• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually if you look up the British North America Act there was a clause about Protection of Personal Firearms Rights.  So until PET constitutionalized Canada there was protection.

Canadian Laws have gotten stupider and stupider since 1979.  Machine Guns where restricted weapons like handguns then, no one was causing crimes with them, but after all the US had the 68 gun control act with no more foreign machine gun imports, so Canada HAD to do something.  (like the '35 act that followed the US NFA, which required registration of handguns and machine guns in Canada and made them restricted weapons).

Here in Virigina, I can open carry weapons, I don't as I prefer to conceal handguns.  Now why you may ask?  Well if I carry a weapon, its for defense, something I am constitutionally allowed to do, and if I advertise by open carry, then my chances are rather limited. 

I can own Machine Guns in this state, along with suppressors and standard capacity magazines.  This state is also a "shall issue" concealed carry state -  like Fl is (I now work out of Va for the most part).

Interestingly enough here in the US, the 2nd Amendment technically only covers Military Style weapons for protection of ownership rights.
  Thus in theory I should be able to buy a M4A1, but I cannot due to the 86 Machine Gun Ban - which froze transferable machine guns.
Interestingly enough there is ONLY one case of a Legal MachineGun being used for unlawful purposes, and that was by a POLICE OFFICER (shot his wife). 

I have several weapons, as does my wife.  All but one are semi-automatic weapons.  Weapons that some here feel are no use for the public.


I can shoot groups smaller than .5" at 100m with my SR-25, and I shoot it in competitions and use it for hunting.


Its not just gun control that people want, when they want to take away weapons, it all about control of the population.  Look to the genocides of the past, the populations where unarmed, and while it may have started out as "its for the children" or "if it saves only one life" however in the end an unarmed population is a police state, and that my friends is not where you want to be.

Too many Canadians have given their lives (including friends of many of us) so that Canada can be free and an example to the world, do not allow it to become what it should not be.



 
Depends how up the food chain you ask...

Interestingly enough the BHO admin classified returning veterans as a national security threat, while most of the rank and file agents I deal with consider it reversed...



 
For all the law abiding gun owners out there, a petition to put CFOs out to pasture... which an MP has agreed to table in the House of Commons.

http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2013/03/CFO_petition_release_en.html
 
Just for the record...Australia has a VERY strict gun control laws...have since some nutter in "96 used a rifle in Tassie....i know the argument of "But the bad guys will always get weapons"...but if there are less around in circulation then there are less chances for it to come into the hands of the bad guys  :blotto:
Also is there REALLY a need for MG or assault weapons.... its not very sporting to bring along a military grade weapon (or a Semi auto version of one) when you go out hunting since the poor (insert name of animal here) doesn't really have a chance when the air is full of 5.56m  :blotto:
Plus it's not the wild west anymore YOU HAVE POLICE FORCES IN EVERY BLOODY TOWN  :blotto: i mean we get by with just our state and federal police looking after us...and they just carry glock 17's most of the time...no need for them to get out SR 25's or any AR/M family Assault weapons everytime theres a robbery...because (most of the time this is) all they have is maybe a baseball bat or knife....gun control (or the stricter amendment's) aren't soo bad...though it would be harder over there since every Tom,dick and Harry has one for him and his dog  :blotto:
 
AustralianNavyGuy said:
Just for the record...Australia has a VERY strict gun control laws...have since some nutter in "96 used a rifle in Tassie....i know the argument of "But the bad guys will always get weapons"...but if there are less around in circulation then there are less chances for it to come into the hands of the bad guys  :blotto:
Also is there REALLY a need for MG or assault weapons.... its not very sporting to bring along a military grade weapon (or a Semi auto version of one) when you go out hunting since the poor (insert name of animal here) doesn't really have a chance when the air is full of 5.56m  :blotto:
Plus it's not the wild west anymore YOU HAVE POLICE FORCES IN EVERY BLOODY TOWN  :blotto: i mean we get by with just our state and federal police looking after us...and they just carry glock 17's most of the time...no need for them to get out SR 25's or any AR/M family Assault weapons everytime theres a robbery...because (most of the time this is) all they have is maybe a baseball bat or knife....gun control (or the stricter amendment's) aren't soo bad...though it would be harder over there since every Tom,dick and Harry has one for him and his dog  :blotto:

Your arguements have been stated before, in this thread, and refuted. Please read the thread before posting duplicate information and trying to stir the shit pot.

Your overuse of the same smilie also does nothing to prove your points as serious.

The thread is about Canadian gun laws. We really could care less about how you guys bend over for your politicians.
 
AustralianNavyGuy said:
Also is there REALLY a need for MG or assault weapons.... its not very sporting to bring along a military grade weapon (or a Semi auto version of one) when you go out hunting since the poor (insert name of animal here) doesn't really have a chance when the air is full of 5.56m
Plus it's not the wild west anymore YOU HAVE POLICE FORCES IN EVERY BLOODY TOWN

This is probably the most ridiculous post in this whole thread.
 
Emergency response time for a cop to get from the nearest RCMP detachment to my house is 15 minutes.  That's if the only cop on patrol at night is at the Det, if he's on the other side of the county, closer to 45.  That's a lot of "I've called the police and they're on the way, so please stop beating me with that pipe so you can take my 5 year old laptop".
 
AustralianNavyGuy said:
Sounds like you guys need more funding for the police not anti gun control hysteria

Sounds like you have to stop trying to turn the thread into your own personal shit show by commenting on things you obviously know nothing about.
 
AustralianNavyGuy said:
Sounds like you guys need more funding for the police not anti gun control hysteria

And the difference between citizens and subjects continues to be portrayed....
 
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const//page-1.html#docCont


- Alas, nothing I can see relating to the possession of firearms in the BNA 1867..
 
KevinB said:
  Thus in theory I should be able to buy a M4A1, but I cannot due to the 86 Machine Gun Ban - which froze transferable machine guns.
Interestingly enough there is ONLY one case of a Legal MachineGun being used for unlawful purposes, and that was by a POLICE OFFICER (shot his wife). 

Thats a murderer and a recruiting failure. Not a police officer. Interesting stuff in here though- thanks for the post Kev

AustralianNavyGuy said:
Plus it's not the wild west anymore YOU HAVE POLICE FORCES IN EVERY BLOODY TOWN

Ill tell the 911 dispatcher to pass that along the next time I have to advise I am at LEAST an hour away from the caller looking for help. That will no doubt help them calm down.
 
Interestingly enough on recruiting failures - former Navy Lt. turned LAPD turned cop killer used a variety of weapons in his short episode of domestic terror.

Guns are inanimate objects - neither good nor bad, its people who are good or bad.  Cars, alcohol and tobacco kill many more than guns.


 
AustralianNavyGuy said:
Sounds like you guys need more funding for the police not anti gun control hysteria

Typically, the hysteria comes from the pro gun control side of the fence.
 
Likely as their "facts" don't stand up to close scrutiny. Funny enough the pro gun control crowd shoots themselves in their own foot by not defining their end goal clearly to the public ( most gun owners realize what the end goal is, hence the reason they fight so hard). If the end goal of gun control types was even slightly reasonable,  enshrined into laws that could not be easily changed,  then they might have a winning formula. As it is hardcore gun control activists dream of a world with no guns in civilian hands and occasional blurt that out. 
 
Saw this on Facebook at The DownRange Girl page

164961_515021568539022_1120804893_n.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top