Reading things like this makes it make sense as to why the government is putting big efforts into reducing legal gun ownership (and the type of guns targeted, ex. 50 cal rifles) instead of going after criminals and makes sense of things like the Online Harms Bill… The elites are trying to prevent a repeat of 1789 France or 1917 Russia.
The funny thing about the polls on guns is polls that have asked about the respondents knowledge indicate that the more educated one is about our gun laws, the less likely they are to support bans. Much of the ban support is being generated by anti-gun propaganda where a lack of understanding of how our actual system works exists.
This is a huge strawman. You can’t just say “of the 20 people I’ve spoken with, trust me, the more they
ownknow about firearms, the less they want bans!”I have my PAL and I think we should ban just about everything that isn’t a shotgun or hunting rifle. 78% of Canadians don’t even own a firearm, I get it’s your fun hobby, but you’re not playing with toy trains, you’re using things designed to kill people. I straight up don’t trust the average person to not kill people with it, and I’m not in the minority there.
(X) doubt
The more respondents self reported as educated, the less likely they are to support bans. Meaning, respondents thinking they are educated in gun laws. Same would happen if you interviewed folks on vaccines and trusted them because “they’re doing their own research”. But are these people really educated on longitudinal studies about the effects of gun laws? Or are they educated in the sense of knowing what the Canadian laws are?
Perfect example of how correlation does not imply causation. If you take a second to think about what you’ve written, it should be quite obvious that the people who are buying guns, and thus don’t support stricter regulation, also tend to educate themselves more about gun laws. It seems you’ve reversed cause and effect.