Trudeau Puts Freeze On Handguns

Ha, totally missed your last line and the sarcasm! Well things have changed in twenty years I guess...
All good and full disclosure I'm all for reduced price for those who need it. My wife qualified when she was a single mom but she never would do it. Pride is a rare thing to come by these days, had to admire that.
 
Here’s what joe wants to do here.

  • Raise the age for purchasing a semiautomatic centerfire rifle from 18 to 21 years old
  • Make it illegal to import, sell, manufacture, transfer or possess a large-capacity magazine, with some exceptions
  • Establish requirements regulating the storage of firearms on residential facilities
  • Build on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' regulatory

  • ban on bump stocks,

  • attachments to guns that make rapid-fire easier. Existing bump stocks would have to be registered, and sale and possession by civilians of bump stocks would be banned.
  • Current federal firearms regulations would apply to so-called "ghost guns."
I don’t see any compromising. It’s just gun owners losing.
You have to be 21 to buy a handgun, what’s the difference?

Mags… on the fence on that one.

Ghost guns and bump stocks? Seriously you support those loop holes? Why? and how and am I losing. I can go buy a handgun today if I want, it’s only an issue for criminals? I can also file the necessary paperwork and buy a fully auto weapon… I don’t understand people complaining about not enforcing current laws and then actively advocating for undermining current laws.

All that being said interesting chart of whether any of it matters. Though hard to say as there are so many variables between states.

484335F3-D975-4372-A48B-E88D7BF8F1E6.jpeg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All that being said interesting chart of whether any of it matters. Though hard to say as there are so many variables between states.
Link to the screen pic? Google seems lost trying to ID the pic. And... if Google's lost, I'm in the pre web dark days! :)
 
Can we get a citation on that? Sounds just a bit suspect...
I’m gonna break all the rules of the internet and claim it was apparently wrong and passed on a rumor from a source I thought was reliable. I was gonna hide in shame but CNN just offered me a job. 🤣

 
I bet increased class size and school shootings are highly correlated.

Why do folks think this is a good idea and then vote against every bond and mill levy to raise funds for more teachers.

How about we fund public education in general.


I agree, quit sending foreign aid to other countries and fund our schools.

It boils down to how the bond issue money is spent. My kids go to a school where class size is ~12 kids per classroom, 35 in a total grade and dropping. The school wants to pass a $29,000,000 bond to add on and build a new gym. I went to the same school, when I was there we had 25-30 kids per classroom with 60 in my class while I went there. They passed a $15,000,000 bond then to add on and revamp 2 old school buildings. They mothballed 1 after 3 years and sold it a few years ago for $100,000 after spending $5,000,000 on it.

Good safe schools are a priority, but just throwing cash at it doesn’t always fix problems
 
I bet increased class size and school shootings are highly correlated.

Why do folks think this is a good idea and then vote against every bond and mill levy to raise funds for more teachers.

How about we fund public education in general.


You like charts. Do you have one on dollars per pupil and academic outcomes?
 
I agree, quit sending foreign aid to other countries and fund our schools.

It boils down to how the bond issue money is spent.

I disagree with this argument. I believe you personally may feel this way, but how this plays out is people complain about Ukraine spending or whatever use education or some other "good" expenditure as an alternative and then when that expenditure comes up later they shoot it down.

So the funding cut from "Ukraine" doesn't go to schools, it goes to a tax cut for earners over 500k. Any comment otherwise is simply BS.

When your legislatures posture against spending for XYZ that's their end game, more money in the pockets of wealthy donners.

You and I probably could hammer out an agreement on spending, but that's not what happens.
 
You like charts. Do you have one on dollars per pupil and academic outcomes?
The problem with academic outcomes is the methodology used to determine outcomes. Historically we have done this by making 6 year olds sit for long tests. These tests have been proven time and again to be woefully poor at measuring anything. Even the SAT/LSAT etc have been proven to basically have no value in determining someone's performance.

The MCAT kinda works simply because it shows you can take a test well and in Medicine you have to take a test every couple of years as part of your job.

Further spending, woof, I 100% believe teacher ratios of 1 to 10 have a dramatically effect on outcome versus 1 to 30.

If not the case why do people with means send their kids to private school, why do private schools place kids into better colleges, and better jobs.

Andover/ Hotchkiss/ Deerfield/ whatever don't have 1 to 30 ratios.

So yeah building gyms doesn't have a positive correlation with Math scores on state standardized tests. Shocker.

Also @MTGomer, I realize the following isn’t your point, but @Stocker here is the issue… “Ukraine sucks let’s spend it on schools, but oh spending on schools is a waste…”

So tax refunds to the wealthy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I disagree with this argument. I believe you personally may feel this way, but how this plays out is people complain about Ukraine spending or whatever use education or some other "good" expenditure as an alternative and then when that expenditure comes up later they shoot it down.

So the funding cut from "Ukraine" doesn't go to schools, it goes to a tax cut for earners over 500k. Any comment otherwise is simply BS.

When your legislatures posture against spending for XYZ that's their end game, more money in the pockets of wealthy donners.

You and I probably could hammer out an agreement on spending, but that's not what happens.

Oh I don’t disagree with you at all that the money is “stolen”. Foreign aid is just taking money from the middle/lower class in this country and giving to the rich in other countries then it gets filtered back to our politicians.
 
The police let the shooting in Uvalde happen. The school police are no longer cooperating with the investigation and the school district police chief, who made the order not to go in, lied about it then stopped talking, was just sworn in as a city council member yesterday. You couldn't make this up if you tried.

If the government won't protect it's people, in particular, the children, why should the citizens subject themselves to any type of gun control?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KB_
This is quite path followed on a post about Canadian PM Trudeau and handguns. Maybe start a different thread on whatever tangent folks want to debate rather that pollute this one with the random topics posted here.

Thanks for keeping it civil. Some forums cannot have civility while debating difficult issues.
 
You have to be 21 to buy a handgun, what’s the difference?

Mags… on the fence on that one.

Ghost guns and bump stocks? Seriously you support those loop holes? Why? and how and am I losing. I can go buy a handgun today if I want, it’s only an issue for criminals? I can also file the necessary paperwork and buy a fully auto weapon… I don’t understand people complaining about not enforcing current laws and then actively advocating for undermining current laws.

All that being said interesting chart of whether any of it matters. Though hard to say as there are so many variables between states.

View attachment 224376
I’m some what indifferent on having to be 21 by a semi automatic weapon.. I think it’ll change absolutely zero but if it makes you feel better fine give me something in return and let’s get her done. It’s called compromise.
Mags, absolutely a nonstarter. Not only will this affect rifles but pistols as well. This would also be impossible to enforce.
Ghost guns and bump stocks, I think they’re both hokey and don’t see the point in them. It’s low hanging fruit, and again I’m willing to compromise and fully support banning those things if I’m getting something in return.
 
I’m some what indifferent on having to be 21 by a semi automatic weapon.. I think it’ll change absolutely zero but if it makes you feel better fine give me something in return and let’s get her done. It’s called compromise.
Hey I'm with you, in MA I can buy a Springfield XD in 9mm or .45acp but not .40sw, why you may ask? Well in addition to magazine restrictions MA also requires all manufactures to get their guns "safety approved", meaning they send the MA firearms bureau like 100 guns + pay a bunch of money per model and the state "throws them downstairs" to make sure they won't fire. A manufacture has to do this for each caliber in each model of gun, so Springfield just does it's XD service weapon series and concealed carry series in their most popular caliber... because you know the safety mechanism is totally different between the .40 and the 9mm :rolleyes:.

Has this rule saved 1 life no... absolutely not... but also whatever.

Personally I'd love for the NRA to bargain ghost guns & bump stocks for 100% legal over the counter, no checks, suppressor sales.

...but I'm also not going to pretend like bump stocks and ghost guns are some how vital to my 2A rights.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Forum statistics

Threads
111,159
Messages
1,949,443
Members
35,063
Latest member
theghostbull
Back
Top