So where are we now?

Status
Not open for further replies.
From CSSA...

COMMENTARY
New Zealand Police Beg Criminals to
Hand in Their Guns
In their effort to take guns out of the hands of gangs and organized crime organizations, New Zealand police have implemented a unique new program to ensure compliance with the nation’s latest gun ban. They’re saying, “Please.”

Gang and organized crime leaders have shown little interest in handing in their guns which, oddly, perplexes Police Commissioner Mike Bush.

“I think it’s fair to say they have a different approach than law-abiding members of the public. They’re very reluctant to be part of this [amnesty],” he said.

Apparently not.

With less than two months until the amnesty’s deadline, New Zealand gun owners are similarly “reluctant” to hand over their legally-purchased property to the state.

Compliance with New Zealand’s gun-back scheme sits at just 18 percent. This puts them on pace for a 30 percent compliance rate when the amnesty period ends in December, something Newsweek laughably frames as “a modest but tangible success for policymakers.”

This is worse than even the lowest estimate of Australia’s buyback in the late 1990s where, according to a comprehensive study by criminologists Peter Reuter and Jenny Mouzos, compliance ranged from 40 – 80 percent, depending on whose estimate of the number of guns you used.[ii]

When 70 percent of New Zealand’s licensed firearm owners refuse to comply with the law, how can you call it anything other than a colossal failure?

Speaking before the Justice Select Committee, Deputy Commissioner Mike Clement insisted they were making progress with the nation’s gangs and organized crime syndicates. He told the committee police had identified 115 key individuals in 37 gangs in New Zealand and that police met with 53 of these crime leaders “to discuss” surrendering their illegal guns.

“We know it’s difficult for people to hand in their firearms but we want to make it as easy and safe and, uh, the best experience it can possibly be,” Police Commissioner Mike Bush reiterated.

In New Zealand, neither career criminals nor licensed firearm owners are interested in this “experience.”

The former have no interest in complying because these criminals regularly use their guns to defend their illegal enterprises.

The latter have no interest because they have committed no crime, so why should they surrender their legally-owned and legally-acquired property?

It’s a question for which no politician has a legitimate answer – not in New Zealand, not in Australia before it, and not in Canada today.


Sources:

https://www.newsweek.com/new-zealand-buyback-program-guns-1469405
[ii] http://faculty.publicpolicy.umd.edu/sites/default/files/reuter/files/gun chapter.pdf – page 131
 
CommunityViolenceInToronto2019_Fig4_AgeSpecificRatesOfFirearmViolentCrime20092017.png


CommunityViolenceInToronto2019_Fig12_Age-StandardizedEmergencyDepartmentVisitsFirearmInjuriesToronto20132017.png


PoliceStrengthVsFirearmViolentCrime_Canada.png


PoliceVsShootings_Toronto20052018.png


-- https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...Repository?p=16422513&viewfull=1#post16422513
 
Never forget who we are dealing with here...

“He doesn’t seem to understand or respect the importance of civilian oversight in a democratic society.”

—Ian Scott, former director of the Special Investigation Unit that studied G20 brutality and law-breaking by police, describing Bill Blair in the Toronto Star, April 17, 2015

“On June 27, a jury found five Toronto police drug squad officers guilty of attempting to obstruct justice. It’s a saga that straddles three decades, and it's not over yet.”

—"Saga of a Toronto police drug squad", Toronto Star, June 29, 2012
 
No.
>assuming I give a shiit about CPP and socialized healthcare.
>assuming I care about the holy gdp and economy
>assuming we NEED wage slaves.

This post is cancer.

Our votes don't matter anyways. Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal will keep electing libs to rule even if you stop all immigration. That train has left the station in 1968.

This topic is getting too toxic for me anyways. I apologize to anyone I offended, it was not my intention.
 
Our votes don't matter anyways. Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal will keep electing libs to rule even if you stop all immigration. That train has left the station in 1968.

This topic is getting too toxic for me anyways. I apologize to anyone I offended, it was not my intention.

This isn't Coaches Corner you can say what you feel like saying
 
Our votes don't matter anyways. Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal will keep electing libs to rule even if you stop all immigration. That train has left the station in 1968.

This topic is getting too toxic for me anyways. I apologize to anyone I offended, it was not my intention.

FWIIW, you did not offend me, just talkin.
 
Our votes don't matter anyways. Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal will keep electing libs to rule even if you stop all immigration. That train has left the station in 1968.

This topic is getting too toxic for me anyways. I apologize to anyone I offended, it was not my intention.

Given that Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal have a LOT more population than AB and SK together, it's normal that they have more elected representatives.

If you want people to vote your way, convince them. Whining like a snowflake and calling people libtards might make you feel good for 5 seconds, but it also ensure your electoral defeat.
 
Given that Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal have a LOT more population than AB and SK together, it's normal that they have more elected representatives.

If you want people to vote your way, convince them. Whining like a snowflake and calling people libtards might make you feel good for 5 seconds, but it also ensure your electoral defeat.


Truth, but those five seconds.....
 
Some people need to see pictures / charts to process, those are excellent!

The reasoning is that different approaches work on different committee members. Sometimes more than one technique is needed to get those votes or give the legislators the political cover they need to vote for the bill in question. Most of us political-types like to think we are pretty left-brained decision makers: we use the logical statistical side of our brain to make those tough voting decisions. The truth is we all make our decisions at the gut level. But we do not want to tell anybody that, so we have to have the statistics to back up what our gut told us. That is why statistics can be twisted in various ways to make them support what you already want to believe.
A good lobbyist will make certain to have both types of testimony on hand, statistical and emotional, not only for the committee members, but also for the inevitable media who attend gun-control debates. If you are testifying, and unless you are the numbers guy, speak from the heart, quote very few statistics unless you want to put everyone to sleep, and do not read your speech. The members can read just fine and probably faster than you can say it out loud. Feel free to use notes so you do not lose your message to nervousness. Outlines work well for many people. Make sure you have a beginning, a middle, and an end.
-- "From Luby's to the Legislature" pg 163 by Suzanna Gratia Hupp, former Republican member of the Texas House of Representatives
 
This thread has gone off the rails......

I unfortunately believe they will never stop until they take everything.

If we don’t come together and stop fighting about other issues and focus on our one common issue we are lost.

I foresee us turning into the UK.


*sigh*
 
I don't post the graphs because I like the graphs.

I post the graphs in the hope that they'll be mass emailed to every Toronto city councilor, every Ontario provincial MPP, every federal MP and Senator.

I post the graphs in the hope that they'll be used on twitter and facebook.
 
I don't post the graphs because I like the graphs.

I post the graphs in the hope that they'll be mass emailed to every Toronto city councilor, every Ontario provincial MPP, every federal MP and Senator.

I post the graphs in the hope that they'll be used on twitter and facebook.

Consider it done, my homework for tonight.
 
The reasoning is that different approaches work on different committee members. Sometimes more than one technique is needed to get those votes or give the legislators the political cover they need to vote for the bill in question. Most of us political-types like to think we are pretty left-brained decision makers: we use the logical statistical side of our brain to make those tough voting decisions. The truth is we all make our decisions at the gut level. But we do not want to tell anybody that, so we have to have the statistics to back up what our gut told us. That is why statistics can be twisted in various ways to make them support what you already want to believe.
A good lobbyist will make certain to have both types of testimony on hand, statistical and emotional, not only for the committee members, but also for the inevitable media who attend gun-control debates. If you are testifying, and unless you are the numbers guy, speak from the heart, quote very few statistics unless you want to put everyone to sleep, and do not read your speech. The members can read just fine and probably faster than you can say it out loud. Feel free to use notes so you do not lose your message to nervousness. Outlines work well for many people. Make sure you have a beginning, a middle, and an end.
-- "From Luby's to the Legislature" pg 163 by Suzanna Gratia Hupp, former Republican member of the Texas House of Representatives

Unfortunately nothing that we've done to date seems to be getting to the GTA anti gun advocates, they're at it again according to CP24 right now.

National handgun ban on the basis of a Toronto City Council resolution. They really do think that they run the country.
 
Big and small of it. The world we live in today, where we are and where we're headed. We're gonna lose, it's a uphill battle and we're on the low ground. Times and people have changed. The want and need for guns is becoming taboo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom