Reply
Tue 27 May, 2008 05:43 am
From today's Toronto Star.... unbelievable. What needs to be shut down is Canada's government, not the shooting ranges.
Miller wants shooting ranges shut down
May 27, 2008 04:30 AM
JOHN SPEARS
ROBERT BENZIE
STAFF REPORTERS
Mayor David Miller wants to close recreational shooting ranges in Toronto, along with giving the city power to block gun manufacturers and wholesalers from opening new plants or warehouses.
"Nobody can deny that hobby directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of our city," Miller said of sport shooting yesterday, amid debate on a possible gun bylaw.
Canadian Olympic pistol shooter and downtown resident Avianna Chao begs to differ. She says that if Miller gets his way, it could mean an end to her sport - and it won't make the streets one bit safer.
Miller wants to terminate leases with two gun clubs that have shooting ranges on city property, one at Union Station, the other at Don Montgomery community centre.
Chao, who will head to Beijing this summer to compete for Canada at the Olympics, began shooting at Don Montgomery and now trains primarily at the Union range.
"When I heard about this city proposal today it just absolutely knocked the wind out of me," Chao said yesterday.
The gun debate erupted on a day when provincial Attorney General Chris Bentley and Community Safety Minister Rick Bartolucci were writing to their federal counterparts, seeking co-operation on curbing firearm violence.
"As you know, the people of Ontario continue to have serious concerns about the threat posed by guns and gun-related crime in our communities, particularly on the streets of downtown Toronto," Bentley and Bartolucci wrote in a five-page letter to federal Attorney General Rob Nicholson and Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day.
They asked for a three-point plan to limit gun violence by:
Making sure federal firearms marking regulations are stringently followed so guns can be traced.
Appointing federal prosecutors to Ontario's guns and gangs task force.
Closing legal loopholes that let gun parts be brought into Canada.
At the same time, city staff released a report calling for a bylaw that would allow the city to restrict or prohibit the making and wholesaling of firearms in Toronto.
Only police and the military should be allowed to operate firing ranges, the report says, calling for an end to the gun club leases.
Recommendations would apply to all firearms, including rifles and shotguns. But in a scrum with reporters, Miller directed most of his comments toward handguns.
"After John O'Keefe's tragic killing, I don't think there's any defence for sports shooters any more," Miller said, referring to the man shot in January by a stray bullet. The gun was legally owned by the man charged in the killing.
"It's a hobby that creates danger to others. Guns are stolen routinely from so-called legal owners. It's time that we got those guns out of Toronto," he said.
"Do we as a society value safety, or do we value a hobby that creates danger?" he asked. "Nobody can deny that hobby directly results in people being shot and killed on the streets of our city. Those are the facts. And they're provable again and again and again."
Existing makers and wholesalers of firearms would not be affected by any new bylaw. Nor would retailers, as they're governed by federal law. The staff report says as many as 40 per cent of handguns seized by Toronto police were legally purchased but stolen from their owners.
But Chao said shutting down shooting ranges and banning manufacturers has nothing to do with safety. "Gang members don't visit these (shooting) clubs," she said.
"You have to show your licence and all the paperwork. This has nothing to do with gang violence."
Her own guns are safely stored and locked, she said. She's never had a gun stolen. "Anyone should be able to see through this," she said, "that this is the politicians just trying to say they did something, even though it will have no impact on actual gun violence. ... Why don't they go after the gangs? Why don't they go after the illegal trafficking of firearms?"
Chao said Canadian shooters are already handicapped compared with competitors because other countries let shooters train full time. If ranges are shut down, she said, "I don't know how we're expected to compete internationally."
Steven Spinney, firearms safety officer for the Scarborough Rifle Club, was also stunned by the news.
"It doesn't make any sense to be zeroing in on a gun club," he said. "We're an Olympic sport ... I'm not sure how shutting us down would help to cut the gun crime."
Participants are required to take a safety course and the club uses only single-shot rifles.
Here's what one Canadian wrote in response (smart guy):
I have an question for Mayor Miller.
In the area of the province in which I live, many locals are hunters and therefore there is a significant gun to person ratio. While I do not have any definitive facts, I feel quite confident stating that the ratio would be close to one firearm for every person (since often hunters will own more than one firearm).
Yet with all the firearms in my town and those nearby, gun violence is non-existent. I cannot recall the last time I heard of a local incidence of violence involving a firearm being shot.
Mr. Miller, do you not find that rather odd? Small, rural towns in Ontario have many guns yet do not have people shooting each other.
Could it be that you have a criminal problem in Toronto as opposed to a supposed gun problem?
Apparently, guns in rural areas, where people hunt for food, is not how many guns are used in urban areas. What is the problem with treating guns differently in urban areas?
Anyway, when the intent of the Second Amendment is finally defined, as to whether only a well trained militia is supposed to bear arms, or anyone may bear arms, isn't that the real concern as a U.S. citizen?
If it is defined that only a well trained militia is supposed to bear arms, then those who value their ability to use a gun would then join a militia. Wouldn't that be a benefit to the citizenry, to have a well trained militia?
Aside from illegal guns being used in crimes, aren't guns also used in urban confrontations where rage is the primary emotion? Do you not agree that urban gun laws should not be the same as rural gun laws?
No, I don't agree. As a law abiding citizen, I insist on being armed and able to defend myself when put into dangerous urban environments. My carrying a weapon in no way increases the chances of violence, as I have no intent to cause mayhem, only defend myself against it.
Foofie wrote:Anyway, when the intent of the Second Amendment is finally defined, as to whether only a well trained militia is supposed to bear arms, or anyone may bear arms, isn't that the real concern as a U.S. citizen?
I have serious doubts that the 2nd amendment can be taken as base for the Canadian legal system and is part of their constitution.
But I may be wrong.
cjhsa wrote:No, I don't agree. As a law abiding citizen, I insist on being armed and able to defend myself when put into dangerous urban environments. My carrying a weapon in no way increases the chances of violence, as I have no intent to cause mayhem, only defend myself against it.
Well, welcome to the club of law abiding citizens. However, in my opinion, you are concerned about yourself, and forgetting perhaps that many people would not feel comfortable in a world where they have to carry a gun, to feel safe against a drunk that can own a gun, or the person with road rage that can own a gun, or the person that feels he/she should take out his/her gun before another person "draws" during some silly street argument.
In other words, if the whole country was as law abiding, and mature, as yourself, there would be no concern. But, you are not allowing, I believe, that your high standards of comportment is not everyone's.
Also, as the sun sets, and it is hard to see who is firing a gun, any celebration may just have a few shots fired into the air by celebrants. You see the chaos in society?
But, let's not pursue this discussion, since you have your beliefs, and I have mine. And, I don't live in your neck-of-the-woods, nor you in mine. So, we just may have different perceptions. I try to understand your perceptions; however, in many of your posts, I fail to see you giving credence to anyone else's perceptions on gun ownership.
Maybe because I think it should be required?
Walter Hinteler wrote:Foofie wrote:Anyway, when the intent of the Second Amendment is finally defined, as to whether only a well trained militia is supposed to bear arms, or anyone may bear arms, isn't that the real concern as a U.S. citizen?
I have serious doubts that the 2nd amendment can be taken as base for the Canadian legal system and is part of their constitution.
But I may be wrong.
I was talking about the U.S., since the originator of the thread, I believe, is a U.S. citizen, and his concerns ultimately come down to U.S. law.
Are guns allowed in Germany. Is there an overall EU approach to gun ownership?
cjhsa wrote:Maybe because I think it should be required?
What should be required? Gun ownership? For octogenarians with poor eyesight? What are you saying?
Foofie wrote:
I was talking about the U.S., since the originator of the thread, I believe, is a U.S. citizen, and his concerns ultimately come down to U.S. law.
Right, but Toronto - and that's what the thread is about - is a Canadian city.
Foofie wrote:Are guns allowed in Germany. Is there an overall EU approach to gun ownership?
Guns are allowed in Germany.
European Union legislators back tough new gun control rules, though, hoping to prevent Europe from becoming a gun-friendly culture like the United States. (The registration of guns is not consistent across the 27 member countries.)
Currently, there are 36 firearms per 100 people in Cyprus and 32 in Sweden, according to the the Small Arms Survey (Geneva/Switzerland).
At the bottom of the scale is Poland with one weapon per 100 people, the Netherlands with 3 and Estonia and Ireland with 9.
In my county (307,00 inhabitants), we've 26,356 registered guns, 6,214 and 20,142 long arms.
There's no need for a shooting range in downtown Toronto. It may have been an appropriate location a century ago, but it is no longer. The only thing to shoot in downtown is people. There's no upside to adding guns to the city.
I'd be glad to see the hind-end of that particular location.
Anyplace is appropriate for a shooting range. You are confusing criminal activity with an inanimate object.
What about bowling alleys? People go in them and drink heavily, then throw large objects. Now that sounds dangerous!
We don't have bowling alleys downtown either.
Good for you! God forbid!!!
Pretty much my feeling about it.
~~~
~~~
Shooting ranges, generally a good concept, IMO. In the middle of a downtown where there are already people looking to get into trouble, not so much.
So you really think that criminal types go to the shooting ranges where they have to present ID and rent the gun, since gun ownership is already restricted?
Is that how you think? I don't want to insult you ehBeth but my buddy Nuge calls that kind of thinking "brain dead". I tend to agree.
Prove me wrong.
No, I don't think they're going to go rent a gun.
Don't be too goofy if you don't need to be.
~~~
A problem here of some degree is organized crime gang affiliates doing home invasions at gun collectors' - and picking off the collections. My concern has been that they attempt something similar at the downtown shooting range, it gets messed up somehow, and they feel a need to use the weapons. The downtown shooting range is connected to our busiest transit hub. I don't want my commute messed up by something like this.
A hostage-taking on the street outside the transit hub bunged traffic up for hours a couple of years ago. P*****d me off to no end.
As I've said before, shooting ranges in and of themselves, fine. Just not where they has potential to inconvenience my commute.
cjhsa wrote:where they have to present ID and rent the gun.
It's almost as easy to fake i.d. here as it is in the U.S., so that was a bit meaningless.
Trust me, criminals don't go to gun ranges. Besides, everyone running a business like that should be carrying and armed to the teeth. If not, blame your silly government and their rules.
shikas dick won't get any bigger no matter what the size of the gun he sticks in in his pants.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace