• 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

Haggis said:
And to the folks who say "it's just a mag", it's also a prohibited device under the CC and FA and a controlled asset. How many "lost mags" have been recovered by contractors, scavengers in the trg areas (yes, it happens) or follow-on course and never properly dealt with?

Crap happens when doing the business.  I've dropped mags during quick mag change on an attack and seen some go missing on an attack. Train like you fight and sometimes you just don't have time to put them in the drop pouch. 

Luckily the miltiary isn't beholden to the firearms act, otherwise we would never get any real training done. 

As for lost weapons, funniest one I saw was a Canadian Maple Branch snag a C7 out of the bustle rack of a LAV.  Spent a couple of hours driving around looking for that thieving tree! 
 
Humphrey Bogart said:
Luckily the military isn't beholden to the firearms act, otherwise we would never get any real training done. 

I get that, but it doesn't change the fact that the item is still prohibited when not in the lawful (i.e. duty or training related) possession of a CAF member or other exempted person.  E.g. A troop "loses" a C7 magazine or two on an FTX.  Then, he uses the magazine in his dreaded S&W AR-15 clone on a civilian range.  That magazine is prohibited as it is not lawfully in his possession as he is now subject to the CCC/FA .  That's what I meant.
 
Good side of banning firearms out west.

Less things criminals, burglers and intruders have to worry about being hurt with.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/alberta-man-who-fired-warning-shots-at-bandits-is-now-being-sued-for-damages-by-one-of-them/ar-AAHJRjc?li=AAggNb9
 
Jarnhamar said:
Good side of banning firearms out west.

Less thibgs criminals, burglers and intruders have to worry about being hurt with.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/alberta-man-who-fired-warning-shots-at-bandits-is-now-being-sued-for-damages-by-one-of-them/ar-AAHJRjc?li=AAggNb9

This is why nobody in Alberta likes or respects the RCMP any more  :nod:

Not really their fault as they are just agents of the state but a little common sense would go a long way.
 
Haggis said:
I get that, but it doesn't change the fact that the item is still prohibited when not in the lawful (i.e. duty or training related) possession of a CAF member or other exempted person.  E.g. A troop "loses" a C7 magazine or two on an FTX.  Then, he uses the magazine in his dreaded S&W AR-15 clone on a civilian range.  That magazine is prohibited as it is not lawfully in his possession as he is now subject to the CCC/FA .  That's what I meant.

If founnd, a law abiding fire arm owner would put a rivet in that magazine :p
 
Another promise from JT is to “further strengthen safe-storage laws”. (Which are already rock solid) I'm thinking they are looking seriously into centralized storage. Ranges will have increased costs for facilities and security or close up completely. The costs related to sport or recreational shooting would skyrocket. More costs = less shooters = exactly what the Liberals want.

More importantly, centralized storage makes confiscation oh so easy.....
 
Jonezy76 said:
I'm thinking they are looking seriously into centralized storage.

Blair specifically mentioned centralized storage at gun clubs and ranges for gun owners in urban areas during an interview on CTV's Question Period. This is because those are the only places where one can legally use them. 
 
Haggis said:
Blair specifically mentioned centralized storage at gun clubs and ranges for gun owners in urban areas during an interview on CTV's Question Period. This is because those are the only places where one can legally use them.

Unless your firearms are non-restricted. Not everyone that lives in a urban area has restricted firearms, or belongs to a gun club.
 
We are such a fractured group of people, Canadian Firearms owners.  We have just as much suspicion and mistrust from within as we do for the outside. 

What defence can we mount ?

I am very interested to see what happens if the Liberals manage to pull another majority and pass their plans into legislation and law.  There are allot of key board commandos talking about resistance and vaguely veiled hints of possible violent resistance as well. 

I for see the sale of rifle length PVC piping and caps, strong plastic bags and shovels to skyrocket.
 
Halifax Tar said:
We are such a fractured group of people, Canadian Firearms owners.  We have just as much suspicion and mistrust from within as we do for the outside. 

What defence can we mount ?

I am very interested to see what happens if the Liberals manage to pull another majority and pass their plans into legislation and law.  There are allot of key board commandos talking about resistance and vaguely veiled hints of possible violent resistance as well. 

I for see the sale of rifle length PVC piping and caps, strong plastic bags and shovels to skyrocket.

The amnesty for the LGR lasted as long as the registry did, one could only hope that there will be non-compliance or owners taking advantage of the 2 year amnesty. If only 10% or 25% of "assault weapons" are turned in, the amnesty will be extended. The only other recourse would be to start a legal protest.

IF the government wants to ban any firearms by OIC, then the firearms act automatically creates grandfathered ownership privileges for all affected owners via 12.8 of the firearms act. If they do this, everyone who holds a registration certificate for these firearms will receive a new registration certificate indicated prohibited status, and should at the same time receive a new license indicating prohibited in some way. If for whatever reason you are not eligible for a prohibited license, or if the government tries to enact that ban without grandfathered privileges, you will receive a seizure notice in the mail, giving you 30 days to comply or file a protest. Filing a protest is free, and involves you requesting a S74 judicial review of the revocation of your certificate. You do not need a lawyer for this. You will be given a court date. Probably 9-12 months away.  You have 9-12 months to find a lawyer, tell them about your actual court date, and pay them for actual advise.

With or without them you will go in front of the judge, plead your case, and the judge will rule that the order was properly enacted, that governments are allowed to make stupid laws, and will order you to comply with the seizure notice. IN other words, you will lose. BUT, then you get to file an appeal. This will cost money. You will NEED a lawyer. This will take at least a year. By this point the court system will be clogged with hundreds of thousands of reviews and appeal requests that the Crown Attorneys will be begging the government to do something or else bona fide criminals will be having their cases tossed due to excessive delays.

2 year amnesty + 1 year wait for court + waiting for an appeal. Hopefully the conservatives will get elected and repeal that nonsense by then.

 
Taken from the shipbuilding thread:

“The tribunal was still formulating an official response to the government’s use of the exception, which the Liberal government quietly expanded over the summer without any consultation with industry or experts”

This expansion* of power appears to be a running theme from all levels of Canadian government in many areas- from ship building to gun control.

If the federal government gives municipalities any powers whatsoever in gun control (which many cities are requesting)  they will most assuredly ban most firearms and then seek to expropriate some existing ranges for police training purposes. This might be constitutional overreach, but if a province approves then it can be done.

The only provinces that might push back are in the West, with the exception of BC.

*  silent exercise of raw legal power for political purpose.
 
Cloud Cover said:
The only provinces that might push back are in the West, with the exception of BC.

I suspect that Ontario under Ford, no friend of John Tory or anything Toronto. might also push back.
 
Haggis said:
I get that, but it doesn't change the fact that the item is still prohibited when not in the lawful (i.e. duty or training related) possession of a CAF member or other exempted person.  E.g. A troop "loses" a C7 magazine or two on an FTX.  Then, he uses the magazine in his dreaded S&W AR-15 clone on a civilian range.  That magazine is prohibited as it is not lawfully in his possession as he is now subject to the CCC/FA .  That's what I meant.

If he wanted a 30 round mag for his AR, he can just drill out the rivet. A whole bunch simpler and expedient than fucking with the military horseshit over a lost mag.
 
Fishbone Jones said:
If he wanted a 30 round mag for his AR, he can just drill out the rivet. A whole bunch simpler and expedient than fucking with the military horseshit over a lost mag.

Isn't this prohibited in Canada too? 4 nails and some electrical tape.

1.jpg
 
Absolutely. I often wonder why some people don't understand that prohibition doesn't work.
If it did, we could just make murder and assault illegal...... that would cure the "gun" problem.

Let's put meth and crack cocaine on the list too!! :)
 
An interesting read on gun control from Bermuda... and their solution when bans and confiscation didn't work.


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-what-bermudas-50-year-old-gun-ban-can-teach-canada/

It’s become a tragic ritual: Whenever gun violence strikes, there is a conversation about gun control.
And in that conversation, certain “success stories” invariably come up. After 35 people were killed in the Tasmanian city of Port Arthur in 1996, Australia banned certain guns, established a registry and implemented tighter restrictions. The firearm homicide rate dropped by about 42 per cent in the seven years afterward. Canada, too, is often cited as a haven, especially compared with the United States.
But Canada saw 249 gun-related killings in 2018. And Toronto – where a fifth of those killings occurred – endured another spate of violence this summer evoking fears of 2005’s “year of the gun.”
For people truly looking for a better approach on gun violence, Australia is not a fair parallel. Allowing provinces to decide to implement a handgun ban, along with a prohibition on military-style “assault weapons” – as the Liberal party proposed, in its campaign platform last week – won’t work if that’s the extent of its gun policy. And a better example lies on an affluent island nation that’s closer to home.

In the early 1970s, a spate of high-profile murders in Bermuda – including the assassination of the governor – prompted the government to confiscate firearms, resulting in one of the world’s strictest gun regimes. Today, only certain members of the Bermuda Police Service are authorized to use handguns; all others must receive authorization from the police commissioner, and that’s usually reserved for the military. Members of licensed rifle clubs may possess firearms with a licence that must be renewed annually, and Bermudians cannot keep ammunition at home.
Bermuda, meanwhile, also shifted its economy to focus on international business. It is now the world’s “risk capital,” and the largest underwriter of catastrophe reinsurance to the United States. As a result, it now enjoys one of the world’s highest per-capita incomes.

But despite all these changes, Bermuda was rocked by the worst period of gun violence in its history, spurred by feuding gangs, starting in 2009. By 2010, there was a shooting every 10 days, on average. The murder of Kimwandae Walker was described by police as one of the “most heinous"; he was killed at a school field on Good Friday in front of his children.
It turns out a blunt ban wasn’t enough. Guns weren’t really off the streets; as a hub for air travel, cargo ships, cruise ships and private yachts from the United States, Bermuda remained vulnerable to firearm-smuggling. And the guns found their way to communities affected by deeper traumas and societal inequalities that a gun ban didn’t address.
"We did not realize that in our communities we were taking this dysfunction from generation to generation,” said Wayne Caines, Bermuda’s Minister of National Security, in a phone interview with The Globe and Mail. Amid alcohol and drug addiction problems, abuse, incarceration, and parental absenteeism, he says this particular generation’s dysfunction is manifesting as gang activity.

Other societal forces helped drive young Bermudians to crime, too. Bermuda’s explosion in gun crime coincided with a recession, triggered by the 2008 financial crisis. The country’s gross domestic product declined for five consecutive years, and the unemployment rate in 2010 was 158 per cent higher than it was a decade earlier.
Bermuda’s history of racial segregation and disenfranchisement meant that the crash affected some more than others. The lack of a four-year university there meant that only those wealthy enough to study abroad – or workers who came from away – could access the high-paying, specialized jobs in the reinsurance industry. And so black Bermudians, who make up approximately 55 per cent of the population, disproportionately worked lower-paying and precarious jobs that required less education, in industries that experienced the worst of the shocks: construction, manufacturing and retail services. “For a long period of time, we did not invest in our young men,” Mr. Caines admits.

But to Bermuda’s credit, it has shifted gears. The government conducted a survey of 10,000 students to identify the young people most vulnerable to these crimes; it found that 4 per cent, or approximately 400 students, fit that definition. The Gang Violence Reduction Team began providing mediation and support sessions in schools. A Violent Reduction Unit took aim at anti-social behaviour while offering mediation, de-escalation, and a prison outreach and rehabilitation program. Its Inter-Agency Gang Enforcement Team holds monthly meetings with police and customs officials, as well as with the departments of education and child and family services. They also adopted a few measures that help people avoid the prison-system funnel: mental-health courts, drug treatment courts, and the decriminalization of small amounts of cannabis. The goal was to move away from locking up the majority of black men who commit lesser crimes.
Since then, there’s been a gun-violence miracle. Over the past four years, the Bermuda Police Service has registered a 45-per-cent decrease in gang murders and gun violence. In 2018, Bermuda saw three firearms deaths, down from nine in 2017 and 14 in 2016.

The government did undertake an initial short-term plan to arrest and convict those directly involved in shootings and homicides, Mr. Caines admitted, but insisted that such an aggressive approach alone wouldn’t have solved the problem, and that a more long-term plan was needed to ensure young people stayed connected to society. “We accept and acknowledge that we could have done differently,” he said. "Now we are in the process as a community of coming to grips with some of the failings of our past.”
Canada may not boast Bermuda’s tropical climes, but we share surprisingly similar circumstances. Indigenous, immigrant and refugee families carry unaddressed intergenerational trauma. People of colour, who disproportionately experience poverty, have been historically disenfranchised and marginalized. A Hospital for Sick Children study found that refugee youth had a 43 per cent higher chance of becoming victims of firearms assault than Canadian-born children.

Unlike Bermuda, though, Canada seems unwilling to acknowledge its failings and pursue anything but a gun-violence strategy centred on police action and blunt restrictions.
“Don’t focus on the gun,” Mr. Caines offers up as advice. “Focus on society’s challenge … and put mitigating factors and life-changing factors that allow our young men to get connected to society.”
As Bermuda marches toward an era of zero gun violence, the question remains whether politicians in Canada have the willpower to do the same. The latest round of high-profile gun policy suggests that’s unlikely.
 
Jarnhamar said:
Isn't this prohibited in Canada too? 4 nails and some electrical tape.

1.jpg

Fun fact; brass knuckles are illegal in Canada, but knuckledusters made of 1/2” Lexan are just fine.
 
Seen an article, think it was Toronto sun, that said the gun that was used in the BC murders (an SKS) is the same gun that Trudeau wants to ban.

Read: those murders wouldn't have happened if these assault weapons were banned.

 
Jarnhamar said:
Seen an article, think it was Toronto sun, that said the gun that was used in the BC murders (an SKS) is the same gun that Trudeau wants to ban.

Read: those murders wouldn't have happened if these assault weapons were banned.

I read the same article. By the same logic, we could reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.
 
Back
Top