The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Kat Stevens]

Firearm owners mostly live in jurisdictions that already would not vote lib.

 

[PuckChaser]

2. Too many gun owners drank the PPC Kool-Aid and put their faith in Mad Max.  Had they voted strategically (i.e. for the candidate most likely to defeat their local Liberal, whether Conservative or not) we may not be where we are today.

Quickly looking at the numbers, PPC didn't have the support they thought they would. They only got 1.6% of the popular vote spread out across the entire country. Quickly looking at the numbers here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2019_Canadian_federal_election#Seats_won_and_lost_by_party I only found 1 riding that the Tory candidate would have won with the PPC votes.

I honestly think Andrew Scheer had an uphill battle to fight against the media and a long shot to make Trudeau a single-term Prime Minister. With a new leader, mounting debt, terrible economy and fractured national unity, the Tories will be better positioned in 2021 to take away the basic dictatorship Trudeau has cemented himself in. This firearms ban is also relatively easy to pick apart. Next May if the homicide rate by firearms hasn't dropped then there's hard data Trudeau did nothing for gun crime.

 

[ballz]

With a new leader, mounting debt, terrible economy and fractured national unity, the Tories will be better positioned in 2021 to take away the basic dictatorship Trudeau has cemented himself in. This firearms ban is also relatively easy to pick apart. Next May if the homicide rate by firearms hasn't dropped then there's hard data Trudeau did nothing for gun crime.

I am way less optimistic. Unless another scandal hits between now and a somewhat return to normalcy, I'd be surprised if we're not at the polls again sooner rather than later. The Liberals are polling in majority territory and the Conservatives are in shambles, wounded, leaderless, and the party is disenfranchised by the lackluster leadership candidates.

Once we're back to some normalcy, and by then we'll be experiencing economic recovery as it bounces back from people actually doing things again, the Liberals well say "well, situation has changed drastically, a new government needs a new, stronger mandate from Canadians to help us fully recover from this."

 

[MilEME09]

I would argue it depends who us the new leaders inner circle, Pierre poilievre is great at playing offensively. If I was leader I would be using him to form my election media strategy. The next leader would need to win over Toronto that the CPC has a better plan for gun control, strike the liberals at any weakness, but also show why your the better choice.

 

[ballz]

Some interesting posts today....

On FB, Ian Runkle, a well-known firearms lawyer in AB, posted this FB three hours ago:
https://www.facebook.com/Ian.Runkle.Lawyer

Apparently the rumour (which I consider fairly credible) is that the LPC is going to push for central storage next. 
Gun owners know why this is terrible, so this is largely going to be aimed at friends, colleagues, and so forth who may not be aware of some of the issues.
The first is practicality.  A farmer who has a pack of coyotes eyeing his/her cattle can't drive an hour each way (you think these storage locations are going to be convenient in rural Canada?) to get a rifle.  A hunter who has to wake up in the early hours to get to his/her spot is pretty inconvenienced by having to do so hours early--and would the central storage even be open?  How do we know the difference between a hunter who is spending a week bedded down in the wilderness versus one who just takes their gun home?  We have communities that are fly-in, fly-out, and so a hunter or target shooter might need to get on a plane (or a ferry) to get to the nearest central storage location. 
The second is cost.  If you're requiring central storage, that won't be free.  What this means is that the notion of "We are sparing hunters and farmers" is anything but--it's going to put tremendous costs on hunters and farmers.  These costs will disproportionately harm those who are most vulnerable.  My mother, growing up, was in a family with many children and where hunted meat was necessary for them because they were far from wealthy.  Living off the land should not be something partitioned off for the wealthy elite. 
The third is safety--many ranges and the like are in remote areas, because that's where you can afford to buy a stretch of land a kilometer or two long.  This makes them prime targets for theft. 
The fourth is that a lot of practice and maintenance happen at home.  There's no competition shooter who isn't spending a lot of time working with their firearm off-range as well as on. 
For those of you who supported the latest OIC because "They're leaving hunters and farmers alone", well, they're coming for hunters, farmers, target shooters, and so forth next in a big way, it seems.

And this was posted to Reddit, which is obviously not reliable but the reasoning stated seems exactly what the Liberals would go for... https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/comments/gdec16/this_is_whats_coming_next/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

I work for the LPC, and I'm also a gun owner who is not only affected by the recent ban, but is disgusted by it. I do not want to give more details to what extent I work for the party other than to say there are quite a few of us, and we were the ones responsible for leaking the list of firearms to the media before the official announcement. We've been keeping our ear to the ground since, and this is what we've heard from the public safety office on recommendations for future legislation;

The next tag line the party will push is women and domestic violence, as well as suicide. The point the government will be pushing is that women are victim of gun violence at home, and suicide by gun are happening because the gun is readily accessible at home.

They know that a ban on hunting rifles and shotguns will have very bad optics, but they feel they will be able to get away with central storage. The argument will be made that if the gun isn't readily available, it can save the lives of women and those who might re-think their suicide if they don't have their firearm handy, while not infringing on the rights of hunters by banning their firearms.

The idea is that the government will be offering subsidies to gun businesses (either ranges or commercial stores) to adapt their establishments to allow for on site storage. I don't have any further details on what form the subsidies would be in.

This is getting out of hand. Internal polling has shown huge support for the recent ban, so they feel they can get away with their next phase of legislation.

I have no idea when this will be put forward, but I haven't heard it will be done by order in council. They look like they're going to allow democracy to play out this time, but word is that 2 parties currently support such a move, and will be able to provide enough seats. I'll let you guess which parties those are.

I've also heard some rumblings about modifying the requirements for a PAL or RPAL. They will want you to prove that you are either a hunter or a sport shooter. The hunting license in most provinces does not expire, so the talk has been about proving you're holding firearms for hunting by showing yearly proof in the form of hunting tags. For sport shooters, they want to require membership to a range. These were just ideas thrown around by a few people. There is no talk of putting any such requirements in future legislation.

I'll post more as more information becomes available.

Good luck all.

 

[Infanteer]

Yikes.  :not-again:

 

[MilEME09]

Sounds like they want to make it an unaffordable hobby

 

[ModlrMike]

...proving you're holding firearms for hunting by showing yearly proof in the form of hunting tags.

Yea, I can see all the FN getting behind that one.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Yes, but what about domestic violence and firearms related suicides on Indian reserves. They get a pass on that too?
This government's decisions are truly questionable.

Staff Edit to comply with rules of posting in political threads.

 

[Haggis]

Not that I am in any way advocating for it/them, there is already one company in the GTA selling offsite firearm storage space.

I suspect the Liberal's first target for centralized storage will be remaining semi-automatic long guns, bolt action long range rifles and handguns. Farmers and FN will be exempt but with severe calibre and action type restrictions.  The costs to gun clubs, as alluded to above, will be enormous thus pushing the price of participation in the shooting sports out of reach of most who now partake.

 

[Haggis]

No other firearms OIC has ever been reversed by a subsequent government that I can recall.

I posted this a few days ago.  Subsequent research and discussion has shown that there was recently one reclassification OIC that was reversed regarding the Swiss Arms and cz858 rifles.  Both have now been prohibited as of last Monday, but the point is that reclassifications to a less controlled class have happened by OIC, except that Bill C71 has taken that power away from cabinet.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Sounds like a lot of hunters are criminals now too. Well those with 12 gauge shotguns that have removable chokes.

Imagine a pump action shotgun with a honking 28" long barrel being considered an assault weapon  :

For Immediate Release! CSAAA- Shotgun ban!!

The Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association (CSAAA) and the Canadian Shooting Sports Association (CSSA) demand the immediate withdrawal of the flawed Order in Council.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Minister Bill Blair looked Canadian gun owners in the eye last Friday and said they would not take guns suitable for hunting away from us.

Minister Blair is either too inept to comprehend the scope of his regulations…or he lied to the Government and Canadians.

In the legal opinion of our firearms legal team – headed by Edward Burlew L.L.B., one of the foremost experts in Canadian firearms law – Blair banned almost every modern 12-gauge and 10-gauge shotgun in Canada with removable chokes because they exceed the maximum bore diameter of 20 mm as defined in SOR/2020-96.

It is estimated there 1.5 – 2 million of these common hunting firearms in Canada.

As well, many large bore hunting rifles – some more than 100 years old and valued at more than $100,000 have become prohibited. None of these firearms are semi-automatic or “military style.” They encompass common bolt-action rifles such as the .460 Weatherby, break-open single and double rifles. These firearms are captured because the powerful cartridges they shoot – designed to humanely dispatch the largest game animals. PURE hunting rifles.

Canada’s firearms industry body, the CSAAA, is advising retailers to top sales of “large hunting calibre, non semi-automatic rifles such as the Weatherby Mark V .460 as these rifles exceed the 10,000 Joules energy restriction.

Additionally, CSAAA advises retailers to cease sales of many 12-gauge or larger shotguns with removable chokes.”

Despite open hunting seasons across much of Canada, lawful firearms owners should refrain from using 12-gauge or larger shotguns with removable chokes or large calibre rifles capable or exceeding the government’s energy ceiling.

Those firearms are PROHIBITED and may not be used or transports for any reason.

Intentional likes or incompetent mistakes? You decide.

The Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association (CSAAA) and the Canadian shooting Sports Association (CSSA) demand the immediate withdrawal of the Governments’s flawed Order in Council and the immideate removal of Minister Blair from the Public Safety file.

For more information call:

Alison de Groot, CSAAA 1-705-875-2302 info@csaaa.org

Tony Bernardo, CSSA 1-905-571-2150 info@cssa-cila.org

 

[Stoker]

Sounds like a lot of hunters are criminals now too. Well those with 12 gauge shotguns that have removable chokes.

Imagine a pump action shotgun with a honking 28" long barrel being considered an assault weapon  :

Not actually banned by name. Its a gambit to take the government to court on the OIC.

 

[NavyShooter]

I ended up having some 'discussions' with a couple of people.  One of them addressed me in the following way after I posted them:

"I would like to see the abusive rhetoric on this issue - on both sides - toned down."

My detailed comments.  Question for the group - is any of the below rhetoric?

I'll point out that any shotgun larger than 12 Gauge is now a prohibited device - so Grandpa's old 10 gauge? Prohib because it's got a bore larger than 20mm. There are also somewhat 'standard' big game and dangerous game cartridges (.416 Rigby I think is one of them) that are also now prohibited. There is a photo of a beautiful Westley and Richards double hunting rifle from the early 1900's that's floating around the internet - it is now prohibited also.
The single shot bolt action rifle that is the basis for the Cadet Fullbore program is (I think) the RPA - it's now on the prohibited list as well, so a bunch of $5000 target rifles are now prohibited.
This prohibition order is as useless as the ones that were done in the early 90's. Recall the tragedy in Mayerthorpe where 4 RCMP officers were murdered? The gun used there had been prohibited for over 2 decades.
Sadly, evil will find a way, whether it is a rental truck, or arson (9 of the deaths here in NS were from fire so I'm told.)
The points Marcel Boudreau made about firearms owners being vetted...well, I passed my daily RCMP check today - have you?
There are 28 day waiting periods, mandatory training, mandatory background checks, daily background checks, individual approval for restricted firearms transfers, storage laws, transport laws, all of which didn't matter to the POS who committed a spree killing here in Nova Scotia. He didn't have a license. He had smuggled guns. He murdered to get another gun. How do you stop a monster like that?
Would any of the wonderful things that our national leadership have emplaced have stopped him?
Nothing they've pulled out of their hat would have stopped him.
How about - a registry of those who have been given a court ordered firearms prohibition? (There's about 500,000 Canadians who have one.) There's also no record, no tracking, and no verification that they're not using or carrying guns.
THAT is something that all of us can support. How about a useful measure instead of useless bans.

There can be arguments that fully automatic firearms have a place in the world as well. *HEAR ME OUT PLEASE*.
Consider that most innovation in this world comes not out of governments or government controlled development programs. We all know how efficient those can be.
Some of the greatest innovations in small arms over the past number of years have been driven by individuals, rather than businesses or governments. John Moses Browning - John Garand - Carbine Williams - Eugene Stoner - Diudonne Saive, etc. For development purposes, having a good understanding of how to improve small arms needs to involve doing more than just looking at them in museums.
Governments may be good at managing incremental improvements (see M1 Garand vs M14 rifle) or the entire development of the Lee Enfield after James Paris Lee did his work (truly, the differences between a #1 and a #4 rifle are fairly small.) I won't even really discuss the SA-80 rifle project that the Brits ran....ironically, it's just a development of Eugene Stoner's Armalite Rifle model 18 (AR-18) put into a 'bullpup' configuration.
I note that small arms innovation has, for the most part, stalled in the past few years - interestingly, around the same period of time that individual restrictions have been emplaced in many places around the world. Truly revolutionary changes in small arms technology have not happened since the days of Hiram Maxim.
Is there a reason for individuals to be permitted to have automatic weapons? I think so, under controlled and permitted circumstances.
In the same way - firearms such as the Armalite Rifle model 15 have been used under carefully controlled and permitted conditions for the past 30+ years - so much so that the 3 incidents which I'm aware of using AR's in crimes in Canada involve guns that were smuggled in specifically for the actions they were used for. One of them being a mob hit where the criminal ended up shooting himself.
Is this prohibition order going to fix our nations problems with smuggled guns and gangs? No.
So it's actually a waste, a waste of time, a waste of resources, and a waste of effort.
I'd like to see the government actually do something useful to fight crime - instead, they target me, and Marcel.

Peter, I will observe that a single shot rifle is not the pinnacle of safety when dealing with dangerous game. Do you want to deal with a grizzly bear with one shot? Do you want to deal with a pack of wolves with a single shot rifle? When hunters have been trying to deal with the recent scourge of feral pigs across the north American continent (note, they're now in Canada too) there were groups in the US actually using helicopters and rifles with 30 round magazines to take them down. When a herd of 40-50 pigs is running - that makes sense.
Limiting a hunter to a single shot is to endanger that hunter - you may not hunt anywhere by the meat market, but for some that is their primary means of filling their larder and freezer.
As for modifying bolt action rifles - well, I will ask you to consider that in WW1, when there were not enough machine guns available, an enterprising Canadian by the name of Huot modified a number of Ross Rifles to become machine guns that were trialed against the Lewis gun and found to be slightly more reliable than the Lewis.
https://youtu.be/1UI0XvrIfl0

In WW2, the Australian army found itself on the wrong end of the supply chain to get Bren guns - so an enterprising man named Charlton modified several thousand of their Lee Enfield rifles into a functional light machine gun.
https://youtu.be/glcuSPMAAHs

In the face of adversity, the human being can be very creative.
Observe the Webley Fosbery Automatic Revolver pistol.
https://youtu.be/4EqkcVlzVSw

The FN-FAL (C1 in Canadian service) was designed to be a machine gun - they were originally made in the German 7.92x33 Kurz cartridge from the STG-44 fame, and only when it was discovered that the new chambering of 7.62x51mm was uncontrollable in Full Auto fire was the design limited to semi-auto except in the C-2. (This is a gross simplification of the history here...I have much more detail I am trying NOT to add.)
That said, none of the firearms that were banned by this will have any real measure of impact on public safety - when was the last time a TOW anti-tank missile was used in crime in Canada?
You posit that taking these guns away will make things safer, particularly for women. Yet this Order exempts First Nations people for the next two years from its implementation so that they can continue to own and use these arms for hunting - specifically recognizing the sporting use of these arms. First Nations also tend to have a higher rate of spousal and domestic abuse - so - if the concern was legitimate, you should be asking why they were given an exemption?
As I observed above, there's not a single aspect to the Order that has been enacted that will give a measurable increase in public safety. Please look at the 3 charts I will include (one here, and the next in the following charts) and tell me with a straight face that this will have any measurable impact on our crime rates.

Peter, I will also speak to the 'ease' of modification that is needed to make a standard semi-automatic rifle function in full-auto (firing more than one shot for every pull of the trigger.)
I am *quite* familiar with the internals of the C-7/M-16 and the civilian AR-15. While they are externally similar, the internals have a number of changes that make it very difficult to convert the civilian rifle to Full Auto. There is also no way to do so without resorting to permanent modifications to the receiver - modifications which are clearly visible should the firearm be inspected - and of note - any firearms owner who holds restricted firearms, or has more than 10 firearms is subject to inspection under the Firearms Act as enacted in the early 90's.
First. The Hammer. The hammer on the semi-auto has two distinct modifications, first the auto-sear catch has been ground off, and second a notch has been cut in the face of the hammer that is designed to interact with the bolt and firing pin to prevent full auto fire.
Second. The Auto Sear. This piece is physically not present in the gun, nor is the hole for it's cross-pin.
Third. The safety selector switch. It is physically different and the cutouts necessary for it to rotate to the 'automatic' position are not present.
Fourth. The trigger. The trigger itself is formed differently at the rear where it interacts with the safety to prevent it from being capable of interacting properly with a Full Auto selector switch even if one was installed.
Fourth. The Disconnector. The Disconnector in a Semi-auto is different from that of a FA gun.
Fifth. The Lower Receiver. The lower receiver in a semi-auto is not cut out internally for the necessary full auto parts. The rear area where the selector fits has a number of extra compound curves on it - if you did attempt to drill a hole to insert an auto sear, those curves would cause the drill bit to bend and drill an off-set hole which would prevent things from working at all. There are some models of lower receiver that had a block of hardened steel fitted inside in this area as well - these things were done specifically to prevent the rifle from being easily converted, or to allow any of the above parts from being fitted.
Sixth. The Firing Pin. The retaining ring section of the firing pin has been enlarged on the semi-auto rifles so as to interact with the hook mentioned above on the hammer.
Seventh. The Bolt Carrier. The ramp on which the hammer slides on the bottom of the bolt carrier is milled away so as to expose the enlarged ring of the firing pin. The bottom portion of the Bolt Carrier is also milled away at the rear in the area where it would act to trip the Auto sear if one was installed.
So. Long story long. You would have to first, modify the lower receiver to accept all of the above parts, then get all of the above parts, and properly install them.
The AR-15 has had almost 70 years of engineering put into it to meet the stringent requirements of today's police and bureaucratic inspections to ensure that it is *NOT* easy to make into a machine gun.
Can it be done? Yes. But you'd spend almost as much time doing it as it would take for me to add a gas piston to my Ross rifle and turn it into a machine gun.

I gather that your position is not swayed?
The above information is the sort of detail that is not a part of the discussions surrounding gun laws in Canada. The 'evidence based' research that brought us to this place and enacted this Order in Council is so detailed that, as mentioned, the bolt action Cadet target rifle has now been prohibited - the Cadet fullbore program has just been shut down. The list includes airsoft pellet guns even that are not firearms at all, and as mentioned, every shotgun above a 12 gauge is now a prohibited weapon.
The list looks to me like a 'copy/paste' from various parts of the internet, and will certainly not have the positive influence on public safety that is supposedly the reason for it's implementation.
I would far rather see some honest open discussions to find REAL ways to fix the problems. The 'buy back' or 'compensation' for these guns - which are demonstrably not the problem - will see by some estimates 3-5 times the amount of money given to firearms owners as is being spent on border security programs designed to stop smuggled guns.
How about we leave these guns alone, and put those hundreds of millions of dollars into the anti-smuggling activities NOW?
That would have a real, measurable impact.

 

[PuckChaser]

I'm not a huge gun guy, but a quick look online shows a 12ga barrel diameter is 18 and change millimetres. Are there chokes that make the barrel flared so its larger than a 10ga at the opening, since chokes by name and nature actually constrict the barrel?

 

[Haggis]

I'm not a huge gun guy, but a quick look online shows a 12ga barrel diameter is 18 and change millimetres. Are there chokes that make the barrel flared so its larger than a 10ga at the opening, since chokes by name and nature actually constrict the barrel?

18.3 to 20.3 mm for a .12 ga.  .10 ga average is 19.69 mm.  I'm sure someone from the Minister's office will be along to put the CSAAA in their place very shortly.

 

[NavyShooter]

Put who in their place?


The technical details apparently specify that the bore is to be measured at the muzzle with all muzzle devices removed.

 

[NavyShooter]

"

The Benelli Nova measures 0.789" or 20.04 mm and the Winchester SX3 measures 0.836" or 21.23 mm"​

 

[Haggis]

Put who in their place?

The technical details apparently specify that the bore is to be measured at the muzzle with all muzzle devices removed.

And here comes "the law of unintended consequences".  Maybe the hunters and farmers will listen now.

 

[Jarnhamar]

And here comes "the law of unintended consequences".  Maybe the hunters and farmers will listen now.

Ducks Unlimited was very neutral on the proposed coming gun restrictions and abjectly refused to sign that petition that went around.