• 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

Question is - with the addition of the guns to be banned with it - are they confiscating with no compensation...or is there a compensation part of it as well?

If there's a compensation part, then it becomes a money bill....which might make it a confidence vote from the Liberal perspective.

NDP have agreed to vote with the Liberals to sustain the government.

Trudeau might have his election in the spring afterall...
 
NavyShooter said:
Question is - with the addition of the guns to be banned with it - are they confiscating with no compensation...or is there a compensation part of it as well?

If there's a compensation part, then it becomes a money bill....which might make it a confidence vote from the Liberal perspective.

NDP have agreed to vote with the Liberals to sustain the government.

Trudeau might have his election in the spring afterall...
Click to expand...

I have said before. There are rumors from within fortress LPC that their MPs have been told to fund raise and prepare for a spring election.
 
Humphrey Bogart said:
God I'd love to have a fence beside his place, his rants are highly entertaining.

Ben Shapiroesque almost 😄
Click to expand...
He’s actually a street and a small lake across from me, but I’m looking at the back of his house right now…no rant party on the deck at the moment. 😆
 
QV said:
How many times have predicting future outcomes of bad laws/polices been labelled conspiracy theory?
Click to expand...
world forum GIF
 
This is not a question designed to elicit a "gotcha" moment; as a non-hunter I am literally just ignorant:

How many of you and/or how often while hunting did you:
a. use a semi-auto rifle while hunting; and
b. actually use the semi-auto function in the process of taking down the animal? (i.e. shoot 2-3 times in quick succession)

I have it in my mind that hunters only ever fire one bullet and one bullet only to take down a target, and I want to figure out if that's a wild and incorrect assumption or not.
 
Lumber said:
This is not a question designed to elicit a "gotcha" moment; as a non-hunter I am literally just ignorant:

How many of you and/or how often while hunting did you:
a. use a semi-auto rifle while hunting; and
b. actually use the semi-auto function in the process of taking down the animal? (i.e. shoot 2-3 times in quick succession)

I have it in my mind that hunters only ever fire one bullet and one bullet only to take down a target, and I want to figure out if that's a wild and incorrect assumption or not.
Click to expand...
First question: "what are you hunting?"

If you're varmint hunting, being able to quickly conduct what's called a "follow up shot" is pretty critical.


Ironically, the "black scary gun" people most associate with gun control is primarily used for smaller game.
 
Lumber said:
This is not a question designed to elicit a "gotcha" moment; as a non-hunter I am literally just ignorant:

How many of you and/or how often while hunting did you:
a. use a semi-auto rifle while hunting; and
b. actually use the semi-auto function in the process of taking down the animal? (i.e. shoot 2-3 times in quick succession)

I have it in my mind that hunters only ever fire one bullet and one bullet only to take down a target, and I want to figure out if that's a wild and incorrect assumption or not.
Click to expand...

Depends on what I'm hunting. For migratory bird a semi is almost essential.

I've harvested deer with an M14. I used an M1 Carbine this year. Both semi auto center fire rifles. I really like the rotating bolt action on those rifles. It just feels smooth and ergonomic to me. And the carbine is so light and easy to maneuver in the woods.

Generally if I'm stalking large game I like a semi. If I'm stand hunting I take a bolt gun.

Have I ever needed a follow on shot ? No. But I've hunted with lots of folks who do.

One has to remember hunting isn't the only reason for one to want to own firearms.
 
Halifax Tar said:
One has to remember hunting isn't the only reason for one to want to own firearms.
Click to expand...
Yea, no worries, I wasn't arguing against that. I was just contemplating the argument that people have made that "you don't need a semi-auto to hunt". To me it doesn't even matter if that's true, because there are other reasons to have a semi-auto (sport shooting), but then I realized I had no idea if the statement about hunting with semi-autos was true or not.
 
Lumber said:
This is not a question designed to elicit a "gotcha" moment; as a non-hunter I am literally just ignorant:

How many of you and/or how often while hunting did you:
a. use a semi-auto rifle while hunting; and
b. actually use the semi-auto function in the process of taking down the animal? (i.e. shoot 2-3 times in quick succession)

I have it in my mind that hunters only ever fire one bullet and one bullet only to take down a target, and I want to figure out if that's a wild and incorrect assumption or not.
Click to expand...
I have taken down numerous game: ducks, geese, rabbits, deer. In all my time hunting, the only time I fired a second shot was when there were more than enough waterfowl to elicit a second shot, and that was through a 870 Wingmaster, which is a pump, rather than a semi. I didn't know of anyone who used a semi: bolt action check, single shot check, pump action check.
 
Lumber said:
Yea, no worries, I wasn't arguing against that. I was just contemplating the argument that people have made that "you don't need a semi-auto to hunt". To me it doesn't even matter if that's true, because there are other reasons to have a semi-auto (sport shooting), but then I realized I had no idea if the statement about hunting with semi-autos was true or not.
Click to expand...

I hear you.

I mean you can hunt just about anything with a single shot Cooey .12ga. But there are much better tools out there.
 
Hypothetical here. In an alternate universe an honestly well-meaning (as opposed to vote and fear mongering) LPC seeks to tighten gun control in a fair and effective way. In addition to measures expressly aimed at criminals committing firearms related offenses (harsher penalties, strict liability for unlawful possession, etc) they seek to reduce access to the guns that make mass shootings easier. Instead of hysterical and nonsensical "assault weapon" and handgun bans, they, in consultation with the CPC and firearms groups come up with a fair and clear definition of weapon to be added to the Restricted class (not banned). Two year grace period for PAL holders to upgrade to RPAL, with expedited processing.

Example definition/ criteria: semi-auto, centrefire, commercially marketed after 19xx, designed with intent for reload via variable capacity detachable magazine (not an integral mag designed for reload via en bloc/stripper/ single round that happens to be detachable).

Tolerable? Reasonable?
 
Halifax Tar said:
I hear you.

I mean you can hunt just about anything with a single shot Cooey .12ga. But there are much better tools out there.
Click to expand...
I had a Cooey 22. But almost every time I would cock it to shoot, the sound would distract the target, to my dismay. I bought a Remington.
 
IKnowNothing said:
Hypothetical here. In an alternate universe an honestly well-meaning (as opposed to vote and fear mongering) LPC seeks to tighten gun control in a fair and effective way. In addition to measures expressly aimed at criminals committing firearms related offenses (harsher penalties, strict liability for unlawful possession, etc) they seek to reduce access to the guns that make mass shootings easier. Instead of hysterical and nonsensical "assault weapon" and handgun bans, they, in consultation with the CPC and firearms groups come up with a fair and clear definition of weapon to be added to the Restricted class (not banned). Two year grace period for PAL holders to upgrade to RPAL, with expedited processing.

Example definition/ criteria: semi-auto, centrefire, commercially marketed after 19xx, designed with intent for reload via variable capacity detachable magazine (not an integral mag designed for reload via en bloc/stripper/ single round that happens to be detachable).

Tolerable? Reasonable?
Click to expand...
How about the government just enforce the rules that they already have on the books, instead of making new ones?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Edward Campbell
QC Muslim 1st woman charged under 9/11 terror law for shipping wpn parts to LBN
Replies
2
Views
11K
The Bread Guy
The Bread Guy
Ex-Dragoon
Wierd But Supposedly True News Stories:
Replies
0
Views
8K
Ex-Dragoon
Ex-Dragoon
Mike Bobbitt
Direct Action: Memoirs of an Urban Guerrilla (Book review)
Replies
2
Views
13K
Mike Bobbitt
Mike Bobbitt
Back
Top