handgun ban isn't going to happen. It is just more liberal knee jerk don't face the real issue, punish everyone else ideas.
Just doesn't cut the mustard anymore. We have 10 years of HIGHLY restrictive firearms laws in Canada and it hasn't done shit. Why do people think getting any more restrictive will make any difference?
The logic defies me, it isn't reasonable and it isn't practical.
Australia's report on their firearms ban from another thread
http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/wp/wp2008n17.pdf6. Conclusion
This paper takes a closer look at the effects of the National Firearms Agreement
on gun deaths. Using a battery of structural break tests, there is little evidence to suggest
that it had any significant effects on firearm homicides and suicides. In addition, there
also does not appear to be any substitution effects – that reduced access to firearms may
have led those bent on committing homicide or suicide to use alternative methods.
Since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, two other shooting incidents have attracted
much media attention in Australia. An incident on 21 October 2002 at Monash
University, in which a gunman killed two people and wounded five, prompted the
National Handgun Buyback Act of 2003. Under this scheme that ran from July to
December 2003, 70,000 handguns were removed from the community at a cost of
approximately A$69 million. Another shooting on 18 June 2007, in which a lone
gunman killed a man who had come to the aid of an assault victim and seriously
wounded two others in Melbourne’s central business district during morning rush hour,
renewed calls for tougher gun controls. Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical
and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears, the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.
CKA Elite 
) but you're right 
CKA Elite 
