Contra Stephen's comment, civilian firearm ownership IS highly restricted already. Canada has all the "common sense" gun laws that Americans talk about, and much beyond.
However, acquiescing to all this has put licensed gun owners in a difficult position. They're often scapegoated for a host of social ills that have little to do with them. There never seems to be a point at which gun laws are good enough; it's a ratchet that tightens indefinitely.
Since politicians have limited ability or desire to address the drug-and-gang-related violence behind the majority of firearm homicides, what they do instead is add regulatory measures that are easy, visible, and popular, regardless of efficacy. Reclassifying particular guns is one of those gimmicks.
It's noteworthy that the government has not even tried to offer a serious cost-benefit analysis of their latest prohibition of certain models. It's obvious why: the policy is a sop that was rushed out to show something was being done after the Portapique massacre (which, incidentally, neither the "assault weapon ban" nor Stephen's more draconian proposal would've prevented).
You'll notice similar stirrings in Canada after US mass shootings, too. This is an even weirder dynamic, since the laws there are quite different and most of the hardware of concern (30-round magazines, bump stocks) was banned here eons ago. Depressing as it is, gun policy is a wedge issue, and playing on Canadians' fears is effective politics.
The evidence regarding gun control is clear. Civilian firearms ownership should be highly restricted. Semi-automatic firearms should be outright banned. Beyond 'toy' value, there's no rational or responsible case for civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms.
Storage of firearms at private residences should be banned, too. Firearms should stored in guarded, public armories where owners can check out their guns and ammunition on an as-needed, time limited, geographic-limited basis.
There may be a case for special dispensations, but for most firearms owners, especially in urban and suburban areas, firearms are 'toys.' No rational, responsible case can be made for a person living in Toronto or Kelowna having a GSG MP40 9mm semi-automatic rifle they can use to kill their family, their neigbour's family, and themselves before someone can call 911.
Most gun deaths in Canada are suicide. Having a firearm in a residence, also, increases the risk of a person murdering their spouse. Firearms should not be stored in private residences or places of business.
By the way, I have a Firearms Licence (Possession - Acquisition) that doesn't expire until 2024.
Contra Stephen's comment, civilian firearm ownership IS highly restricted already. Canada has all the "common sense" gun laws that Americans talk about, and much beyond.
However, acquiescing to all this has put licensed gun owners in a difficult position. They're often scapegoated for a host of social ills that have little to do with them. There never seems to be a point at which gun laws are good enough; it's a ratchet that tightens indefinitely.
Since politicians have limited ability or desire to address the drug-and-gang-related violence behind the majority of firearm homicides, what they do instead is add regulatory measures that are easy, visible, and popular, regardless of efficacy. Reclassifying particular guns is one of those gimmicks.
It's noteworthy that the government has not even tried to offer a serious cost-benefit analysis of their latest prohibition of certain models. It's obvious why: the policy is a sop that was rushed out to show something was being done after the Portapique massacre (which, incidentally, neither the "assault weapon ban" nor Stephen's more draconian proposal would've prevented).
You'll notice similar stirrings in Canada after US mass shootings, too. This is an even weirder dynamic, since the laws there are quite different and most of the hardware of concern (30-round magazines, bump stocks) was banned here eons ago. Depressing as it is, gun policy is a wedge issue, and playing on Canadians' fears is effective politics.
The evidence regarding gun control is clear. Civilian firearms ownership should be highly restricted. Semi-automatic firearms should be outright banned. Beyond 'toy' value, there's no rational or responsible case for civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms.
Storage of firearms at private residences should be banned, too. Firearms should stored in guarded, public armories where owners can check out their guns and ammunition on an as-needed, time limited, geographic-limited basis.
There may be a case for special dispensations, but for most firearms owners, especially in urban and suburban areas, firearms are 'toys.' No rational, responsible case can be made for a person living in Toronto or Kelowna having a GSG MP40 9mm semi-automatic rifle they can use to kill their family, their neigbour's family, and themselves before someone can call 911.
Most gun deaths in Canada are suicide. Having a firearm in a residence, also, increases the risk of a person murdering their spouse. Firearms should not be stored in private residences or places of business.
By the way, I have a Firearms Licence (Possession - Acquisition) that doesn't expire until 2024.