Author Topic: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0  (Read 187747 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline shawn5o

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 268
  • "We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1275 on: August 26, 2020, 11:58:46 »
Please go back and read post #525, there is an edit on the bottom showing they have been used.  As well, for some reason the RCMP have not officially stated an AR15 was used in Nova Scotia shooting spree, many sources have privately said it was one of the weapons used.  IMO, the only firearms that should be allowed are hunting rifles.  No handguns, or other firearms.  We don't need them.  If people want to shoot them, they can join a gun club and lets have the gun clubs own these weapons so that people can use while on the premises.  This is my opinion and I understand others may have a different belief.

Hi SP

Good msg and I have to say its good. I just wanted to point out that handguns are used more often than rifles ref homicide.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3510007201

I don't think it would be a good idea (it does have merit) to store your firearms at the gun club. Wouldn't the gun club(s) be targeted for robbery when bad guys want to do some shopping? I know its a stretch to say that but stranger things have happened.

Cheers
“We can't all be heroes because somebody has to sit on the curb and clap as they go by.” ― Will Rogers

stellarpanther

  • Guest
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1276 on: August 26, 2020, 12:12:25 »
stellarpanter, I would say handguns could be used for self defence reasons. With this ban, where it may or may not reduce the amount of guns aquired illegally, I think that law-abiding and responsible citizens should be able to use this weapon system in the event of self defence.

I do think people should be able to protect themselves but the way our laws are and I think it would be the same regardless of the party in power, if you shoot someone in your house, you will probably go to prison.  I knew someone who stabbed a person in the hand after he saw the person look in his child's bedroom, this father was charged because according to the police and prosecutor, he intruder didn't actually threaten the child or anyone else and you can't use that kind of force to protect your property.  If he would have used a gun, the guy would probably be dead and this father in prison.  I don't know all the details but the case was apparently tossed on a technicality. This was about 12 years ago.
 

Offline Drallib

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Member
  • *
  • 5,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 211
    • Making a Pilot in the RCAF
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1277 on: August 26, 2020, 12:20:27 »
I do think people should be able to protect themselves but the way our laws are and I think it would be the same regardless of the party in power, if you shoot someone in your house, you will probably go to prison.  I knew someone who stabbed a person in the hand after he saw the person look in his child's bedroom, this father was charged because according to the police and prosecutor, he intruder didn't actually threaten the child or anyone else and you can't use that kind of force to protect your property.  If he would have used a gun, the guy would probably be dead and this father in prison.  I don't know all the details but the case was apparently tossed on a technicality. This was about 12 years ago.

I'm not completely sure, but I think it's if you shoot someone in the back? I could be wrong.

When I first read about the person looking into the child's bedroom I imagined them already being inside the house? Not sure the details, but if the father pointed a Glock in their face, I'm sure they'd run, and then call the cops. Or if they were outside peeking inside the child's bedroom, fire a warning shot, then call the cops.

This could go on forever... I respect your opinion. I know you just want safety for Canadians, as do I.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 373,556
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,565
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1278 on: August 26, 2020, 12:22:55 »
Quote from: stellarpanther
if you shoot someone in your house, you will probably go to prison.

Thankfully that's not accurate. Canada has some pretty robust self defense laws and examples of people not going to prison for self defense. Here's a short clip from a lawyer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB2Z8yreRbY&app=desktop


There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline shawn5o

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 268
  • "We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1279 on: August 26, 2020, 12:24:27 »
Here's an an article ref MP O'Toole's view on firearms. Sensible in my view. Via email


The CSSA Congratulates Erin O'Toole on his victory as the new Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada

Canada is a nation with proud rural and outdoor traditions. Learning to hunt or target shoot with a family member is a way of life for millions of Canadians and must be respected. Firearm owners, be they hunters, farmers or sport shooters are among the most law-abiding citizens in Canada.

An O'Toole-led Opposition will:

Oppose efforts to reverse the former Conservative government’s policy advances on firearms, including the Trudeau government’s new proposals to confiscate legal firearms.

Oppose regulations that do not advance public safety and instead penalize law-abiding firearms owners. This includes the arbitrary reclassification of firearms and magazines.

An O’Toole government will update Canada’s firearms legislation to ensure that it is evidence-based and focuses on keeping Canadians safe, not demonizing those Canadians the Liberals do not like.

The Proposed legislative changes will:

Conduct a review of the Firearms Act with participation of law enforcement, firearms owners, manufacturers, and members of the public, and then update legislation by introducing a simplified classification system and codifying it in law, so that it is clear what types of firearms fit into each category and classification decisions can, therefore, be made quickly, and with the public and firearms owners having confidence that they are not arbitrary. The legislation will also – for the first time – contain definitions of currently ambiguous issues like the term “variant”.

Harmonize rules for discharging firearms on your own property so that restricted firearms are treated the same as non-restricted, where the local municipality allows the discharge of firearms.

Mandate a return to the 180-day period for the re-designed classification system to release firearm import decisions and put final authority for classification decisions back in the hands of Cabinet.

Focus the resources of the federal government on criminals engaged in the trafficking and use of illegal firearms instead of imposing more layers of bureaucracy on law-abiding Canadians.

Amend firearms laws to ensure that no administrative expiry could lead to criminal charges or the seizure of a licence holder’s firearm(s). Until an expired licence is renewed, it would remain illegal for licence holders to acquire new firearms or ammunition.

Support specialized illegal firearms enforcement led by the CBSA and RCMP working closely with American authorities in the United States, to target smuggling operations before illegal firearms reach the border.

Develop a suicide prevention strategy that encourages people – including legal firearms owners – to seek help when they need it. The current system actually discourages firearms owners from seeking help, due to the fear that the police will show up at their door, and the Trudeau government is making this worse, putting lives at risk.

The CSSA believes that Erin O'Toole will be an outstanding leader for Canada, and we strongly encourage our membership to support him in his efforts to bring a Conservative majority government to the House of Commons.
“We can't all be heroes because somebody has to sit on the curb and clap as they go by.” ― Will Rogers

Offline LittleBlackDevil

  • Member
  • ****
  • 7,160
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 219
  • Hostium acie nominati
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1280 on: August 26, 2020, 12:26:35 »
I do think people should be able to protect themselves but the way our laws are and I think it would be the same regardless of the party in power, if you shoot someone in your house, you will probably go to prison.  I knew someone who stabbed a person in the hand after he saw the person look in his child's bedroom, this father was charged because according to the police and prosecutor, he intruder didn't actually threaten the child or anyone else and you can't use that kind of force to protect your property.  If he would have used a gun, the guy would probably be dead and this father in prison.  I don't know all the details but the case was apparently tossed on a technicality. This was about 12 years ago.

In my view, it is actually very unlikely for someone to actually be convicted of defending themselves inside their own home. They will most likely be charged and have to pay a lawyer lots of money and go through the stress of the court process, but they will most likely be acquitted in the end. Just consider a few recent cases where people were acquitted:

R. v. Peter Khill - summary of facts from the Ontario Court of Appeal decision on his case: [6] Mr. Khill and his then girlfriend, now wife, Millie Benko, lived in a single-story house in a rural area near Hamilton, Ontario. Mr. Khill was asleep at about 3:00 a.m. on February 4, 2016 when Ms. Benko woke him up and told him she had heard a loud banging. Mr. Khill listened and heard two loud bangs. He went to the bedroom window. From the window, he could see his 2001 pickup truck parked in the driveway. The dashboard lights were on indicating, to Mr. Khill, that some person or persons were either in the truck or had been in the truck
...
[7] ... Mr. Khill loaded the shotgun he kept in the bedroom and, armed with the shotgun, went to investigate the noises.

[8]         Using techniques he had learned as an army reservist, Mr. Khill stealthily made his way through his house, ending up at the front door of the breezeway connecting the house to the garage.

[10]      Mr. Khill said in a loud voice, “Hey, hands up.” Mr. Styres, who apparently had not seen Mr. Khill, began to rise and turn toward Mr. Khill. As he turned, Mr. Khill fired a shot. He immediately racked the shotgun and fired a second shot. Khill said he thought the deceased had a gun and was reaching for it.

Mr. Khill was acquitted by a jury. I'm not sure that I would have acquitted him ... sneaking up on a guy who's ransacking your truck and shooting him twice when he turns around does not seem like a reasonable use of force. Personally, while I think people should have wide latitude to defend themselves inside their homes, if someone was stealing from my car I'd call police but otherwise let them have whatever is in my car. Neither my life nor the thief's life is worth whatever is in my car.

But the point is he was acquitted. Also there's the case of Gerald Stanley, also acquitted. I could give lots of other examples, but it seems that unless the case is very clearly not one of self defence (like repeatedly striking someone once they're already unconscious, or stabbing someone in retaliation for them saying something offensive) people are most likely to be acquitted. In the case of your friend, I suspect that there was more to the story than what you heard if he was convicted.

Offline LittleBlackDevil

  • Member
  • ****
  • 7,160
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 219
  • Hostium acie nominati
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1281 on: August 26, 2020, 12:29:43 »
Here's an an article ref MP O'Toole's view on firearms. Sensible in my view. Via email

Thanks for posting this.

Mr. O'Toole's firearms policy was the thing that, at the last second, caused me to switch my vote from MacKay to O'Toole. Also, MacKay's stated position that "assault rifles" (i.e. black firearms) should be banned (cf. https://thepostmillennial.com/exclusive-mackay-proposed-ban-on).

Offline Donald H

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 1,900
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 329
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1282 on: August 26, 2020, 12:51:18 »
Here's an an article ref MP O'Toole's view on firearms. Sensible in my view. Via email


The CSSA Congratulates Erin O'Toole on his victory as the new Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada

Canada is a nation with proud rural and outdoor traditions. Learning to hunt or target shoot with a family member is a way of life for millions of Canadians and must be respected. Firearm owners, be they hunters, farmers or sport shooters are among the most law-abiding citizens in Canada.


Is that a quote of O'Toole?

If it is, I would be disappointed if Trudeau was challenged on it's substance and couldn't say the exact same thing.
It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.
~Mark Twain.

Offline Eaglelord17

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 21,315
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 409
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1283 on: August 26, 2020, 13:09:19 »
I do believe the NS shooter's firearms were all illegally obtained as well.  So he simply ignored firearms laws, which is the bog standard thing for a criminal to do... you know, ignore laws.

He didn't just ignore firearms laws, it seems the RCMP in his case did too...

Offline shawn5o

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 268
  • "We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1284 on: August 26, 2020, 13:59:15 »
Is that a quote of O'Toole?

If it is, I would be disappointed if Trudeau was challenged on it's substance and couldn't say the exact same thing.

I can't say for sure Don

But it is from Canadian Shooting Sports Association. The editors may have put their spin on it.
“We can't all be heroes because somebody has to sit on the curb and clap as they go by.” ― Will Rogers

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 85,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,155
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1285 on: August 26, 2020, 14:56:42 »
Is that a quote of O'Toole?

If it is, I would be disappointed if Trudeau was challenged on it's substance and couldn't say the exact same thing.

No, it is not.  It is, however, a statement of fact by the CSSA.  A fact that is routinely ignored by the left in their haste to craft new laws for criminals to thumb their noses at.

A Liberal MP was recently quoted by O'Toole stating "there is no such thing as a 'responsible gun owner' in Canada".  That's the ideology we are up against.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

stellarpanther

  • Guest
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1286 on: August 26, 2020, 16:52:14 »
Thankfully that's not accurate. Canada has some pretty robust self defense laws and examples of people not going to prison for self defense. Here's a short clip from a lawyer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB2Z8yreRbY&app=desktop

You are wrong, what I said is very accurate,  Unless you or your family is being physically threaten there is a very good chance you will be charged if you shoot an intruder even in your house.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/im-glad-he-shot-him-newfoundland-man-up-on-murder-charges-for-shooting-home-invader

Offline LittleBlackDevil

  • Member
  • ****
  • 7,160
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 219
  • Hostium acie nominati
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1287 on: August 26, 2020, 17:08:04 »
You are wrong, what I said is very accurate,  Unless you or your family is being physically threaten there is a very good chance you will be charged if you shoot an intruder even in your house.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/im-glad-he-shot-him-newfoundland-man-up-on-murder-charges-for-shooting-home-invader

To be fair, you didn't say "there is a very good chance you will be charged" you said "you will probably go to prison".

You're pretty much guaranteed to get charged. But you're very likely to be acquitted at trial, and therefore very unlikely to do jail time. Unless you have a prior criminal record, you will most likely get bail pending trial and therefore never go to prison but at most spend a night or two in a police station's overnight holding cells.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 373,556
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,565
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1288 on: August 26, 2020, 17:14:29 »

You are wrong, what I said is very accurate, 

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/im-glad-he-shot-him-newfoundland-man-up-on-murder-charges-for-shooting-home-invader

You said:
if you shoot someone in your house, you will probably go to prison.

You should have picked a better example to prove your point.

The guy in your article had the charges dropped, did't even make it to trial.


Murder charge dropped against Gilbert Budgell, who police say killed home intruder

Crown says couldn't prove it wasn't self defence, no reasonable liklihood of conviction

Gilbert Budgell, a Botwood homeowner who police say shot and killed a man who was invading his home, will not face trial for murder charges.

Crown attorneys have decided not to proceed with a second-degree murder charge against Budgell, citing a low likelihood of securing a conviction.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4351371
There are no wolves on Fenris

stellarpanther

  • Guest
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1289 on: August 26, 2020, 17:25:01 »
To be fair, you didn't say "there is a very good chance you will be charged" you said "you will probably go to prison".

You're pretty much guaranteed to get charged. But you're very likely to be acquitted at trial, and therefore very unlikely to do jail time. Unless you have a prior criminal record, you will most likely get bail pending trial and therefore never go to prison but at most spend a night or two in a police station's overnight holding cells.

You make a good points.  I also noted in your other post on this topic that the shooter, while likely to be acquitted will still be stuck with expensive legal bills. I have no idea what that amount could be but I would assume it could be pretty high for the average person.  Please correct me if I'm wrong but I've heard that sometimes just a charge is enough to ruin a persons life.  I can imagine a murder charge even if acquitted could be tough on a person afterwards.

,

Offline Retired RCN

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,262
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,189
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1290 on: August 26, 2020, 17:38:45 »
You make a good points.  I also noted in your other post on this topic that the shooter, while likely to be acquitted will still be stuck with expensive legal bills. I have no idea what that amount could be but I would assume it could be pretty high for the average person.  Please correct me if I'm wrong but I've heard that sometimes just a charge is enough to ruin a persons life.  I can imagine a murder charge even if acquitted could be tough on a person afterwards.

,

What would you rather have, some legal bills or be dead. I know what I would do. What would you do if you had an armed intruder?
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

stellarpanther

  • Guest
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1291 on: August 26, 2020, 18:02:30 »
What would you rather have, some legal bills or be dead. I know what I would do. What would you do if you had an armed intruder?

I think it's a fair bet to say anyone would rather be alive but I'm just saying the consequences of shooting that person even if not convicted can still be severe.  Having legal bills probably in the tens of thousands of dollars can be enough to ruin someone as well.  I would suggest that unless you or your family's life is threaten let them have what they are stealing and call the police.  I don't own a gun but I can guarantee I would use whatever I could find, such as the bat under my bed to defend my family if they were at risk of being harmed.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 373,556
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,565
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1292 on: August 26, 2020, 18:22:30 »
Quote from: stellarpanther.
I don't own a gun but I can guarantee I would use whatever I could find, such as the bat under my bed to defend my family if they were at risk of being harmed.

Interesting.
You wouldn't use a gun to shoot an animal to save yourself but you would use a bat to bludgeon someone threatening your family.

Would you use an AR15 to protect your family?
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Donald H

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 1,900
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 329
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1293 on: August 26, 2020, 18:46:51 »
I think it's a fair bet to say anyone would rather be alive but I'm just saying the consequences of shooting that person even if not convicted can still be severe.  Having legal bills probably in the tens of thousands of dollars can be enough to ruin someone as well.  I would suggest that unless you or your family's life is threaten let them have what they are stealing and call the police.  I don't own a gun but I can guarantee I would use whatever I could find, such as the bat under my bed to defend my family if they were at risk of being harmed.

You're safer not having a gun in the house for self defense.
https://www.thetrace.org/2020/04/gun-safety-research-coronavirus-gun-sales/

Quote
Having a gun in the home increases the chance for accidental injury, homicide, and suicide, all of which have been shown to outweigh the potential protective benefits of firearms.

This has been a pretty well known fact for a long time.
It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.
~Mark Twain.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 106,800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,592
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1294 on: August 26, 2020, 18:52:13 »
"You're safer not having a gun in the house for self defense."

What that actually means is, statistically most people are not safer, particularly those who are accident- and suicide-prone.  It doesn't mean I'm not.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 373,556
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,565
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1295 on: August 26, 2020, 18:56:24 »
You're safer not having a gun in the house for self defense.
https://www.thetrace.org/2020/04/gun-safety-research-coronavirus-gun-sales/

This has been a pretty well known fact for a long time.

Do you happen to have a Canadian source of research?

There's at least 75,634 of those AR15 rifles in Canada, the ones designed for killing. I'm wondering how many family members are murdered in their homes by these guns every month.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Retired RCN

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,262
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,189
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1296 on: August 26, 2020, 19:17:39 »
Do you happen to have a Canadian source of research?

There's at least 75,634 of those AR15 rifles in Canada, the ones designed for killing. I'm wondering how many family members are murdered in their homes by these guns every month.

End of the day, due to no fault of my own I will more than likely be out thousands of dollars when everything is said and done.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Donald H

  • Banned
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 1,900
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 329
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1297 on: August 26, 2020, 20:16:47 »
Do you happen to have a Canadian source of research?

No. There are relatively few Canadians who are hiding guns under their beds (or wherever) in Canada and so we are short of that kind of information I think. The US tells the story pretty well I think.

Quote
There's at least 75,634 of those AR15 rifles in Canada, the ones designed for killing. I'm wondering how many family members are murdered in their homes by these guns every month.

I haven't the slightest idea but I would assume it's not many. But I don't see any connection on that statistic to what I've said.

It does bring up an interesting question though. Numbers of AR type weapons (meaning black, semi-auto, assault weapon style which would include the FN's and AK's) as opposed to other legitimate hunting rifles, the number of people killed with each would be an interesting statistic. I would highly expect those who own hunting rifles and shotguns would be less likely to kill for any and all reasons.

Or another way of putting it would be, how many murders, suicides, accidental deaths happen with each type of weapon? On an even playing field in which the number of weapons of each type is considered.
It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.
~Mark Twain.

Offline Target Up

    ........pull, patch, and score.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 260,350
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,255
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1298 on: August 26, 2020, 20:26:43 »
I've been unfortunate enough to have more than a couple of friends self terminate themselves. Only one used a firearm, and it was a shotgun. One opened up his forearms with a box cutter, two decided a rope in the garage/basement was the way to go, and one swallowed about a years supply of oxy one afternoon. Almost every one of them owned firearms.
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 373,556
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,565
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #1299 on: August 26, 2020, 21:01:14 »
No. There are relatively few Canadians who are hiding guns under their beds (or wherever) in Canada and so we are short of that kind of information I think. The US tells the story pretty well I think.

Fair enough. When I can go hunting with an AR15 or carry around a concealed pistol I'll be happy to use US data on firearms.

Quote
I haven't the slightest idea but I would assume it's not many. But I don't see any connection on that statistic to what I've said.
I'm cheating a little. I've seen that research referenced a lot before.

The connection is the argument that guns in the house don't make them safer, it makes them (houses) more dangerous (well you know what I mean)
There's 20 million guns in Canadian houses. There doesn't seem to be a correlation in Canada where guns in the home make them less safe.


Quote
It does bring up an interesting question though. Numbers of AR type weapons (meaning black, semi-auto, assault weapon style which would include the FN's and AK's) as opposed to other legitimate hunting rifles, the number of people killed with each would be an interesting statistic. I would highly expect those who own hunting rifles and shotguns would be less likely to kill for any and all reasons.

Why? If my wife cheats on me am I going to be more inclined to murder her if I'm an AR15 owner instead of a shotgun owner?
What makes hunting rifle owners less likely to kill than target rifle owners?

« Last Edit: August 26, 2020, 21:08:59 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris