• 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

I can safely say if they did try to do their pilot on me right now I would tell them to pound sand as I have at least until September to be in possession legally. They wouldn't have a leg to stand on to order me to surrender it as the amnesty lasts until then.

I am glad no private company wants anything to do with this, people fail to realize firearms have been the largest case of non-compliance with a law in Canadian history. Before they did the long gun registry they estimated over 20-30 million firearms in country. After long gun registry they only say 8 million. Based off the amount of people I have met which had unregistered firearms, that 20-30 million seems like it was a relatively accurate estimate. Likely the largest single failure to implement law in Canadian history. There isn't going to be a mention of that in the history books though.
 
The idea of a registry only tells criminals where the weapons are. There is zero doubt in my mind that there would be corrupt individuals within the registry selling information.
Many years ago one of my mentors here in Corrections said there’s a dozen dirty guards employed here at any one time. A gun registry would be no different
 
Personally I think you will see a minority of legal gun owners handing over their firearms in the end. I suspect a lot of hunting firearms will “fall off the boat into the water/bog, couldn’t recover it”. None of this, of course, will do anything to reduce real gun violence, or violence for that matter.

Back when I was becoming a teenager and getting interested in hunting and guns, my mom made me dad sell his old single shot Baikal 12ga (wish I had that now, nice hardwood stock etc). She tried to explain her logic that guns are dangerous. I remember saying “you better tell dad to sell the shovels in the shed and my baseball bat then”.

I could have the same argument with the current government; at best, they’re trying to “look like they’re doing something”. At worst, they’re trying to disarm their citizens for no good reason.
 
Assault pistols will be the next..,,oh sorry JT already took pistols out of the hands of legal owners.

Archery will be next I think. There’s some pretty potent crossbows out there these days that are shooting fast speeds and now even multi-bolt options.


340 FPS = 373 km/h or 232 mph.

This one is 510 FPS = 560km/h or 348 mph.


These will be next, or soon I fear.
 
Archery will be next I think. There’s some pretty potent crossbows out there these days that are shooting fast speeds and now even multi-bolt options.


340 FPS = 373 km/h or 232 mph.

This one is 510 FPS = 560km/h or 348 mph.


These will be next, or soon I fear.
It wouldn't surprise me if he did try to ban crossbows, seeing as even fewer Canadians have any connection to bow hunting than to firearms.

Good thing we have an election coming up soon 🙏


That attempt would be an even bigger waste of time & garner even more criticism, than the argument that...

"illegal crossbows are being used in crimes every day, so instead of focusing on reducing the importation of these illegal bows, we will take legally purchased bows away instead..."

Bows & arrows, banned. Brought to you by the same folks who decided to tax you on the 2nd most common element in the universe.
 
Personally I think you will see a minority of legal gun owners handing over their firearms in the end. I suspect a lot of hunting firearms will “fall off the boat into the water/bog, couldn’t recover it”. None of this, of course, will do anything to reduce real gun violence, or violence for that matter.

Back when I was becoming a teenager and getting interested in hunting and guns, my mom made me dad sell his old single shot Baikal 12ga (wish I had that now, nice hardwood stock etc). She tried to explain her logic that guns are dangerous. I remember saying “you better tell dad to sell the shovels in the shed and my baseball bat then”.

I could have the same argument with the current government; at best, they’re trying to “look like they’re doing something”. At worst, they’re trying to disarm their citizens for no good reason.
I believe its the good old "try to look like they're doing something" method of governing.

The lowest intelligence voters will look at this and say "Guns are bad!" and be supportive of the government banning firearms across the board.

They will feel safer, and that's what's important to them. (Until someone robs them at gunpoint, who didn't get the memo...)


These are the same folks who literally thought a virus couldn't infect them if they were walking in the same direction as an arrow on the floor - an arrow that wasn't there the day prior...
 
It wouldn't surprise me if he did try to ban crossbows, seeing as even fewer Canadians have any connection to bow hunting than to firearms.

Good thing we have an election coming up soon 🙏


That attempt would be an even bigger waste of time & garner even more criticism, than the argument that...

"illegal crossbows are being used in crimes every day, so instead of focusing on reducing the importation of these illegal bows, we will take legally purchased bows away instead..."

Bows & arrows, banned. Brought to you by the same folks who decided to tax you on the 2nd most common element in the universe.
Certain crossbows are already banned, as are Blowpipes and some ninga equipment.
 
So let’s spend x billion dollars on a registry “if it saves just one life it will be worth it,”

What bollocks.
I'll be honest, I'm glad I'm not the only one tho thinks this way 😅

I don't know what formula between 'dollars spent & lives lost' is the answer for me...

but that whole "if it saves just one life it will be worth it" has always been an eyebrow raiser for me too.

Like it was said with the intention of becoming a slogan, nothing more.
 
That expression is a total nonstarter. There’s plenty of other places where billions have real lives to save. And there’s only so many billions. When I hear that expression it’s useful in helping me know how close I should listen to the person lol
 
At worst, they’re trying to disarm their citizens for no good reason.
Everyone in high places understands that a population without firearms is less trouble to strongarm than a population with firearms. We've essentially given up on putting much effort into controlling low-level crime, so we must turn to keeping the honest part of the population honest before they start taking matters into their own hands. That means making it hard for people to act out, and coming down hard on those who do.
 
That expression is a total nonstarter. There’s plenty of other places where billions have real lives to save. And there’s only so many billions. When I hear that expression it’s useful in helping me know how close I should listen to the person lol
People who say "You can't put a value on human life", haven't worked for an insurance company or understand what they do. They can even tell you how much your pinkie is worth.
 
People who say "You can't put a value on human life", haven't worked for an insurance company or understand what they do. They can even tell you how much your pinkie is worth.

People who say "you cant put a value on human life" haven't come to grips with the fact that human life has no value and no one gets out alive.

Tragedy happens, and the world keep turning.
 
CCFR has launched a new letter writing program called Scrap C21. They've included a lot of interesting suggestions on what to include in a letter or social media post, and a link to the various C-21 committee members. It's a pretty good attempt at further mobilizing the gun community.


Not sure if this is an accurate stat, but I recently heard that there are approximately 3 million legal firearms owners in Canada, and only about 10% of us belong to one of the big 3 organizations (CCFR, CSSA, and NFA).

We are not united and don’t have the strongest voice we could have.
 
Back
Top