The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Eaglelord17]

Hey Don

Speaking of restrictions, ref ammo restictions for rifles .I won't comment. But going with pistols, calibres prohibited are .32 and .25 cals.

Back when I was attached posted to in D & E Pl, 1 HQ & Sigs, I cleaned the Brig Comd's weapon, a .32 cal and was told it was his "suicide pistol".
Cool, eh

Anyway maybe the govt. should just ban the AR-15 556 round from the civie market. Just a thought.

Caliber restrictions are the most pointless thing possible. How does banning any specific caliber accomplish any sort of reduction in crime?

 

[Donald H]

Hey Don

Speaking of restrictions, ref ammo restictions for rifles .I won't comment. But going with pistols, calibres prohibited are .32 and .25 cals.

Back when I was attached posted to in D & E Pl, 1 HQ & Sigs, I cleaned the Brig Comd's weapon, a .32 cal and was told it was his "suicide pistol".
Cool, eh

Anyway maybe the govt. should just ban the AR-15 556 round from the civie market. Just a thought.

That has me interested in the topic Shawn. Why would a .32 and a .25 be banned? I can only guess that there has to be a lot more 32's and .25's than I was familiar with 20 or 30 years ago.

I'm not familiar with any round that is designated AR-15 or would be suitable for only an AR-15. You must be suggesting a ban on some 5.56 round?

:cheers:

 

[Donald H]

Caliber restrictions are the most pointless thing possible. How does banning any specific caliber accomplish any sort of reduction in crime?

I have to agree in principle with that, at least from a relatively uninformed position.  Having said that, I do recognize the difference between a 50 cal machine gun and an old British double rifle of 50 cal or larger.

If those who make the laws are uninformed then it behooves the gun lobby to step forward and volunteer expertise on the subject that falls within the suggested parameters. All that is required would be that an agreement could be reached on the parameters. By doing that, silly mistakes could be avoided.

That is, assuming that there are some silly mistakes.

That would be a good discussion but don't consider it for my benefit.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I have to agree in principle with that, at least from a relatively uninformed position.  Having said that, I do recognize the difference between a 50 cal machine gun and an old British double rifle of 50 cal or larger.

If those who make the laws are uninformed then it behooves the gun lobby to step forward and volunteer expertise on the subject that falls within the suggested parameters. All that is required would be that an agreement could be reached on the parameters. By doing that, silly mistakes could be avoided.

That is, assuming that there are some silly mistakes.

That would be a good discussion but don't consider it for my benefit.

This government removed nearly everyone with firearms expertise from the firearms advisory council and replaced them with activists.

This government is entirely uninterested in hearing from firearms owners and experts.

 

[Donald H]

This government is entirely uninterested in hearing from firearms owners and experts.

Thanks for your opinion. I won't attempt to dispute that because I'm not confident I'm on safe grounds to do so.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Thanks for your opinion. I won't attempt to dispute that because I'm not confident I'm on safe grounds to do so.

Good, because you're not. This gov't gives the square root of fuck all's amount of shits what gun people have to say.

 

[shawn5o]

Caliber restrictions are the most pointless thing possible. How does banning any specific caliber accomplish any sort of reduction in crime?

You got me there EL17

I have no idea why certain calibres are banned. Saturday night specials perhaps?

 

[shawn5o]

Or we could ban rap music and target the gangster culture flourishing in big cities causing violence, shootings and crime.

If it helps - go for it. Main reason - I can't stand rap and gangster culture.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Thanks for your opinion. I won't attempt to dispute that because I'm not confident I'm on safe grounds to do so.

Fair enough. Don’t take my word for it alone. Ask around.

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/cfac/index-en.aspx

Edited: to add the link to the bios of the advisory council. Not one member possesses what I would call a “technical expertise” in firearms. It would be about like having a medical policy  advisory council composed of bus drivers, auto mechanics and florists.

 

[Donald H]

Good, because you're not. This gov't gives the square root of frig all's amount of shits what gun people have to say.

On that I can say that I'm perfectly confident in saying that's not true. If only for their own political reasons of knowing they need to fear the reaction of the gun lobby.

But obviously more.

The gun lobby's attitude of all or nothing is probably not going to work. Make the best of the situation with some positive input that can be received by the estimated 70% majority.

Fwiw, I've been trying to inject a bit of moderation into this conversation.

If it's somewhere close to unanimous that I should just butt out of the conversation then I'll do so. Otherwise I think that some are at least interested in debating and rebutting my opinions. Reserved as they are!

 

[GAP]

If it's unanimous that I should just butt out of the conversation then I'll do so

do so

 

[SeaKingTacco]

On that I can say that I'm perfectly confident in saying that's not true. If only for their own political reasons of knowing they need to fear the reaction of the gun lobby.

But obviously more.

The gun lobby's attitude of all or nothing is probably not going to work. Make the best of the situation with some positive input that can be received by the estimated 70% majority.

Fwiw, I've been trying to inject a bit of moderation into this conversation.

If it's somewhere close to unanimous that I should just butt out of the conversation then I'll do so. Otherwise I think that some are at least interested in debating and rebutting my opinions. Reserved as they are!

Moderation and cooperation in the firearms community hasn’t really worked. Because the Liberals like to demonize firearms owners as evil and treat every firearms issue as a zero sum game, where owners do not get due process or input. Consequently, over time, the owners become more and more militant and fight every initiative around firearms because one can never be sure it is not a Trojan horse for abolition. Which is not awesome for anyone.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

do so

I disagree. Nobody will learn anything if people “just butt out” of subjects they are unfamiliar with.

I am more than willing to politely debate you, Donald.

 

[Donald H]

Moderation and cooperation in the firearms community hasn’t really worked. Because the Liberals like to demonize firearms owners as evil and treat every firearms issue as a zero sum game, where owners do not get due process or input. Consequently, over time, the owners become more and more militant and fight every initiative around firearms because one can never be sure it is not a Trojan horse for abolition. Which is not awesome for anyone.

I hear you! If that is so then the Liberal party is not in tune with it's voters who must be fairly representative of gun owners. It's not just Conservatives who enjoy the sport. And so that indicates to me that the Liberal party should be running up against a brick wall at some point in time.

I'll speak for myself. I'll either support the Liberals or the party that has the best chance of beating the Conservative in my riding. And I'm supportive of gun related sports with some qualifications.

 

[suffolkowner]

One of the problems with a caliber restriction is that the cutoff point is entirely arbitrary as it in all things searching to define a "type" as it is comitting an essentialist error in logic. It is actually worse than that as the caliber is not a measure of the firearm's power at all as it does not take into account the case capacity of the round. Banning a firearm/round due to it's muzzle energy of 10000 joules is better I guess but what if I use a round with 9999 joules? One of the reasons I have a 6.5x55 and a 260 is that in some places in Ontario you can not carry a larger caliber rifle during the hunting season where rifle hunting is not permitted.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I hear you! If that is so then the Liberal party is not in tune with it's voters who must be fairly representative of gun owners. It's not just Conservatives who enjoy the sport. And so that indicates to me that the Liberal party should be running up against a brick wall at some point in time.

I'll speak for myself. I'll either support the Liberals or the party that has the best chance of beating the Conservative in my riding. And I'm supportive of gun related sports with some qualifications.

There is no brick wall when you can ram through anything you like with an OIC. Gun owners were already compliant with a pretty balanced system between safety and liberty to go play guns in the bush. The people you need to worry about are the ones that don't play by the rules, including bringing unreg'd firearms across an international border. One, ten, or a hundred more laws aren't going to make them quit, nor will it make Jane and Finch even the tiniest bit safer after dark on a Friday night.

 

[Haggis]

I hear you! If that is so then the Liberal party is not in tune with it's voters who must be fairly representative of gun owners. It's not just Conservatives who enjoy the sport. And so that indicates to me that the Liberal party should be running up against a brick wall at some point in time.

You are confusing Liberal voters with the Liberal Party. There a re lots of Liberal gun owners who still vote Liberal for more reasons than gun laws. They are wiling to sacrifice their sport for what they perceive to be a greater societal good.

The Liberal Party, however, is hard over against any type of civilian gun ownership and that has been shown time and time again by the legislation they bring into force which is intended to make legal gun ownership so difficult, complicated and expensive that it will be abandoned as a sport form/hobby in Canada.These laws, by and large, target lawful owners only because criminals already ignore gun laws and more won't mean anything to them. A case in point is the potential buyback (compensated confiscation) regime which the Liberals may enact to collect up and destroy the lawfully owned newly banned 1800+ models of firearms. That buyback, if eventually offered, will only apply to lawfully owned guns. No incentive there for criminals to turn in theirs.

I'll speak for myself. I'll either support the Liberals or the party that has the best chance of beating the Conservative in my riding.

That's your choice and the majority here will respect that, even if they don't support it.

And I'm supportive of gun related sports with some qualifications.

I'd like to hear some examples of those qualifications you'd like to see enacted above and beyond those that are already in place in Canada and your rationale for each.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Haggis]
I'd like to hear some examples of those qualifications you'd like to see enacted above and beyond those that are already in place in Canada.
[/quote]

Gender parity with the club management.
Mandatory course on climate change.
Regulate number of vehicles traveling to the range per day
Advisory board for the spot who lack any knowledge on firearms.
Sole sourced contract to set up a committee on something or another.
Has to use ammunition purchased in Quebec?

 

[Haggis]

Gender parity with the club management.
Mandatory course on climate change.
Regulate number of vehicles traveling to the range per day
Advisory board for the spot who lack any knowledge on firearms.
Sole sourced contract to set up a committee on something or another.
Has to use ammunition purchased in Quebec?

STOP HELPING!!!

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Gender parity with the club management.
Mandatory course on climate change.
Regulate number of vehicles traveling to the range per day
Advisory board for the spot who lack any knowledge on firearms.
Sole sourced contract to set up a committee on something or another.
Has to use ammunition purchased in Quebec?

Funnily enough, the gender parity thing is happening (Maybe not fast enough for some) on its own and is healthy for sport shooting Canada. I have met some wicked good women shooters. Good on them for being a part of the sport.