quote:

---

Mayor David Miller wants to close recreational shooting ranges in Toronto, along with giving the city power to block gun manufacturers and wholesalers from opening new plants or warehouses.

"Nobody can deny that hobby directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of our city," Miller said of sport shooting yesterday, amid debate on a possible gun bylaw.

---

I still have it, but haven't fired it in a very long time.

When did Canada stop using them?

[ 28 May 2008: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

Until I see that evidence, I'm going to assume he pulled that directly out of his ass.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
What next? Banning dart boards in Irish pubs?

---

Some of my American relatives are of the "you'll get my gun when you pry my cold dead fingers from it" sort. Another uncle kept a .357 Magnum next to his bed - my brother and I, as children, were playing about his house and happened upon it. I think that's the largest handgun I've seen, unless those Glock 9mm carried by the task force are larger (I filled a prescription for one of those guys, and what the hell; I asked him about his gun).

Anyway, what David's on about is gun ownership in general, and I can see his point. My dad grew up surrounded by guns in the western US, and besides the gun crime there were all sorts of accidents with guns. Just having a larger number of guns in the community, however law-abiding the citizenry, results in gun-related tragedies, criminal or accidental.

One source of guns for gun crime is smuggled guns from the US. Another source, and what David is targeting, is legal guns stolen from collectors. Basically, what he's saying, and it's pretty radical, is we need to consider whether handgun-owning and the shooting of handguns is a legitimate hobby, given that the consequences of gun ownership is gun crime, whether it's perpetrated by the gun owner, or a thief.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Caissa:
The last time I shot a rifle was an FN C1 back in 1983.

---

Now I have never been to the show but a quick look at the sportsman show website provided the simple fact that 450 exhibitors and 125,000 visitors.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:
If Miller's move helps to make the "gun culture" (for lack of a better term) a thing of the past, I'm for it.

---

So am I.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:
If Miller's move helps to make the "gun culture" (for lack of a better term) a thing of the past, I'm for it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:

So am I.

But if Miller's move causes a hotel to lay off staff because a convention is now not staying at the hotel. I am against it.

---

So rather than take a stand on principle, you're giving in to convenience? It's my opinion, having been a member of rod and gun clubs, and having shot at rifle and handgun ranges in northern Ontario, that a lot of these "sportman's shows" agressively promote the gun culture, and as far as I'm concerned, if you can't have a "sportman's show" without guns, then too friggin' bad.

ETA: I decided to get out of the shooting "sport" after I went to sportman's show near North Bay where semi-automatic replicas of military rifles were on sale to anyone with a FAC. What the hell do "sportsmen" need semi-auto assault rifles for???

[ 25 June 2008: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]

Cute comment about how if the gun show helped the economy the gun nuts should be allowed their vice. I think hotels should be banned because they're bourgeoise.

Personally, I don't care if the gun clubs are shut down, or if handguns are banned in Canada. I don't belong to a gun club and won't, either. They're full of fairly predictable characters, although I'd be interested to meet some of the TO gun clubbers. Handguns themselves don't really scare me anymore than any other firearm, other than the fact that they're easier to conceal and have a criminal cachet all their own.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:
So rather than take a stand on principle, you're giving in to convenience?
[ 25 June 2008: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]

---

a stand on principle? this is an attempt by a mayor to change the news to positive in the City of Toronto.

If the mayor wanted to eliminate guns he would be calling for tougher sentencing, calling for the end of time served for those who commit a crime with a gun. He would go after our borders and the illegal guns that cross the border in addition to legal handguns. He should be calling for the immediate implementation of the federal law that was introduced and ignored by martin and harper about labelling on guns.

No this is nothing more than a publicity stunt by the Mayor of Toronto.

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:
If the mayor wanted to eliminate guns he would be calling for tougher sentencing, calling for the end of time served for those who commit a crime with a gun. He would go after our borders and the illegal guns that cross the border in addition to legal handguns. He should be calling for the immediate implementation of the federal law that was introduced and ignored by martin and harper about labelling on guns.

---

In Ontario it has been the McGuinty government has pushed for the other additional points.

Mayor Miller responded to a spate of shootings with a petition calling for the banning of hand guns.

He has been quiet about more cops on the street since he would have to pick up the cost.

He has been careful to not go further.

Miller on tougher gun laws

excerpt:

Mayor David Miller re-iterated the need to toughen up gun laws.

"We know where the guns come from," Miller said. "Half come across the border, sometimes more than half. We need real action on border security.

Leonard's Beach, in the Town of Innisfil, is a 200-hectare wetland that is currently protected from development under provincial rules. Under the province's points rating system, it scores 618. Anything over 600 is off the table for development.

Turns out that Leonard's Beach got 20 points for being an area used for hunting. Now the town wants to pass a by-law banning the use of guns.

Turns out, though, that nobody actually does use the area for hunting, and the sole purpose of passing the bylaw is to lower its rating to 598 points, so that a local developer can build houses on five lots in the buffer zone around the wetland.