The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Eaglelord17]

Perhaps they can remove the authority of the RCMP to classify, then use their majority to reclassify everything back to where it was. That would allow firearms owners to use their guns again until they sort shit out. Might not need to change anything else until they take a wrecking ball to trudeau's disarm the citizen initiative.

The RCMP aren’t the issue here. They classify based off how the law is. The issue is the poor law.

They may change a classification but that is only after evidence comes out which shows the proper classification of said firearm according to our laws.

Many of their ‘stupid’ classifications are based off the prohibited by name list. It isn’t their fault a blowback .22 is based off one on the prohibited by name list, it is our politicians fault. We shouldn’t even have a prohibited by name list, it should only be technical criteria only.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The RCMP aren’t the issue here.

Except when they refuse an order by the government to delete their long-gun registration information then use said information to search homes (multiple times) for firearms during natural disasters.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The RCMP aren’t the issue here. They classify based off how the law is. The issue is the poor law.

They may change a classification but that is only after evidence comes out which shows the proper classification of said firearm according to our laws.

Many of their ‘stupid’ classifications are based off the prohibited by name list. It isn’t their fault a blowback .22 is based off one on the prohibited by name list, it is our politicians fault. We shouldn’t even have a prohibited by name list, it should only be technical criteria only.

I see the 'experts' (RCMP), still have websites listed as prohibited weapons. (AR15.com and ARFCOM are a couple) I wonder who's fault that is? And how they made that determination.

 

[NavyShooter]

Those 'websites' as prohibited weapons were actually AR-15.com Lower receiver group buys with the Lowers marked as AR15.com.

It's not a mistake. It's someone attempting to capture every possible type of AR lower receiver in their ban.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Except when they refuse an order by the government to delete their long-gun registration information then use said information to search homes (multiple times) for firearms during natural disasters.

Did they use the long gun registration or did they use the PAL information? Either way they know who owns firearms, just whether they know exactly what you own is the question.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Did they use the long gun registration or did they use the PAL information? Either way they know who owns firearms, just whether they know exactly what you own is the question.

During our court case (CCFR) the Crown introduced evidence that could only be obtained from the supposedly destroyed long gun registry. That registry was ordered to be completely erased. Obviously it wasn't. The RCMP kept a copy contrary to a parliamentary order. Just another reason that gun owners don't trust the RCMP to do the right thing. That incident was the final nail in the coffin of co-operation.

 

[OldSolduer]

During our court case (CCFR) the Crown introduced evidence that could only be obtained from the supposedly destroyed long gun registry. That registry was ordered to be completely erased. Obviously it wasn't. The RCMP kept a copy contrary to a parliamentary order. Just another reason that gun owners don't trust the RCMP to do the right thing. That incident was the final nail in the coffin of co-operation.

As I suspected would happen. Bureaucracy never throws things out.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

During our court case (CCFR) the Crown introduced evidence that could only be obtained from the supposedly destroyed long gun registry. That registry was ordered to be completely erased. Obviously it wasn't. The RCMP kept a copy contrary to a parliamentary order. Just another reason that gun owners don't trust the RCMP to do the right thing. That incident was the final nail in the coffin of co-operation.

Were they called on that? Would that not make such evidence inadmissible?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Were they called on that? Would that not make such evidence inadmissible?

Yes they were. I forget the resolution. I'll try go back and find it. Don't wait up though

 

[Fishbone Jones]

During our court case (CCFR) the Crown introduced evidence that could only be obtained from the supposedly destroyed long gun registry. That registry was ordered to be completely erased. Obviously it wasn't. The RCMP kept a copy contrary to a parliamentary order. Just another reason that gun owners don't trust the RCMP to do the right thing. That incident was the final nail in the coffin of co-operation.

Sorry, got the case wrong. It was another case. Main points still stand though.

LILLEY: Evidence shows Mounties kept a copy of the gun registry

The long-gun registry was brought into being in 1995 with Bill C-68 but was done away with after the passage of Bill C-19 in 2012.

torontosun.com

 

[Haggis]

During our court case (CCFR) the Crown introduced evidence that could only be obtained from the supposedly destroyed long gun registry. That registry was ordered to be completely erased. Obviously it wasn't. The RCMP kept a copy contrary to a parliamentary order. Just another reason that gun owners don't trust the RCMP to do the right thing. That incident was the final nail in the coffin of co-operation.

Remember, too, that QC won an injunction to retain a copy of the original for their use and have since implemented their own.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

JT effing us over once more

 

[Haggis]

JT effing us over once more

See my post #3862. Runkle is holding his cards pretty close to his chest but others in the firearms world, not so much.

 

[childs56]

The RCMP aren’t the issue here. They classify based off how the law is. The issue is the poor law.

Except the RCMP are the experts who were consulted for the classification changes.
They were the ones who worked closely with and approved the various Canadian Firearms manufactures design for compliant firearms. Only to turn around and restrict them.
When the government let go the previous firearms expert from the RCMP and hired a more friendly one it says it all.

They may change a classification but that is only after evidence comes out which shows the proper classification of said firearm according to our laws.

Zero evidence of such, just a pile of names of scary black rifles they want banned.

Many of their ‘stupid’ classifications are based off the prohibited by name list. It isn’t their fault a blowback .22 is based off one on the prohibited by name list, it is our politicians fault. We shouldn’t even have a prohibited by name list, it should only be technical criteria only.

between the ideologists views of trudeau, singh and that bloc guy, the RCMP firearms classifiers and those anti firearm groups, the classifications have been based off vague description of a thought. "assault style" leaves something to the imagination. But to those with ideologies it means to ban every firearm in the hands of citizens.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Except the RCMP are the experts who were consulted for the classification changes.
They were the ones who worked closely with and approved the various Canadian Firearms manufactures design for compliant firearms. Only to turn around and restrict them.
When the government let go the previous firearms expert from the RCMP and hired a more friendly one it says it all.

Zero evidence of such, just a pile of names of scary black rifles they want banned.

between the ideologists views of trudeau, singh and that bloc guy, the RCMP firearms classifiers and those anti firearm groups, the classifications have been based off vague description of a thought. "assault style" leaves something to the imagination. But to those with ideologies it means to ban every firearm in the hands of citizens.

They didn’t restrict anything, they followed the law and classified items accordingly. Just because the government changed the law isn’t their fault, they have as much control over that as you or I.

They don’t get to work outside of the law because of ideology. Believe it or not to work in the firearms lab you basically have to be a gun nut. You pretty much can’t gain the technical expertise needed to work there without having a ton of personal interest.

I have a buddy who works there and I even turned down working there about 8 years ago. The problem isn’t the employees, rather the laws themselves. When our law is as vague and poorly written as the firearms act it ends up being pretty broad in scope.

Much in the same way sending soldiers to a war zone with crappy ROEs isn’t the soldiers fault for following them, rather the governments fault for the poor ROEs. The act itself needs to be changed.

 

[Haggis]

They didn’t restrict anything, they followed the law and classified items accordingly. Just because the government changed the law isn’t their fault, they have as much control over that as you or I.

They don’t get to work outside of the law because of ideology. Believe it or not to work in the firearms lab you basically have to be a gun nut. You pretty much can’t gain the technical expertise needed to work there without having a ton of personal interest.

I have a buddy who works there and I even turned down working there about 8 years ago. The problem isn’t the employees, rather the laws themselves. When our law is as vague and poorly written as the firearms act it ends up being pretty broad in scope.

Much in the same way sending soldiers to a war zone with crappy ROEs isn’t the soldiers fault for following them, rather the governments fault for the poor ROEs. The act itself needs to be changed.

I know a couple of guys who work there and a few more who work closely with the lab. They are hamstrung by the way are laws are written for sure. One of the biggest obstacles they have to work around is the word "variant" which is not defined in law, just like "assault style" is not defined either. My understanding is that a classification recommendation can be overruled based on those three words alone.

 

[childs56]

They didn’t restrict anything, they followed the law and classified items accordingly. Just because the government changed the law isn’t their fault, they have as much control over that as you or I.

They don’t get to work outside of the law because of ideology. Believe it or not to work in the firearms lab you basically have to be a gun nut. You pretty much can’t gain the technical expertise needed to work there without having a ton of personal interest.

I have a buddy who works there and I even turned down working there about 8 years ago. The problem isn’t the employees, rather the laws themselves. When our law is as vague and poorly written as the firearms act it ends up being pretty broad in scope.

Much in the same way sending soldiers to a war zone with crappy ROEs isn’t the soldiers fault for following them, rather the governments fault for the poor ROEs. The act itself needs to be changed.

When the Liberals replaced the top classifying officer in place for their own choice things changed.
The government refers to advice from the RCMP experts often in their change in classification.
The government has said numerous times they use the expert advice from the RCMP for reclassiying firearms as they "RCMP" are the experts.

We all know the liberals replaced Canada's top RCMP firearms expert with their own when the old one was trying to talk commonsense and law.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The trudeau marxists can make or change any law they want. I'm not getting twisted about it.

Poliviere can undo whatever the idiots place into law. Can it be difficult? Yes it can. However, if the Conservatives win a supermajority it should be a breeze. The buyback, new restrictions, new classifications, whatever new stupid games, etc will only live as long as the current government does and until the new government let's them.

Time has run out for the liebrals. They have nothing left.

 

[Remius]

The trudeau marxists can make or change any law they want. I'm not getting twisted about it.

Poliviere can undo whatever the idiots place into law. Can it be difficult? Yes it can. However, if the Conservatives win a supermajority it should be a breeze.

No such thing as a super majority in Canada. It’s a majority or it’s not. Obviously the stronger the better.

And no. It will not likely be easy. The Senate will be a stumbling block. And then there are the provinces. Some could just do their own thing and ignore the Feds.

Don’t get me wrong. I think we have bad gun legislation. But I think gun owners will be disappointed that this will not be a breeze.

 

[Haggis]

And then there are the provinces. Some could just do their own thing and ignore the Feds.

You can pretty much count on QC maintaining their Loi 9 (Anastasia's Law) and their provincial long gun registry for as long as they can particularly if the BQ form the Opposition.

Don’t get me wrong. I think we have bad gun legislation. But I think gun owners will be disappointed that this will not be a breeze.

There will be compromises as there always are in politics. The anti-gun lobby is well funded and experienced in shaping public opinion in urban Canada. If PP gets a second term, more progress ahould be expected on a return to common sense gun laws. We will never see 2A style gun laws in my lifetime unless Trump has his way with Canada.