Ran a full 45 minute mission (lots of dicking around no such thing as avoiding a patrol in the group) tons of samples. Called a gat sentry off in the distance as last stratagem. Buddy ran down the hill and walked down in front of it and died, kicked. FFS

AI without proper regulation could be the downfall of humanity. Many pros, but the cons may outweigh them. Opinion.

I deleted Facebook a couple years ago. Instagram is my guilty pleasure for car reels and god damn dancing toothless. It seems like the end of my ig use is getting closer

I agree with you but what are they going to use to keep roads from being lethal in certain winter conditions?

People are supposed to be complying with that since 2020 since it's announced. Yes 2025 is the amnesty deadline, but if people haven't taken part now, they won't by then.

Edit: the actual buyback program doesn't take effect until 2025 when the amnesty period ends. So again, with having 2000 models of weapons now prohibited since 2020, has it made an impact on firearm crime rates? Another question to ask is whether the buyback program will reduce crime rates. Which if all these prohibited weapons are already locked up like fort Knox, what real difference will it make?

Well I'm being told I'm confused on the timeline. Sure by a year or so. All I'm trying to prove is: is the law in question as to whether it is actually reducing crime. I've asked the same question a dozen times and all I get back is hey this guy is a dumb gun nut. In retrospect I could have worded a clearer question right off the bat. No one is perfect

On May 1, 2020, the Government of Canada announced a prohibition on more than 1,500 models and variants of assault-style firearms, such as the AR-15. Since then, approximately 500 additional variants of these prohibited firearms have also been prohibited.

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/campaigns/firearms-buyback.html

There is a link to what I'm talking about.

Having a conversation with internet strangers isn't embarrassing. I stand by my original point which is: are recent amendments calling to bring your grandfather's ww2 weapons in and get rid of them because they are deemed "assault style" actually reducing crime?

"On May 1, 2020, the Government of Canada announced a prohibition on more than 1,500 models and variants of assault-style firearms, such as the AR-15. Since then, approximately 500 additional variants of these prohibited firearms have also been prohibited."

Is this actually reducing crime post may 1 2020? Sure you really don't need to own a fully automatic assault rifle so I get that. Is this prohibition effective in reducing gun violence?

This makes sense. You are able to apply for a license to carry a pistol, however chief firearms officers are denying them, regardless whether you meet criteria or not. The RCMP also will not disclose how many permits for carrying a handgun they issued on a given year. Fun facts.

How many school shootings did we have in 2016 comparatively? How many of you actually live in Canada and watched the news about these stories unraveling after 2019?

I'm not saying that GUN CONTROL BAD GUNS GOOD as much as you guys are portraying it that way. I asked how is it cutting down on crime and one of about 15 comments actually had a logical response to that without being a dick about it.

You guys are nuts. I own zero firearms so I can take it or leave it. You putting words into my mouth is non helpful to the conversation. So why don't we go back to my original comment, which asked are recent amendments to gun laws actually cutting down on crime in Canada. Instead of attacking why don't you offer some anecdotal evidence like Mr cumfart over there instead of jumping into the echo chamber and attacking someone?

Between 2019 and 2023 the Canadian government issued a ban on "assault style weapons" including pistols shorter than 105mm in length.

Another commenter pointed out that law was to prevent them being stolen during break and enters which makes sense, but even then I've never heard of that happening. I'm sure it does in larger cities So back to the original question of did the change of law to give your newly prohibited weapons back to the government decrease crime rates?

I literally did not say that. I offered a conversation point to compare with what Canada has been doing and asked how it has cut down on crime

We started off talking about whether recent Canada gun law amendments actually cut down on firearm crime. You then presented statistics about the US.

I stand corrected by several years, but again, I don't think recent amendments 2019+ has reduced crime. Our government has taken lawful gun owners, and are trying to take their weapons away. No criminal who owned a handgun is going to go and turn in their weapon that they may use in a crime.

Edit: take a look at this link https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2022001/article/00009-eng.htm

It is firearm crime statistics from 2009 to 2021. I would like to see up to 2023 but it isn't there unfortunately. I see no correlation to 2019 law amendments and decreasing crime. Except for maybe robberies. Which I would have expected to increase with COVID and unemployment. That being said perhaps there hasn't been enough time passed to reflect the law changes via statistics.

I mean this in the most polite and conversational way possible but what you are saying is wrong.

October 21 2022 a national freeze on sale and transfer of handguns was placed. It is still in effect today unless you take a restricted firearms course.

The article you linked me does in fact show that the US has a gun violence problem, which I believe should be rectified. How? I don't know.

Your article makes no mention of handgun/restricted weapon (automatic rifles) crime statistics decreasing after 2022, which is what I am getting at.

I completely agree the US needs to change some things but what I'm asking is are the 1.5-2 year old laws made in Canada actually cutting down on gun violence in Canada? Because what I see first hand is no change.

In Canada we have gone to extreme lengths on gun control, specific to handguns. You can take a restricted firearms course, allowing you to own handguns, and other restricted arms.

The rules go something like this. If you own a handgun, the government can come and check on you at almost any time. You must keep it locked in a safe. You must keep ammunition in a separate room. If you plan to take the handgun to the range, or anywhere outside of your home, you have to contact the government for approval and establish a timeline.

I may not be 100% accurate on those laws but that is the gist of it. The idea is to cut down on firearm related crimes.

Now answer me this. How is that cutting down on crime at all, other than punishing lawful gun owners. How many people that caused death or injury with a handgun, took a PAL course to legally buy it? My gut says little to none. Those who commit the crimes buy handguns illegally.

It may be a sort of bias, but fuck me have there been way more shootings in my locale lately. Drug and gang related but still.

That sounds pretty different actually. On one hand you have someone talking about being inconvenienced.

On the other hand you have someone in the industry talking about practicality. Biased or not, people that work in their respective areas generally know the most about that same area, as opposed to random people online.

Quick everyone, downvote to oblivion because this guy actually is educated in the subject