The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[SeaKingTacco]

My primary critique (I own no firearms and live in an urban area) is that the regulations purport to address assault-style weapons, but never define the term "assult-style".

I also note the observations on risk:

If they define the term in law, then somebody can actually go to court and fight decisions on a legal basis and a judge may not necessarily come down on the government's side. If they refuse to define the term, then it means whatever the Liberals want it to mean. Pretty handy, huh?

 

[Cloud Cover]

They use “specified firearm” and “ specified device”

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=CloudCover] write with some glee that it will be “aggressive” males primarily located in Ontario, BC and Alberta who will be impacted. So no hit to the liberal voter base and that is the only thing that matters to these people.
[/quote]

Yup.

 

[dapaterson]

The narrative discussing the rationale for the regulations uses the phrase "assault-style" a minimum of twenty times.

I suspect that "assault-style" is like pornography - they can't define what it is, but know it when they see it.

 

[Cloud Cover]

“ military or tactical in nature”.  Because that’s a social crime ...

 

[MarkOttawa]

Mark,

No, you could not buy the 20 round magazine for the Mini-14 legally in Canada. It was prohibitted.

Thanks, was pretty sure that was the case. So ban is logically non-sensical--compare to same barrel length Ruger® 10/22® Stainless Synthetic Semi-Auto Rifle (11 rounds):
https://www.cabelas.ca/product/4883/ruger-1022-stainless-synthetic-semi-auto-rifle

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Love when Justin said firearms were an indigenous tradition ;D so they needed them.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Jarnhamar]

Certain people in Canada can continue using assault weapons, which the government argues can't be used for hunting, to hunt animals.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Another consequence of elections.  If these things truly do never get rolled back and the compensation is short of value, at least maybe a future government can top up compensation to what the value was before the market was threatened.

Disappointing to see the "reality-based" community so far from reality-based policy.  This is basically the mob against a minority culture.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I see they banned a $7965.00, 15 pound .308 bolt action rifle. (Accuracy International AX)  :

 

[ballz]

And the anti-gun community has already moved onto handguns, because this ain't enough either and nothing firearm owners compromise on ever will be....

 

[FJAG]

I see they banned a $7965.00, 15 pound .308 bolt action rifle. (Accuracy International AX)  :

That's because it looks like this:

And not like this:

This is truly a stupid government supported by a stupid bureaucracy

:brickwall:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

On what basis to appeal. This is a complete blanket ban. The Supreme Court has already decided that the regulations about possession and use of firearms are within federal authority so there really is no need to consult on this. The only things that might be appealed are lack of compensation, or insufficient compensation but even that is a stretch.

I would note the governments true ideological intention was expressly stated by Bill Blair this morning - to end the “militarization in society”  - to the extent that even actually exists in Canada.  Note also they state in the Gazette that they have no idea of the true numbers of the “ implicated” firearms, but they also write with some glee that it will be “aggressive” males primarily located in Ontario, BC and Alberta who will be impacted. So no hit to the liberal voter base and that is the only thing that matters to these people.

That might come as a shock to the Two urban Lesbians I just helped to get their PAL's. I think they find the spread is larger than anticipated.

 

[PuckChaser]

Folks to show you how serious the Liberals are at saving Canada, they've made sure to ban 2 websites (technically a website and the forum on the website). I wish I was kidding. This is a cut from the Gazette post, I had to check to make sure it was legit since I saw it on Facebook first.

Signaller screwed up image hosting, I'll turn my cap badge in at the door.

 

[mariomike]

My deer rifle.

 

[MarkOttawa]

I see they banned a $7965.00, 15 pound .308 bolt action rifle. (Accuracy International AX)  :

Looks, er, too mean; great for a tower mass shoot by a skilled marksman, otherwise...:

Mark
Ottawa

 

[ballz]

Folks to show you how serious the Liberals are at saving Canada, they've made sure to ban 2 websites (technically a website and the forum on the website). I wish I was kidding. This is a cut from the Gazette post, I had to check to make sure it was legit since I saw it on Facebook first.

<cut>

Signaller screwed up image hosting, I'll turn my cap badge in at the door.

Wow. I'm not super familiar with AR-15 variants but the name looked so peculiar so I googled it... It looks like AR-15 Chatterbox is a FB group.

They put so much thought into all this they failed to even read their google search before copying & pasting into the gazette?

 

[MarkOttawa]

My deer rifle.

Military-style, designed to kill the greatest number of people in the shortest... Lever-action only Winchesters etc. for the public, slow to reload for mass shooting (like Parliament Hill).

Mark
Ottawa

 

[mariomike]

Military-style, designed to kill the greatest number of people in the shortest... Lever-action only Winchesterse etc. for the public, slow to reload for mass shooting (like Parliament Hill).

Mark
Ottawa

I haven't been following this. Did they ban the Lee Enfield? I've had it since I was 16. All I ever used for deer.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Irony...but if the Liberals understood firearms history and logic...

Mark
Ottawa