Canadian police: 10 dead, 15 injured from stabbings

Not yet, apparently:

 

I'll bet you complain that the lefties turn every thread into a Trump thread. This isn't a gun thread, but act like the lefties you hate. I enjoy seeing it.

 

There's no such thing as 'instantly'. They 'act', you have to 'react' and that means there is always a delay between recognizing a threat and responding to it. Always.

 

You might have a point about urban areas, but these killings were mostly on a First Nations Reserve and on a very small town. Canada restricts handguns, not shotguns and rifles. The used to have a long gun registry, but dropped it when so few people were murdered with long guns that it made no sense.

These people could have been armed, but apparently weren't.

 

Firstly someone did bring up the idea that (planned) ambushes were required. And having a gun may be better, assuming you can get shots off. More often than not people probably will but they are going to get cut/stabbed. To be clear there any number of possible scenarios where having a firearm to defend yourself would be better than not having a firearm. The issue was that (absent full knowledge) this particular tragedy was probably not one of those scenarios.

And the point I was refuting was the claim made early on in this thread that 'If the victims had been carrying firearms this could have been prevented'. i.e. that 'gun beats knife' and therefore if I have a gun I can defend/protect myself'. Gun doesn't automatically beat knife and there's no guarantee you can protect yourself in scenarios involving a surprise attack even if you are carry one. As for 'ridiculous' bit? the reactionary gap is a reality, it effects all of us including you and even training and the maintenance a heightened state of situational awareness (not physically possible to do constantly) only ameliorates the problem. It doesn't solve it.

And finally I never suggested any such thing. I 'suggested' that anyone who believes carrying a gun will automatically 'protect' them' in scenarios like the one that has recently unfolded in Canada is fooling themselves. That's only in the movies, real life is vastly different.

 

no it hasn't. it hasn't worked in Mexico or south africa and it won't work in a country with 400 million guns and thousands of miles of unguarded borders. It doesn't even work in that pathetic little island where the government doesn't trust the people

 

not having a gun almost always guarantees someone who wants to harm you will be more successful than if you are packing. I know, I shot a mugger. In reality, me shooting him saved his life

 

Good video. Illustrates the key point I was trying to get across to people who might have thought a firearm would have automatically 'solved' the scenario that unfolded in Canada. Possibly if one of the civilians involved was very well trained and lucky or the attackers were really sloppy. Otherwise?

Couple of points. Side stepping out of the line of attack while using the non master arm and clenched fist to deflect/deter a strike (don't was those pinkies sliced off). Also dropping to the floor and using one leg to kick out at the attacker while sliding as needed to keep that leg and your lower body between you and the assailant until you've drawn and acquired the target (and FGS don't shoot yourself in the foot!)

Lastly both experts acknowledged now hard/impractical it would be in real life to deal with a close range attack using a concealed blade (as opposed to the 7 meter 'charge' in the demo). Point being I very much doubt the two assailants in Canada were signalling their intentions from long distance and then running at their victims screaming. And yes people can learn the techniques but the issue remains they need regularly practiced and maintained while also maintaining the situational awareness needed to apply them effectively. And in all honestly the latter is far, far harder to do than the former. As I said how many people can manage that 24/7 in real life. Answer no-one.

 

Wrong.

"Canadians have a right to defend their property or themselves as long as their defensive actions are reasonable under the circumstances. This means that if you injure an intruder entering your home or property, you would need to show that the circumstances gave you no other reasonable choice. Essentially, you can use whatever force is needed to prevent someone from unlawfully entering your house or from hurting you, but not more. The use of lethal force would generally only be appropriate in a situation where you had cause to perceive a threat to your life or of severe bodily harm, and had no other reasonable options for defending yourself."​

https://www.kruselaw.ca/library/using-reasonable-force-to-defend-myself-or-my-property-kruse-law.cfm

 

Handguns, yes. Rifles and shotguns are allowed.

 

It would eventually cut down on interruptions.

 

Guns are not illegal in South Africa. Where guns are illegal, 10 years, problem solved

 

Guns have nothing to do with knives. And threads are about needles. Take a deep breath and relax.

 

Mass knife attacks are rare. Mass gun attacks are common.
There's false equivalence here.
A knife is for cutting but can be use to stab.
A gun is designed to kill.
If Americans are fine with 120,000 shot a year, and having schools shot up all the time then make hand guns compulsory for anyone over five years of age.

 

You know what makes me angrier than the stabbings - the report that the Prime minister calls attacks “horrific and heartbreaking.” Such reports really grate my nerves. "The President expressed concern." "Authorities rejected the claim". "Official sources say .."

 

Oh dear! The pro-gunners are not going to like this. Turns out that hand guns are not banned in Saskatchewan

Sask. residents argue both sides of gun legislation debate
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...sQFnoECA4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1aNel5MUV_NKCNq_WbH46G

Their hands are tied': Why Sask. municipalities can't ban handguns
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...QQFnoECBwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1Zn7q5wQJPzXrS34VdTI4S

Scott Moe criticizes legislation that would put a national freeze on the sale of handguns
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...sQFnoECBAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1Mul2_DdYTjoh2DZYbfNVy

 

Canadians have mass knife killings and think knives are ok. Only guns should be banned. I bet the dead killed by knives in Canada would disagree.
BAN KNIVES!!!

 

Oh, Christ! What a stupid argument. ANYTHING can be used as a weapon to kill someone ..... and you think that's the point. Duh!

 

Semi-automatic rifles have been banned.

 

No, false equivalence. Cars kill too. If we are going ban anything that kills then we could even ban screw drivers and ladders.
But guns are different - t.h.e.y...a.r.e...d.e.s.i.g.n.e.d...t.o...k.i.l.l............ and they do a good job of it. Look how easy it is to mow people down.

 

but more people are killed with cars than guns, they’re much more efficient at “mowing” people down.

 

you are just making that up-Try Mexico and get back to me. Look, if you want to live in a nation where your masters treat you as an incompetent child, so be it

 

what a pathetic argument

cars-not designed to kill
guns (according to the anti gun left) designed to kill

yet cars kill more-and almost never with a premeditated intent

what is more dangerous?

 

Guns are legal in SA btw...