• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

But most of those are Winchester 100's, commercial/ sporting BAR's, Remington 742 or 7400 on the rifle side, and Auto-5's, 1100's etc on the shotgun. Then a lot of .22LR Cooey/Lakefield/ Savage 64's and the odd Ruger 10/22.

If it weren't for Quebec Carney would have a super easy path to cementing the firearms file as a poison pill issue for the CPC.
  • Back off the SKS and Garand
  • Remove any .22 from the OIC lists
  • Codify protection for the SKS,Garand, .22's, the guns I initially listed, plus any other currently other NR firearm
  • Provide some sort of grandfather provision (shift them all to restricted class with an amnesty period for people to upgrade?) to replace the buyback/ confiscation and avoid criminalizing law abiding Canadians

I think Carney is sitting on an opportunity to bridge some divisiveness and take the wind out of PP's sails. But unfortunately Que is more important.

If the LPC left a the file as above, the number of Canadians that would actually care to relax it would be tiny (and dwindling every year), and any attempt to relax it would set up as easy attack line of Conservative's wanting to get "dangerous assault weapons" back on our streets.

Firearms licensing is on the rise and that trend has been continuing for over a decade.

 
I expect with the level of resistance to the scheme growing daily, that the Liberals will take some drastic action to accomplish the program objectives.

I don't think they have the cajones for that.

In rural Canada it still has some life left in it as rural Canadians don't want to play along. In urban Canada, same, but with the opposite goal in mind. Urbanites "know" guns are bad and they are constantly reminded of that by the MSM.

Don't forget well funded and influential as well as "loud".

I think people think gun violence is bad, which I think we could all agree with, but I think the sentiment is shifting and recognizing its smuggled guns that are the problem; not you and me.
 
I don't think they have the cajones for that.
They had the cajones to freeze bank accounts, enforce vaccine mandates etc. during COVID. The simple fact that they don't have enough money to properly pay for this scheme shows me that they were never serious about compensation to start with, but they are serious about confiscation. I would put nothing past this Liberal government.
I think people think gun violence is bad, which I think we could all agree with, but I think the sentiment is shifting and recognizing its smuggled guns that are the problem; not you and me.
Remember Wendy Cukier's famous line "every illegal gun started off as a legal gun."? You've got police forces saying "smuggled guns are the problem" on page 10 of the newspaper, but Poly saying "legal gun owners with issues are the bigger threat" on page 1. Who is the public going to believe?
 
Was looking for something else and came upon this opinion piece. Clear clickable links to references, footnotes and research. Mostly about Nathalie Provost, founder and current spokesperson for the PolySeSouvient gun-control advocacy group. Paints a pretty good representation of the purpose, modus operandi and end game. Initially, I felt they were just an activist organization, who's growth facilitated Nathalie Provost and Heidi Rathjen becoming full time employees. It's likely become their career and source of their salary. Cant shut it down, that's their paycheck. The article goes deeper though and makes more sense of operations and end states. Who is backing them and why.

 
Firearms licensing is on the rise and that trend has been continuing for over a decade.
Yes - but in the situation I laid out with every passing year a smaller and smaller percentage of PAL holders would be in possession of grandfathered/amnestied firearms, fewer and fewer would ever have had a PAL when they were available for purchase, and the 2020/ OIC period would get farther and farther in the past.
 
I think Carney is sitting on an opportunity to bridge some divisiveness and take the wind out of PP's sails. But unfortunately Que is more important.



Firearms licensing is on the rise and that trend has been continuing for over a decade.

And the two growing demographics in PAL acquisitions is women and immigrants. The Liberals realized that the firearm file will soon not be women voter issue in their favour.
 
Doesn't Australia have some of the strictest gun control laws in the world?

Yes they do.

Australia has a dramatically lower rate of shootings and firearm-related deaths compared to the United States, particularly since implementing strict national gun control laws in 1996. The U.S. firearm homicide rate is approximately 33 times greater than Australia's.
 
Australia’s political leaders seem to have decided on their policy reaction. Restricting firearms ownership to citizens is reasonable perhaps.
It’s interesting that the authorities won’t state the shooters country of origin.

Albanese’s proposals to limit the number of guns someone can own and review licenses were announced after the authorities revealed that the older suspected gunman had held a gun license for a decade and amassed his six guns legally.

Leaders of the federal and state governments on Monday also proposed restricting gun ownership to Australian citizens, a measure that would have excluded the older suspect, who came to Australia in 1998 on a student visa and became a permanent resident after marrying a local woman. Officials wouldn’t confirm what country he had migrated from.

His son, who doesn’t have a gun licence, is an Australian-born citizen.

The government leaders also proposed the “additional use of criminal intelligence” in deciding who was eligible for a gun license. That could mean the son’s suspicious associates could disqualify the father from owning a gun.

Chris Minns, premier of New South Wales where Sydney is the state capital, said his state’s gun laws would change, but he could not yet detail how.

“If you’re not a farmer, you’re not involved in agriculture, why do you need these massive weapons that put the public in danger and make life dangerous and difficult for New South Wales Police?” Minns asked.

 
Australia’s political leaders seem to have decided on their policy reaction. Restricting firearms ownership to citizens is reasonable perhaps.
It’s interesting that the authorities won’t state the shooters country of origin.


Its the low hanging fruit and plays to political base.

Dealing with the real issues takes time, effort, resources and might make some folks a little squirmy.
 
Australia’s political leaders seem to have decided on their policy reaction. Restricting firearms ownership to citizens is reasonable perhaps.
It’s interesting that the authorities won’t state the shooters country of origin.



Oh you can bet that our gun control whackos over here are salivating over the opportunity to force more gun restrictions on us. People just got to witness that hunting rifles are round for round more powerful than "Military style assault rifles".

I know that some of my Jewish American friends are tasked to guard their local synagogue during such celebrations and gatherings and do so in body armour and with AR-15's.
 
The government leaders also proposed the “additional use of criminal intelligence” in deciding who was eligible for a gun license. That could mean the son’s suspicious associates could disqualify the father from owning a gun.
This proposal should be raising alarm bells, as horrific as the attack was, the idea that you can have your rights/privileges curtailed by actions of those three removed from you is concerning.


“If you’re not a farmer, you’re not involved in agriculture, why do you need these massive weapons that put the public in danger and make life dangerous and difficult for New South Wales Police?” Minns asked.
This statement from the NSW Premier is interesting. It is only slightly removed from the thought of outright prohibition of all private ownership. Firearms should be only held by licensed businesses for licensed activities is an underlying sentiment I suspect. The statement also appears to put officer safety over and above citizens rights in a liberal society as understood by the political philosophers that created the fundamental underpinnings of western society.

Interesting views into the mindset of Australian political leaders.

While I respect Australian defence policies, there domestic policies are atrocious. Culturally and politically they seem to adhere closer to the UK than we do. Our sharing of the North American continent with the USA appears to have some historical influence on ameliorating authoritarian tendencies.
 
Oh you can bet that our gun control whackos over here are salivating over the opportunity to force more gun restrictions on us. People just got to witness that hunting rifles are round for round more powerful than "Military style assault rifles".
Oh, don't worry - the commentary & memes with blanket solutions based on just gun control or just on immigration has already begun.
Remember when beatniks march with Global Intifada signs, this is what they mean.
For sure - more on that here ......
Also archived here.
 
And comments like the below will do nothing but help them.
Unfortunately it's true and the minute military-whatever firearms are all locked down they're going to say holy shit no one needs a gun powerful enough to kill a bear!

The only solution is to ban all firearms and let citizens deal with what happens after that.
 
Unfortunately it's true .
It's true, but irrelevant. It's a physics based red herring, and it's introduction to the firearms control debate is nothing but selfish petulance.

If there's to be a cynical debate on firearms policy stemming from this disgusting attack, the pro-gun side needs to get on board with two truths-

Australian gun control laws saved lives by limiting what those assholes had in their hands
Australian LE preparedness/ policy cost lives by limiting the effectiveness of response, giving the assholes more time
 
It's true, but irrelevant. It's a physics based red herring, and it's introduction to the firearms control debate is nothing but selfish petulance.
It won't be irrelevant when citizens shift focus and fight to ban your deadly military grade Remington 700 and 870. After all why do you need to hunt with guns that snipers and combat soldiers use?


Australian gun control laws saved lives by limiting what those assholes had in their hands
Maybe. High caliber rifles and shotguns can do some serious damage.
Imagine the carnage if these assholes would have "opened fire" with 2 haul trucks to start.


Australian LE preparedness/ policy cost lives by limiting the effectiveness of response, giving the assholes more time
Probably yeah.

Lots of police are more akin to armed social workers than "warriors". I doubt the Australian people would go for every day police officers looking and acting like goons from tactical teams.
 
It won't be irrelevant when citizens shift focus and fight to ban your deadly military grade Remington 700 and 870. After all why do you need to hunt with guns that snipers and combat soldiers use?
Selfish, petulant, and remarkably disingenuous. Combat ignorance with insight, don't give it fuel.

This board has an active 20 page thread lamenting the failings of and arguing the minutiae of the effectiveness of the various upgrade paths of the C7/ C8 family and how its absolutely critical to get it right so our troops aren't disadvantaged, and I'm willing to bet some of the people posting here stung by OIC's spent a lot of time discussing and optimizing the their rigs for 3 gun comps, but once gun control is the topic lets go full stupid and say a gun is gun so lets dare them to ban em all.
75 shots in 5 minutes is what I've seen reported, and I've seen multiple clips of people running in clear sight and getting to safety as black pants worked the action feverishly to get 1-2 shots off.

High caliber rifles and shotguns can do some serious damage.
Sure they can. But again, we all know that Mauser's and Enfield's are no longer standard issue infantry weapons for good reason. We know that no amount of training is going to get a guy with a lever 45-70 and 12 ga sxs to the winner's circle in an open 3 gun match Rounds may be as lethal, or more so- but the weapons are less effective.
 
Back
Top