- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 430
Lumber said:
Post your fence line every 50'.... "No Trespassing or Hunting"...pretty sure that would have legal standing, it does in Alberta.
Cheers
Larry
The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
- Thread starter Jarnhamar
- Start date
Post your fence line every 50'.... "No Trespassing or Hunting"...pretty sure that would have legal standing, it does in Alberta.
Cheers
Larry
Nuggs
Member
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 280
That varies province to province.
In Nova Scotia:
No person may be
prosecuted for contravening any notice given
pursuant to this Act prohibiting entry or prohibiting
activity on "forest land" as defined in the Act if that
person is hunting as defined in the Wildlife Act,
fishing, picnicking, camping, hiking skiing or
engaged in another recreational activity or
engaged in the study of flora or fauna.
"forest land" means a wooded area, forest stand,
tract covered by underbrush, barren ground, marsh
or bog.
"hunting" means chasing, driving, flushing,
attraction, pursuing, worrying, following after or on
the trail of, searching for, trapping, attempting to
trap, snaring or attempting to snare, shooting at,
stalking or lying in wait for any wildlife whether or
not the wildlife is then or subsequently captured,
killed, taken or wounded, but does not include
stalking, attracting, searching for or lying in wait for
any wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the
purpose of watching or taking picture of it.
I've run into a similar issue back home recently. When they get into trouble is building a blind, leaving garbage, causing damage, or violating hunting regs.
WRT hunters; Basically once they break a law they are deemed to no longer be engaged in a lawful activity under the wildlife act and are then subject to trespass charges.
In Nova Scotia:
No person may be
prosecuted for contravening any notice given
pursuant to this Act prohibiting entry or prohibiting
activity on "forest land" as defined in the Act if that
person is hunting as defined in the Wildlife Act,
fishing, picnicking, camping, hiking skiing or
engaged in another recreational activity or
engaged in the study of flora or fauna.
"forest land" means a wooded area, forest stand,
tract covered by underbrush, barren ground, marsh
or bog.
"hunting" means chasing, driving, flushing,
attraction, pursuing, worrying, following after or on
the trail of, searching for, trapping, attempting to
trap, snaring or attempting to snare, shooting at,
stalking or lying in wait for any wildlife whether or
not the wildlife is then or subsequently captured,
killed, taken or wounded, but does not include
stalking, attracting, searching for or lying in wait for
any wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the
purpose of watching or taking picture of it.
I've run into a similar issue back home recently. When they get into trouble is building a blind, leaving garbage, causing damage, or violating hunting regs.
WRT hunters; Basically once they break a law they are deemed to no longer be engaged in a lawful activity under the wildlife act and are then subject to trespass charges.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 5,548
- Points
- 1,040
Another aspect that is often overlooked here is that the numbers involved are so low that they make any statistical change from year to year fall in the "not statistically significant" category, regardless of how wild the swings. It is only long term trends that can be significant here, and they are all downwards presently.
The reason is simple: the sample numbers are so low that they can be largely impacted by single events. An example: In year X, a gang is busted that used the "legitimate owner that has guns stolen" trick as the method to acquire their firearms, and 30 firearms are seized in that sole bust. In that year, there will be a huge jump in the number of firearms traced to as legally registered in Canada. Yet it means nothing. Next year no such bust occurs and we are back down by as much.
As usual, statistics can tell a story, but you must review the basis of their collection to draw meaningful conclusions.
Here, the statistics have now been shown to be in the "Lies, Damn Lies" category.
The reason is simple: the sample numbers are so low that they can be largely impacted by single events. An example: In year X, a gang is busted that used the "legitimate owner that has guns stolen" trick as the method to acquire their firearms, and 30 firearms are seized in that sole bust. In that year, there will be a huge jump in the number of firearms traced to as legally registered in Canada. Yet it means nothing. Next year no such bust occurs and we are back down by as much.
As usual, statistics can tell a story, but you must review the basis of their collection to draw meaningful conclusions.
Here, the statistics have now been shown to be in the "Lies, Damn Lies" category.
I caught part of an interview with the Ottawa chief of police about half an hour ago. When asked, he stated he was not in favour of a ban, because it would not work. Instead he suggested stiffer and more stringent bail conditions, along with heavier penalties for criminal use of a firearm.
- Reaction score
- 9,091
- Points
- 1,160
Old Sweat said:
Exactly as advocated, consistently, by the legal gun owning crowd for years. We are not afraid of stiff penalties and jail time, because we follow the rules. We want this so the government can stop inflicting damage to us and goes after those that need it. It is too easy for the government to make us the constant scapegoat.
- Reaction score
- 37
- Points
- 560
National Post had a good article here: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/what-it-would-look-like-if-canada-banned-all-handguns
But recent history tells us it is all a sham anyway. Mayor David Miller in Toronto puled a lot of crap, including closing gun ranges and harassing legal gun owners while Toronto was suffering a wave of violent gun crimes in the early to mid 2000's, yet gun crimes continued to climb.
What ended the reign of violence was a multi national police operation in Canada, the US and Jamaica which took down a criminal organization known as the Shower Posse...no amount of "gun control" stopped the violence, only dedicated and wide ranging police work directed against the criminals. South of the border, we also have the example of cities like Chicago with draconian gun laws suffering waves of violence similar to low intensity war zones.
This is all about posturing and virtue signalling, pure and simple.
But recent history tells us it is all a sham anyway. Mayor David Miller in Toronto puled a lot of crap, including closing gun ranges and harassing legal gun owners while Toronto was suffering a wave of violent gun crimes in the early to mid 2000's, yet gun crimes continued to climb.
What ended the reign of violence was a multi national police operation in Canada, the US and Jamaica which took down a criminal organization known as the Shower Posse...no amount of "gun control" stopped the violence, only dedicated and wide ranging police work directed against the criminals. South of the border, we also have the example of cities like Chicago with draconian gun laws suffering waves of violence similar to low intensity war zones.
This is all about posturing and virtue signalling, pure and simple.
- Reaction score
- 13,070
- Points
- 1,160
The Liberal government was quick to trump out the police in support of their designs, like when Goodale got behind the cheery picked 2013 stat, bullshit "gun and firearm related surge" or mysterious Toronto police detective.
When the police however advised caution a out legalizing pot the Liberals brushed them off.
I wonder how the Liberals will handle these police members or unions or whoever going on the record saying a handgun ban won't help.
Will the Liberals just ignore them (and the pretty solid looking stats and evidence they tried to bullshit everyone) or will the clever Liberals capitalize on this and use it as a political get out of jail free card to avoid the mess of banning handguns.
'We looked at banning handguns but our brave and wise police officers say it won't fix the problem so we're looking at other avenues, because we care'.
And speaking about missing firearms.
In 2012 a Freedom of Information request from then NFA determined that between October 2008 and February 2012, police forces and other law-enforcement agencies have lost at least 428 firearms nationwide.
When the police however advised caution a out legalizing pot the Liberals brushed them off.
I wonder how the Liberals will handle these police members or unions or whoever going on the record saying a handgun ban won't help.
Will the Liberals just ignore them (and the pretty solid looking stats and evidence they tried to bullshit everyone) or will the clever Liberals capitalize on this and use it as a political get out of jail free card to avoid the mess of banning handguns.
'We looked at banning handguns but our brave and wise police officers say it won't fix the problem so we're looking at other avenues, because we care'.
And speaking about missing firearms.
In 2012 a Freedom of Information request from then NFA determined that between October 2008 and February 2012, police forces and other law-enforcement agencies have lost at least 428 firearms nationwide.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 19,984
- Points
- 1,260
I think we as Canadians way over react when it comes to crime and gun crime.
Sure we have pockets of rougher areas but in comparison to juristicians in other countries we have a pretty safe country.
We tend to internalize American problems as well, I suspect that this comes from an over consumption of American media.
Truly in Canada the small problems we do have are 99% socioeconomic I reckon. Withs gun play being a small spin off effect.
Sure we have pockets of rougher areas but in comparison to juristicians in other countries we have a pretty safe country.
We tend to internalize American problems as well, I suspect that this comes from an over consumption of American media.
Truly in Canada the small problems we do have are 99% socioeconomic I reckon. Withs gun play being a small spin off effect.
- Reaction score
- 13,070
- Points
- 1,160
Hypothetical question.
Suppose the government decides all handguns and "assault weapons", let's say ar15s, are banned and must be turned in to the government without compensation.
Considering it is a firearms serialized receiver that is the registered part, could gun owners get away with turning in stripped down pistol and rifle receivers?
After all I don't even need a firearms licence to purchase an AR15 upper receiver or pistol upper slide.
Suppose the government decides all handguns and "assault weapons", let's say ar15s, are banned and must be turned in to the government without compensation.
Considering it is a firearms serialized receiver that is the registered part, could gun owners get away with turning in stripped down pistol and rifle receivers?
After all I don't even need a firearms licence to purchase an AR15 upper receiver or pistol upper slide.
- Reaction score
- 9,091
- Points
- 1,160
Hypothetical answer
They will likely insist on the whole firearm, but you're right.
All of my ARs are builds. They are registered Receiver Only. That will all they get from me. Totally stripped and smashed in a press with only the serial # untouched. They will get the same with my pistols. I sold all the other non accountable parts before they asked me to turn them in.
edit - You MAY be able to call them, tell them you've stripped it all away and only have the receiver left and could they register it Receiver Only? It's still restricted. The worse they can do is say NO.
They will likely insist on the whole firearm, but you're right.
All of my ARs are builds. They are registered Receiver Only. That will all they get from me. Totally stripped and smashed in a press with only the serial # untouched. They will get the same with my pistols. I sold all the other non accountable parts before they asked me to turn them in.
edit - You MAY be able to call them, tell them you've stripped it all away and only have the receiver left and could they register it Receiver Only? It's still restricted. The worse they can do is say NO.
- Reaction score
- 13,070
- Points
- 1,160
Bill C71 is crushing through Parliament, there is talk of it being implemented by christmas.
Max Bernier didn't bother to even shown up to vote on Bill C71.
In other news Ralph Goodale supported the woman who was found guilty kidnapping raping and murdering Tori Stafford, 8, getting moved to a healing lodge, calling her actions "bad practices".
This guy is really something else.
Max Bernier didn't bother to even shown up to vote on Bill C71.
In other news Ralph Goodale supported the woman who was found guilty kidnapping raping and murdering Tori Stafford, 8, getting moved to a healing lodge, calling her actions "bad practices".
This guy is really something else.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,460
- Points
- 1,140
It is now in the Senate.Jarnhamar said:
Jarnhamar said:
Nor did 18 CPC members. Not that it would've made a difference, because the Bill was destined to pass by virtue of the Liberal majority anyways (bolstered by the near-liberals of the NDP). However, it would've been nice if they'd showed up even to symbolically vote against it and show their support to law-abiding firearms owners.
Similar threads
