know that here?  I was thinking about something else when I typed that and promptly edited after submitting it. 

Since I make everyone so uncomfortable here how about I bow out now... :salute:

It's always been recceguy from day one. Never been anything else. I've often been called frank, but only when I was telling someone the truth they didn't want to hear. ;) ;D
 

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
34
Points
530
Darn,

You mean I'm not going to get a straight answer about how you intend to use it as a "Police Tool" while you investigate the law-abiding citizens who'll be using it??

While you're busy using it as a tool to track and investigate those law-abiding types; the criminal types are stocking up on their illegally purchased and unregistered firearms.

Now that's a concept for Canada that doesn't sit very well with this firearm hater.
 

Fry

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
QV said:
So in summary,
We agree that Billions of dollars is too much money to spend on a gun registry.
We agree that firearms need to be regulated in some manner, but the current registry is having problems.
We agree that people need to be licenced to buy/sell own a firearm
We agree that the justice system is messed up
We agree that the charter of rights and freedoms does not specifiy any "right to bear arms"

What pisses people off is the registry, which also in itself does not violate a persons rights, it just appears to be a waste of money and energy. 

QV said:
Fry (not a police officer) telling a police officer what is and what is not a police tool... lol.  Usually people get told to "stay in their lane" around here when they do stuff like that. 

And yet how ironic. I'm not a police officer, but I certainly know my stance on the issue unlike yourself. You (whether you have 500 badges or none at all) are unable to stay on track here. You have said the registry appears to be a waste of money, energy, and is inefficient. However you come on later and ridicule me becuase I downplay it as not being a valuable police tool. Which you yourself have stated in previous posts as being just that.

Seems as though you don't even know what you're arguing about anymore, just here to prolong your lost cause a little more.

You're backing a police tool that is a waste of money and energy?

Again,

QV said:
I really don't read much about whether Canada's gun laws are making a difference or not. 
Yourself admitting your stance on the whole issue.

QV said:
By having to register the guns someone buys, it deters them from being misused.  Like loaning to an unlicenced person, selling to an inlicenced person... ect. 
That is the most laughable post in the thread... Apart from some of Sigs Guy's stuff.

QV said:
Also it aids police.  When going to violent calls and knowing (positively) that there are guns around.

So you'd rely on your wonderful 'police tool' and if nothing checks up on the registry you take off your vest, bring your guitar and marshmellows to their campfire?

QV said:
It is also an enforcement tool when people have firearms in their possession illegally. 

How so? Since the registry only contains legally registered firearms? How do you know that *he/she/they don't/doesn't have something fresh off the street?

QV, as I've mentioned before, you're all over the radar with your entire stance on this topic. I hope that I, Fry (not a police officer) have explained this in enough detail for you, QV (police officer) to understand.

Edit: Typo*
 

Franko

Army.ca Fixture
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
2
Points
0
QV said:
Kat Stevens you are jumping to conclusions.  You guys probably know more about me then I about you.  If you are referring to recceguy's previous handle being Frank, doesn't everyone know that here?  I was thinking about something else when I typed that and promptly edited after submitting it. 

Since I make everyone so uncomfortable here how about I bow out now... :salute:

Wrong guy....get your fact straight before shooting off your mouth. I'm getting tired of all this one liner shyte and such,from both you and Sigs Guy.

Back on topic troops....next one out of line gets C&P.

You've had enough warnings.


The Milnet.ca Staff
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
715
Points
1,010
recceguy,

Touche


Fry,

You are interpreting my posts out of context as usual.




PM inbound.

The Milnet.ca Staff
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
813
Points
1,060
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/238608
Child, 11, among dead in city's overnight violence

Jul 22, 2007 07:54 AM
Rachel De Lazzer
Staff Reporter

The death of an 11-year-old boy from a gunshot wound was the first of a string of violent incidents across city streets through Sunday's early morning hours.

Police and paramedics were called to an apartment building on Sheppard Ave. W. near Jane St. just before 1 a.m. where they found the boy, said Duty Officer Dave Viljak with Toronto Emergency Medical Services. He was pronounced dead on scene.

"At this age . . . this is very unusual," Viljak said.

A man in his mid-20s was also shot and killed in an apartment building on Bleecker St. near Bloor St. E. and Parliament St. shortly before 2 a.m., said Staff Sgt. Lorenzo Bressan.

In the city's west end, police are investigating a double stabbing overnight in a room at the Belaire Hotel on Belfied Rd. at Highway 27. Two victims were taken to hospital, said Staff Sgt. Dan Sova. "One guy is going for surgery at (hospital)," he said, adding that the man's stab wounds were very serious. The other was sent to hospital with less serious injuries. Both were stabbed multiple times. He said investigators are interviewing witnesses and have an idea who the suspect is.

Finally, one man was killed after he and another man were shot in the entertainment district near Adelaide St. W. and Duncan St. just before 1 a.m., said Staff Sgt. Ed Lemch. One victim was taken to hospital to be operated on but was later pronounced dead, while the other man was shot in the buttocks and leg. "The suspect took off in a cab eastbound on Adelaide," said Lemch.

Anyone with information about any of the incidents is urged to call police at 416-808-7000 or Crime Stoppers anonymously at 416-222-TIPS.

What's the problem? Just look them up on the CFC Registry and go get them! They should have the firearms registered and their Authority To Transport all in order, right?. I'm sure they had their trigger locks on and had the firearms in opague cases, ammo separated from the firearm, etc.

What we've been saying all along, it does nothing to deter crime and the criminal and is all about controlling the law abiding citizen.

And with that, I think we can all take a break and let this cool off. The vortex in the spiral is getting very strong.

edit to fix spacing
 

canadianblue

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
QV, their's really no point in debating or else you'll be banned. Usually its better if everyone nods their heads in full agreement, if not then the mob mentality usually starts to take hold.
 

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
34
Points
530
Sigs Guy said:
QV, their's really no point in debating or else you'll be banned. Usually its better if everyone nods their heads in full agreement, if not then the mob mentality usually starts to take hold.

With that bit of trolling, welcome to C&P

ArmyVern
The Milnet.ca Staff
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,296
Points
1,060
QV said:
Kat Stevens you are jumping to conclusions.  You guys probably know more about me then I about you.  If you are referring to recceguy's previous handle being Frank, doesn't everyone know that here?  I was thinking about something else when I typed that and promptly edited after submitting it. 

Since I make everyone so uncomfortable here how about I bow out now... :salute:

Evidently I was mistaken.  I apologize.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
2,774
Points
1,010
>It's in reference to the post about mentally unstable people being allowed to have guns. In my own opinion it would be better if such people who could possibly be involved in criminal activities should not be given legal access to firearms.

Would that include, say, police officers who administer extra-legal justice and CF members who occasionally stray outside the lines?  Anyone can "possibly" be involved in criminal activities.  ["Egad."]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top