The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Haggis]

its not progressive but it might appeal to the "progressive" wing of the party
I dont see how only apportioning enough money for 10% of the registered restricted firearms is a policy win

Remember that we are lucky that compensation is being offered at all. The Firearms Act has provisions for seizure and forfeiture without compensation for any good and sufficient reason such as "that model is now prohibited and you can no longer possess it". The antis have always stood against compensation as it would give owners cash to buy replacement firearms like an SKS.

 

[MrWhyt]

I guess it boils down to if you think under pressure, or by non compliance the government eventually either terminates the buyback program, grandfathers the remaining AR's and cites whatever they collected as a "success" for the Quebec voters.

they will collect/confiscate the formerly restricted guns before they give up the on program IMO. They know who has them and where they are. Collecting them will be an easy victory "we got X guns off the street".

 

[Eaglelord17]

Remember that we are lucky that compensation is being offered at all. The Firearms Act has provisions for seizure and forfeiture without compensation for any good and sufficient reason such as "that model is now prohibited and you can no longer possess it". The antis have always stood against compensation as it would give owners cash to buy replacement firearms like an SKS.

Common law and pre-1867 property rights are enshrined in the Constitution (reinforced by the Bill of Rights). The government cannot declare they owe you nothing as much as they would like to.

If we had to pay slave owners compensation you have to pay gun owners compensation.

They aren’t getting anything from me, I will deactivate and make a art display before I surrender anything.

 

[Stoker]

Remember that we are lucky that compensation is being offered at all. The Firearms Act has provisions for seizure and forfeiture without compensation for any good and sufficient reason such as "that model is now prohibited and you can no longer possess it". The antis have always stood against compensation as it would give owners cash to buy replacement firearms like an SKS.

Apparently that's the reason why the Anti's want the SKS banned now so people don't go out and buy one with the compensation money.

 

[North Star]

Based on recent diplomatic events, it's a bit funny that some may spend their compensation money on crap Chicom imports.

 

[Lumber]

I'm just being petulant assuming you voted Liberal after mentioning being a proud progressive. I still think you're a cool dude even if you're probably obsessed with soup.

You're right about people being ambivalent. I think anyone who voted Liberal should be embarassed by their support for the government, specifically leading to this. The truth is many don't care, and many will be very happy over this. Some will no doubt be angry the Liberals even offered $1 compensation. I hope karma kicks into over drive here.

Did I mention I was a "proud progressive"? I don't recall that, and I don't think I would label myself as such. Progressive? Sure, but getting more and more conservative with my age. Though I'm actually an enigma in that my time in the navy did not endear me toward soup (though I love a good Seafood Chowder).

I think what you, and many on here, fail to appreciate is just how much of a non-issue gun ownership is for the vast majority of Canadians. The latest numbers I could find indicate that up to 26% of households have guns, but in terms of individuals, only about 7% of Canadians own guns. So, already there isn't that many Canadians who really care about gun ownership. Now the mistake I think you and others on here are making is assuming that those 7%, which is already a pretty small number, are a monolithic block that are all hardcore Liberal hating, pro-property, pro-gun absolutists; they are not. Included in this number are supporters and/or votes of every party. Included in this numbers are people who probably AGREE with the Liberal policy. Included in this number are probably even those who agree with the position that semi-automatics have no real use-case and are fine to see them go bye bye. So, if you remove THOSE people form the 7%, and then just look at the Liberal voting gun owners who are left, how many are there actually who would "be embarrassed" by this policy?

Now, you probably do have supporters from even non-gun owners, who think this buy-back program is utter bullshit, and that taking away legal guns from harmless and law-abiding gun owners won't do shit to help with gun violence, but it's not enough to make a "splash" in the Liberal calculus.

 

[suffolkowner]

Did I mention I was a "proud progressive"? I don't recall that, and I don't think I would label myself as such. Progressive? Sure, but getting more and more conservative with my age. Though I'm actually an enigma in that my time in the navy did not endear me toward soup (though I love a good Seafood Chowder).

I think what you, and many on here, fail to appreciate just how much of a non-issue gun ownership is for the vast majority of Canadians. The latest numbers I could find indicate that up to 26% of households have guns, but in terms of individuals, only about 7% of Canadians own guns. So, already there isn't that many Canadians who really care about gun ownership. Now the mistake I think you and others on here are making is assuming that those 7%, which is already a pretty small number, are a monolithic block that are all hardcore Liberal hating, pro-property, pro-gun absolutists; they are not. Included in this number are supporters of every party. Included in this numbers are people who probably AGREE with the Liberal policy. Included in this number are probably even those who agree with the position that semi-automatics have no real use-case and are fine to see them go bye bye. So, if you remove THOSE people form the 7%, and then just look at the Liberal voting gun owners, how many are there actually who would "be embarrassed" by this policy?

Now, you probably do have supporters from even non-gun owning, who think this buy-back program is utter bullshit, and that taking away legal guns from harmless and law-abiding gun owners won't do shit to help with gun violence, but it's not enough to make a "splash" in the Liberal calculus.

tyranny of the majority

 

[Jarnhamar]

Did I mention I was a "proud progressive"? I don't recall that,

I'm being a dick and lashing out. Sorry. You didn't phrase it as a proud progressive.

You're simply right about many Canadians just not caring. And even if they don't have a dog in the fight and don't support what the Liberals are doing, their ambivalent.

Emotionally, I hope this decision fucks Liberal & left-wing voters somehow (without loss of life, that is). But pragmaticly speaking the country will just move on.

Carney showed his true colours here and took the cowards way out. I'm not surprised but I am disappointed.

 

[Lumber]

I'm being a dick and lashing out. Sorry. You didn't phrase it as a proud progressive.

You're simply right about many Canadians just not caring. And even if they don't have a dog in the fight and don't support what the Liberals are doing, their ambivalent.

Emotionally, I hope this decision fucks Liberal & left-wing voters somehow (without loss of life, that is). But pragmaticly speaking the country will just move on.

Carney showed his true colours here and took the cowards way out. I'm not surprised but I am disappointed.

I'm still holding out hope that, either by honest coincidence, or by Machiavellian planning, Carney claims to have finally looked at the same numbers as we are (i.e. this many guns, this much money available) and goes, "What the hell, this makes no sense, sorry Poly, policy reversed", but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Did I mention I was a "proud progressive"? I don't recall that, and I don't think I would label myself as such. Progressive? Sure, but getting more and more conservative with my age. Though I'm actually an enigma in that my time in the navy did not endear me toward soup (though I love a good Seafood Chowder).

I think what you, and many on here, fail to appreciate is just how much of a non-issue gun ownership is for the vast majority of Canadians. The latest numbers I could find indicate that up to 26% of households have guns, but in terms of individuals, only about 7% of Canadians own guns. So, already there isn't that many Canadians who really care about gun ownership. Now the mistake I think you and others on here are making is assuming that those 7%, which is already a pretty small number, are a monolithic block that are all hardcore Liberal hating, pro-property, pro-gun absolutists; they are not. Included in this number are supporters and/or votes of every party. Included in this numbers are people who probably AGREE with the Liberal policy. Included in this number are probably even those who agree with the position that semi-automatics have no real use-case and are fine to see them go bye bye. So, if you remove THOSE people form the 7%, and then just look at the Liberal voting gun owners who are left, how many are there actually who would "be embarrassed" by this policy?

Now, you probably do have supporters from even non-gun owners, who think this buy-back program is utter bullshit, and that taking away legal guns from harmless and law-abiding gun owners won't do shit to help with gun violence, but it's not enough to make a "splash" in the Liberal calculus.

Numbers mean squat. If it was purely numbers, no one would give a sh*t about gays and such as they represent a even smaller subset

• About 1.3 million Canadians (4.4% of those 15+) identify as part of the 2SLGBTQI+ community, with youth representing a larger proportion than in the general population.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The latest numbers I could find indicate that up to 26% of households have guns, but in terms of individuals, only about 7% of Canadians own guns.

That math doesn't compute. In any household where there is a gun, there must be, by definition, at least one individual who owns the said gun. Last Statscan numbers say 15 millions households in Canada, for a 40 millions population. That would put the households with guns in the 18-20% range and that's only if in each household, there is only one gun owner, which is unlikely as many couple are either both hunters or both sports shooters.

On the other hand, as we know, large numbers of farming / country households own guns, which reduces by that much the number of city / suburbs households where you find guns. And that's unfortunately where the votes are.

I always get a chuckle (but shouldn't really) when I hear politicians mention "We are taking those guns off the street". This is not Texas. We don't have people driving around displaying their long guns in a rack on the back window of their pickup trucks. When I ask anti-gun nuts the following question: "When was the last time you saw someone in Canada, other than cops, walking around town with a long gun in his hands?" I invariably get the answer" "Well I've never seen one but I know they are there because the government says so."

 

[Lumber]

Numbers mean squat. If it was purely numbers, no one would give a sh*t about gays and such as they represent a even smaller subset

• About 1.3 million Canadians (4.4% of those 15+) identify as part of the 2SLGBTQI+ community, with youth representing a larger proportion than in the general population.

Yes but the difference is in the 2nd area of support: those who aren't members of the group but support it. When it comes to "gay marriage", it relates to an activity that just about everyone in this country participates in: love and marriage. With gun ownership, not so much.

 

[HavokFour]

Anyone else starting to see a very clear offramp for the entire thing, between what's going on domestically and internationally.

Toronto police refusing to help with Carney government’s gun buyback, minister says

In an interview with the Star following a weekend launch of the national program, Anandasangaree, a Scarborough MP, said the Toronto Police Service has "expressed that they do not want

www.thestar.com

Archive

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Anyone else starting to see a very clear offramp for the entire thing, between what's going on domestically and internationally.

Toronto police refusing to help with Carney government’s gun buyback, minister says

In an interview with the Star following a weekend launch of the national program, Anandasangaree, a Scarborough MP, said the Toronto Police Service has "expressed that they do not want

www.thestar.com

Archive

We need Ford to copy provincial firearms policy from Alberta and Saskatchewan and enact it into law. Ontario has more gun owners and almost half Canada's population. Non compliance from Ontario should pretty well put the theft of this private property at an end.

Or we can have a spring election, and get rid of the marxists.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Anyone else starting to see a very clear offramp for the entire thing, between what's going on domestically and internationally.

Toronto police refusing to help with Carney government’s gun buyback, minister says

In an interview with the Star following a weekend launch of the national program, Anandasangaree, a Scarborough MP, said the Toronto Police Service has "expressed that they do not want

www.thestar.com

Archive

Government is lying to people again.

Canadian owners of around 2,500 types of weapons banned

the plan to get more than 100,000 “assault-style” weapons out of people’s hands.

There are approximately 95,000 AR15 models alone. There's a lot of firearm owners who have 1 or 2 AR15s, and half a dozen or more non-restricted turn prohibited firearms. Also lots without AR15s but a bunch of non-restricted turn prohibited firearms.

Ottawa appears set on using mobile collection units staffed by off-duty RCMP or local police officers to collect the weapons

I wonder if the police services in Ontario refused to officially take part in the buy back just so their officers can get a bunch of extra cash working off-duty. From an employer perspective that's pretty thoughtful of them.