Battle lines drawn over illegal guns

[Remius]

Well.  If you are going through the process of trying to get a WW I pistol, then you know how the rules work and unless you have the proper permits, you will not be able to get that pistol.  Unless you are trying to tell us that you are special and should have that permit and get the pistol?

Riiight. I'm not sure what you are getting at.  I was merely aknowledging that the rules were indeed strict to get the firearm.  My mom thinks I'm special so maybe I should get it. ;D

All kidding aside I don't think that I mentioned that I had a problem with that.

 

[George Wallace]

So then the Rules and Regulations for ownership of firearms seem to be acceptable in this case?

 

[Remius]

So then the Rules and Regulations for ownership of firearms seem to be acceptable in this case?

In my particular case.  Sure.  It sucks a bit though from a personal stand point.  It's something I inherited.  I've gone through a seperation and that is slowing it down.  But because of the type and make of the weapon it is somewhat harder to get my hands on.    But it will happen in due time.  I'm in no rush.  And I understand why it would take time in my case.

Again, as I've said before, the rules just have to be more efficient.  Would you not agree?

 

[George Wallace]

They seem to be quite efficient here; or am I missing something?  You have stated the process you are going through.  You probably won't get the weapon in question, with the existing laws, as they have put an end to "hand me down" or inheritance of a weapon of this type, unless you are already a certified collector (which as I understand, you had to be before the law was changed, and can not become after.)  Are you advocating that the law be changed so that you can accept your 'inheritance'?

 

[Remius]

They seem to be quite efficient here; or am I missing something?  You have stated the process you are going through.  You probably won't get the weapon in question, with the existing laws, as they have put an end to "hand me down" or inheritance of a weapon of this type, unless you are already a certified collector (which as I understand, you had to be before the law was changed, and can not become after.)  Are you advocating that the law be changed so that you can accept your 'inheritance'?

I feel that you are going somewhere with this.  Not sure where though.  There is an exception to the law for family heirloms made prior to 1934 (I believe that's the date).  I require the restricted FAC and need a "possession only" lisence for that specific firearm.  Then I have to register it as such with the firearms registery.  The local police are currently holding it for me.  So no, I'm not asking for a change in the law for my situation.

So you are saying you are happy with the current bureaucracy?

 

[George Wallace]

It seems that the bureaucracy is doing its' job.  Inefficiencies in bureaucracy are the norm.  Can there be improvement?  Sure.  The Liberal Gun Registry was a dismal failure, but there was a system before they came along, and it seems to still be working. 

If you want to come back and state that criminals are still getting Restricted Weapons, we can also look at Alcoholics, and Drug Users, as always finding a way to get their fixes.  Those who are desperate for something, will always find a way to get it.  Where do you want the Laws to stop?  Have you ever snuck booze into a party, or food into a theatre?  Do we need LEOs on every square foot of the country, to enforce ever increasingly restrictive laws?  I'm no 'Leftie', but that is a little bit extreme.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

.  I require the restricted FAC and need a "possession only" lisence for that specific firearm.  Then I have to register it as such with the firearms registery. 

There's no such thing as a FAC anymore, restricted or otherwise. Ditto for the Possession Only License (POL). You'll have to either challenge the test(s)or take the course(s) for a Restricted Possession and Acquisition License (PAL)

 

[Remius]

Well, when something that was supposed to cost 700 000$ turns into 1Billion there is a problem with the bureaucracy.  Criminals are still getting restricted weapons.  I don't think I argued that it was because the rules were not tight enough.  That billion dollars could have gone to law enforcement or even new legislation to harden sentences and punishments.

And  I agree that we shouldn't have to babysit every square inch of the country.  But certain things still have to be overseen and dealt with.  We can't have a free for all as some people advocate.

 

[Remius]

There's no such thing as a FAC anymore, restricted or otherwise. Ditto for the Possession Only License (POL). You'll have to either challenge the test(s)or take the course(s) for a Restricted Possession and Acquisition License (PAL)

Sorry, I got my terms wrong.  And I have taken the test and filed the paperwork.

 

[GO!!!]

And  I agree that we shouldn't have to babysit every square inch of the country.  But certain things still have to be overseen and dealt with.  We can't have a free for all as some people advocate.

Good. Lets start with people like you, who want a dangerous, concealable weapon, a military firearm, designed only to kill other people (your words), just because his pappy gived it to 'im.

You have no demonstrable need for this gun, were not a collector or enthusiast at any point in time before now, so, by your own logic, you should now turn in this killing device for destruction by the proper authorities, so as to prevent a "free for all" where just anybody (you) can own anything (handgun).

So, guns are dangerous and require regulation in all hands but.....yours.

 

[Remius]

Good. Lets start with people like you, who want a dangerous, concealable weapon, a military firearm, designed only to kill other people (your words), just because his pappy gived it to 'im.

You have no demonstrable need for this gun, were not a collector or enthusiast at any point in time before now, so, by your own logic, you should now turn in this killing device for destruction by the proper authorities, so as to prevent a "free for all" where just anybody (you) can own anything (handgun).

So, guns are dangerous and require regulation in all hands but.....yours.

Um, not sure what you are getting at.  First of all the weapon in question was designed to kill.  It certainly wasn't designed for recreational use.  And no I don't want it "just because my pappy gave it to me" (where did I say that?).  My logic didn't indicate anything about turning a gun over to the authorities to prevent a free for all.  Just that rules have to exist.  Rules I am happy to abide by but that can be better administered.

Your last statement is assuming something that isn't there and something I never said.

 

[Armymatters]

Well, when something that was supposed to cost 700 000$ turns into 1Billion there is a problem with the bureaucracy.  Criminals are still getting restricted weapons.  I don't think I argued that it was because the rules were not tight enough.  That billion dollars could have gone to law enforcement or even new legislation to harden sentences and punishments.

The problem was that originally, the Gun Registry was supposed to be self-funding by a registration fee. However, some wise-guy in the government decided to waive that registration fee, so that meant money had to be pumped in to replace the funding that the registration fee would have provided. In short, good idea (controling firearms in Canada by setting up a method of tracking known firearms), shoddy execution.

 

[KevinB]

The $25 fee per registration was not collecting even a 10th of the monies required...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Funny how people see the AR’s as weapons only designed to kill, but consider the .303 as a “hunting rifle” In fact I will argue that the .303 is far more optimized for killing than the AR’s are. The AR fires a smaller weaker bullet, one of it’s major design function is to be light and easy to carry. The .303 is designed with only one thing in mind and that was to kill either with it’s bullets, as a short “pike” with it’s bayonet or as a club.

 

[GAP]

Funny how people see the AR’s as weapons only designed to kill, but consider the .303 as a “hunting rifle” In fact I will argue that the .303 is far more optimized for killing than the AR’s are. The AR fires a smaller weaker bullet, one of it’s major design function is to be light and easy to carry. The .303 is designed with only one thing in mind and that was to kill either with it’s bullets, as a short “pike” with it’s bayonet or as a club.

and carrying on your theme, that you left out, about 95% of it's use is as a hunting rifle, in the hands of farmers, hunters, other scum.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Mr Dallaire got it wrong.  Correctly phrased:

Last week in Ottawa, the general made his stand plain: "I join the thousands of Canadians, who are asking the government to take leadership at the UN meeting ... to ensure it results in strengthened efforts to effectively regulate tyrannical governments, control genocide and other crimes against humanity, and eliminate government violence.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Mr Dallaire got it wrong.  Correctly phrased:

Last week in Ottawa, the general made his stand plain: "I join the thousands of Canadians, who are asking the government to take leadership at the UN meeting ... to ensure it results in strengthened efforts to effectively regulate tyrannical governments, control genocide and other crimes against humanity, and eliminate government violence.

Didn't we do that already when we voted out the liebrals?  JK

 

[Bob Terwilliger]

I am not sure how anyone could compare the capabilities or lethality of a modern assault rifle like any of the AK series rifles to a Lee Enfield No.4 Mk1!

 

[Kat Stevens]

No, but I'm sure, taken in total, they both have equally impressive body counts.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I am not sure how anyone could compare the capabilities or lethality of a modern assault rifle like any of the AK series rifles to a Lee Enfield No.4 Mk1!

Modern? I am figuring the AK is about 60+ years old if you consider the basic design came from the STG 44. Plus the the .303 has more punch than a 7.62x39 and is more accurate. The AK is better in close quarter/urban fighting, due to size, rate of fire and ammo capacity. But if I put you out in the tundra with a AK against a Canadian Ranger armed with their .303, we better measure you for the pine box first.

Plus the Enfield N 4 is still in production, sort of