The Great Gun Control Debate

[sappermcfly]

We've been here a dozen times.

I'll state this one more time.

This thread is about Canadian Gun Laws.

We're done entertaining every little gun article from the States, trying to make some tenuous relation to Canada.

As much as we'd like to have some of the same liberties as them, It's not what this thread is speaking to.

Nor is what is happening there, having any influence whatsoever on what happens here.

This is not the first warning about this or these articles, but it will be the last.

Milnet.ca Staff

If you seriously think that what is happening in the US has no bearing here, you are sadly deluded.

What is your aversion to anecdotal evidence from our neighbour?

Quite frankly, what is your agenda? If you want to direct every conversation and every thread to suit your aims, I suggest you close this forum to everyone except those who are admins, and their respective lackey's.

Out.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

If you seriously think that what is happening in the US has no bearing here, you are sadly deluded.

What is your aversion to anecdotal evidence from our neighbour?

Quite frankly, what is your agenda? If you want to direct every conversation and every thread to suit your aims, I suggest you close this forum to everyone except those who are admins, and their respective lackey's.

Out.

Hey lad?

I venementally disagree with the general postings of the gun lovers here and yet somehow I'm not insulted or whine when challenged.  I guess I just have to stop being such a lackey............

:

 

[Edward Campbell]

Hey lad?

I venementally disagree with the general postings of the gun lovers here and yet somehow I'm not insulted or whine when challenged.  I guess I just have to stop being such a lackey............

:

:ditto: and  :goodpost:

 

[cupper]

If you seriously think that what is happening in the US has no bearing here, you are sadly deluded.

What is your aversion to anecdotal evidence from our neighbour?

Quite frankly, what is your agenda? If you want to direct every conversation and every thread to suit your aims, I suggest you close this forum to everyone except those who are admins, and their respective lackey's.

Out.

:facepalm:

 

[sappermcfly]

Hey lad?

I venementally disagree with the general postings of the gun lovers here and yet somehow I'm not insulted or whine when challenged.  I guess I just have to stop being such a lackey............

:

The point I am trying to express here is simple. How can one have an intelligent debate about an important issue without relying on anecdotal evidence? That is what intelligent , rational debate is all about. Although I agree that the US and Canadian situations are different, there is precedent for US law encroaching into Canadian law, and in fact politics. Therefore I find it highly unfair to stifle debate in regards to this particular subject, as well as the use of anecdotal evidence which I guarantee the politicos in our country are also aware of.

I will admit that lackey may be a provocative term, but then again referring to someone as lad can be taken in the same context. However we are all grownups hers.I have noticed a pattern and wish to express an opinion.Should this be a hanging offense, so be it, however I stick to my original statement as I am a proponent of free speech as well as a proponent of responsible gun ownership.

Kill the messenger...

 

[57Chevy]

This article from The Loop by Sympatico is shared with provisions of The Copyright Act

Where are guns in Canada, and what are the most likely places for gun-related crime?

Guns in Canada: Ownership and crime across the country
by Jordan Hale and Greg J. Smith, January 1, 2013
http://www.theloop.ca/news/all/map-of-the-week/article/-/a/1025253/Guns-in-Canada-Ownership-and-crime-across-the-country

For some reason I almost posted that article over here:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/103611/post-1199276/boardseen.html#new
because IMO there is some major problems in those isolated northern communities.

Seriously sappermcfly, Your post was totally uncalled for after almost 6 months.
C'mon now :

 

[sappermcfly]

For some reason I almost posted that article over here:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/103611/post-1199276/boardseen.html#new
because IMO there is some major problems in those isolated northern communities.

Seriously sappermcfly, Your post was totally uncalled for after almost 6 months.
C'mon now :

Perhaps.

I suppose I shall apologize to anyone I offended then.

I apologize.

 

[BernDawg]

For some reason I almost posted that article over here:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/103611/post-1199276/boardseen.html#new
because IMO there is some major problems in those isolated northern communities.

Seriously sappermcfly, Your post was totally uncalled for after almost 6 months.
C'mon now :

I've been up North (as most of us at some time or other) and I believe that because this is based on "reporting of crimes" that many smaller offences that occur in these areas are handled in a more direct manner. What I mean to say is when the town constable tells someone to go home and sleep it off it's not reported but when any firearm is involved charges must occur and the resulting reporting and paperwork.

 

[Kirkhill]

I don't normally post on this subject but in this case I couldn't help myself.

It was sparked by this headline: "‘A shotgun will keep you a lot safer': Biden advocates shotguns over assault rifles amid gun control debate"

National Post.

A minute of JFGI uncovered this:

Apparently that's not scary at all.  It is a shotgun.

By the way I happen to agree with Biden.  A shotgun is a much more effective PDW and I would be in favour of a universal right to carry.

Something like this perhaps?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

No need to get carried away with over the top stuff like a 12 gauge revolver.

The Judge in .410 shotshell or .45 Colt is more than sufficient.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Of course, if you want a high cap 12 gauge, you can get a 15 shot KelTec pump

 

[Bass ackwards]

This SunMedia article is reproduced here under the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act:

Gunowners in New Brunswick, Ontario need invites to shoot guns at ranges
BY KRIS SIMS ,ATLANTIC BUREAU

Handgun owners in both New Brunswick and Ontario are being told to carry written invites with them when they drive with their firearms to shooting ranges.

The tighter gun rules in both provinces took effect Jan. 1.

It directs target shooters and instructors to get the paper permission slips if they ever visit a range where they don't have a membership.

"Can we imagine when we have 200 or 300 target competitors coming to a range that they must all get separate letters of invitation?" lawyer Ed Burlew told QMI Agency.

Burlew is the lead lawyer with the Canadian Shooting Sports Association fighting the new rule in court against Ontario's chief firearms officer Chris Wyatt.

"The CFO believes he's the PMO, because really, this isn't necessary," he said.

Restricted firearm owners in Canada need Authorizations to Transport (ATT) documentation to move pistols from their homes to shooting ranges. It's in addition to keeping the gun unloaded, with trigger locks and placed in locked boxes in their vehicles. The need for an invitation was printed on new ATTs sent to gun owners earlier this month.

Burlew says the new changes in Ontario also direct every person who goes to a range to use a handgun to submit their names, addresses, phone numbers, and birthdates to a file where it will be kept for years.

Sources say the move did not come from the federal government which is so far refusing to comment on the case as it is before the courts.

Link here:
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/01/30/gunowners-in-new-brunswick-ontario-need-invites-to-shoot-guns-at-ranges

****************************************************************

Yep, that'll save lives.... :

 

[Fishbone Jones]

This SunMedia article is reproduced here under the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act:

Gunowners in New Brunswick, Ontario need invites to shoot guns at ranges
BY KRIS SIMS ,ATLANTIC BUREAU

Handgun owners in both New Brunswick and Ontario are being told to carry written invites with them when they drive with their firearms to shooting ranges.

The tighter gun rules in both provinces took effect Jan. 1.

It directs target shooters and instructors to get the paper permission slips if they ever visit a range where they don't have a membership.

"Can we imagine when we have 200 or 300 target competitors coming to a range that they must all get separate letters of invitation?" lawyer Ed Burlew told QMI Agency.

Burlew is the lead lawyer with the Canadian Shooting Sports Association fighting the new rule in court against Ontario's chief firearms officer Chris Wyatt.

"The CFO believes he's the PMO, because really, this isn't necessary," he said.

Restricted firearm owners in Canada need Authorizations to Transport (ATT) documentation to move pistols from their homes to shooting ranges. It's in addition to keeping the gun unloaded, with trigger locks and placed in locked boxes in their vehicles. The need for an invitation was printed on new ATTs sent to gun owners earlier this month.

Burlew says the new changes in Ontario also direct every person who goes to a range to use a handgun to submit their names, addresses, phone numbers, and birthdates to a file where it will be kept for years.

Sources say the move did not come from the federal government which is so far refusing to comment on the case as it is before the courts.

Link here:
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/01/30/gunowners-in-new-brunswick-ontario-need-invites-to-shoot-guns-at-ranges

****************************************************************

Yep, that'll save lives.... :

It has nothing to do with public safety.

It's all about making it inconvenient and onerous as possible to the legally documented shooter.

His next step will be to demand the gun clubs records on who the members are and if they are maintaining range time, which he has already done in some cases.

If a person lets their membership lapse or they don't attend, for target practice, his next step is to withold the RPAL designation on your renewal and demand you relinquish your restricted and prohibiteds. Don't forget, you put down 'target practice' on your RPAL application as the reason to have restricted\prohibs. If you don't fulfill that requirement he feels he has the right to have your status removed. No status, no restricted\prohibs.

They already tried this with my daughter, who was pregnant and didn't go to the range, so she let her membership lapse. They sent a letter asking her to turn in her restricteds and that they were going to drop the R portion of the PAL.

We renewed her membership and they renewed her RPAL.

Police officers, including the CFOs, are supposed to apply the rule of law, equally.

They are not empowered to produce and enforce their own laws on a whim.

Wyatt is already in trouble for this sort of 'own interpretation' and under a judge's order to issue an ATT to an individual.

He refused the judge's order and won't follow his direction.

 

[Jed]

Yes, the main question is:

Who should we fear more? The occasionally rare criminal or psychotic deranged individual intent on using a readily available firearm to harm himself or others OR the relatively common control freak bureaucrat who for his own purposes imposes their will on the unsuspecting masses.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Yes, the main question is:

Who should we fear more? The occasionally rare criminal or psychotic deranged individual intent on using a readily available firearm to harm himself or others OR the relatively common control freak bureaucrat who for his own purposes imposes their will on the unsuspecting masses.

I'll fear the latter, because to mere law abiding citizens, an autocrat like Wyatt is untouchable to us and can do as he pleases.

The former can be neutralized with the very tool(s) the latter wishes to deprive me of.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Who should we fear more? The occasionally rare criminal or psychotic deranged individual intent on using a readily available firearm to harm himself or others OR the relatively common control freak bureaucrat who for his own purposes imposes their will on the unsuspecting masses.

All well and good until you're part of the unsuspecting masses who don't like the imposition of said bureaucrat's will, or whose imposition creates hardship in spite of doing everything correctly, right?

 

[Jarnhamar]

M14.
Rem 870 police 12 gauge with folding stock.
sti Spartan .45
"Anti-CSM" knife.

I'm inclined to fear neither  ;D

 

[Jed]

All well and good until you're part of the unsuspecting masses who don't like the imposition of said bureaucrat's will, or whose imposition creates hardship in spite of doing everything correctly, right?

Too many sheeple fear the unknown and unseen and rare wolf (psycho) more than the scary looking sheep dog (average aggressive self sufficient neighbor) who they see every day. That's why powerful control freaks can wreak such havoc.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The Ontario CFO is proof why gun owners have no trust in the system and know it will be abused at any time. Then the gun control nuts cry out that we are unreasonable. How do you reason with people on a witch hunt?

 

[OldSolduer]

It has nothing to do with public safety.

It's all about making it inconvenient and onerous as possible to the legally documented shooter.

His next step will be to demand the gun clubs records on who the members are and if they are maintaining range time, which he has already done in some cases.

If a person lets their membership lapse or they don't attend, for target practice, his next step is to withold the RPAL designation on your renewal and demand you relinquish your restricted and prohibiteds. Don't forget, you put down 'target practice' on your RPAL application as the reason to have restricted\prohibs. If you don't fulfill that requirement he feels he has the right to have your status removed. No status, no restricted\prohibs.

They already tried this with my daughter, who was pregnant and didn't go to the range, so she let her membership lapse. They sent a letter asking her to turn in her restricteds and that they were going to drop the R portion of the PAL.

We renewed her membership and they renewed her RPAL.

Police officers, including the CFOs, are supposed to apply the rule of law, equally.

They are not empowered to produce and enforce their own laws on a whim.

Wyatt is already in trouble for this sort of 'own interpretation' and under a judge's order to issue an ATT to an individual.

He refused the judge's order and won't follow his direction.

:goodpost:


Then this person - Wyatt-  should be arrested and charged.