Your Community

Reaction to Canadian laws on Colorado shooter's guns

Categories: Community

CBC News wrote yesterday about the legal status of the guns used in the shooting deaths of 12 people at a Colorado movie theatre under the headline 'Guns used in Colorado theatre shooting legal in Canada.'

The article included a discussion of Canada's laws on restricted firearms and an interview with a sports shooter on the differences between Canada and the U.S.

But judging by the headline alone, you might think that the legal status of the AR-15 rifle and the Glock handgun used in Aurora was similar in Canada and in Colorado. Many in the CBC Community took us to task for what they thought was a misleading headline.

  • "The title seems to just be trying to stir up drama, really. It's legal, but guns are heavily regulated in Canada. Of course this could happen anywhere, but the laws in Canada help restrict who can own these weapons and who can use them. In some states in the U.S., you can walk in without I.D. and buy a gun. In Canada, you have to jump through a dozen hoops to get a restricted firearm. That's not a bad thing," said Sinoco.

  • "The CBC embarrasses themselves again with this 'breaking news' story. The handgun and the AR-15 can only be taken out of your house and moved to a specific place with a permit from the police in Canada. The permit has a time limit and you have to say what your exact route will be. I doubt the Colorado shooter told the cops beforehand that he was going to the theater to shoot people as he would legally be required to do in Canada," said saskall.

Some pointed out that the body of the story covered these details. 

  • "All of what you said was in the article, perhaps you need to pay more attention?" replied  Wobbler.

Some members of the CBC Community commented on the legal status of the AR-15 rifle, saying that firearms with similar capabilities are not restricted in Canada and the difference is only esthetic.

  • "It's incredibly silly for the AR-15 to be on the restricted list. It's no different than any other rifle other than that it looks scary and the media likes to call it an 'assault weapon.' It just shows how irrational the people who wrote our gun control laws are that weapons are restricted, not based on their functions, but based on their appearance," said osooso.

  • "And just to point out how stupid restricting the AR-15 is. Other guns, like the Ruger Mini-14 which is functionally identical in the way it operates, are fully legal and unrestricted in Canada. All because the Ruger has a nice wooden stock and the AR has a black plastic stock," said Jim_Pook.

And some of the commenters insisted that none of these guns should be permitted in Canada.

  • "It is said Canada has stricter laws for gun ownership. But just one gun can kill a lot of people. The gun registry should never have been abolished. Law enforcement officers wanted it because it helped and protected them. There is only one use for a gun. It is intended to kill. As far as I am concerned hunting is not a sport but a desire to kill a living creature. Only police and other such entities need guns. Otherwise most guns should be banned," said Frayea.

  • "Guns really have no place in our society. Get them off the market and get the police out to clean up the illegal market. Surely it is time we grow out of this fixation with mechanical devices designed to kill, and the false sense of security and power they seem to give some people," said observer2011.

Thank you, as always, for following our news coverage. Please feel free to comment on or challenge any of these points and continue the conversation below.

Tags: Community, Community Reaction, guns, law

Comments are closed.