Gun Business: Canadian court ruling could zap Taser’s bottom line
Taser X3 multi-shot ECD
Canadian Judge Robert Sewell, denied Taser International Inc.’s (TASR) request to reject the previous findings of a governmental inquiry. A public inquiry into stun gun safety began in May 5, 2008 after the 2007 death of a man in a Vancouver Airport. Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) shot the man multiple times with a stun gun and he later died. The inquiry report provided evidence that stun guns also called conducted energy weapons which disable potential targets with up to 50,000 volts of electricity can be lethal.
“It is quite clear to me that there were presentations made to the commissioner by medical experts,” said British Columbia Supreme Court judge Sewell,” and others to the effect that such weapons can cause serious harm and even death in exceptional circumstances.” Read more
Fourth of July Editorial From Brady Center Misses the Mark
If you believe the word from The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the United States leads the world in gun related homicides. In a misplace Fourth of July editorial, which appeared on the Tauton Daily Gazette website, the Brady Bunch offered this thought:
“On this Independence Day weekend, as Americans reflect on the history of the nation’s founding and contemplate its future, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has released the latest edition of its God Bless America poster, documenting that, in one year, guns murdered 17 people in Finland, 35 in Australia, 39 in England and Wales, 60 in Spain, 194 in Germany, 200 in Canada, and 9,484 in the United States.”
Where is Afghanistan or Iraq on this list? While maybe a very different picture of “gun homicides,” we question why these nations weren’t included? What about other wartorn nations in Africa and Asia? Why aren’t those nations included? Many experience violence every day? This is because those nations lack the freedom of the United States?
Where does China rank on the list? In China it is a capital offense to even be caught with a gun, yet gun violence happens. In Mexico it is hard to legally obtain a gun, yet here too we see regular violence that is all too common.
No, the picture that the Brady Center offered is not a good one of the United States, but it isn’t a fair one either. Are those deaths really because we have guns however, or because we have a criminal element? That’s the question that isn’t being asked enough.
Doctors Take Aim at Guns
Watch out, soon the American mainstream media could be reporting the “expert” opinion of doctors on the issues of firearms. In a story from north of the border, CTV.ca offers:
“A group of emergency doctors, nurses and suicide prevention workers asked members of Parliament to vote against a federal bill that seeks to quash the long-gun registry. The group says a significant drop in gun-related suicide since 1995 is evidence the registry works and scrapping it would set them back years in suicide prevention.”
Neither the political motivation, nor the actual size of this “group” is ever actually mentioned, however the article suggests it is at least “61 organizations and medical professionals.” So again, we have to question the motivation, and according to the article the biggest concern is suicide, because a long gun (rifle, shotgun), would offer a far greater success than other methods, notably an overdose. We counter that a long gun would also be better for hunting and home defense than pills.
Who Guards the Guards: Canadian Edition
The anti-gun zealots like to note that every “illegal gun must have been legally owned originally,” and they like to imply that a legal gun owner sold the gun to a criminal. But what about the guns stolen from the police? This happens more often that you think, and it isn’t limited to the United States. Cnews.com is reporting:
“Ottawa police are reviewing how they award contracts to private companies after a security guard became the prime suspect in the theft of a cop’s gun.”
This incident occurred at a police HQ no less.
What’s That About Less Crime in Canada? Explain Why RCMP Need MP5 Submachine-guns?
What a changing world we live in. The Toronto Star is reporting that soon the Royal Canadian Mounted Police will be packing some serious heat. The paper notes:
“RCMP officers who guard Parliament Hill are being equipped with submachine guns to give them more stopping power should a gunman attack the heart of Canada’s government.
“Security, which has already been significantly beefed up after a high-profile breach last December, will get another boost in the coming months when Mounties patrolling the Hill get the Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine-gun.”
This is a very interesting turn of events, and as one who has regularly seen these types of weapons in New York City since 9/11 – as well as police snipers carrying M-14s, it just suggests that the world isn’t really as safe as many would like to believe. Of course this won’t give any anti-gun zealot pause – they’ll continue to believe the police need MP5 submachine-guns because there are too many gun owners out there.
What’s This? Canadians Smuggling Guns!
Time and time again the American mainstream media likes to point out that our neighbor to the north doesn’t have gun crime, but as we’ve been reporting over the last year that is just bad reporting. And while the MSM notes every Americans smuggling guns to Mexico, how about stories that aren’t being picked up on this side of the border. The Windsor Star is reporting such an example:
“Two Windsor men are facing several charges after a seven-month joint forces investigation targeting an organized crime syndicate smuggling guns into Windsor. Project Folkstone, a Provincial Weapons Enforcement Unit investigation in partnership with several police services including Windsor, has resulted in 22 people facing more than 250 criminal charges.”
That’s a lot of guns and that’s a lot of people involved. But do you think this will make the news in America? Probably not, and that’s fine. But what do you think that Michael Moore and others will continue to note how few gun crimes there are in Canada in the future?
New York Times Offers Biased Take on Canadian Gun Laws
In an article from The New York Times this week it sounds like the old gray lady believes Canada to be more enlightened about firearms, and health care!
“OTTAWA — Like public health care, Canada’s tight gun-control laws help distinguish the country from its powerful neighbor to the south. But as Canadians commemorated the 20th anniversary of one of the country’s most notorious shooting sprees on Sunday, their Parliament was on course to eliminate one of its most significant gun-control measures.”
The question we’d like to ask is whether these laws actually distinguish Canada in a good way? Anyone? But let’s look at some other questionable points in the article. First up, note how the firearm is described in this passage:
“A decade before the Columbine high school shootings set off a national debate on gun violence in the United States, an angry, unemployed 25-year-old armed with a semiautomatic hunting rifle stormed the École Polytechnique, an engineering school in Montreal.”
Then the article goes a bit further, and note the use of the wording here:
“The current debate does not involve handguns, whose registration has been required since 1934. Nor does it involve a variety of military-style weapons like assault rifles and sawed-off shotguns, which are banned outright. And the law’s repeal would not alter the requirement that gun buyers take safety courses and obtain a license.”
A “military-style weapon” is not a “hunting rifle” nor is a “sawed-off shotgun” a military weapon or hunting weapon. This is just another case where lots of different scary sounding words are thrown around to confuse the reader. Not exactly solid reporting, now is it?
Canadian Press as Misguided as American Mainstream Media
Responding to Canada’s recent over turning of long run registry The Toronto Star ran an editorial this week, and as we often find with American editorials, the facts don’t seem to matter when making an opinionated statement:
“And we remember the outrage when we learned that military-style weapons were being sold to civilians and that there were 6 million guns in Canada and no one knew who had them.”
What exactly are “military-style weapons? Handguns are used by the military, rifles with scopes are used by the military as well, and of course fully automatic electric powered machine guns with multiple barrels are used by the military. So what defines a small arm that is “military” vs. “civilian.” In Canada fully automatic weapons are nearly impossible for the private citizen to own.
So this is clearly another biased article that suggests just because a firearm looks like an M-16 that it must be an M-16! That’s of course nonsense. An AR-15 is a semi-automatic, civilian version. But if it was a more dangerous weapon why wasn’t it used for hunting? The reason is that it is better at close range, while a hunting rifle is better at a distance. But most militaries around the world still rely on traditional bolt-action rifles. In fact a civilian bolt-action rifle today is probably also more accurate than a true World War II military rifle. And as far as close range, a double barrel shotgun looks nothing like a military weapon, but it can be extremely devastating in close range situations – which is why it is preferred by criminals.
So what we’re saying is why all this nonsense about “military style.” If the anti-gun lobby can tell us what they mean, instead of trying to scare the public with this notion that anyone can buy an AK-47 at a gun show, we’d have a lot more respect for those opposed to our firearms.
Canadian Media Reporting Facts
While we like to point out when the American mainstream media gets the facts right, or shows less biased reporting on the issue of firearms, and gun control. So for that reason, we’ll also note reporting this week from The Vancouver Sun, which took aim at the debate raging in Canada over long guns:
“More than 80 per cent of British Columbians believe that gun crime is at least a moderately serious problem, but only eight per cent believe that Canada’s $1 billion long-gun registry has been effective at preventing crime, according to a survey conducted by pollsters Angus Reid.”
Interesting numbers, not the least of which suggest that Canada isn’t exactly the crime free land that Michael Moore made it seem. To many in the American media, Canada is a carefree land with no crime. Yet, here we see that the citizens note that crime is a problem, and rifles are not really part of the problem!
More Vocal Bias From Canadian Mainstream Media
At Firearmstruth.com we thought it was only the American press that was so staunchly biased against guns, but the Canadian mainstream media seems just as bad. The Vancouver Sun didn’t pull any punches with this editorial headline:
“Scrapping long-gun registry is pandering to vocal minority” Read more
