Author Topic: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0  (Read 49067 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #25 on: May 22, 2018, 21:21:05 »
Interesting article over at the gun blog.

Seems like having to actually pass Bill C-71 is just a formality. Looks like a done deal to me.

Quote
TheGunBlog.ca — Canada’s federal police agency is so eager to ban guns that it’s ordering owners to register their firearms under a law that doesn’t exist.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which manages firearm licensing, registration and classification, said owners of so-called “Restricted” CZ 858 and SAN Swiss Arms rifles must register the firearms with the police by June 30 to benefit from the delayed confiscation offered by Bill C-71.

“If you have not done so, the registration must be completed by June 30, 2018, in order for your firearm to be eligible for grandfathering,” the RCMP said May 7 on a new web page titled “How does Bill C-71 affect individuals?”

But Bill C-71 doesn’t affect individuals, businesses or anyone else because it isn’t law. There is no June 30 deadline for anything. The date is based on the text of draft legislation presented by the government in March and currently under review by parliament. It may become law, and it may not. For now it’s a draft proposal.



https://thegunblog.ca/2018/05/09/rcmp-is-so-eager-to-ban-guns-its-already-enforcing-bill-c-71/
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 145,280
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,293
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #26 on: May 22, 2018, 22:41:25 »
Well, I for one welcome our new RCMP gun control overlords.

You know, the ones the Liberals are so eager to delegate the role of Parliament to.

 ::)

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #27 on: May 26, 2018, 14:42:10 »
Pretty weird there's a deadline to be grandfathered for a law that hasn't passed yet.  Thinking of buying one just to get the prohibited grandfather class. Probably won't even shoot it  :facepalm:

Kinda funny- someone else who won't be shooting guns, some retired American porn star.
(she retired from porn because ISIS was threatening to kill her).
I think the real travesty there is that she thinks a Remington 870 is worth $1500 USD.

https://tribunist.com/news/mia-khalifa-calls-police-to-surrender-her-shotgun-it-doesnt-make-me-feel-safe-anymore/?fb_comment_id=1891021197583804_1891072267578697&comment_id=1891072267578697

« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 12:14:47 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Eaglelord17

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 297
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #28 on: May 26, 2018, 21:56:27 »
The RCMP should have all the members involved with that page either fired or reprimanded. Unfortunately nothing will be done about it much like High River. Simply put it is a blatant abuse of power and it is fraud. The question is who polices the police?

To be honest I wouldn't bother with the prohibited class. I suspect it will end up like all 12.x classes (except 12.6) where you are unable to use them at all.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #29 on: May 27, 2018, 00:39:27 »
I thought I read somewhere that CZ victims who are grandfathered  will be allowed to buy, use and sell the cz's and other prohibited guns in that 12 class.

Kinda sounded too good to be true. 
I'd like to trust the RCMP when it comes to firearms but they really seem to be targeting law abiding gun owners. 

It's too bad too because I think most of us legal gun owners really detest criminals and dirt bags. I'd take pride in being able to help th RCMP catch criminals and going out of my way to help and support them but the trust just isn't there.  I don't feel like they make a distinction between me(us) and a gang member. Imagine the kind of support they'd get if they did a 180?
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Eaglelord17

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 297
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #30 on: May 27, 2018, 01:16:02 »
I suspect those grandfathered into the new prohibited class would be able to still transfer and sell the CZ and Swiss Arms rifles, however I also suspect like all 12.x classes other than the 12.6 short barrelled handguns you wouldn't be able to shoot them.

In recent years my faith in the police has reached a all time low. Large cases like High River, smaller things like this C-71 page, a friends cousin who was a Bosnia vet getting shot and killed from behind and lying about how it happened (coroners report contradicted the police statement, however they had already been cleared by the provinces investigative unit). Other cases like some local cases where clear nepotism, corruption, and abuse of power came to light and was agreed upon by a judge. Police threating members of the press with lawsuits, police chiefs son abusing a unarmed and cooperative arrested citizen (to the point that citizen almost died in the hospital from his injuries), supervisors watching the abuse and doing nothing about it.

I honestly believe there is a 'old boys club' at work in many police forces and they fail to take the criminals within their ranks to task. Much like how the military can't seem to make hard decisions and do what we are ordered to do (such as more teeth, less tail), the police can't police themselves.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #31 on: June 06, 2018, 09:31:26 »
I'm not going to be able to drive around town with my AR15 and glock under my seat anymore. That sucks.


Quote
Mr. Mark Holland (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.)

“By having clear legislation on the requirement to have an authorization to transport, that sends that clear message that one cannot just drive around with a restricted or prohibited weapon anywhere one wants to go. I think that is a reasonable way of working with law-abiding firearms owners to make sure we do not have thugs who can just throw weapons in the back of their car, and drive anywhere they want to go.”

An hon. member: “What do thugs do?”

Mr. Mark Holland: “What thugs do, is to make sure that they are able to keep weapons in their car and not have to answer any questions. That is what they are going to do. They are going to put the weapons in the car and drive wherever they go. They know that if they are pulled over by a police officer, all they have to do is list one of a million different places to explain where they are going. That is what this legislation changes.”


https://firearmrights.ca/en/mark-holland-calls-gun-owners-thugs-in-parliament/
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -5620.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 276,762
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,579
    • Army.ca
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #32 on: June 06, 2018, 16:28:48 »
Holland with his same old tired bullshit.

He just admitted that the grits gun laws are a farce and have no deterrence, whatsoever, to people intent on breaking the law.

They are only there to harass the lawful gun owner.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2018, 11:34:33 by recceguy »
Corruption in politics doesn't scare me.
What scares me is how comfortable people are doing nothing about it.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #33 on: June 06, 2018, 18:51:36 »
Quote
and not have to answer any questions.


Quote
all they have to do is list one of a million different places to explain

So which is it?
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #34 on: June 11, 2018, 12:14:40 »
Liberals making Liberal use of the definition of "consulted".

I guess they thought adding names of various people in the firearms community as people they consulted would lend some kind of credibility to Bill C-71.  They they think people wouldn't object to being lied about? Or maybe just expected people not to find out.

https://thegunblog.ca/2018/06/10/bill-c-71-consultations-table-lists-people-who-werent-consulted/

"Lengthy posts and fully quoted articles are posted here. Link to these large posts in the regular boards."
https://milnet.ca/forums/index.php/topic,128220.0.html

Edit: thanks for the editing MM!
« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 12:42:49 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #35 on: June 21, 2018, 17:14:23 »
RCMP (could be) in Contempt

Quote
Commons Speaker Geoff Regan has ruled the RCMP could be found in contempt of Parliament over advice to firearm owners and gun shops on rifle prohibitions under new gun law amendments.
Regan said language the national police force had used assumed the government’s bill to bring in new controls over gun sales had already been approved by the Commons – when it had not yet passed through committee hearings.
Responding to a complaint from Alberta Conservative MP Glen Motz, Regan said the RCMP acted in a “careless manner” by posting advice to gun owners and businesses that made it seem as if Bill C-71 had already become law.
The Commons referred the incident to the Procedure and House Affairs Committee for investigation on a motion from Motz.
In his ruling, Regan dismissed RCMP attempts to duck the issue quickly by changing the wording on its Canadian Firearms Program web site the same day Motz made his complaint in the Commons.
After the Mountie web site adjustments, Liberal MP Mark Holland, the Parliamentary secretary to Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, had urged Regan to dismiss the contempt allegations because “the matter raised was simply one of debate as there was clearly no presumption of anything in the information respecting Bill C-71 on the RCMP website.”


More at link
https://ipolitics.ca/2018/06/20/rcmp-web-posts-on-gun-bill-careless-and-could-be-contempt-of-parliament-speaker/



There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 919,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,163
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #36 on: June 21, 2018, 21:35:21 »
With only 18 months left, I can either see 2 things happening:

1. Liberals use majority to ram the legislation through with limited or no debate.
2. Senate holds up the legislation in committee or with amendments so that it dies on the order paper when Parliament is prorogued for the fixed election date in October 2019. Then the Liberals pacify their base that they desperately tried to stop those mean gun owners from murdering people, but it didn't work.

Edit to remove implication that October 2019's election is rigged.  :rofl:
« Last Edit: June 22, 2018, 22:13:23 by PuckChaser »

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,340
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #37 on: July 23, 2018, 19:43:45 »
Their 'familiarity' with weapons does not, to mind, extend to any particular degree of expertise. A small number of CAF members are pretty experienced and proficient with pistols. The rest might occasionally get to play with them but fall well short of anything I would want to see for someone carrying.

Aside from that, as frequently as I've seen CAF members saying really outlandish stuff on police use of force discussions, I have zero faith that CAF training or mindset appropriately equips people to be carrying firearms on civvy street. Honestly, soldiers and vets are some of the worst armchair quarterbacks for what should be done in use of force situations. There's quite a strong hubris from soldiers who believe that carrying a rifle in training or combat operations carries across perfectly or even adequately for being armed for daily carry for self/public defense. Many are very out to lunch. All that said- military training/experience should not be a factor that is at all in play in determining whether someone should or should not be permitted to carry a firearm in public in Canada.

There's not a chance we are going to see private open or concealed carry of firearms expanded generally in Canada, and I'm fine with that. There's no significant political appetite here, and few of us want to see us move along the trajectory to what we see south of the border. Just no thanks.

CCW was more common here, without a wild west happening. There are quite a few people , myself included that would like to see a return to historical levels or higher. CCW permit carriers in the US have a incredibly low indictment rate, they are not the problem. For a civilian CCW, the use of deadly force is much more cut and dried, then for a police officer who has several levels of lethal and non-lethal force to use and a much wider level of variables to consider.

Offline RomeoJuliet

  • Donor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 10,205
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 451
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #38 on: July 23, 2018, 20:40:09 »
CCW was more common here, without a wild west happening. There are quite a few people , myself included that would like to see a return to historical levels or higher. CCW permit carriers in the US have a incredibly low indictment rate, they are not the problem. For a civilian CCW, the use of deadly force is much more cut and dried, then for a police officer who has several levels of lethal and non-lethal force to use and a much wider level of variables to consider.
Pretty sure there is little to no appetite for ccw permit carrier expansion in Canada. Our laws around handguns are sound. If and when I get a restricted permit to go with my non restricted permit it will be a PIA to transport a pistol but I will do it properly IOT    to keep  sidearms out of criminals’ hands.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,340
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #39 on: July 23, 2018, 21:24:34 »
There is a strong effort to push for a more open policy on CCW here, known as ATC for self defense. The CFO's won't even release the training standard as they know that someone will design a course to meet it and that would remove another obstacle to getting them.

 https://globalnews.ca/news/1411270/applications-to-carry-handguns-skyrocket-in-b-c-alberta/

Offline JesseWZ

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 42,060
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 539
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #40 on: July 23, 2018, 22:01:41 »
CCW was more common here, without a wild west happening. There are quite a few people , myself included that would like to see a return to historical levels or higher. CCW permit carriers in the US have a incredibly low indictment rate, they are not the problem. For a civilian CCW, the use of deadly force is much more cut and dried, then for a police officer who has several levels of lethal and non-lethal force to use and a much wider level of variables to consider.

My comments (and criticisms) are more directed towards the idea that every able bodied soldier, sailor or air-person could be an ideal candidate for a CCW. The sheer number of lost weapons, magazines and ammunition files that came through the Esquimalt guardhouse when I worked there was argument enough that many in the military are not aptly suited to take care of and/or keep custody of a weapon. Sometimes I had a hard time believing we weren't tripping over old weapon parts in the training area with every step. (I jest, but only slightly...)

Honest unbaited question - In your ideal CCW world, would we relax magazine restrictions for CCW permit carriers so that they could have more than 5 rounds?
I will be seen and not heard... I will be seen and not heard... I will be seen and not heard...

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #41 on: July 23, 2018, 22:32:39 »
Quote from: JesseWZ
would we relax magazine restrictions for CCW permit carriers so that they could have more than 5 rounds?

Handguns are limited to 10 rounds and semi-auto rifles 5.

Most people can pop the rivet out of a pinned magazine in a few seconds.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline JesseWZ

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 42,060
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 539
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #42 on: July 23, 2018, 23:39:12 »
Handguns are limited to 10 rounds and semi-auto rifles 5.

Whoops... brain fart.

You're answer is not really what I meant by the question - I know people *can* unpin their magazines easily. People *can* do lots of things. I'm wondering if those who support a more robust CCW program would argue for more relaxed rules in general for the portion of the population granted CCW status.
I will be seen and not heard... I will be seen and not heard... I will be seen and not heard...

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 139,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,618
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #43 on: July 23, 2018, 23:59:12 »
Quite frankly, since most of the hand guns I know have a maximum capacity  of 13 to 15 rounds for their magazines, I don't believe that the "10" rounds restriction is a biggie when compared to the restriction on mags for the semis.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 286,366
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,717
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #44 on: July 24, 2018, 00:31:52 »
Whoops... brain fart.

You're answer is not really what I meant by the question - I know people *can* unpin their magazines easily. People *can* do lots of things. I'm wondering if those who support a more robust CCW program would argue for more relaxed rules in general for the portion of the population granted CCW status.

Happens  ;D
Asking about mag limits and ccw seemed like a bit of a red herring and I was wondering where you were going with it. Carrying a handgun for self defense and limiting how much ammo is in the mag seems self-defeating, know what I mean?


« Last Edit: July 24, 2018, 08:10:03 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Eaglelord17

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 297
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #45 on: July 24, 2018, 05:59:28 »
Honestly for self defence you can't beat a revolver. If it is in good shape basically no stoppages, and anything that is a stoppage is solved by pulling the trigger again vs. a semi where you can have all sorts of out of ammo related stoppages, people grabbing your pistol and putting it out of battery, safeties to fumble with (as opposed to a DA trigger pull for a revolver). Many of the serious self defence classes in the US show just how much more difficult it can be to use a pistol for self defence over a revolver as most these situations happen within 5m or less where there can be a chance to try and grab your gun. 5 or 6rds is sufficient for pretty much all self defence requirements, anything requiring more than that you really should have something more serious such as a rifle or shotgun.

Shooting skill for concealed carry is pretty much not important. Some of the worst trained pistol shooters I have ever seen are the police and they carry pistols on a regular basis. What is important is knowing where and when you are legally able to use your carry firearm. That is the part which matters, and for those arguing about civilian casualties how is it that the police and all these civilian concealed carry permit holders in the States seem to avoid them despite in many States the bar for being both is pretty low?

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 497,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,198
    • The job.
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2018, 07:45:40 »
Honestly for self defence you can't beat a revolver.

"I like to know the XXXXX is going to work."  :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI33vW90yqg

Warning: Offensive language.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2018, 09:04:21 by mariomike »

Online YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 23,920
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 718
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #47 on: July 24, 2018, 08:30:39 »
I'd be quite happy if started holding the illegal gun dealers much more accountable.

If an illegal gun you sold was used in a murder = Automatic 10 years.

And before the naysayers jump in and start complaining about "What about the UHaul dealers?", it's apples and oranges.

One is renting a legal good which has many legal uses.  The other is selling an illegal item which only has illegal applications.
aUTOMATIC penalties don't work in Canada.  They have been deemed unconstitutional by the supremes in most cases.  Although you might get away with it when it comes to firearms.

Offline Beadwindow 7

  • Life is cruel, and I am but a small slice of life
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 44,940
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,141
  • ZBM2
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #48 on: July 24, 2018, 10:28:41 »
aUTOMATIC penalties don't work in Canada.  They have been deemed unconstitutional by the supremes in most cases.  Although you might get away with it when it comes to firearms.

Not necessarily automatic sentences, however supplementary charges in my opinion are warranted. IE, Criminal Code 351(2):

Quote
Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.
.

I don't like group punishment, along the lines of "criminals are wearing body armour, so legislate and regulate body armour". But targeting criminals who commit these particular offences makes sense to me.

Used body armour in the commission of an indictable offence? Additional charge.
Used a firearm in the commission of an indictable offence? Additional charge.
Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline EpicBeardedMan

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 9,491
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 462
  • Getting better, stronger, faster.
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #49 on: July 24, 2018, 20:22:25 »
Quote
that the Trudeau government is prepared to consider a proposal to ban handguns.

When are we going to ban drinking and driving so no more drinking and driving related deaths occur? Oh wait... :facepalm:
The military isn't really like a James Bond movie where you go for jet training in the morning and then underwater demolitions after lunch.