An Interesting Email Indeed....

[rtm]

I agree with this. I think they're trying to study something that they know absolutely nothing about and haven't conducted a seconds worth of their own research. I read that in the tone of someone who has never spent more than an hour under the sun and thinks they're actually going to make a difference in the world.

The reason why the left is ascendant and has continually gained ground on issue after issue for several decades running is because they play to win. From ever-expanding gun control measures to metastasizing restrictions for simple building permits to regulating unfavorable industries out of existence to banning everything from plastic bags and straws to internal combustion engines and natural gas stoves, progressives have captured our institutions and perfected the process of funding bogus academic studies that then become pilot programs that then become the latest cause du jour for activists and “policy experts” before finally being mandated for all by force of law.

This is not an innocent questionnaire. These people are not your friends, and they are not interested in the dispassionate search for truth. They are ideological zealots who are simply looking to manufacture “evidence” that will conveniently support their pre-existing conclusions and policy prescriptions (which will inevitably increase government control while further diminishing the horizons of freedom in this once great country).

Aren’t you sick of losing? At what point does one accept that the approach we’ve been taking doesn’t work and that it’s time to stop ceding ground??? If we want any hope of preserving our rights as Canadians, we have to get much better at identifying threats and fighting back. (edit: “fighting back” using exclusively legal and non-violent means such as raising our voices and adopting the left’s “rules for radicals” when dealing with our opponents e.g. pick your target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. At the very least, we must avoid aiding and abetting our enemies when they are clearly making moves against us and our interests)

 

[bcbravo2zero]

It could be a psychological study into how people react to being treated as criminals. The people posting here are the unwitting guinea pigs.
Psychological experiments are never about what they say they are about.

LOL! Nonsense.
So much paranoia…

 

[bogusiii]

To be fair, we all have knowledge about illegal firearms, knowledge gained from reading newspapers, listening to police chiefs and looking at statistics. Nothing first hand of course, but all those sources tell me exactly where the problem of illegal is: smuggled guns. Why a researcher would need to research further than that is mind boggling.

 

[furet]

- Pick a topic (it's in the news so no point in actually searching for a usefull topic)
- Ask a few questions (like what ever!!)
- Interpret a few answer (which ever ones fit the preconceived story line)
- write about it (as I perceive it, add a comment about Trump)
- hand in research (napkin works, but 2 paragraphs of 50 words or less is better)
- Publish it (twitter, instagram...)
- get Nobel prize

 

[bcbravo2zero]

To be fair, we all have knowledge about illegal firearms, knowledge gained from reading newspapers, listening to police chiefs and looking at statistics. Nothing first hand of course, but all those sources tell me exactly where the problem of illegal is: smuggled guns. Why a researcher would need to research further than that is mind boggling.

Yep, no more research! We know everything now. Nothing more to learn. And presume those who do this research are bad guys trying to trick us! Always.

And if you find a basic page on a uni website act like you’ve had an “a-ha!” moment. When you get thru these papers, move on to the CV’s of the 8 PhD students doing work in the Douglas Lab. You’ll have a better idea of their motivations.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kevin-Douglas-5

Funding grants are also posted and publicly available.

Good luck!

 

[furet]

When you read those publications it is enough to want to jump off a bridge...
What is the forensic correlation between stubbing your big toe on a chair and wanting to eat pizza... now what if the chair is blue, does that mean you want a different toping on your pizza or does it make you want to throw the chair across the room then again if it is light blue you may simply say ouch??
Next once the above imperical data has been established (and all grant funds spent), lets compare to a full moon vs a 1/16 moon...

How about you stop looking at your damn phone when you're walking and pay attention...
Sit down on the chair, order the pizza on your phone and enjoy!

 

[bogusiii]

Yep, no more research! We know everything now. Nothing more to learn. And presume those who do this research are bad guys trying to trick us! Always.

And if you find a basic page on a uni website act like you’ve had an “a-ha!” moment. When you get thru these papers, move on to the CV’s of the 8 PhD students doing work in the Douglas Lab. You’ll have a better idea of their motivations.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kevin-Douglas-5

Funding grants are also posted and publicly available.

Good luck!

That's a little presumptuous, testy even. How about researching known sources before looking for a 'hint-hint-wink-wink' crack at legal gun owners? The question itself implies guilt or at least a link between legal gun owners and illegal guns. Maybe research that link first before the loaded question, no?

 

[Thunderhog]

The reason why the left is ascendant and has continually gained ground on issue after issue for several decades running is because they play to win. From ever-expanding gun control measures to metastasizing restrictions for simple building permits to regulating unfavorable industries out of existence to banning everything from plastic bags and straws to internal combustion engines and natural gas stoves, progressives have captured our institutions and perfected the process of funding bogus academic studies that then become pilot programs that then become the latest cause du jour for activists and “policy experts” before finally being mandated for all by force of law.

This is not an innocent questionnaire. These people are not your friends, and they are not interested in the dispassionate search for truth. They are ideological zealots who are simply looking to manufacture “evidence” that will conveniently support their pre-existing conclusions and policy prescriptions (which will inevitably increase government control while further diminishing the horizons of freedom in this once great country).

Aren’t you sick of losing? At what point does one accept that the approach we’ve been taking doesn’t work and that it’s time to stop ceding ground??? If we want any hope of preserving our rights as Canadians, we have to get much better at identifying threats and fighting back. (edit: “fighting back” using exclusively legal and non-violent means such as raising our voices and adopting the left’s “rules for radicals” when dealing with our opponents e.g. pick your target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. At the very least, we must avoid aiding and abetting our enemies when they are clearly making moves against us and our interests)

Well said RTM!.....

 

[bcbravo2zero]

That's a little presumptuous, testy even. How about researching known sources before looking for a 'hint-hint-wink-wink' crack at legal gun owners? The question itself implies guilt or at least a link between legal gun owners and illegal guns. Maybe research that link first before the loaded question, no?

Oh boy…
You’re operating under a fundamental misunderstanding about scientific/social scientific research…like many here…see above for toes, blue chairs and pizza b/c that is totally what it’s all about.
Years ago, George W Bush m0r0ns were outraged and very vocal about a large research grant to study canary songs and how they change. Stupid university eggheads! Except that the songs changing are the result of neural regeneration, the understanding of which could lead to treatments for brain and spinal injuries in humans.
But, anyway, I’m sure the PhD’s appreciate the advice on research methodology.
And no, the question does not imply guilt. It assumes that they might have some knowledge.

It appears that most of you would benefit from reading Carl Sagan’s “The Demon Haunted World”.

Bravo, out.

 

[bogusiii]

Oh boy…
You’re operating under a fundamental misunderstanding about scientific/social scientific research…like many here…see above for toes, blue chairs and pizza b/c that is totally what it’s all about.
Years ago, George W Bush m0r0ns were outraged and very vocal about a large research grant to study canary songs and how they change. Stupid university eggheads! Except that the songs changing are the result of neural regeneration, the understanding of which could lead to treatments for brain and spinal injuries in humans.
But, anyway, I’m sure the PhD’s appreciate the advice on research methodology.
And no, the question does not imply guilt. It assumes that they might have some knowledge.

It appears that most of you would benefit from reading Carl Sagan’s “The Demon Haunted World”.

Bravo, out.

No sir, however you are taking things to an illogical extreme. I'm well aware of research programs in university and professional/trade organizations. So please spare me your "you don't understand'.

 

[bc308]

Oh boy…
You’re operating under a fundamental misunderstanding about scientific/social scientific research…like many here…see above for toes, blue chairs and pizza b/c that is totally what it’s all about.
Years ago, George W Bush m0r0ns were outraged and very vocal about a large research grant to study canary songs and how they change. Stupid university eggheads! Except that the songs changing are the result of neural regeneration, the understanding of which could lead to treatments for brain and spinal injuries in humans.
But, anyway, I’m sure the PhD’s appreciate the advice on research methodology.
And no, the question does not imply guilt. It assumes that they might have some knowledge.

It appears that most of you would benefit from reading Carl Sagan’s “The Demon Haunted World”.

Bravo, out.

OK, fine just don't treat the peasant taxpayers with condescension. Where in the assistant's email was there a disarming statement to the effect of "We would like to see if the Liberal party's longstanding persecution of the firearms industry contributes to further illegality"

 

[Polvo Negro]

As a professor myself, I have to say this is just poor research and is indeed biased.

Indoctrination? Maybe not so much, more like lack of exposure or understanding... like the vast majority of Canadians who are not part of the shooting community. But hey, that's more than enough to work on.

What's funny is that when people do find out that I shoot there first question is: Can I try?

 

[Polvo Negro]

And really the bias is more in the assumptions that are in the letter.

I also wonder what they picture in their mind when say illegal firearms sales.

 

[Juster]

December 21, 2022

BCWF recommends against participating in SFU firearms study


Dear BCWF Clubs and Members,
Many clubs and club members have started to receive letters from Simon Fraser University requesting participation in a study of illegal firearms. The BCWF strongly recommends that our clubs and members decline to participate. We have little confidence that this study would provide meaningful information about illegal firearm ownership; we are deeply concerned that those involved believe lawful firearms owners know about illegal firearms acquisition and trade.
The goals of the research study are described as follows in the email:
“Through our study, we are hoping to gain a better understanding of how illegal firearms are being acquired and traded in British Columbia. We are also hoping to determine why individuals are acquiring and trading them, their preferred methods of illegal acquisition, and information about how they are being traded. We have contacted you because many of your members may have experience with legal firearms, and perhaps knowledge about illegal firearms.”
The BCWF finds it difficult to understand how anyone knowledgeable about Canadian firearm laws could imagine that established Fish and Game clubs would be associated or know about the illegal firearms trade. Our members are law-abiding conservationists, hunters and sport shooters.
The bottom line: The BCWF recommends that member clubs and members decline to participate. The BCWF will be engaging Simon Fraser University on behalf of our members.
Regards,
Gary Mauser
Chair, BCWF Firearms Committee




SFU Professor emeritus

https://bcwf.bc.ca/bcwf-recommends-against-participating-in-sfu-firearms-study/

 

[Dlask Arms]

https://bcwf.bc.ca/bcwf-recommends-against-participating-in-sfu-firearms-study/

That's awesome, thank you Gary !

 

[bcbravo2zero]

OK, fine just don't treat the peasant taxpayers with condescension. Where in the assistant's email was there a disarming statement to the effect of "We would like to see if the Liberal party's longstanding persecution of the firearms industry contributes to further illegality"

It’s pretty tough not to sound that way when trying to discuss methodology in social science research w/ those who don’t get it. Especially with those who think they do, but clearly do not. And once again, the kind of knee-jerk paranoia I’ve seen here does NOT reflect well on our community.
In any case, there it is! Before drawing firm conclusions re: good/bad, do your research, or better yet (and more efficiently), ask a real expert in this area of research. If a guy like Mauser says “don’t touch it”, then that’s that.

 

[Dlask Arms]

It’s pretty tough not to sound that way when trying to discuss methodology in social science research w/ those who don’t get it. Especially with those who think they do, but clearly do not. And once again, the kind of knee-jerk paranoia I’ve seen here does NOT reflect well on our community.
In any case, there it is! Before drawing firm conclusions re: good/bad, do your research, or better yet (and more efficiently), ask a real expert in this area of research. If a guy like Mauser says “don’t touch it”, then that’s that.

We understand where you are coming from but.....as you just said :

"Before drawing firm conclusions re: good/bad, do your research"

They did not start from scratch, they started already biased against the firearm community by ASSUMING that we as a collective are intermixed with members of the illegal side of the firearm problem. This is massively insulting to most of us and I hope you can see that.

Better sources for this would be :

-The RCMP
-The CBSA
-Your local jail where there may be gang members and other undesirable folk incarcerated

These are far better leads to finding detailed information on how to smuggle or manufacture illegal firearms.

 

[bcbravo2zero]

We understand where you are coming from but.....as you just said :

"Before drawing firm conclusions re: good/bad, do your research"

They did not start from scratch, they started already biased against the firearm community by ASSUMING that we as a collective are intermixed with members of the illegal side of the firearm problem. This is massively insulting to most of us and I hope you can see that.

Better sources for this would be :

-The RCMP
-The CBSA
-Your local jail where there may be gang members and other undesirable folk incarcerated

These are far better leads to finding detailed information on how to smuggle or manufacture illegal firearms.

Re: insult, yes, I could see that possibility before, and NOW I see it much more clearly…because I have more info…the most important of which comes from an actual expert in the field who I trust b/c of his qualifications and past works. Look before you leap. That was my point.

But look, I stand by what I said: our legal community DOES have knowledge of how and why criminals get guns. Or am I the only one who CONSTANTLY tells those who discuss gun control with me about the fact that crime guns are overwhelmingly pistols that get here via smuggling, from the USA, often via FN reserves (NOT racist, but factual), and are used for violence and intimidation in the drug trade (and others)? Of course, I have even more that I could type here. But 99% of you already know it and know that WE ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. The general public doesn’t…b/c of Liberal disinformation campaigns and decades of fomenting popular prejudice…but they seem to be learning at least a bit b/c of our community’s counter-messaging.

If some “good” research project comes around then we should add our voice to it. Clearly, this is not one you want to participate in. So, as you said, thank you Dr. Mauser.

 

[Dlask Arms]

Re: insult, yes, I could see that possibility before, and NOW I see it much more clearly…because I have more info…the most important of which comes from an actual expert in the field who I trust b/c of his qualifications and past works. Look before you leap. That was my point.

But look, I stand by what I said: our legal community DOES have knowledge of how and why criminals get guns. Or am I the only one who CONSTANTLY tells those who discuss gun control with me about the fact that crime guns are overwhelmingly pistols that get here via smuggling, from the USA, often via FN reserves (NOT racist, but factual), and are used for violence and intimidation in the drug trade (and others)? Of course, I have even more that I could type here. But 99% of you already know it and know that WE ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. The general public doesn’t…b/c of Liberal disinformation campaigns and decades of fomenting popular prejudice…but they seem to be learning at least a bit b/c of our community’s counter-messaging.

If some “good” research project comes around then we should add our voice to it. Clearly, this is not one you want to participate in. So, as you said, thank you Dr. Mauser.

Well said, I do agree.

 

[Leo M]

Yeah, she called me on Tuesday afternoon. I gave her a polite rant about how I found it offensive that she would assume legal gun owners have knowledge of illegal gun trafficking. She actually seemed confused.

She's confused alright.