A) - Criminals use unregistered weapons, often times you hear of serial numbers being removed (to idenfity registration).

B) - Too much, maybe, but what is your point? This is about if taking away guns will help so this is quite obsolete.

C) - Don't follow, obsolete as well.

D) Violence

Rape (per 100,000)

# 1	France:	10,277	2009
# 2	Germany:	7,292	2009
# 3	Russia:	6,208	2009
# 4	Sweden:	4,901	2009
# 5	Argentina:	3,276	2008
# 6	Belgium:	2,786	2009
# 7	Philippines:	2,585	2009
# 8	Spain:	2,437	2009
# 9	Chile:	2,233	2009
# 10	Lesotho:	1,878	2009

# 12	Japan:	1,582	2009
# 13	New Zealand:	1,308	2009

# 23

Canada:

491

2009

# 43

Australia:

91.6

2003

# 57

United States:

30.2

2006

Source

Assault Victims:

# 1	Saint Kitts and Nevis:	3%
# 2	United Kingdom:	2.8%
= 3	New Zealand:	2.4%
= 3	Australia:	2.4%
# 5	Canada:	2.3%
# 6	Finland:	2.1%
= 7	France:	1.4%
= 7	Denmark:	1.4%
= 9	Sweden:	1.2%
= 9	United States:	1.2%

Source

Assault Crime (per 100,000):

# 1	Swaziland:	1,308.2	2004
# 2	South Africa:	1,188	2002
# 3	Mauritius:	1,044.9	2006
# 4	Sweden:	845.2	2006
# 5	New Zealand:	839.4	2006
# 6	Australia:	797	2003
# 7	United States:	786.7	1999
# 8	Zimbabwe:	765.1	2004
# 9	Israel:	763.3	2004
# 10	Canada:	737.5	2006

Source

D-II) Not sure what your point is. His point was mass shootings happen elsewhere when gun laws are stricter or completely banned.

E) Removing guns stops violence? No. Homicide? Let's see:

Notice the blue line is gun ownership rate, so one would expect to see decreased homicide rate (red dotted line) with the decreased gun ownership rate. We simply do not see such a trend.

F) No Canada Mass Shootings:

• In the 1989 massacre of 14 women at the Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal, Marc Lepine used a Ruger Mini-14 rifle, at the time equipped with a substantial magazine.
• And in 2006, Kimveer Gill used a Beretta Cx4 Storm to shoot 72 rounds at Montreal’s Dawson College, injuring 16 and killing student Anastasia DeSousa.

And that took about 5 seconds to google "Canada Mass Shootings".

Source

Final thoughts: 

It's good to debate these things, but not when you bring nothing factual to the table. Next time do some research so someone doesn't make you into a fool.

Guns should not be easy to get.

I remember the Columbine High School shooting. Two students 17 to 18 years old, dressed like they came out from the Matrix with:
Intratec TEC-DC9
Hi-Point 995 Carbine
Savage 67H pump-action shotgun
Stevens 311D double barreled sawed-off shotgun
explosives
4 knives

this shyt is ridiculous

I think the whole reason this is being discussed, is to take away even more independce from the people. False flag attacks has become a very important tool for these psychos and people are falling for it over and over again.

Personally, I don't think this topic matters much in either direction. Banning or permitting guns of whatever types will cause a mixture of good and bad results, and the risks involved are slight enough in either direction so it's honestly not worth the trouble of discussing in much depth.

That said, I lean a bit towards the "ban guns" crowd. Not because I agree with them. I think they're more likely to be wrong. I just find gun afficandos to be a suspicious, cowardly bunch.

...which they aquired illegally.

Uhh... Really, that's your counter? I tell you that countries with laws that have lenient gun control polocies, and countries with free boarders to these countries have high high homicide rates, and countries with strict boarders do not, using your own data, and you say...

"My data says otherwise, despite you using it to make these claims."

WOW

Here, I'll give examples: Strict Boarders and strong regulations

Country-Homicide Rate

Australia-1.0
New Zealand-0.9
Japan-0.4
Hong Kong-0.2
Macau-0.7
South Korea-2.6
China-1.0
Canada-1.6
IceLand-0.3

Weak Regulations, or Weak Boarder Control
USA-4.8
North Korea-15.2 (LOL I had to add it)
Mexico-22.7
Russia-10.2

BTW, Drugs are a much much bigger incfluence on homicide rates. The two regions of the world with the highest homicide rates are South America and West Africa. This is why Mexico's homicide rate is so high despite strong regulations (lots of smuggling). Even when you look at US states, while Nevada has a high homicide rate and gun ownership rate, it's also got a lot of drug related problems, same with Puerto Rico.

You're also 3 times more likely to get shot when there is a home robbery when you carry a firearm vs. when you don't. I also really doubt USA's "Hot" Home Invasion rate is lower then Canadas.

You can't argue for a ban or not until you recognize the underlying reason for the gun violence.

Until then, you're just arguing an effect rather than a cause.

1. See, that's just not true. You are taking one fact and using it to make a false claim. Canada's Gun Resistry is still strong, and we still have a 2 day wait period plus a psych test to see if individuals qualify for a weapon.

Registering prohibited and restricted firearms include conceilable handguns, sawed off shotguns, sawed off rifles. Basically guns which are more easily used to commit crimes. On the same page OPP Commissioner Fantino says " None of the guns we know to have been used were registered, although we believe that more than half of them were smuggled into Canada from the United States."

You also have 74% of general duty police officers stated that the registry "query results have proven beneficial during major operations" according to a Canada Firearms Centre (CAFC) survey.

So you see, whatever guns we get in Canada, responsible for homicides, are smuggled weapons. This means that the ban is working, it makes it impossible for criminals to get a gun through legal means. Now if you guys just banned guns too, the number of weapons smuggled would drop.

2. Did you read that article? Those two mass murders were done with guns, not on the prohibited/restricted firearms list, and one of the two shootings only had 1 victim.

So you found an article, on a mass homicide in Quebec, the French Part of Canada, and another shooting with only 1 fatality

The article also has many exerts from Prime Ministers with heavy gun tolerance, all of which stating that their country is now safer. e.g.

“Australia is a safer country as a result of what was done in 1996,” former prime minister John Howard wrote last August. - He didn't pass this law, so why would he praise it, if it wasn't a fact?

What??? I never said this, or implied it.

In fact I said multiple times guns aren't even the main source of homicides, just a factor. Drugs are the bigger cause of homicide. I know for a fact that most homicides in Canada are done under the influence of alcohol.

So you're going to see a higher homicide rate in a country with lenient gun control, or free/poorly controlled boarders, and it's true. I even showed above that most gun related homicides in Canada occur because of smuggled guns from the USA.

I like japan's approach to gun control, where they basically ban all guns, and give large penalties -10 years or so- for getting caught being an owner. I'd be all for that as soon as I stock up on my favorites and get my shed full of ammo.

After that, go ahead and ban them.

Who are "we"? Foreigners have absolutely no say in whether or not Americans should forfeit their rights to the states' and federation's discretion. I know "progressives" don't put much credence into rights, from the moment of their inception, and when they made eugenics lawful, but certainly they must understand that all of their "progress" means nothing if the people are unsatisfied because of the rights taken away from them and the liberty taken away from them. "Progressives" have played it safe though, on both sides: Republican and Democrat, liberal and not.