CANADIAN freedom and right to own a Firearm

[Foxer]

There is "no" reason except one for government to disarm citizens. Control. Its not for the children or "safety" or any other line of bs.

It's the same thing to them. We must be controlled for our safety.

[RangeBob]

We must be controlled for our safety.

These are the arguments I hear most often:

Everyone wants criminals not to have guns. ( or cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition and explosive substance)

So we have weapons prohibition orders, and laws against trafficking and smuggling, and licencing so that gun stores and millions of law abiding firearms owners can/must verify that the buyer isn't a criminal because the government doesn't trust criminals with guns. But I note that prohibition orders make no mention of edged weapons, blunt instruments, etc, so perhaps they're fine?

And we have the registry, because without the registry some gun stores and owners might be occasionally tempted to sell their guns to criminals, thus the registry is there because the government doesn't trust the background checked with guns either.

And we have ATTs, because the government doesn't trust the background checked with where they might have their guns either.

And we have classification (non-restricted, restricted, prohibited, antique, replica, air rifle, toy, deactivated), because the government doesn't trust the background checked with guns that send projectiles down a barrel either, but some of them are too popular and electorate supported to produce serious restrictions on without losing more than an acceptable number of votes.

[Foxer]

These are the arguments I hear most often:

Everyone wants criminals not to have guns. ( or cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition and explosive substance)

So we have weapons prohibition orders, and laws against trafficking and smuggling, and licencing so that gun stores and millions of law abiding firearms owners can/must verify that the buyer isn't a criminal because the government doesn't trust criminals with guns. But I note that prohibition orders make no mention of edged weapons, blunt instruments, etc, so perhaps they're fine?

And we have the registry, because without the registry some gun stores and owners might be occasionally tempted to sell their guns to criminals, thus the registry is there because the government doesn't trust the background checked with guns either.

And we have ATTs, because the government doesn't trust the background checked with where they might have their guns either.

And we have classification (non-restricted, restricted, prohibited, antique, replica, air rifle, toy, deactivated), because the government doesn't trust the background checked with guns that send projectiles down a barrel either, but some of them are too popular and electorate supported to produce serious restrictions on without losing more than an acceptable number of votes.

Those aren't "arguments". Those are mental health issues.