The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[NavyShooter]

The attached images are quite pertinent.

There is an amnesty in place until 31 Oct.

It is legal IAW Section 106(1) to destroy your firearm so long as you 'with reasonable dispatch' report the destruction to a peace officer, firearms officer, or chief firearms officer.

I will not speak for anyone else, however, under the existing provisions of the amnesty, it is legal for me to hold/own/store firearms that have become prohibited by OIC until 31 Oct. According to 106(1), I can destroy them, and report it as legally required, and am not committing an offense.

If I turned anything in through the 'compensation' program, I'd get pennies on the dollar.

Between now and the end of October, maybe the government will change, maybe the law will change, maybe the US will invade us and we'll need to take up arms, maybe....maybe....

As a law abiding firearms owner, I'll follow the law. Much as it hurts to do so.

 

[Eaglelord17]

The attached images are quite pertinent.

There is an amnesty in place until 31 Oct.

It is legal IAW Section 106(1) to destroy your firearm so long as you 'with reasonable dispatch' report the destruction to a peace officer, firearms officer, or chief firearms officer.

I will not speak for anyone else, however, under the existing provisions of the amnesty, it is legal for me to hold/own/store firearms that have become prohibited by OIC until 31 Oct. According to 106(1), I can destroy them, and report it as legally required, and am not committing an offense.

If I turned anything in through the 'compensation' program, I'd get pennies on the dollar.

Between now and the end of October, maybe the government will change, maybe the law will change, maybe the US will invade us and we'll need to take up arms, maybe....maybe....

As a law abiding firearms owner, I'll follow the law. Much as it hurts to do so.

This is likely the route I will take. I only have one now prohibited rifle (somehow) a registered AR-15 lower. Sawing it in half (maybe quarters) and reporting it as destroyed should be sufficient I think.

I refuse to participate in their ‘buyback’ and I will eat the loss over the pennies they offer.

Deactivation requires a registered gunsmith and paying for that service. This wouldn’t be a deactivation as it is 100% unserviceable and not intact.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Food for thought.

Junk food.

The Liberal government is making the gun buy back as least attractive as possible because they want to spend the least amount of money as possible. Public safety minister already said it. The whole thing is just to shut Quebec up for a little bit.

Conversely, widespread compliance blows the issue wide open.

Widespread compliance is Canadian gun owners setting their money on fire and weakening Canada in the case of an invasion by a foreign power. A patriot wouldn't get rid of their guns.

 

[Deleted member 175000]

Junk food.

The Liberal government is making the gun buy back as least attractive as possible because they want to spend the least amount of money as possible. Public safety minister already said it. The whole thing is just to shut Quebec up for a little bit.

This essentially what I wrote on the PMO perspective.

You agree they don't actually want people to participate. You don't want to participate. How convenient for them.

Your emotion and desire to not participate is keeping you from considering the second and third order "why's" and confront the reality that generally speaking, doing what the enemy wants you to isn't a good way of winning.

 

[Jarnhamar]

You agree they don't actually want people to participate. You don't want to participate. How convenient for them.

Nope. Cheaper for them and they can count on armed civilians if need be.

Your emotion and desire to not participate is keeping you from considering the second and third order "why's" and confront the reality that generally speaking, doing what the enemy wants you to isn't a good way of winning

I understand why some Canadian gun owners are embarassed about their views and behavior, and want others to embrace the gun confiscation with open arms. It takes the spotlight off them.

Trying to justify not doing the right thing because you think "the enemy" wants you to do it ergo its the wrong thing is just you letting someone manipulate you.

 

[Jarnhamar]

As a law abiding firearms owner, I'll follow the law. Much as it hurts to do so.

That's a great post. I too believe in following the law and will do the same as you.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I doubt the government is playing some deep game. The LPC (and NDP) know that firearms is a vote-killing (single) issue for many owners. There is nothing they can do to get those votes; there is nothing they lose by further offending those voters. Understand very clearly that it is still the case that politicians reward supporters and punish opponents, particularly in the absolutely zero-sum game of acquiring votes. We are not living in some magical time of high ethics and compassion when politicians "serve all Canadians".

It absolutely makes sense to do it as cheaply as possible - more money to spend on their own voters.

Government is perfectly capable of sticking people (and organizations, such as corporations) with huge uncompensated losses.

 

[Haggis]

A lot will depend on how the police unions approach this paid-duty scheme. Since it won't come out of department's budgets nor impact the number of front line officers available for regular policing and their members will profit from it, I expect there will be a lot of buy-in.

However, will this paid duty be funded out of the money intended to be used for paying compensation? Or is there a new bag of money under Nathalie's desk to cover these costs?

Replying to my own post, the Toronto Police Association haa stated they support the Toronto Police Service's decision to not support the confiscation scheme.

 

[Deleted member 175000]

I understand why some Canadian gun owners are embarassed about their views and behavior, and want others to embrace the gun confiscation with open arms. It takes the spotlight off them.

Trying to justify not doing the right thing because you think "the enemy" wants you to do it ergo its the wrong thing is just you letting someone manipulate you.

This is a whole lot of projection a hefty dose of irony (the bolded). Believe it or not- I don't want them to get your guns, if they're going to get them I want you fairly compensated, and I don't want the anti's to have more ammo than possible. If I was embarrassed about that or anything else I wouldn't have bothered to post.

Not registering has three outcomes
A. Deux ex Machina between now and November (ideally) (and hope is not a valid strategy)
vs.
B. Doing their work for them AND getting nothing for your property
C. Exposing yourself to significant legal liability indefinitely in the hopes of eventual A

2 out of 3 are objectively bad


Meanwhile, there are options to push deadlines and deny them the easy outs.

 

[Jarnhamar]

It absolutely makes sense to do it as cheaply as possible - more money to spend on their own voters.

Naturally.

Government is perfectly capable of sticking people (and organizations, such as corporations) with huge uncompensated losses.

And lots of us Canadians are not just ambivalent at other Canadians getting screwed over we're down right happy about it.

 

[Lumber]

Naturally.


And lots of us Canadians are not just ambivalent at other Canadians getting screwed over we're down right happy about it.

Wait, you're happy with other Canadians being screwed over?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Believe it or not- I don't want them to get your guns, if they're going to get them I want you fairly compensated

Thanks friend. I hope you get fairly compensated for the firearms I sold you as well

Not registering has three outcomes

Not registering means you retain your property. You'll be in violation of the law unless the government changes and the laws change. Maybe get some kind of fancy amnesty.

 

[NavyShooter]

Not registering has zero implication except for a lack of payment options under the 'buyback'.

At least until 31 Oct when the Amnesty runs out.

If you don't register, you can't be part of the buyback. That's it.

If you don't do anything with things you may own that have become prohibited by 31 Oct, then you're moving into criminal activity.

De-activation through a licensed gunsmith, destruction with proper reporting, turning in through legal means, exporting legally are your options if you don't go with the 'buyback'.

I've got plans for the evening of the 30th of October....anyone want to join me to help out?

NS

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

This is a whole lot of projection a hefty dose of irony (the bolded). Believe it or not- I don't want them to get your guns, if they're going to get them I want you fairly compensated, and I don't want the anti's to have more ammo than possible. If I was embarrassed about that or anything else I wouldn't have bothered to post.

Not registering has three outcomes
A. Deux ex Machina between now and November (ideally) (and hope is not a valid strategy)
vs.
B. Doing their work for them AND getting nothing for your property
C. Exposing yourself to significant legal liability indefinitely in the hopes of eventual A

2 out of 3 are objectively bad


Meanwhile, there are options to push deadlines and deny them the easy outs.

The best thing to do when dealing with the authorities is to say nothing and do nothing. If you own firearms, just shut up about it, enjoy your firearms, don't speak about it. Practice some discretion and trade craft.

Don't even try talking to the Govt. They aren't going to listen anyways and aren't going to magically have an about face on the issue. We expose ourselves to significant legal liability everyday by living, deal with what's in front of you and decide if the cost is worth it.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Not registering has zero implication except for a lack of payment options under the 'buyback'.

At least until 31 Oct when the Amnesty runs out.

If you don't register, you can't be part of the buyback. That's it.

If you don't do anything with things you may own that have become prohibited by 31 Oct, then you're moving into criminal activity.

De-activation through a licensed gunsmith, destruction with proper reporting, turning in through legal means, exporting legally are your options if you don't go with the 'buyback'.

I've got plans for the evening of the 30th of October....anyone want to join me to help out?

NS

Whiskey or Scotch ?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Just spitballing.
If we don’t have a change of government or can't get them to back down, I wonder how they could handle a couple of million private lawsuits. If 1/3 of owners took them to court, that would still be a massive cost for them. Lots of different suits could be brought.
They have to pay their lawyers, they still need to take the time to respond and co-ordinate the cases in local court. It all takes money. And given the state of the government, they will pay twice the going rate.
I wonder if those overruns will count in the total cost to taxpayers. That should blow out their costs and estimates bottom line.

 

[Lumber]

Some things to consider for anyone hoping to not participate and just keep quiet. If you bought one after July 2021, they know you have it:

Just thinking about this video again and what he was saying...

If the OIC making all these gun prohibited happened in 2020,
But the law creating the "soft registry" didn't come out until 2021,
Then wouldn't there be no prohibited gun on the registry? They couldn't be sold/transferred after 2020, so anything in the registry is all non-restricted weapons, no?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Wait, you're happy with other Canadians being screwed over?

I'm working on avoiding army.ca some people wordage. Being more inclusive, yeah know?

 

[Deleted member 175000]

Just spitballing.
If we don’t have a change of government or can't get them to back down, I wonder how they could handle a couple of million private lawsuits. If 1/3 of owners took them to court, that would still be a massive cost for them. Lots of different suits could be brought.
They have to pay their lawyers, they still need to take the time to respond and co-ordinate the cases in local court. It all takes money. And given the state of the government, they will pay twice the going rate.
I wonder if those overruns will count in the total cost to taxpayers. That should blow out their costs and estimates bottom line.

To have standing in such a suit you'd have to declare ownership of the impacted property- de facto registration. But good thinking- grit in the gears.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I wonder how the liberals would like to be accused of creating, maybe over a million, criminals on Nov 1, 2026. Becoming a criminal though, flips gun owners to the other side. Liberals love criminals and endevour to provide them succor. No bail for release, no court, et al.