The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[KevinB]

That’s because they are expanding their powers to be the first responders in the areas where they are so they can assist in emergencies as an authority. So because they may be the dispatched cop to
Something criminal, not hunting and fishing regulation related, they have to have the kit.

That’s the direction of the agencies out west anyways. You’ll see that drift continue. I did see an article about the Yukon game wardens and how the
Rifles were referred to in the context of bear encounters. So it seems a little disorganized in the messaging.

The AR-10 would be around the last firearm I would recommend for that task.
There are a lot more effective 7.62 NATO gas guns than the AR-10, and with magazines that actually work.

Even new Armalite AR-10 that use the SR-25 magazine are pretty awful guns (but at least it’s not a modified M-14 magazine anymore)

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Until they are rampaging through the Quebec City-Windsor corridor they aren't really a "problem" in the eyes of many.

They're already here.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

That’s because they are expanding their powers to be the first responders in the areas where they are so they can assist in emergencies as an authority. So because they may be the dispatched cop to
Something criminal, not hunting and fishing regulation related, they have to have the kit.

That’s the direction of the agencies out west anyways. You’ll see that drift continue. I did see an article about the Yukon game wardens and how the
Rifles were referred to in the context of bear encounters. So it seems a little disorganized in the messaging.

You're only using 5.56 in your assault style rifles. Why are the Game Wardens carrying .308? Let's be serious, there's no children here. They weren't issued AR-10 style platforms to act as emergency police. They were issued these because they are effective against large, dangerous game. Your scenario leaps into the cavern of what if's. Like what happens when a bystander is hit with a .308 soft nosed hunting round? Do wardens go through the same course of fire annually that the RCMP do? I'm sure you get the point. We're not here to discuss wardens as cops.

The government says we don't need a semi auto to hunt, but that is what they provide their wardens. And for good reason. Why them and not us? Do we not deserve to use the same rifles the government experts picked for their own in case of attack?

 

[Booter]

The AR-10 would be around the last firearm I would recommend for that task.
There are a lot more effective 7.62 NATO gas guns than the AR-10, and with magazines that actually work.

Even new Armalite AR-10 that use the SR-25 magazine are pretty awful guns (but at least it’s not a modified M-14 magazine anymore)

When has procurement worked on what’s effective for a task. The game wardens have evolving tasks- one of their hang ups was their equipment being unsuitable. So they started looking for kit that can be useful in a broad cross section of things- heavy leaned to the side of fish and wildlife stuff but also able to complete other tasks.

I don’t know enough about their requirements to speak beyond that. They are looking at two hats,

As for “no kids in the woods” they were the first responders at an active shooter at an oil and gas camp a while back. I’m not clear on their requirements beyond some talks about equipment and expanding roles.

 

[Booter]

You're only using 5.56 in your assault style rifles. Why are the Game Wardens carrying .308? Let's be serious, there's no children here. They weren't issued AR-10 style platforms to act as emergency police. They were issued these because they are effective against large, dangerous game. Your scenario leaps into the cavern of what if's. Like what happens when a bystander is hit with a .308 soft nosed hunting round? Do wardens go through the same course of fire annually that the RCMP do? I'm sure you get the point. We're not here to discuss wardens as cops.

The government says we don't need a semi auto to hunt, but that is what they provide their wardens. And for good reason. Why them and not us? Do we not deserve to use the same rifles the government experts picked for their own in case of attack?

There is nothing “whataboutism” about it- early discussions on carbine rifle replacements and upgrades discussed multiple roles- when they were discussing the enhanced peace officer responses. I’m sure they selected it for big dangerous game- there are a Series of factors im sure- so I’m sure you’re right. I’m also certain that it’s more complicated based off those equipment needs discussions and what was brought up- and the example of the work camp.

It’s not entirely on topic and I see your point. I don’t know anything beyond what I said here and it’s a derail
At best

 

[Eaglelord17]

I'm not going to be able to do that. But I can propose that "criminal illegal ownership of firearms" is one of three avenues to gun related (non-suicide) violence- particularly when homicide is the objection
A- criminal illegal ownership - gang bangers etc. Gun control laws have no effect, and the government is not doing near enough for political reasons.
B-person that desires to commit violence seeks legal ownership
C-person with legal ownership desires to commit violence

I'll fully concede that in Canada A is the greater issue (and even then not a big one in the National context), but when we look to the South, we can see B and C become serious threats to public safety at the intersection of insufficient gun control and sufficient societal... angst? That angst level is rising in Canada. I wholly admit to being a fudd, but have been around guns all my life. 6-10 years ago I'd be fully against the need for any further gun control in Canada, and am in no way in favour of Bill C21 or the "assault weapons" ban. That being said, I can see the argument that the PAL (which can be passed by a reasonably trained monkey) is not a high enough bar to be the only thing standing in between increasingly disgruntled/radicalized/ scared / disenfranchised people and a modded Ruger Mini with no purpose other than the planned or hypothetical taking of human life, hence musing about the RPAL as a compromise to raise the bar on who has high capacity semis without all this ban nonsense.

A- is the only issue you can really control. We control that with the licensing system and it works quite effectively. Very few strawbuyers and those that do get caught quickly. Next step is cracking down on drug distribution and the criminals involved in that as they are the criminals shooting each other with guns.

B- We have barriers to prevent people from getting licenses. believe it or not it is harder for a someone who wants to commit crimes to get a license than you think. Most who wish to commit that type of violence have a record and as such can't get a license. Most the recent shooting examples were done with guns smuggled from the US. Hell even things like the Nova Scotia shooter may have been prevented if the cops had done their job and followed up on the illegal firearms complaints.

C- This happens, but it happens less than your average citizen desiring to commit violence. If there was no firearm they would use a knife, or a hammer, etc.

Gun related violence is a red herring argument, you need to look at violence as a whole. Obviously if you take guns out of the picture the firearm suicide rate goes down, but the overall suicide rate does not. That means you didn't have a effect, yet this is the argument people choose to take because it is reductionist and easy to be communicated no matter how wrong it is. It is the same thing in domestic murders (most common type for legal firearms owners). Taking guns out of that picture doesn't change the fact those murders happen, just changes how, from gun to knife, to hammer. If anything your providing women less of a chance in those cases.

The disenfranchised argument is a weak one. How about instead we stop disenfranchising people and making people get angry and violent through useless and discriminatory laws. I am more concerned about the government than it is of me, I can assure you. Considering this government has admitted it was committing genocide within the last 30 years, I don't think it has any moral authority to tell me I shouldn't own firearms for my safety.

 

[KevinB]

When has procurement worked on what’s effective for a task.

Once in 1944, maybe

The game wardens have evolving tasks- one of their hang ups was their equipment being unsuitable. So they started looking for kit that can be useful in a broad cross section of things- heavy leaned to the side of fish and wildlife stuff but also able to complete other tasks.

I would have suggested the FN C1A1 but those had all been disposed of…

I don’t know enough about their requirements to speak beyond that. They are looking at two hats,

As for “no kids in the woods” they were the first responders at an active shooter at an oil and gas camp a while back. I’m not clear on their requirements beyond some talks about equipment and expanding roles.

Honestly a decent 5.56mm load would be able to do both quite well, or a suppressed .300BlackOut.

Then a 12ga with Slugs.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Once in 1944, maybe


I would have suggested the FN C1A1 but those had all been disposed of…


Honestly a decent 5.56mm load would be able to do both quite well, or a suppressed .300BlackOut.

Then a 12ga with Slugs.

I say with we give them Martini Henrys.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Even the US suicide rate is not really out of line with other countries, despite the guns. Then there is SK and Japan, with almost no private gun ownership and massive suicide rate. A very red herring.

 

[CBH99]

You mean like he and his cabal threatening to sue Parliament because Parliament wanted to know the details of the Chinese foreign nationals working in Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg that has a redacted material transfer record between the

PMJT need to up his reconciliation game it would seem.

Morning Update: First Nations leaders vote against Ottawa’s gun-control legislation

Chiefs express concern about last-minute amendments, saying changes would criminalize guns First Nations people use for hunting

www.theglobeandmail.com

Reconcilliation can wait until an election is called...

Funny how it was major national news when they found hundreds of bodies using ground penetrating radar, and that was just at one or two sites. They were going to go to hundreds of sites across the country and use the same technology to discover the extent of such a nationally disgraceful problem.

It was all over the TV, radio, newspapers, etc

Then voting day happened, and the election was over...and not one peep from a single news organization since.


So I have no doubt the LPC will amend it so FN users can continue to lawfully do so, but that amendment will come when it'll do the most good for the LPC.

(Closer to spring if an election does indeed get called around then.)

 

[Fishbone Jones]

As for “no kids in the woods” they were the first responders at an active shooter at an oil and gas camp a while back. I’m not clear on their requirements beyond some talks about equipment and expanding roles.

I said nothing about kids in the woods. I said there are no kids here, meaning the forum.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Funny how it was major national news when they found hundreds of bodies using ground penetrating radar, and that was just at one or two sites. They were going to go to hundreds of sites across the country and use the same technology to discover the extent of such a nationally disgraceful problem.

It was all over the TV, radio, newspapers, etc

What they found was anomalies. They haven't uncovered a single body yet. And they don't want to. Partially because the majority would be found as having died from disease and not at the hands of their warders, which works against their narrative.

 

[calculus]

Well written article, from the Fraser Institute: BLOG: Trudeau government targets law-abiding gunowners, again

 

[OldSolduer]

I say with we give them Martini Henrys.

I have one of those. It hangs on the wall - it looks better there.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I have one of those. It hangs on the wall - it looks better there.

I have a Martini Enfield carbine Sadly I think its life is over and it will transition into a wall hanger as well. I cant find someone to do a barrel swap on it

 

[Deleted member 175000]

I will never understand why suicide is in these talks. That's a pure and simple mental health issue. The fact uncle bob used his 870 to take his own life when his wife left has absolutely zero to do with the shotgun. Instead it has everything to do with a hurting individual who couldn't handle it anymore. If the gun wasn't the means, it was going to be the McKay bridge or a toaster in the tub. I just do not comprehend how this is a firearms issue.

First of all stop, looking south. Jesus Canada, stop looking south. The USA has a whole host of complicating issues that cause their violent crime. And guns themselves aren't the big issue. But as Canada does we some how internalize the problems their problems.

Having said that, we do share some ground. And I get roasted on here when I say this, I am all for tougher and more stringent testing, like you I think its too easy and I would incorporate a practical range portion.

What makes no sense to me is our classification of firearms. Its completely illogical, politically driven and arbitrary.

Maybe we are more the same page than I thought...

I think we are. That being the case, I have to point out that the only time I mentioned suicide was to explicitly exclude it as I'm in in complete agreement that its not germane to the conversation.

Re the bold, I also have to point out that the hypothetical that was initially presented was an aim to fix just that. By definition it would only impact firearms that provide no added functional value to law abiding gun owners, many of which could avoid restriction via retrofit such as the Cross Armory Fixed mag.

 

[calculus]

Did they though? Here is their statement on the "Poly" promo code:

Statement on Promocode - Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights

Concerning the discount code controversy: Our promocode was in no way a reference to the tragedy at Ecole Polytechnique. It was a two-week-old response to a Twitter account criticizing us for fundraising. Any suggestion to the contrary is blatantly false.

firearmrights.ca

More on the "Poly" controversy:

 

[Lumber]

I think we are. That being the case, I have to point out that the only time I mentioned suicide was to explicitly exclude it as I'm in in complete agreement that its not germane to the conversation.

Re the bold, I also have to point out that the hypothetical that was initially presented was an aim to fix just that. By definition it would only impact firearms that provide no added functional value to law abiding gun owners, many of which could avoid restriction via retrofit such as the Cross Armory Fixed mag.

I just watched the video on the Cross Armory Fixed Mag. That thing is so simple and ingenious.

They should make the law this: all semi-auto center-fire rifles that are capable of accepting a detachable magazine with a greater than 5 round capacity must be modified to include a non-removable magazine with a 5-round capacity.

There, everyone is happy.

 

[Eaglelord17]

How about we don't bother with any magazine restrictions and let law abiding citizens do as they please?

If you have no defensible argument as to the restrictions you want, then there is no need for them. California bothers with all that fixed magazine crap and all it does it frustrates the law abiding.

Magazine restrictions mean nothing. You already have a firearm, if your intent is to do harm you will do so. Just as if you intend to do harm and have a truck you will do so. Welcome to society where you can't control everyones actions and must accept there are risks involved in being part of it.

 

[Deleted member 175000]

How about we don't bother with any magazine restrictions and let law abiding citizens do as they please?

Law abiding citizens have no use for a centre-fire mag that exceeds 5 rounds.

Also, retrofit to a fixed mag isn't a "mag restriction", it changes the functional properties of the firearm