• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

IKnowNothing

Member
Reaction score
155
Points
530
It's not that weird when you look it at as an extension of our polarization. If gun ownership was big in the Liberal party they wouldn't propose such stupidity.

This is isn't legislation for a safer Canada this is legislation to attack the other politcal side.
I see this very much as the follow up to the trucker vaccine thing. Well calculated division. Most Canadian's will either support or not care, and the vast majority of legal gun owners are left almost completely untouched. 5 rounds has been the long gun cap for what, 30 years? Restricted licenses make up what, 1/6 of PAL's? But the opposition has to fight it on principle, which distracts from winning at general. In my opinion this is less about capitalizing on fear and more about capitalizing on apathy to generate localized anger.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,213
Points
1,010
My main objection is that the government claims the country has a bit of a problem with right-wing extremism, and this policy - at the margins - should be expected to move a bunch of people a little further to the right from wherever they were yesterday/last week/last month. Extremists are "at fault" for what they do, but as with vehicle accidents, there are usually others who were in a position to reasonably prevent tragedy.

More coarsely, it's stupid to the fucking bone to unnecessarily piss people off.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,901
Points
1,160
This is super important in my opinion. Where I am I deal with an astronomical amount of gun crime from gang bangers. They don’t go to jail On firearms offences. And when they do it’s a couple months. Until they commit a VIOLENT crime.

Like hanging a rival gang member and bleeding them out. Then they get a couple years.

But the firearms offences net me basically zero unless it’s in conjunction with something else.

So how are these laws impacting Canadian safety? It’s just impacting Canadians as far as I can tell in a practical and anecdotal way,

I don’t care for firearms much. But I am not concerned with my friends and family having them.

It’s very weird
I don't know any frontline officer who knows even a bit about civilian gun ownership that supports the attacks on civilian gun owners.
 

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
433
Points
810
The only good thing about this is it is likely going to die at the summer recess. Liberals will likely use it to blame the Conservatives and claim they are trying not to keep the public safe, well concurrently telling the anti-firearms people they are trying to implement legislation.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,677
Points
1,090
The only good thing about this is it is likely going to die at the summer recess. Liberals will likely use it to blame the Conservatives and claim they are trying not to keep the public safe, well concurrently telling the anti-firearms people they are trying to implement legislation.
It doesn’t die. It gets postponed to the fall.
 

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
433
Points
810
Oh well thats a problem then, maybe its time to write to some senators and ask them to do their job and prevent this poor legislation from becoming a reality.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
964
Points
1,060
My main objection is that the government claims the country has a bit of a problem with right-wing extremism, and this policy - at the margins - should be expected to move a bunch of people a little further to the right from wherever they were yesterday/last week/last month. Extremists are "at fault" for what they do, but as with vehicle accidents, there are usually others who were in a position to reasonably prevent tragedy.

More coarsely, it's stupid to the fucking bone to unnecessarily piss people off.
Same as the States. One only need look at the way trudeau and biden's goals, plans and policies are aligning, to catch the drift. Censorship, firearms, fossil fuels and more. Both are ramping up their right wing, white supremist, "biggest threat to the country today" rhetoric. Meanwhile, last month they caught 45 people that are on the terrorist watch list, at the southern border. No telling how many, from 151 other countries, have gotten through undetected. And how many have we had walk across Roxham Rd, illegal crossing point? The illegal point trudeau never closed during the pandemic, while locking you in your home, voluntarily of course.🙄
 

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,388
Points
1,260
This from The Line on substack (archived link)
... There is no coherent rationale for this. Trudeau could start getting rid of handguns overnight. He has the power to immediately ban them and begin a buyback or confiscation process. Handguns are registered; he knows where they are, so it's not a logistical problem. He would have the support of the NDP in doing this, so it's not a political constraint, either. There's only one possible explanation for this proposal: if the Liberals aren't banning the guns, they're acknowledging the guns aren't the problem. It's the same for their "military style assault rifle" plan: they're banning some semi-automatic rifles that fire the various ammunition calibres, but not all semi-automatic rifles that fire the various ammunition calibres. Clearly, the rifles aren’t the problem. There's no way to read this without concluding that the purpose of the announcements is the announcements themselves.

(...)

What looks like confusing policy becomes clear once understood as politics. The Liberal have moved away from the previous shared understanding of the purpose of our gun control laws was and now view gun control as political signalling to their urban base voters, voters who won't know enough to realize how bizarre and toothless the proposals are. And that's it. The more vulnerable the Liberals have become politically, the harder they've worked to make a lot of noise on guns without actually coming down with a policy that goes all the way toward the obvious natural conclusion of their proposals. Excellent politicians that they are, they know actually solving the issue isn’t in their interests — it’s better for them to keep stuff in hand to roll out, bit by bit, every time there's a tragedy. That only makes sense if one of these things are true: the Liberals are either willing to let Canadians die to give them more political cover, or they know the freezes and bans won't actually save lives, so feel no real urgency to actually do anything.

This is either a cynical ploy or an unconscionable choice. It can't be anything else ...
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
964
Points
1,060
I mentioned in another post how the democrats and our grits policies and programs are aligning ever faster. Kill fossil fuels, create shortages, climate change, over the top demonizing of anyone not far left as themselves. Anyone white and conservative "is the greatest terrorist threat to our country." Racists, misoginists, knuckle dragging gun owners is their mantra. And now, not a week apart, is trudeau and biden bullishly pushing ahead with their ill thought out, garbage based evidence, laws to disarm the populations. Both policies are using some of the same rules and citing the same evidence. It used to be years apart when Trump upset the apple cart. It was supposed to be clinton and trudeau doing then what biden and trudeau are doing now. Aligning policies, programs, socialist ideals, industries. I don't mean to take this off on a tangent. Suffice to say, disarming us is at the top of both there agendas right now. There is a drive to get our guns.
 
Last edited:

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,688
Points
1,140
Yesterday was the first National Range Day. Gun ranges across Canada opened their doors to the public, some, for the very first time.

My little club had around 200 visitors. Forty participated in a reservation-only live fire event where they were introduced to the shooting sports using handguns and long guns. The "open house" showcased the facility as well as IPSC, Steel Challenge and Cowboy Action Shooting.

If your club/range did something similar, please sound off here. Maybe we can share ideas to improve the event next year.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,036
Points
1,040
Yesterday was the first National Range Day. Gun ranges across Canada opened their doors to the public, some, for the very first time.

My little club had around 200 visitors. Forty participated in a reservation-only live fire event where they were introduced to the shooting sports using handguns and long guns. The "open house" showcased the facility as well as IPSC, Steel Challenge and Cowboy Action Shooting.

If your club/range did something similar, please sound off here. Maybe we can share ideas to improve the event next year.
Shame there wasn't better advertising. My son and I would have loved to have gone.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,704
Points
1,040
I like how there is really no middle ground here; either any idiot can buy any gun they want at any time, or you are Hitler/Mao etc.

I'm not a fan of the additional restrictions, but really no good reason that there shouldn't be some kind of licensing and limitations on buying/owning/operating them. If you look at all the things that do require a license to safely operate, it's simply irrational to not require that for guns, who only exist to kill sometime better.

Doesn't stop criminals, but really no reason someone needs an automatic weapon for hunting, and if you need a 30 round mag to hit a deer you should just learn to shoot.

I think needing to be licensed (and having tied to basic safety training) to buy guns and ammo, requiring safe storage and some other limitations are pretty reasonable. Things like cooling off periods also make sense. Personally thought our existing gun laws before some of the recent changes and these proposed restrictions were mostly pretty reasonable on the whole, with the exception of some of the fear mongering around 'assault style weapons'.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,294
Points
1,140
I like how there is really no middle ground here; either any idiot can buy any gun they want at any time, or you are Hitler/Mao etc.

I'm not a fan of the additional restrictions, but really no good reason that there shouldn't be some kind of licensing and limitations on buying/owning/operating them. If you look at all the things that do require a license to safely operate, it's simply irrational to not require that for guns, who only exist to kill sometime better.

Doesn't stop criminals, but really no reason someone needs an automatic weapon for hunting, and if you need a 30 round mag to hit a deer you should just learn to shoot.

I think needing to be licensed (and having tied to basic safety training) to buy guns and ammo, requiring safe storage and some other limitations are pretty reasonable. Things like cooling off periods also make sense. Personally thought our existing gun laws before some of the recent changes and these proposed restrictions were mostly pretty reasonable on the whole, with the exception of some of the fear mongering around 'assault style weapons'.
Mag laws are fairly pointless- it takes a fraction of a second for a criminal to drill out a rivet or remove a block.

Most state and province have mag limits for hunting. - but action sports use normal capacity mags - so you’re just punishing the shooting sports with mag laws.

Canadian Safe Storage laws are fairly ridiculous. I have a pistol in a holster on my bed stand - my carry gun that I place there when I got to bed. You can’t do that in Canada because apparently at night that gun is going to jump up, grab your car keys and commit mayhem by itself?

I agree that unattended guns should be secured - but some of the rules are just poorly thought out.
 
Top