Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[IronNoggin]

Firearms bill debate pushed to new year as MPs weigh more talks over hunting concerns

The House of Commons public safety committee, which is conducting a clause-by-clause review of a Liberal firearm-control bill, did not meet Thursday as planned after the House adjourned Wednesday for the holidays.

The government says the aim is to outlaw firearms designed for the battlefield while respecting the legitimate needs of hunters and others who own rifles and shotguns.

MPs have been poring over the latest list of firearms that would fall under the definition.

There is debate over exactly what is included and what is not, because the definition applies only to some variations of certain models that meet the criteria — guns the government considers inappropriate for civilian use.

Another sticking point for the committee is the potential travel requirements, which staff confirmed would not be able to be approved until April at the earliest — delaying the issue even further into next year.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9352672/firearms-bill-c21-committee-delay/

​Referring to the highlighted content:

The first is an obvious and blatant lie at this point.

The second is a very clear indication of just who is making these asinine decisions.

Nog

[IronNoggin]

Facing anger in Liberal -- and other -- ranks, Trudeau pulls his gun ban, for now

In a major climbdown, the Trudeau Liberals have halted their efforts to ban hundreds of hunting rifles.

The push, which began last November and was defended by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau himself until recently, saw the party lose the support of every opposition party and cause dissension in Liberal ranks.

At first the Trudeau government defended it and said they were not banning any hunting rifles or shotguns despite the clear evidence to the contrary. Eventually the government said that they would pause and listen to make sure they were getting it right, before Trudeau himself said in a year-end interview that some hunting guns need to be banned.

“It is not our intention to impact hunters,” Liberal House Leader Mark Holland said.

Holland invoked images of guns used in mass shootings, which this amendment didn’t come close to touching, it was all about hunting rifles and shotguns. The Liberals knew this despite months of denial and only pulled the amendments when they felt threatened electorally.

Liberal MPs have been sounding the alarm bell inside their own caucus since this started. It seems Trudeau’s office finally realized that if they moved ahead with these changes they wouldn’t win a single seat outside of major urban centres.

To show how out of touch the Trudeau Liberals were on this bill and these amendments, they lost the support of the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois. Isn’t it telling when the NDP is telling the Liberals to back off, that they are going too far on issues like this?

The Trudeau Liberals no longer listen to or speak to people who disagree with their urban, ultra-progressive agenda and it is showing.

The question now is whether they can undo the damage they have done before voters head to the polls in the next election to cast judgment.

o.canada.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-facing-anger-in-the-liberal-and-other-ranks-trudeau-pulls-his-gun-ban-for-now

[IronNoggin]

The Liberals backed themselves into a corner on firearms — leaving no option but surrender

What truly forced the government to retreat was more likely the simple fact that they couldn't count on enough support from everyone else. And the government's mistake was to allow itself to get so thoroughly cornered that throwing up its hands was the only conceivable way forward.

But the NDP was not the only player the government had to worry about. Liberal MP Kody Blois, chair of the party's rural caucus, called the amendments "problematic." The Assembly of First Nations passed a resolution officially opposing the changes.

Even if the amendments had somehow passed, the Speaker might have been compelled to rule them out of order. Once a bill has been approved at second reading, the committee charged with studying the legislation has limited scope to propose amendments. Any changes must fall within the original intent and purpose of the bill.

Conservative MP Raquel Dancho described the Liberal machinations as "underhanded" on Friday — but this might be a good moment to remember Hanlon's Razor ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"). These amendments were never going to escape notice. If the Liberals believed they'd easily win support for the changes, they miscalculated wildly.

Liberals are obviously inclined — either by personal belief or electoral calculation — to pursue stricter gun control. And they no doubt understand how much trouble the issue can create for Conservatives.

But regardless of their intentions, the Liberals suffer if they appear clumsy and bumbling — especially when they're still trying to recover from a difficult year during which their competence was in question.

www.cbc.ca/news/politics/guns-c21-analysis-wherry-1.6736430

[IronNoggin]

Mass homicide by firearm in Canada: Effects of legislation

Abstract

Canada implemented a series of laws regulating firearms including background checks and licensing, references, psychological questionnaires, prohibition of paramilitary style rifles, and magazine capacity restrictions in order to decrease the incidences and deaths from mass shootings. The associated effects of these laws were examined over the years 1974 to 2020. A model was constructed using difference-in-differences analysis of firearms and non-firearms mass homicide incidences and death rates. Mass homicides were defined as a homicide due to one event involving three or more deaths. Incidence rates of mass homicide by firearm were found to be 0.11 (95%CI 0.08, 0.14) per million compared to a non-firearm mass homicide rate of 0.12 (95% CI 0.10, 0.15) per million. Mass homicide death rates by firearm were found to be 0.39 (95% CI 0.29, 0.49) per million compared to a non-firearm mass homicide rate of 0.47 (95% CI 0.34, 0.61) per million. Overall, there is a gradual declining trend in the incidence of mass homicide by firearm (IRR 0.97 (95% CI 0.96, 0.98)) and by non-firearm (IRR 0.97 (95% CI 0.97, 0.98)). The decline in mass homicide death rate by firearm and non-firearm is IRR 0.96 (95% CI 0.95, 0.97), and IRR 0.97 (95% CI 0.96, 0.98) respectively. No specific associated decrease in mass homicide incidence rates or death rates with firearms legislation was found after the implementation of background checks and prohibition of full auto firearms in 1980, by the implementation of references and psychological questionnaires in 1994, by the restriction of magazine capacity in 1994, the prohibition of paramilitary rifles in 1994, or licensing in 2001.


Conclusions

This is the first study to examine mass homicide in Canada as well as the association between legislative interventions controlling firearms and firearm mass homicide incidence rates and deaths. Over the period 1974 to 2020 the incidence and death rates associated with mass homicide gradually declined. Interestingly, interventions such as background checks, licensing, prohibition of military style firearms, and prohibiting large-capacity magazines, were not specifically associated with changes in the incidence and deaths by mass homicide by firearms. The benefit from the consistency of firearms regulations in Canada eliminates the confounders in US studies due to the differing regulations across states. Recommended areas for data collection by Statistics Canada to aid future study include locations of incidents, the interpersonal relationship between perpetrator and victim, and the perpetrator’s motivation for mass homicide.


journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0266579#sec009

[IronNoggin]

Government Backs Down On Gun Ban, But They're Not Going To Give Up -- A Lawyer Explains

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqUaEtMbB4Y