Today Thu Fri
It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on April 23, 2014
Partly Cloudy
10°/1°
It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on April 24, 2014
Partly Cloudy
12°/5°
It is forcast to be Chance of Rain at 11:00 PM EDT on April 25, 2014
Chance of Rain
14°/5°

18 Comments

news

Newsstand: June 13, 2012

Wednesday. The week's crazy middle child. Try to give it some extra love today. Let it know that it's important, too. Plus, Wednesday's got the news: a proposed ban on bullets; an update on the ban on shoreline fishing; how to get around a rejected condo proposal; TDSB brings out the axe; and a new bike park.

Since the city is all up in arms about the plastic-bag ban, we will go out on a limb and guess that a new, unrelated proposed ban may elicit a similar response. City Councillor Adam Vaughan (Ward 20, Trinity-Spadina) is exploring a ban on the sale of ammunition within city limits. By pushing for changes in City-controlled zoning bylaws, Vaughan will aim to make owning a gun extremely difficult, if not outright illegal, by outlawing the sale of ammunition or by enacting prohibitively strict controls on how gun owners store their weapons. Somewhere, Charlton Heston is rolling over in his grave, gun still firmly grasped in his cold, dead hands.

Although we told you yesterday that there is definitely no fishing allowed at the waterfront, it looks like city council is making us eat our words. (Though we’d really prefer some of Lake Ontario’s finest fish. Humph.) Councillors voted Tuesday to remove those pesky no-fishing signs and approved a “Fishing Summit” on shoreline angling in the city’s downtown, which will aim to encourage urban angling and to determine if there are any locations not suitable for shoreline fishing.

Pro tip for all you condo developers out there: if your plans get rejected by Toronto’s city planners because the proposed building could fundamentally alter the character and quality of the area by creating poor pedestrian conditions, including wind tunnels, just redraw plans so that they’re even bigger. Hey, it worked for King Financial Holdings, whose proposed tower at 323–333 King Street West was rejected when plans had it at 39 storeys with 201 condo units. After King Financial Holdings bought an adjacent property and redrew the tower at 47 storeys with 304 condo units, however, the plan was approved. Because that makes sense.

The Toronto District School Board, which is experiencing a major budget crunch, will vote on cuts tonight in an effort to balance its 2012–2013 budget. Trustees will be voting on closing classrooms and cafeterias and on cutting education for special-needs students. This is really tragic. No more Sloppy Joes? Obviously these people don’t care about the children.

Mountain bikers, if you are willing to accept, High Park wants you back in the ’hood. The Parks, Forestry & Recreation department announced Monday that a new off-road bike park will be located just south of High Park, on a strip of land north of Lake Shore Boulevard West, between Colborne Lodge Drive and Ellis Avenue. We know you are probably still hurt by last year’s cold rejection, but don’t play hard to get for long. The new park will include a skills trail, pump tracks, jump lines, a large drop, and a wall ride. No word yet on whether or not you should expect flowers and dinner, but they’re trying.

Comments

  • Anonymous

    Don’t ban bullets, put a $5,000 surcharge on them.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAoMNEQo4sQ

    • Anonymous

      … and then if you find someone with bullets, they either have to show they receipt where paid the tax, or face jail for tax evasion.
      (Oh, and if you need the bullets for professional resason, you can reclaim the tax).

    • Anonymous

      LOL, love that bit!

  • Taketheredpill

    If all you anti-gunners really want to save lives lets ban cars for starters because car accidents kill alot more people than legal guns. Logic is non-existent from the average citizens vernacular, fear mongering, stupidity and propaganda is the rule of law.

    According to statistics Canada and I quote:

    “In 2004, there were 21.6 million licensed drivers in Canada among a population of 25.8 million people aged 16 or older. They operated over 25 million registered vehicles.”

    “From 2000 through 2004, there were 44,192 accidental deaths in Canada; 32% of the (14,082) were the result of motor vehicle accidents (MVAs). In the 15 to 24 age group, MVA deaths (3,417) accounted for 70% of all accidental deaths (4,895).

    How many legal gun owners were involved with these gang crime shootings? NONE, NEVER!

    Now lets look at how many guns owners there are in Canada.

    “According to the United Nations, Canada ranks third among the developed
    western countries (behind the US and Norway) in civilian ownership of
    firearms.[40] A 1992 survey sponsored by the UN reported that 26% of
    Canadians, over 7,000,000 people, own firearms.[41] A 1991 Justice
    Department telephone survey indicated there were an average of 2.67
    firearms in one of every four Canadian Households, with 71% having
    access to a rifle, 64% to a shotgun, and 12% to a handgun. They
    calculated that there are over six million legally owned firearms in
    Canada. Other authorities insist that this estimate is much too low and
    that there are at least 20,000,000 rifles and shotguns in Canada; as
    many, per capita, as in the United States. [1]”

    These gun stats are 20 yrs old and the numbers of gun owners must be equal or past that of car ownership. Why aren’t we seeing the numbers of crimes in the 30, 40, 50% range according to the idiot fear mongers who attack law abiding, legal gun owners. Shouldn’t there be mass murders on a weekly basis, tens of thousands of homicides a year? I’ll tell you why, because the only people who are unreasonably insane are those that think that just because you own a gun (tool) makes you a murderer! Guns don’t murder people its an inanimate object, its the intention of the individual and all of you anti-gun fools are saying all legal gun owners are irresponsible, sociopaths. According to the reasoning owning matches makes you arsonist or if you own an axe it constitutes that person to being a serial axe murderer, or if you own a knife you’re a night stalking slasher? Do you realize how stupid you all make yourselves sound, do you think before you speak?

    Illegal gun crime, organized street gangs, stabbings, robberies, assaults, rapes, home invasions, car jacking’s…etc will continue day after day, week after week and the yearly stats will go up you can bet your money on that. We’ll see how the legal guns stats fare, my guess the only thing that will continue to go up is the responsible, God given rights to legal gun ownership.

    According to certain politicians and mindless citizens I should be on a shooting rampage in downtown Toronto right about now with a body count in the dozens, so I should get going I got a long day ahead of me.

    Take the red pill folks, time to live in the real world!

    • Anonymous

      You do realize criminals do not pop out of the earth, you’re law abiding until you kill someone. Were do you the stats that says legal gun owners never kill or are not involved in crimes with guns? 20 year old stats are meaningless your pulling stuff out of the air to prove a point. Were does god say it is you given right to own a gun? You feel the number of gun related deaths does not matter as long as they are less then deaths due to motor vehicles?
      You need to stop watching American cops and robber show and learn to live in a real world

      • Taketheredpill

        Your comments are what popped out of the earth, you provide no evidence to back your claims so once again we have some anti-gun, fear mongerer who thinks their hot air are FACTS.

        That’s right you’re law abiding until you kill someone so in your reasoning its guns that turn people into psychopathic murderers right! Guess what, you ban guns criminals still will get access to them. Do you realize how much red tape there is to get a restricted hand gun, so all these street crimes are from legal gun owners! LOL You’re clueless. You could remove every single gun off this planet and criminals will use anything else they get their hands on even a sharp rock, then what ban rocks?

        Lets ban all potentially lethal objects, lets start with banning all knives, then lets ban hammers, gasoline, forks, axes, chainsaws, lets remove all trees from the city because criminals could sharpen sticks to lance their victims. Anything could be used as a weapon, should we all be wearing handcuff’s because according to you and others we all should be liable to pre-emptive crime until further notice and habeas corpus should be removed and sovereign citizens in a sovereign land is way too much responsibility and freedom…that’s a great idea lets continue where hitler left off.

        What you’re proposing is the first steps to fascism where the government regulates everything. What happened to rights (choice) to allow citizens the options and until an offense is committed one is NOT guilty.

        If it weren’t for the guns you and others hate so much Canada and the rest of the world would have been conquered by tyrants long ago. Everyday crimes are committed and many are saved by the ownership and use of a gun accessible to them. Thousands of brave men gave up their lives in WWII with the use of guns so that you have the rights and freedoms to run you’re stupid mouth to disgrace them with your hypocrite, asinine anti-gun ideals. On veterans day perhaps you can enlighten one of our brave veterans who put their lives on the line with your anti-gun spiel and tell them how all guns owners are potential criminals and how you hate guns. I wonder how many of them are legal gun owners, do you even care. People like you deserve no freedoms!

        Lets not stop with guns I propose that all people who travel in cars are drunk drivers, or enjoy running people down with their cars. Some people do this, so I guess we should bunch everyone up in the same irresponsible group. Do you drive, I guess that makes you a drunk driver right!

        Gun owners = criminals
        Car owners = criminals

        both can and have caused death in the hands of irresponsible people.

        Show me the stats where legal gun owners have used guns in crimes, its not what you say its what you can prove, and you’ve proved NOTHING! You’re opinion holds NO MERIT. PROVIDE FACTS!

        “20 year old stats are meaningless your pulling stuff out of the air to prove a point”

        Many of these criminals who are committing these crimes are career criminals who will never get reformed or respect the rule of law. The recent case of the Eaton center shooting wasn’t this first criminals offense, he was on house arrest. The criminal who was involved with the kensington market stabbing had over 15 prior convictions. Here’s your chance to add your “Lets ban all knives rant”

        Why do you think the government removed the registry, its did NOT PREVENT ONE ILLEGAL GUN CRIME. Even elected officials and police realized how stupid, wasteful and pointless the registry was they found out legal gun owners don’t commit crimes or so few that the registry was pointless. You haven’t provided one shred of evidence to back your claims so you’re the one who’s meaningless.

        “Were does god say it is you given right to own a gun?”

        Its called The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in FACT the first law states that rights are God given and only God could take them away. What gives any politician the jurisdiction to remove the right of “security of the person”. If criminals have guns I have the RIGHT to “security of the person” and to be provided with the tools necessary to preserve my rights as stated in section 7 of the Charter of Rights and freedoms. This is my choice and no one except God can remove those Rights.

        “Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:”

        http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html

        ” While such a guarantee was not put into our constitution (as was done in
        the US), our countries share a common history. We both have legal
        systems based on English Common Law. We share rights dating back to the
        Magna Carta.

        The 1689 English Bill of Rights specifically states that subjects of
        the Crown (citizens), in their capacity as individuals, as a right
        “may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions”. The
        Bill also states that disarming citizens is contrary to the law.
        This law still applies and re-enforces the common-law right.

        Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms states:
        “7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the
        person and the rights not to be deprived thereof except in
        accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”
        This section re-inforces the right of self-defense and strengthen
        the argument that access to firearms by law-abiding citizens is a
        right that continues to exist for Canadians.

        The Charter also states:
        “26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms
        shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights
        or freedoms that exist in Canada.”
        This section states that even if a right is not mentioned in the
        Charter, that doesn’t mean it does not exist. Many of our rights
        exist in common-law and were established centuries ago by such
        documents as the Magna Carta and the 1689 English Bill of Rights.”

        “Not only can you defend your life with deadly force, but you may defend
        your home. Sections 32 and 40 of the Criminal Code (CC) allow use of
        deadly force
        1) where you fear death or grievous bodily harm, and
        2) to keep persons from illegally entering your home.

        Colet v Regina (CCC vol. 57, 2d, pages 105 to 113, Jan 27, 1981) is the
        most recent example of the latter that I have found. Briefly, the local
        police tried to enter Mr Colet’s home in Prince Rupert, BC, without a
        warrant to do so. (They had only a warrant to seize whatever weapon he
        might have had.) He violently denied entry, even throwing Molotov
        cocktails at the police. Mr Justice Ritchie wrote in the _unanimous_
        Supreme Court of Canada decision:

        “The common law principle has been firmly engrafted in our law since
        Semayne’s case (1604) as reported in 5 Co. rep. 91a 77E.R. 194 where
        it was said [at p. 91b]: “that the house of every one is to him as
        his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and
        violence, as for his repose…”. This famous dictum was cited by
        my Brother Dickson in the case of Eccles v Bourque et al (1974), 19
        CCC (2d) 129, 50 D.L.R. (3d) 753, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 739, in which he
        made an extensive review of many of the relevant authorities.”

        However, it is likely far better to use the protection offered by
        sections 494, 25 and 29 of the Criminal Code (CC) of Canada. They
        “marry” to offer major protection to any person who is trying to
        _arrest_ a criminal, or a person he or she believes on reasonable
        grounds to be a criminal _and_ a threat of death or grievous bodily
        harm. They also protect him or her if force is used because the
        person being arrested is resisting arrest.

        When dealing with any home invasion (or other criminals) the _first_
        words out of your mouth should _always_ be, “YOU ARE UNDER ARREST!”
        If the intruder then assaults _you_, he has _no_ justification. He
        is resisting arrest, and that is a crime under CC s. 270. One
        should also read CC s. 265, 267, 268, and 270(1)(b) to clarify the
        above sections. CC s. 27, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44,
        and 45 should be read by every person interested in what one can and
        cannot do in the areas of self-protection and control of doubtful
        situations.”

        “You feel the number of gun related deaths does not matter as long as they are less then deaths due to motor vehicles?”

        Get this straight, there’s two types of gun owners legal and illegal, what the proposed bill does is attacks the law abiding citizens rights as banning ammunition targets legal gun owners. This is just another avenue of anti-gun hating rhetoric. The registry FAILED miserably and this new proposed bill is the same non-sense, only under a different name. It won’t prevent crime what so ever…are you all that dense!

        Criminals don’t have gun licenses, don’t go through the necessary steps to attain a firearm, don’t attend the gun safety courses or pay the ridiculous fees. This is just another stupid attempt to smear all gun owners in stereotypical fashion.

        Its cut and dry to scare you moron’s who lack sensible reasoning.

        Guns = Crime propaganda.

        Again I revert to the stats 20+ million guns in Canada, that equates for 1 gun for every 2 people for the whole country. Why aren’t there thousands of deaths each year. Provide your evidence! Don’t come back here with 20 crimes non-sense show me some real numbers. Go and research how many people die from use of pharmaceutical products and e-mail the politicians as to why there’s no ban on synthetic drugs. How many people die of lung related illnesses due to inhaling toxic particles from the emission from vehicles, e-mail your concerns about that. These drug and oil companies are killing people in the millions, but hey lets ban guns in the end it will save all the imaginary number of gun related victims that number in the thousands that we’ve never heard or seen stats to prove, but its there…somewhere backed by rock solid opinions.

        • Anonymous

          tl;dr

      • Anonymous

        Speaking of the real world. Maybe use .google before you go off on how much someone’s “stats” are wrong:

        “After the 1997 shooting of 16 kids in Dunblane, England, the United Kingdom passed one of the strictest gun-control laws in the world, banning its citizens from owning almost all types of handguns. Britain seemed to get safer by the minute, as 162,000 newly-illegal firearms were forked over to British officials by law-abiding citizens.

        But this didn’t decrease the amount of gun-related crime in the U.K. In fact, gun-related crime has nearly doubled in the U.K. since the ban was enacted.”

        Also Chicago and D.C. banned handguns for a period and gun crime actually increased

        Gun control isn’t the same as crime control. You’re confusing the two.

    • Anonymous

      I’m all for restricting car licensing, and drastically reducing speed limits, for starters.

  • AEM

    Arguing that banning guns is like banning cars is ridiculous. Cars may kill people, but their main purpose is to get you from point A to point B. In comparison, the only purpose of a gun is to main and kill. Sorry legal gun owners, but just because you like to shoot ‘em up and go bang bang doesn’t give you the right to do it. If keeping guns out of the hands of criminals means that we also keep them out of the hands of law abiding citizens, I’m all for it. Gun owners are just being disgustingly selfish if they argue otherwise. I mean, cocaine is one hell of a drug but the government has decided that it’s in society`s best interest to keep it illegal. Doesnt matter than thousands of people have used cocaine responsibly and without any problems, there will always be some asshole who ruins everything.

    • Anonymous

      “In comparison, the only purpose of a gun is to main and kill”

      Lying doesn’t help your case.

      • AEM

        Please explain how that statement is a lie. What is the purpose of a gun, other than to maim & kill?

        • Anonymous

          Sport. Maybe you’ve never heard of the Olypmics?

          Also, hunting, which I realize falls into your categories, but not what you’re inferring.

  • Taketheredpill

    Your logic is flawed and completely stupid, it doesn’t matter the main purpose of anything people still behave in an irresponsible and unlawful manner and their actions result in crime.

    “Cars may kill people, but their main purpose is to get you from point A to point B.”

    May kill people? Are you off you conscious? They DO kill people in the tens of thousand a YEAR, this isn’t a debate! I provided stats, so you can stop guessing and blurting our non-sensible opinions and try to pass them off as hard facts to your anti-freedom mob.

    I like the fact how you downplay the seriousness of the crime because its a car. Don’t form any bias opinions by the way you might look like you’re close minded and have an hidden agenda.

    What if those people weren’t shot they were run over by a drunk drivers as we see on a daily basis across the country. Should they ban everyone from access to a vehicle? How many incidents of crime occur with cars on a daily basis…to many to name. People run red lights, speed, drink and drive, drive on illicit drugs, drive with unsafe vehicles…etc those are serious crimes and “KILL PEOPLE”, but should that reflect on everyone else who follows the rule of law.

    Guns are tools they can be used to kill, people use cars to kill also. Its the individual that is the issue not the item used.

    Tell me how does banning legal guns keep them out of the criminals hands?

    PROVIDE FACTS PEOPLE! Opinions and hearsay is not evidence.

    Criminals don’t purchase guns from gun stores you need a license to purchase guns and if you don’t provide your license you don’t have access to a legal gun. Its obvious that criminals don’t follow the rules and they still have access to ILLEGAL GUNS this is why the gun registry failed and so are all your comments.

    Again you people lack the capacity and the brain power to realize what a inalienable RIGHT is. We do have the right to own guns, that’s the point of having laws so that dumbasses don’t come along and decide how much freedoms they think we deserve…its called freedoms! Its in plain English section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms this is the law of the land and it trumps you and all politicians rhetoric.

    According to the definitions in the dictionary:

    Right
       [rahyt] Show IPA adjective, right·er, right·est, noun, adverb, verb
    adjective
    1.
    in accordance with what is good, proper, or just: right conduct.
    2.
    in conformity with fact, reason, truth, or some standard or principle; correct: the right solution; the right answer.
    3.
    correct in judgment, opinion, or action.

    Security

    se·cu·ri·ty
       [si-kyoor-i-tee] Show IPA noun, plural se·cu·ri·ties, adjective
    noun
    1.
    freedom from danger, risk, etc.; safety.
    2.
    freedom from care, anxiety, or doubt; well-founded confidence.
    3.
    something that secures or makes safe; protection; defense.

    “Everyone has the RIGHT, to life, liberty and SECURITY of the person”

    So YES we all have the RIGHT to own the tools and that is not limited to guns, that provide us SECURITY. Is that simple enough for all of you to understand. NO you cannot take away my “RIGHTS” and I have the “RIGHT” whether you like it or not to defend myself against tyranny against the “SECURITY of the person”

    The government banning drugs has not removed all drugs off the street. Do you know how easy it is to get illegal drugs, there available in every town, city, country around the world. You can get illegal drugs easier than prescription drugs because with illegal drugs you don’t need a doctors prescription (if they even give you the prescription) then you need to go to a pharmacist who needs to call the doctor in to confirm the prescription. With illegal drugs there’s no red tape, cash and carry.

    “Sorry legal gun owners, but just because you like to shoot ‘em up and go bang bang doesn’t give you the right to do it.”

    What a moronic statement and its typical of your sort and shows extreme prejudice. Just because you like to stereotype doesn’t mean you have the facts. Again show me evidence that links legal guns owners with all the illegal crimes that happen. You won’t find any. These are gang crimes with ILLEGAL GUNS. Its beyond stupid the mindset of some of you people, “bang bang” what legal gun owner in their right mind does that…PROVIDE FACTS!

    I guess all the stereotypes of visible ethnic groups must be valid aswell since we’re on the topic of prejudices.

    God forbid you’re ever in a situation of crisis believe me no one will help you and you’ll be another statistic of your own ignorance. You cannot reason with the unreasonable, criminals don’t care about your or I that’s why we have prisons. I’ve been a victim of crime a few times and I know with some people you can reason with, with others necessary force is the only option.

    • Anonymous

      also tl;dr

  • Anonymous

    The main flaw in logic with the bullet ban is that criminals who purchase bullets and weapons do so not by legal means in the first place.

    It’s akin to Marijuana, where criminal organizations now have MORE money and MORE pot due to prohibition. In effect, I predict that these organization are probably laughingly waiting for this to come to fruition *cha-ching!*

    • Taketheredpill

      Exactly just watch they ban guns and its like ringing the bell for crime to go up. You’re spot on the criminals said *cha-ching!* because they can engage in illegal activities and they know no one is able to protect themselves.

      Prohibitions of anything don’t work, its human nature to be curious and at extremes be completely disobedient (forbidden fruit) comes to mind if one wishes to use that example.

      Look at alcohol prohibition in the U.S. all that did is put the power in the hands of those criminal organizations. Many people died of alcohol poisoning due to bathtub moonshine aswell.

      Prostitution was recently decriminalized have we seen a public explosion of prostitutes soliciting people everywhere…its sensationalist non-sense by the anti crowd that makes people think up this stuff.

      Amsterdam has very relaxed drug policies, drug use has gone down.

      Alcohol is available everywhere in Canada, is everyone drunk and committing social crimes NO! Same with marijuana, legalize it, tax it, those that want to grow it in huge amounts allow permits and small personal growth or use should be at each individuals discretion. The revenue would be HUGE, they could have a district.

      I don’t even smoke the stuff, heck! I don’t even drink alcohol, but should we ban alcohol because I don’t want to drink it. I believe in freedoms for all and the right to decide what you do with your own body.

      You know you don’t live in a free society when you have people telling you what you can and cannot put in your own sovereign body or you’re denied the right to defend your life from criminals.

  • Anonymous

    We should ban alcohol I mean it IS poison by design.

    Oh wait. We tried that.