The shootings thread!

[Bonjour43MA]

Originally Posted by Culverin

Gun control works to keep guns away from the average person.
If I ever got crazy angry at somebody, and all I had lying around was a baseball bat, I'd think twice about rounding up the boys to go lay the smack down. It's way too personal.

But if I had a gun handy, all I need is 1 boy to do a drive by.

Also, in the heat of anger in a domestic situation, no gun means less murder.
It works.

Just not to protect us from criminals.

Some false assumptions here.

First of all, what is an "average person"? Why can't an average person own firearms? You imply that only the police and military are the only ones that should have guns, which is a very scary thought because that means the people have no power or the means to defend themselves, if the need arises. Owning guns and doing targeting shooting, is no different than owing cars and driving fast on a race track. With proper training anyone can do it, but with IMPROPER use, anyone could become a murderer.

Also, why do you fear that you would use your guns to hurt someone if they somehow looked at you funny. No gun owners I know behave or think that way and many of them have owned guns for 10, 20, 30 years. Their wives, kids, and grand-kids certainly don't agree with you on that. Guns do not automatically make someone go crazy and do crazy things - crazy people USE guns to do crazy things. There is a big difference there.

Then, you mentioned that no guns in domestic disputes = safer. Again you're implying that gun owners are more likely to commit murder in domestic disputes, than say, kitchen knife owners, or baseball bat owners. Hate to tell you but that is completely false. As an example, the Ontario Office of the Chief Corner did a report on Domestic deaths in the year 2008 for the province of Ontario:

http://www.crvawc.ca/documents/DVDRC...28FINAL%29.pdf

and found that 27% of deaths of women were caused by stabbing, 60% were "others" (choking, hitting, etc), and 13% were by gun shot wounds (table 9, page 13 of 51 in the PDF). Meaning, women are twice as likely to die from knives (of any kind) in domestic disputes, than by guns. If you look at the 5-year number, deaths by gunshot wounds is nowhere near as common as stabbing deaths. Check out Table 4 on page 11 of 51 for another stat for the years 2002~2007, where 34% were stabbing deaths, a combined 45% for stragulation/other, and 21% shooting deaths.

In the heat of the moment, ANYTHING can be used as a weapon to hurt the other person. Your statement of "guns at home = more deaths during dispute" is completely false, and is supported only by perception generated by the media (anytime a gun is mentioned, it's bad news), and not by facts. I can google more official government stats for your viewing but you will only see more of the same numbers.

Lastly, I do agree with you that gun control doesn't work to protect us from criminals, and the ironic thing is that IF you had the ability to carry firearms with you, the likelihood of you being a victim can be lessened. Handgun ban lifted in Washington and Chicago = crime rate went down. Prior to the ban being lifted? Both had some of the highest violent crime rates in the USA.

Look, I'm not trying to tell people that they're wrong about how they think of guns and gun owners, but sometimes it's hard to argue with facts when they are so blatantly obvious that objects should NEVER be the center of attention in tragedies like the recent shootings.

[2damaxmr2]

Buddy these people won't listen. There is no point on arguing with them.

[Bonjour43MA]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

.......hand guns are used only for killing, thats pretty cut and dry, therefor by having a handgun, let alone one that is not registered, you clearly have intent to do harm upon others, yet you are punished with little to nothing?

I agree with everything you've said except this last little bit. Hand guns are NOT used for killing, at least not for legal licensed owners - you are looking at this as if all hand gun owners have the intent to go out and kill someone at some point. Last I checked there are at least 500,000 handguns in Canada, legally owned. I don't think we've had 500,000 homicides that I know of...

Hand guns are used legally for targeting shooting, competition shooting, and (very rarely, in Canada anyway) for self-defense. Those are legitimate reasons for someone to want to own one. Simply lumping all hand gun owners together with criminals is just as bad as making generalization of a certain race of people based on assumptions and propaganda.

Originally Posted by 2damaxmr2

Buddy these people won't listen. There is no point on arguing with them.

Well I don't know about you, but I'm not arguing with anybody. I'm simply presenting facts and common sense that I hope will show people that these tragic events COULD be prevented not by taking away the tool used, but to focus on the social and human issues instead.

[Harvey Specter]

Strict gun laws don't protect us from criminals. Criminals and people who want to carry out some sort of shooting will always find a way to buy a gun, period.

And I was watching the interview with the family, it was absolutely heartbreaking when the father said the suspect should have killed him instead. The victims dad did mention something about her ex-bf and his daughter getting into an altercation at a coffee shop. It's still beyond me how a guy can get that hung up about a girl, get a gun and kill her. Hopefully the guy has done the right thing and shot himself in the head.

[2damaxmr2]

Sigh...

[Bonjour43MA]

Originally Posted by Jah Dean

Strict gun laws don't protect us from criminals. Criminals and people who want to carry out some sort of shooting will always find a way to buy a gun, period.

And I was watching the interview with the family, it was absolutely heartbreaking when the father said the suspect should have killed him instead. The victims dad did mention something about her ex-bf and his daughter getting into an altercation at a coffee shop. It's still beyond me how a guy can get that hung up about a girl, get a gun and kill her. Hopefully the guy has done the right thing and shot himself in the head.

If the information was correct, then that guy had premeditated intention to kill, which I hope means a much stiffer sentence.

I was acutally quite surprised at how relationships can lead to some pretty serious crimes committed to women, when reading up some stats on domestic disputes just a little earlier. 90% of the time it's the guys that are hung up on the chicks and either can't get over them, or refuse to accept that the relationship had ended.

[Harvey Specter]

^
I have a few girl friends who have been stalked and I've heard some scary stories. One of my friends was actually stabbed by her ex-bf and he didn't serve any jail time because he claimed it was self defense.

And what can women do? Restraint orders don't do enough and the police don't have the time nor the resources to follow up on every single stalking case. Most of the time they keep a file, if the person keeps harassing they usually visit the person and talk to them. Rarely do you see criminal charges in stalking cases until something bad happens.

[scottsman]

Somebodys been reading too many articles written by Kim Bolan.

She had the nerve to bring up the khun-khun murder and write about it for a paragraph or two in the article about the SFU student. How was that girl's murder even relevant to a gang shooting. Pissed me off, but it seems like she's revised and edited that out of her article.

Not sure what article you are referring to and perhaps you missed my point. I was questioning why someone is saying he is scared because 3 unrelated incidents with guns have taken place in the last few days, 2 of which were specifically targeted.

[gars]

Originally Posted by Bonjour43MA

Also, why do you fear that you would use your guns to hurt someone if they somehow looked at you funny. No gun owners I know behave or think that way and many of them have owned guns for 10, 20, 30 years. Their wives, kids, and grand-kids certainly don't agree with you on that. Guns do not automatically make someone go crazy and do crazy things - crazy people USE guns to do crazy things. There is a big difference there.

I don't disagree with you in that gun control does not prevent criminals from having guns.

But I don't believe that our regulations should change (though I'm not sure what good the long gun registry is good for - I need to do more research until I can form an opinion).

I know plenty of gun owners as well, and I agree with you - that they are safely trained and are no threat to society.

However - I don't believe civilians should be allowed to purchase guns for self protection. I think a concealed weapon permit is one of the worst things you can have in a society - especially a post 9/11 society with so much paranoia. This is probably one of the biggest differences between Canada and the USA - is that while many people in the states might be buying because they enjoy the sport of target shooting and hunting - quite a few are buying and carrying out of fear. Improperly trained person who is scared and has a pistol is a baaaad combination.

[Bonjour43MA]

^^^ I believe in sensible gun laws that do not punish licensed owners for paper-offenses (did you know that you could go to jail if you did not renew your license on time and let it expired? or, if you do not carry a piece of paper (authorization to transport) with you when you goto the range, you could have all of your gun seized and never returned?), and do not cherry-pick on limiting certain types of guns because they are somehow more dangerous (a pistol with a 4" barrel is prohibited, but one that is 4.12" is not?!?!?!).

Our licensing system is decent - mandatory 28 day wait period, police background check, reference check, mental health check, and mandatory safety exams. It does its best to weed out the crazies. I'm still somewhat on the fence with registration, though. I know most people don't like it and think that it's a waste of money, but I think there is some value in keeping track of the ownership of firearms, just as we do with cars. How useful is that information in preventing crime? Not much, really. Just the same as having a license plate on your car doesn't necessary prevent you from driving it impaired and hitting a pedestrian. But I do believe that having firearms registered brings upon an additional layer of accountability to gun owners, to make sure that they know who has access to their guns.

As for owning a gun for self-protection, I think that at the bare minimum, one should have the right to defend his/her life (or the lives of his/her family), when an intruder breaks into your house uninvited. Some form of "castle law" should replace the nonsense we have now (equal force) so that the home owners should not fear of being prosecuted if there ever was a need to use lethal force. Concealed carry is something we probably won't see in Canada anytime soon, as I think most Canadian feel relatively safe in their neighborhoods and don't feel a need to have lethal force on them while say, walking their dogs.

[StylinRed]

stfu with your gun control arguments you guys always find every opportunity to get on your soapbox

this thread is for shootings that happen locally

jesus

[van_driver]

Originally Posted by Mr.Money

so a pretty girl got shot from her insane boyfriend killer?...


fucked up...

Yeah, they just broke up a few days ago apparently

she was in the final top 10 for a modelling contest going on in the mall where the SFU is, now they have had to postpone it because of this.

The ex boyfriend is screwed for life because of a bad relationship.

RIP

[7seven]

Pretty sad seeing the dad on tv last night

SURREY (NEWS1130) - The shooting death of 19-year-old Maple Batalia outside SFU's Surrey campus early yesterday is a case still riddled with questions.

Police have not named a suspect, but there's a lot of talk about Batalia's ex-boyfriend and a restraining order.

Reports that the 19-year-old model and nursing student had recently obtained a no-contact order against an ex-boyfriend is an aspect of this story police won't talk about. Batalia's family has described a troubled past relationship the young woman had been trying to move beyond.

Police will only say they are pursuing some theories; they've dedicated 25 officers to this case.

They have neither identified a motive for the death nor publicly named anyone as a person of interest. Mounties also won't say with any certainty whether this was, in fact, a targeted attack.

A memorial page has been set up on Facebook.

[Death2Theft]

Using domestic dispute stats from say texas would be alot more realistic, where more people actually own guns.

Originally Posted by Bonjour43MA

Some false assumptions here.
Then, you mentioned that no guns in domestic disputes = safer. Again you're implying that gun owners are more likely to commit murder in domestic disputes, than say, kitchen knife owners, or baseball bat owners. Hate to tell you but that is completely false. As an example, the Ontario Office of the Chief Corner did a report on Domestic deaths in the year 2008 for the province of Ontario:

http://www.crvawc.ca/documents/DVDRC...28FINAL%29.pdf

and found that 27% of deaths of women were caused by stabbing, 60% were "others" (choking, hitting, etc), and 13% were by gun shot wounds (table 9, page 13 of 51 in the PDF). Meaning, women are twice as likely to die from knives (of any kind) in domestic disputes, than by guns. If you look at the 5-year number, deaths by gunshot wounds is nowhere near as common as stabbing deaths. Check out Table 4 on page 11 of 51 for another stat for the years 2002~2007, where 34% were stabbing deaths, a combined 45% for stragulation/other, and 21% shooting deaths.

In the heat of the moment, ANYTHING can be used as a weapon to hurt the other person. Your statement of "guns at home = more deaths during dispute" is completely false, and is supported only by perception generated by the media (anytime a gun is mentioned, it's bad news), and not by facts. I can google more official government stats for your viewing but you will only see more of the same numbers.

Lastly, I do agree with you that gun control doesn't work to protect us from criminals, and the ironic thing is that IF you had the ability to carry firearms with you, the likelihood of you being a victim can be lessened. Handgun ban lifted in Washington and Chicago = crime rate went down. Prior to the ban being lifted? Both had some of the highest violent crime rates in the USA.

Look, I'm not trying to tell people that they're wrong about how they think of guns and gun owners, but sometimes it's hard to argue with facts when they are so blatantly obvious that objects should NEVER be the center of attention in tragedies like the recent shootings.

[Hondaracer]

Originally Posted by Bonjour43MA

I agree with everything you've said except this last little bit. Hand guns are NOT used for killing, at least not for legal licensed owners - you are looking at this as if all hand gun owners have the intent to go out and kill someone at some point. Last I checked there are at least 500,000 handguns in Canada, legally owned. I don't think we've had 500,000 homicides that I know of...

Hand guns are used legally for targeting shooting, competition shooting, and (very rarely, in Canada anyway) for self-defense. Those are legitimate reasons for someone to want to own one. Simply lumping all hand gun owners together with criminals is just as bad as making generalization of a certain race of people based on assumptions and propaganda.



Well I don't know about you, but I'm not arguing with anybody. I'm simply presenting facts and common sense that I hope will show people that these tragic events COULD be prevented not by taking away the tool used, but to focus on the social and human issues instead.

Yea I was tired when I wrote that, I should have said the people who have unregistered/unliscenced hand guns have intent other than target practice most of the time, even if it's just to "look cool" a person like that has no business having a hand gun

And Jah, I disagree that stricter gun laws wouldn't be a deterant, of course the people who really want somone killed will get their hands on a gun and somone offered 50k who has nothing will shoot someone, but the little punks who carry guns around etc who might make up 5-10% of the shootings would be taken out of the picture if you got an automatic 5 years for having any unregistered handgun on you

Posted via RS Mobile

[Supafly]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

if you got an automatic 5 years for having any unregistered handgun on you

Posted via RS Mobile

If you are caught with an unregistered firearm....you automatically get slapped with a few charges...( truth)

its something like 5 yrs to start.....with a loaded firearm and intent to do bodily harm.

[Hondaracer]

Well the thing is if they take out long gun registry the only registered guns will be restricted and hand

And like I posted above, if there are severe penalties they definitely aren't enforced
Posted via RS Mobile

[StylinRed]

Originally Posted by dbaz

if south side of metro probably a meth lab. a couple of those ghetto houses are meth labs/ brothels

north side

but yeah the apartments in that area are

[Bonjour43MA]

Originally Posted by StylinRed

stfu with your gun control arguments you guys always find every opportunity to get on your soapbox

this thread is for shootings that happen locally

jesus

This thread is the perfect place to raise awareness about gun laws and gun control issues in this country, which Vancouver is a part of, is it not? Why do you think there are shootings going on? Is it not related to how people got their hands on guns?

You don't have to participate if you don't want to, but telling others to shut up because you can't bother reading something meaningful, not just "OH SHIIEET SOMEONE GOT SHOT!!!! SO SAD!!! RIP!!!! PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!!!", is not really my problem.

[BrRsn]

This debated is fundamentally flawed on the basic notion that if there is a demand for something, someone will fill the demand.


Look at all the illegal drugs that people use, they're illegal, they (in an ideal society) shouldn't even be available to people, yet they are.

[Phozy]

^That's how the world works. Put a prohibition or law/ someone will make say "Challenge Accepted", just to fuck with it.
Make something unavailable, someone will find a way to make it available. The nature of people is much stronger than trying to control us by laws.

Anyhow, sad to hear the girl died..

[MTV Cribs]

Shooting in Surrey again. This time in the Whalley area.
Posted via RS Mobile

[StylinRed]

Originally Posted by MTV Cribs

Shooting in Surrey again. This time in the Whalley area.
Posted via RS Mobile

same area then they're like always in whalley

whalley=dtes for surrey

Originally Posted by news1130twitter

We're hearing shots have been fired near 132nd Avenue and Old Yale Road in Whalley.

[mb_]

That's like a block away from where the SFU shooting happened....... wtf

[StylinRed]

^^^ ITS WHALLEY :P