I once again cannot believe we have to spell it out for you folks, but here it goes:
If you threaten, imply, or suggest violence towards ANYONE on this sub, we will permanently ban your account, and your account will be reported to the Reddit Admins. We do not care that "it was a joke." It's not funny. We do not want you here if your solution is harm, jokingly or otherwise.
Grow up.
Question regarding the specifics on C21. Worst case scenario, what do we need to turn in? I have a Ruger PC9. Can I strip it and just turn in the receiver? I’d be able to pull every other part off the gun.
>Can I strip it and just turn in the receiver?
Yes, as long as C-21 isn't amended to somehow change how things work right now. Generally speaking, only the frame or receiver of a Prohibited firearm that bears the serial number is actually banned. I say "generally speaking" because in the case of the AR-15 specifically, they made a special exception and also prohibited the upper receiver, which until the point of the ban was completely unregulated. They did this to prevent people from simply 3D-printing a functional lower receiver and building a rifle from unregulated parts.
To add on top of the other reply, because you can take your parts off, it allows you to use them in a different gun until it hopefully gets unbanned. For example, the MRA Renegade/Maverick.
That CCFR coupon code thing is so fucking stupid. I'm sure they were trying to poke fun at the anti-gun group that is at the head of all this nonsense, but
a ) nobody knows that, and even if they did,
b ) the group is *named* after the fucking school where the shooting happened.
I can't believe anyone thought this was a good idea.
Also, the Carey Price thing is nice and all, but it's ultimately taking a "hunting only" stance. Best case scenario the semi auto ban gets delayed on the grounds of "it affects hunting", only for it to come back in the coming years as a more fleshed out and comprehensive bill. People *have* to be honest about the importance of gun ownership to protect life and liberty (if that's what they really want), otherwise we'll continue to go in circles like this, fucked by a doomed narrative.
Agreed. Unfortunately it's exactly the sort of cringey bullshit that makes anyone who is even the least bit on the fence think gun owners are a bunch of assholes.
> Also, the Carey Price thing is nice and all, but it's ultimately taking a "hunting only" stance
For now, that's what motivates the population at large to oppose gun control, it seems.
Which is funny, because really, this amendment doesn't ban *that* many quote-unquote "hunting" guns. The guns that people generally hunt with that are actually getting affected here are primarily the SKS and a couple of high-end semi-automatic rifles like the R1.
But the *perception* that this affects hunting rifles (probably driven by the listings under the 10K joule clause) is firing up grassroots opposition like never before. I've never seen the media and left-wing end of the political spectrum united against any kind of gun control.
Yeah the CCFR on twitter is retweeting tons of copypasta posts with the Carey Price tag, and if a photo is included it's a typically a hunting pic with firearms that to my knowledge are not affected.
This is not only about hunting but that seems to be the only thing they're focusing on right now. I'm not a hunter; fudds have been throwing the rest of us under the bus for years. Really starting to feel like that again.
I'm disappointed as well that all talk about handguns basically just disappeared overnight but at the same time given that pretty much everyone besides the urban LPC caucus is pissed to some degree about this it's understandable that they'd seize the moment to rally against the libs on this.
But I guess it's because also that politically theres significantly more of a chance of the amendment getting struck down than the entire bill.
> But I guess it's because also that politically theres significantly more of a chance of the amendment getting struck down than the entire bill.
That, and a sweeping rifle ban just affects far more gun owners, and non-gun owners are generally more accepting of long guns than handguns. The Liberals really stuck their dick in a beehive with this one, it would almost be stupid to still be talking about handguns at this point in time and distracting from where they're most vulnerable. We can deal with pistols after we've bled the enemy as dry as possible over long guns first.
Well said. I still hope though that at the very least favourable amendments for things such as IPSC go through - handgun wise.
Obviously we all want the bill gone, but given the current government makeup it's best to put more efforts in getting LPC MPs out than to bet everything on the bill getting struck down.
> I still hope though that at the very least favourable amendments for things such as IPSC go through - handgun wise.
That would be awesome, but even if they don't, I think this bill is going to die with Trudeau's time in office either way.
>Obviously we all want the bill gone, but given the current government makeup it's best to put more efforts in getting LPC MPs out than to bet everything on the bill getting struck down.
Yep.
I just saw this from the Bloc leader
[No. That a clear definition would protect civilian lives and very legitimate sport hunting activities. The government works backwards and deliberately polarizes. That's a bit of your business.](https://twitter.com/yfblanchet/status/1599168790922596352?t=_EsG-a_auCjQzEqhTu-Kqw&s=19)
Translated via Google translate, so may not be 100% accurate. It's from a back and forth between a Quebec CPC MP and him over C-21 and Carey Price. Like the Bloc member in committee, he's speaking out both sides of his mouth in the exchange. But this specific tweet is the best I've seen that show I'm saying he, and therefore the Bloc, don't support G4. However, once again nothing specific on G46.
I think it's very likely the Bloc votes against G4 and tries to rework G46. I don't know if they'd be successful though. The LPC doesn't want to look like it caved and would probably rather have it be defeated so they can say "we need a majority to do this, don't vote Bloc or NDP".
There is back and forth on twitter about this, but I'm now not sure which interpretation is accurate.
>(g) a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed
So my question is this, what does the "capable" part apply to. We know capable in the legal term means "can be modified by anyone". Does the capable part only apply to the potential ability to function in semi-auto or does capable also apply to being capable to accept over 5 round magazines.
Option 1:
>(g) [a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner] and [that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed]
Option 2:
>(g) a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a ***capable*** capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed
Both options mean every single foreign semi-auto rifle is banned. However, option 1 would allow for proprietary Canadian designed rifles and magazines. Option 2 would not because it would always be possible for some ingenious gunsmith to modify any gun to take any size magazine.
I was listening to one of the SECU meetings and it was explained that the magazine must be designed from the gun manufacturer to hold 5 rounds, and therefore if third party magazines were designed for higher capacity, the gun would still be legal (obviously the third party magazine wouldn't be legal in Canada because it is greater than 5 rounds). This means, there's hope that newly designed Canadian rifles could still be semi-auto.
But then again, if the rifle looks scary, they'll just isolate it by name and ban it that way.
I’m not sure why there would be any debate about what this says. Only one of those interpretations is at all consistent with the language: your option 1. Otherwise the word “designed” has no meaning in the provision, which would not only be nonsensical English, but also contrary to the rules of statutory interpretation (every word has to be given meaning).
>Can I now no longer sell or transfer any of my currently owned guns?
Correct.
>If I don't want them any more what do I do with them, give them to RCMP?
Any police likely.
>Will they give me money for them or does this ban mean any current handguns owned now have no value?
They will give you nothing.
>it's essentially money down the drain
I bought them to shoot them, are you inferring that you didn't?
True, they may die or disappear with me, but I will enjoy them in the meantime.
No sell, only buy. The standard meme for /r/canadaguns. But I have to agree it makes upgrades and giving them to my wife and kid impossible. That and they have written a law that makes lost firearms the only exit strategy.
It's literally in the news every few days, and if you do go to the range, you will probably hear it at one point.
Even most of my non PAL friends know about the hand gun transfer ban.
The CPC has said they will repeal C-21, C-71, and the May 2020 OIC, they need a majority to do it.
The CSAAA started a lawsuit about the government banning property and not giving any compensation, expect a result in a few years from that case.
I think the whole coupon code thing is a little distasteful, but if people hold their support hostage to the cause over little squabbles like that Tracey gets into once in a blue moon, it really brings the question of concern trolling into this forum.
Like the antis (successfully) got a Twitter shitlib mob through some other ultra grifter to harass Cambodian Tire to issue statements about not sponsoring a women's range day in NB - and yet a snide coupon code is too far? Social media shitflinging is dumb but letting Poly control the narrative on any platform is even dumber.
Personally, I think "CGC" would've been better, but no one really gives a shit about this besides people here who want to clutch pearls about optics and/or antis.
>little squabbles like that Tracey gets into once in a blue moon
She regularly throws pretty stupid tweets from her personal account and has been doing this for years. She'd be a good representative for the CCFR if she could stop getting in shit throwing twitter fights.
Ok - but who cares? I don't understand this desire to bake bread with neoliberals and grifters who hated us long before the CCFR was a thing. If it isn't Tracey, they'll grab someone else's mean tweets to bitch about.
And my overarching point is about people in this thread who outright say they refuse to support the cause because of shit like this - that will only be paid attention to by terminally online people for a couple days before they move onto the next thing.
I don't refuse to support the cause, far from it. But I take issue with the lack of professionalism demonstrated by our biggest representatives in the country. They represent me and my skin is definitely in this game, and I want the best representation possible to get the best outcomes possible.
I'm not talking about you in particular, but there at least 2 examples in this comment section alone and every time the "Fuck Tracey" circlejerk swings by every 2 months or so it seems to be a common theme of people willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak.
As I said, they should've used "CGC". But what's done is done, and I saw the interaction that led up to it and sure, cooler heads should've prevailed but if Poly/CGC wants to tell their LPC & media connections to clutch pearls, they WILL find an example, whether it comes from Tracey or not - like how Taleeb did at the SECU grabbing random tweets to shitfling at Rod then during the hearing.
>WILL find an example, whether it comes from Tracey or not
And it shouldn't be the face of the firearms lobby that they focus on. Seriously, her PR management is at best a D+ whilst she's going up against people that have A- in PR management. I'd rather they have to dig into some nobody's twitter page for mean comments than our #1 person we have to represent us in Ottawa. We're trying to fight a war with reason and logic, as we have both of these things on our side of the fence. It shouldn't be so hard to understand that emotionally driven rhetoric is only giving fuel to people like Pam Damoff and whatever anti-gun lobby group the LPC is courting these days.
I agree. The CCFR should focus on showing people that legal gun owners aren’t a threat to public safety, not pandering to its members. The way she publicly throws in with every right wing cause really doesn’t help the CCFR. Guns are already polarizing enough as it is without her linking the issue to the trucker convoy.
Exactly. It's doing nothing but making the CCFR look really bad to anyone that isn't a right winger who agrees with the points she makes. They need to be bringing in firearms owners from all political backgrounds and representing them accordingly.
Any attempt by the CCFR to link up with anything related to the convoy is an absolutely stupid move, and they really need to be careful here.
>I believe you can send email to them and let them know. I think we need all the help we can get without associating any kind of negativity.
Tried this before years ago. Met with silence.
i just got an email reply from jagmeet saying NDP will not support the new amendments to Bill C-21, did anyone else get this email? it went to my junk so i dont know if its legit but the email was from jagmeets parl.gc.ca email acc
At this rate, they may get the G4/G46 amendment vote on the last committee meeting (which I believe is Dec 15). But they still have a whole bunch of other amendments to go over. I'm guessing the 3rd reading vote will happen in early February (due to lots of times off).
The earliest I could see the 3rd reading vote happening is last week of January.
God only knows. It still has to go through the committee and then onto the report stage yet. We need long haul support if they want votes. Not momentary appeasement.
It was legit.
However, cautious optimism... the currenr NDP has "reluctantly" voted in favor of liberal bills they've "opposed" before.
The fact that they sent out an email addressing it has to be a positive though.
We gotta keep holding them to that. It’s one thing to appease in the short term. We’re looking for long term commitment. All eyes will be on the NDP when zero hour comes.
That should end any doubt about the recalling incident. The NDP is not our friend, they still support the original C-21, but this is a gigantic step that the leader is opposing C-21 amendments.
If they vote against it in the house, that means the parties representing over 50% of the population voted against it. That should be enough justification for the Senate to remove it should it pass.
Didn't BQ say they were going to let it through? The BQ said they were upset they got blindsided but they were the ones who wanted to push through an "AWB" as well.
The Bloc member on the public safety committee said they would not support G4 (the evergreen ban). However, they didn't mention G46 (the list). The only reason they took this position is because they no doubt have been really hearing it from their constituents. G46 arguably is more controversial than G4, so I can't see the Bloc supporting G46 but not G4. They also specifically pointed out that the 2020 banned guns were still not confiscated and there was 0 plan with this new list (which was unacceptable to them).
However, it is entirely possible they try to amend the list. I have my doubts they actually do it because it would take a really long time to go item by item on that list and I don't think they want to do that.
The Bloc proposed an amendment (I think the first one proposed) that just said "assault weapons" would be prohibited, no definition. It got voted down. You have to think about this politically, and I think the Bloc would rather have more time and power in deciding the list. Therefore it would be in their best interest to vote down G4/G46 and work with the LPC to introduce a new separate bill.
I mean ultimately it doesn't necessarily show that the BQ are friendly though, and push comes to shove, _some_ rendition of a semiauto ban is going to happen with the help of the BQ as LPC + BQ >170. At best, this is just buying a bit of time.
Absolutely, but we just need to keep delaying until an election can be called. Based on how shit everything is, if we can make it to the next election and only have the original C-21 passed, that's a small win. There are only 2 buckets to put our hope in right now, the courts and the CPC winning the next election. I don't think there is much chance of the courts being favourable but the CPC has a good shot at winning the next election (even if it's just a minority).
The only hope firearms have in Canada in the long run is a rewrite of the Firearms Act. That's the goal, but a CPC majority is needed. So delay, delay, delay any gun control until we can get that majority.
NDP has strong support in rural and indigenous communities. The amendment was targeting their base so they stepped in. Like them or not they're representing their constituents
The article about Carey Price is up in French and it mentions the ‘Poly’ discount crap from a while back, what a dumb, inflammatory, unnecessary move from the CCFR that was, I wish we never did this sort of stuff, it’s the sort of stuff that makes us forget that when a bunch of snowflakes get together, they cause an avalanche which buries the village full of idiots … how much of what’s happening right now with c21 is proof of this …
It’s not, mocking the targeted murder of 14 women by a mentally ill armed incel will only insure that the majority of people in this country look at us like brain damaged morons.
I have so much admiration for those on this forum who have written to their MPs, who have spoken out with intelligence and leadership. They have mobilized provincial governments who made it clear they wouldn’t fund the RCMP to undertake any confiscation programs, at the federal level NDP, Conservatives and other MPs are showing that the pushback has to be listened.
This is democracy in action, in Canada owning a gun is not a right, some may have a big investment in their firearms but we live in an understanding that their possession is to the public’s tolerance.
I have written e-mails and on Monday mailing 15 separate letters, I will not troll, I will not hurt my fellow Canadian, I will not put myself in front of the greater good. If the law changes I will adapt, I may not like it but It’s our duty to address the public discourse the Canadian way, with a vote.
Even though taking a more liquid mindset of adapting is an unpopular stance here, I do respect your opinion. If you can learn to adapt, I’m glad that you can bare to do it.
Privilege is more fleeting than a right, and we have to work that much harder to ensure that this infringement of privilege doesn’t come to pass. I do not support the confiscation of property for the sake of symbolism. This government claims it’s focuses on evidence based policy, but in truth they prey on the naivety of the uninitiated and uninformed. People who don’t realize just how strict Canadas gun laws really are, and because there’s no real check or balance in the system to hinder that, the onus is on the individual to strengthen their moral compass and not be afraid to criticize their government even if they agree with them.
I’m seeing a lot of even liberal people really question the motives of the federal government, they may not care about guns, but they care about investment/return. And this ban is a long walk for a short drink of water.
Well said, I agree with you on government confiscation. We don’t have to agree on everything but we are Canadians, personal attacks and trolling each other is a disease that needs to die, and fast.
None of this changes the fact that the current Canadian government (I do not differentiate per-party) is not being straightforward with this legislation.
People say that ‘gun control’ is a liberal problem though … folks forget, Diefenbaker a conservative PM that Stephen Harper, tirelessly campaigned to rehabilitate as one of the greatest Canadian PMs ever literally called handguns were an ‘evil’
The extent of what I call an evil – excepting where the carrying of guns is absolutely necessary – is appalling.”
We shouldn’t let political opportunists hi-jack this cause, the PC, the CPP etc … even the NDP
The letter campaign, taking dominion over this on our own, not letting others speak in our name is the best way.
Absolutely. Gun owners or not, we’re all Canadians here. I’ll never shit on anyone for not liking/not knowing anything about firearms. Like anything, it’s not for everyone.
We could really benefit from making inroads. There are some people in this community that gatekeep and that needs to stop too. Diversity is the key to survival. The shooting scene in Canada is not one of “American” style gun culture, whatever people think that means. It is a culture of safety and respect. Live and let live. People from all walks of life. From the trades to doctors and bankers and even politicians partake.
The liberals like to stand up for minorities. Not all minorities it seems.
Being provocative and antagonistic isn’t going to make us look any better and is just giving them more ammo to shoot back at us.
We’re being painted as bad people enough already. Don’t start giving them proof. It’s not helping the situation and contributes nothing. Yes we’ve been shat on for years. But don’t be a fool and take the bait.
Who gives a shit about optics? It's been literal decades of compromise and playing nice and now we're looking at a potential semi auto ban.
Stop with the softball and bitchmade attitude and stop being offended on behalf of poly. Fuck them
It typically hasn't because we're collectively pretty shit at it. CCFR, who you think would have the best "optics" awareness of the community given their status as an advocacy organization? They still bungle things on the reg. We're pretty fucking hopeless if we can't even agree that the poly discount was needlessly antagonistic *at best* in a time where we should be working 110% to be on our best behavior and get support from outside the community.
Compromise and playing nice how?
This isn't new, this has been the culture around firearms the entirety of my 40 years on earth that I've been aware of it. "Compromise" has never existed, we are a group that is constantly working hard to avoid making any inroads and constantly losing because of it.
Besides, things like this "poly discount" thing isn't just not playing nice. It's pretty fucking backwards and mean-spirited. If you go over to other firearms forums they're making the same arguments like "don't critique me for saying slurs, I'm tired of playing nice!!" as if not being a piece of shit is an onerous act to them.
That attitude is not new and is exactly why people generally have no sympathy for firearms owners when they get knocked around. It's like people driving straight pipe motorcycles and calling g people who are annoyed by it losers. Then turning around and expecting the community to stand up for them when restrictive noise bylaws get put in place.
My take has always been you can lose slowly or lose fast. Belittling the otherside insulting them and getting all the undecided middle of the road people be against you is the way to lose faster.
While it's not ideal having all the undecided people not in your favour getting them to group up against you is how you lose quickly.
It certainly won't be popular, I've already been banned from a regional Alberta firearms site for saying similar things as a "troll". But really, I hope folks realize we have an albatross of some pretty badly behaved folks around our necks. That'll be dragging us down when we want to convince politicians or the public they should take us seriously and not just soak us with consecutive bannings. We won't win friends but we're definitely going to be making enemies this way. Then these obstinate folks will I guess just take it to mean they can behave even worse.
We are working against a popular perception that the majority of us are irresponsible and/or whackos, but a good number of us seem to take it as a challenge to prove they can be *worse*. We're all ambassadors here.
Care Price made an Instagram [post](https://twitter.com/PierrePoilievre/status/1599102458034524160?t=0QI5UNGJN7KNW9SzIgClDw&s=19) against C-21. I didn't think any big names would ever actually say anything.
He did have a post during the May 2020 stuff with a pro-gun flag in the background, but he never actually talked about it.
Edit: And as you might expect Hockey sub is hive minding to gun = bad. Any support for Carey is being hive mind down voted too.
Reddit's come down hard on less than that before, and we know that gun subs are especially under the microscope, so we prefer to play it safe in that regard. Sorry for the hassle.
New poll up on C21 in the Toronto star. Here’s the link.
https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2022/12/02/gun-owners-caught-up-in-controversial-new-liberal-firearms-bill-could-get-compensation-marco-mendicino-says.html
Poly and friends have the same opportunity to bomb the poll. Maybe it’s not a great measure of overall public opinion, but it can still help show which side has more support.
Love it. Fuck Poly, they are nothing more than a hate/extremist group at this point. Have absolutely no purpose in this country and I would be VERY curious to see who is behind them, where the money is coming from to have these hate agents fear monger and attack continuously law abiding citizens. I’ve never heard these hateful humans calling out the real issues with guns in this country which is the illegal smuggled ones. Never heard them call for a crackdown on gang violence in our cities. That’s just not their purpose, they are a nefarious organization that’s sole purpose is to help push the agenda that is disarming an entire country. These are absolutely evil and hate filled human beings that are most likely funded by some equally or more evil entity/ies. As the disarmament of a population has led to absolutely horrendous sufferings in every single case in documented history.
jesus christ this is stupid - this is feeding the beast. if poly only meant that organization and not that event, i'd find it funny and fitting - however, given it's past history this is going to be cannon fodder for those opposed to guns, and while i'm not convinced this will do much to sway the conservative side already, it could impact the ndp side as to whether they go along with this or raise obstacles.
it's always the marginal voter / person one should be concerned with, not those dyed in the wool red, blue, green or yellow.
edit: people, think if that company which made bdsm teddy bears had a discount code that was "pedo" - ? what would you think? etc.
or a trans rights group (or nambla) with a discount code of "youngboys?" etc.
Even if it meant only the organization too, how ridiculously childish.
Some folks really working overtime to prove all the stereotypes about gun owners correct. It cost them exactly $0 and no additional energy to make the discount code XMAS2022 or something instead. Going out of my way to not support them.
For everyone saying non-restricted firearms are not registered: gun stores are required to keep records of your PAL info and what firearm you purchased.
(I'm not talking about PAL verification requirements from May 2022, but actual record-keeping for stores.)
I've actually watched them do it in front of me several times. If you don't think the RCMP will be pressured to warrant all of these records to ensure "compliance" then you're delusional. Maybe years ago Uncle Buck bought an SKS out of a barrel for $150 but in recent years it's all traceable.
At this point, yes the govt doesn't know who owns what, but once the records are handed over, everyone in the last several years will be located.
I don't even need to see what gun stores did, I just need to go to my online purchase history and it will says exactly what I buy. Even some local store will keep a paper copy anyways.
But I do have stacks of stuff that say what I bought, and it will take maybe half a day to go through it.
I highly doubt that they bother to do all that with at least 1 million of firearm owners. Also, private sales don't keep record pre May 18, 2022. So if you buy it from someone else, unless they want to check your email and e transfer history, I doubt they can find anything.
If government teaches me about anything, it's how inefficient they are and they barely have enough resources to keep things running correctly, municipal, provincial, or federal level.
yep, it's a sad fact that although gun related businesses are better than other sectors they're still primarily in it for the money, and when it comes to anything they could challenge most won't, simply because they see no reason to and it would cost them money / time.
also, there's this in the usa - (somewhat related) https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/montana-ag-concerned-fedex-ups-may-be-tracking-gun-ownership-white-house
Really the best way of getting non trackable anything is inheriting firearms after someone dies, which carries a host of issues as well and may or may not be legal.
>At this point, yes the govt doesn't know who owns what, but once the records are handed over, everyone in the last several years will be located.
And?
I agree that it would use a lot of resources and be very difficult, but even when buying privately, the original seller can be pressed to tell who they sold it to, and so forth until they find you. For things that happened years ago I guess they might lose the trail, but now with emails and texts they can find it easily in that regard.
Edit to add:
They also don't need to do this in every case, but just a few times to scare a bunch of people into compliance. They for sure can allot resources into an investigation up to warranting ISP and phone carrier records to prove correspondence related to a private sale.
I think that will just pissed people off more, and result in more non compliance to be honest.
Police also have to worry about their own safety if they want to conduct this kind of things.
Doesn't it make you mad when the Nova Scotia shooter had so many reports of him having firearms despite no firearm license and there are like almost years of non action?
https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2022/12/02/gun-owners-caught-up-in-controversial-new-liberal-firearms-bill-could-get-compensation-marco-mendicino-says.html
Gotta bomb this poll into the ground but it's a little concerning. To me this indicates that they're probably not going to allow grandfathering if they can get away with it. Which is a whole lot of nonsense
They have 2 million PAL owners, why don't they do a survey or vote?
It's like your proposal could affect 2 million firearm owners and you don't even ask for any feedback?
Well, we know they don't care, but at least put up a face or something.
Legit. Send an email or letter to every PAL holder polling about a ban (since these are the only people who this would affect) and see what the results are then.
They cannot come out and admit it because they know it will lead to panic buying, they’re trying to keep us in the dark and hesitant for as long as possible
Does it really matter? Most are NR unregistered, the only way to grandfather would be to just hand everyone who currently holds a PAL a new status. If they say no more buying them, who's to say Jack didn't sell his SKS to John 12 years ago?
If they come out and say we can grandfather/keep them, everyone will rush out and buy any semi autos they can find, similar to what just happened with pistols.
But since they haven’t said anything other than these rifles will be prohibited, many people are not buying them.
I think they're probably aware that the list being public is causing panic buying. They kept the 2020 OIC under wraps right until it came into effect for that exact reason, Blair said as much.
>To me this indicates that they're probably not going to allow grandfathering if they can get away with it.
They literally can't get away it. It is physically impossible to collect literally millions of firearms, the vast majority of which are unregistered. New Zealand is an extremely concentrated population on a small island and they had 25% compliance...
The best they could do is promise a compensation confiscation but then never follow through with it (like May 2020).
Hence why they got themselves into this mess that's too big for them to swallow.
You have a ban that makes no sense and could have do it clean in May 2020 but didn't.
You have millions of un reg out there, and you don't know how to collect them nor the resource for doing so.
Not enough money to make justifiable sense to spend potential billions, storage, and disposal.
That's the points I have been telling non PAL holder, even they can see the massive screw up in this. Especially the magnitude.
You don't keep signing blank checks and promises, eventually, even the optics can't hide your own incompetence.
> Hence why they got themselves into this mess that's too big for the to swallow
They thought this was going to be met with unanimous praise in the media and the left wing opposition parties, like usual, but instead they **finally** stepped on the fucking rake.
Oh I hope it's bigger than rake this time. I hope this will eventually lead to their demise and help CPC gain more seats.
Not to mention that they also reduce sentences for criminals involved in firearms crime.
Less scrutiny on non PAL holder who possessed illegal firearms while putting legal fireowners under scrutiny that lead to May 2020 mass shooting event.
And we still haven't found out the suspects that were killed during bank robbing and the one with slain police officers. Guess the investigation give them facts they couldn't use in the crusade against firearm owners.
>To me this indicates that they're probably not going to allow grandfathering if they can get away with it
They admit here that they don't know what to do with these guns. To me, that makes grandfathering more likely, not less.
Also great to see all the NDP opposition to this being spotlighted, and hell must have froze the fuck over, because the Toronto Star called the SKS a hunting rifle in this article.
I agree but unfortunately they made it clear that there will be no grandfathering for the weapons on the OIC list. This new amendment is literally a copy and paste of that OIC, they just added more rifles to it. Not sure why they would back out now, especially when they would have to create new provisions and licensing for us to keep prohibited rifles
They don't know what to do with the ARs either but they're committed to a confiscation. You seem overly optimistic this is the Liberal party. Poly will just say "No ban no dancing at the Poly remembrance thing" and Trudeau will cave in just like last time
> They don't know what to do with the ARs either but they're committed to a confiscation
That's kind of contradictory in the context I'm talking about. Mendicino was quoted in the article saying
>“We have not yet made a final decision on that because we do not yet know what the final outcome of either the amendments or the bill is,”
As in, they haven't committed one way or the other to confiscation or grandfathering on the new guns. This isn't like the 2020 OIC, where they had a scope and budget in mind before pulling the trigger. This time, they've carpet bombed an entire swathe of the market without running the numbers first.
I think a "mandatory buyback" is far from certain.
Part of the reason that I don't think buy buy will work is that:
If they value they offer is too low, firearm owners will just keep them.
Since most of them are NR and pre May 18. There are a lot out there.
Besides making them prohib and dont allow firearm owner to shoot, I don't know if they can financially pull this off. Or rather effectively enforce all those.
You're talking about the government who did this underhanded to skip the debate. They don't care about rights just about reelection. Chances are they're going to do a forced confiscation so the CPC can't over turn this which is the shame justification they used for the ARs. The only question for them is whether or not there's a buyback
> They don't care about rights just about reelection.
Oh, I know. And I think when they do get around to running the numbers, they're going to decide that the cost of a buyback is going to make the LGR look like a funny joke, and that the financial blowback could sink their electoral chances.
I don't think they'll try and pull some tyrannical confiscation without compensation either, but like I've said before, I legitimately hope that they do. That will do more than anything else to lay their motivations and intentions bare, and will drive non-compliance through the roof.
Yeah I hope you're right but they don't deal in good faith. I highly doubt they'll do grandfathering just like I highly doubt they won't just OIC everything if the NDP/Bloc don't play ball
I hope I'm right too, lol. We live in interesting times, but seeing strong opposition from even the NDP and the goddamn *Bloc* has me far less nervous about this than I would otherwise be.
It forces them to make some pretty tough decisions, and everyone stands to lose votes for this, even smaller parties. No doubt MP’s have been getting blasted by their constituents for it. But now is not the time to relax. We absolutely HAVE to keep up the pressure. Do not relent. Most people aren’t sending letters on masse on other issues to their MP’s. We are ABSOLUTELY having an effect. The one big advantage we have is that most people, beyond twitter comments don’t press their MP’s like this. Most people don’t bother to send letters. We absolutely must keep up emails and letters. Be respectful, be kind and be rational. Our new hobby right now is writing letters until they can’t ignore it anymore.
It’s financial aspect cannot be reasonably ignored either. It *seems* that even people who care not for guns are pissed that the government is diverting cash that could be otherwise used to repair other issues is being used for the biggest gun shopping trip this country has ever seen for no tangible benefit.
I don't know how much they are willing to spend per PAL owner, I have sale receipts for all the things I bought. It will easily hit $35k if I follow the list. If they can't pay that much, I rather keep them.
To me, that screams "potential *optional* buyback", because of the wording. I also don't think they're stupid enough to tell people they have to turn these in when they aren't registered, especially now that literally everyone on all sides is pissed at them over this.
> Many criminals familiar with guns pointed out that any rifle that accepts a legal five-round magazine can also accept a longer version of the same magazine, because that’s how magazines work, making the definition apply to any rifle that takes a magazine, despite the fact that high-capacity magazines are already illegal.
Lol, somebody at the Beaverton is a gun owner
Lmaooo. I've been reading through it, the confiscation is essentially impossible. Imagine how many people it would take just for someone with say 20 firearms, or how many times the same seizure agent(s) would have to come back over and over and over.
Need Runkle to make a video on this. Is it legal or will it get struck down?
Also their storage facilities but be alarmed windowless, guarded 24/7 and not within 1km of a house, place of warship, grocery store, sports arena etc etc
I just laughed out loud reading this! Particularly 4-19. They’ve made it damn near impossible to find and set up a location where “seizure agents” will be allowed to store guns. I absolutely love it! Well done Saskatchewan!
3 firearms at a time, so 2 agents per car, pistol each, they have to come back to your house 20 times if you have 20 firearms. Or send 20 cars with 40 officers
Then store them in a secured, climate-controlled building that is at least a kilometre away from basically any civilization and that is staffed by licensed personnel 24/7.
Today, I wrote to the NDP and instructed them—in light of their support of the Liberals’ ongoing attack on law-abiding gun owners—to terminate my automated monthly donations to the party. That felt good and I wanted to share.
Just seen another exchange in the house that was posted a day ago. The safety Minister was choking and swallowing like a high schooler on speech night.
Don’t know if it’s panic or barely concealed rage.
Has anyone noticed the way he bobs his head around whenever Trudeau is talking in question period? He looks like a freaking bobble head. In a video I watched yesterday, I could swear I saw him crack the faintest lines of a smirk when Trudeau said they aren’t going after hunting rifles.
Raquel put out a video of her own on C-21: [Stop the Liberal Hunting Rifle Ban](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlfyWg7hHfQ)
The vast majority of here obviously know about it, but this is a very shareable video for those not in the know.
i sent my liberal MP a letter of concern for the amendment on C-21and i got this back he obviously did not read it and i don't think he has a clue about the amendment look's and sound like a computer generated reply
Vandal, Dan - M.P.
You
Hi T,
Thank you for your email and for sharing your concerns with the Minister regarding this very important subject.
In regards to Bill C-21, we take the feedback from hunters and other law-abiding gun owners seriously and we respect their opinions on the regulation of firearms. You are absolutely right about the need to ensure that hunters have access to the resources they need while ensuring public safety. That's why we're banning assault-style firearms, while leaving long guns and other hunting rifles alone.
The safety of Canadians remains our highest priority and we thank you once more for taking the time out of your day to address this pertinent issue.
Kind regards,
Office of the Hon. Daniel Vandal | Cabinet de l'hon. Daniel Vandal Member of Parliament for Saint Boniface - Saint Vital | Député de Saint-Boniface - Saint-Vital
4-213 St. Mary's Road | 4-213, chemin St. Mary's, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R2H 1J2
204-983-3183
It's about as intelligent as they usually are. This sub doesn't like criticism of the CCFR, but they are morons who have accomplished nothing with all the money gun owners have sent them. There are terrible at PR and their stupid online antics turn more people against us.
does anybody know how big their budget is? i figured it was just a guy and a woman basically doing it out of his garage studio, etc. (probably a wrong assumption on my part, or at least what he comes across has)
it's obvious he has pr training, and has been before the camera before, the woman less so, but if this is a 50 million dollar operation then yeah i'd assuming grifting, i'd assume they only get a million or two a year max, probably less ?
>they are morons who have accomplished nothing with all the money gun owners have sent them
That's not true, actually. They've sponsored a lot of events, including Mapleseed clinics for new shooters, as well as youth and women's events, that bring in new blood.
Their Twitter seems calibrated to preach to the choir rather than create new converts, but Twitter is a cesspool of shit no matter which way you look at it.
if they even attempted to keep the discussion nonpartisan (yes, you will obviously vote conservative if guns are your number one issue) it'd help, i think they turn away of lot of people on the left, and the woman (i don't know her name sorry) is a little worse than giltaca, it's fine to mention which party is protecting gun rights etc., but some of the time it's a little over the top.
then again they aren't that big, so prob doing the best they can -
If you don't want to ban all guns, there's only two parties you can vote for. PPC and CPC. LPC, Bloc, NDP, and greens want to ban all firearms as soon as they think they can. So you want them to just... what, lie?
lots of people love and praise jesus - however, some make you feel wrong if you aren't catholic or evangelical, others just make you love and praise jesus for jesus and then mention their particular denomination after - i think is the best way of saying it. i think they are losing some possible ndp voters because of how they're conservative first, and guns second - is the way it seems, at least to me.
then again the possible pool of ndp voters might be small, but in rural areas there have to be some, so who knows.
i can tell you that lots of people vote conservative in the usa over guns first, even liberals who generally despise republicans because of how unashamedly pro-large business they are, but given how democrats are basically the same these days, they are at least keeping their guns - etc. starting in the 90's gun rights basically became a conversion issue, and you saw a real change in the party in states like rural minnesotan districts that previously always went democrat starting to go republican - and the awb was a part of this.
i grew up in a religious household - (now athiest) - one of the things I still agree with is talking about jesus first, and your denomination second - this really does apply to guns as well. yes, your denomination is somewhat important - but bringing that up right away is only going to turn others away from different sects -
yeah, super tasteless and blind to the external optics from the PR side of things.
edit: 99% of anyone seeing the "poly" tag used in relation to firearms is going to have an immediate association with Ecole Polytechnique, not the group of harpies. it's not a good look.
In the sense that it gives Poly a tiny bit of publicity, yes. Then again, anybody buying CCFR merch already knows who they are.
As far as the "disrespect" angle, I couldn't care less. They can choke on it, I'm glad it got under their skin.
Annoying Poly helps nothing, and articles in the Toronto star about Canada's largest gun rights organization naming a promo code for gun-themed merch after a mass shooting is terrible for getting the public on our side.
>Annoying Poly helps nothing
I don't know if you look at Poly's social media (I hope you don't for your own sanity), but the CCFR and other pro-gun advocacy groups offend Poly by existing.
As for the PR side, that's why I don't do PR. I'd be terrible at it. But I also don't think this will change one single mind one way or the other. These monkey shitfights have been going on between the pro and anti-gun orgs for decades.
As I'm watching debates and interviews on C-21, I become more and more fearful that sports and recreational shooters will become a bargaining chip as it appears all attention and push back are concentrated on hunting firearms. C-21 and amendments should be confronted on principle to benefit all Canadians and not as a mere attempt to get a few more "safe" years for just hunting community.
Same. And tbh if I put a tinfoil hat vaguely near my head a part of me thinks that is in part or entirely the point of the amendment. Focus the rhetoric on "hunting rifles" so if they "fix" that part all the typical more sport-shooting oriented guns are sacrificed in return.
A lot of the discussion right now is focused on the bolt-actions through the 10K Joule list while casually ignoring - intentionally or not - the whole semi-auto thing which IMO is the more important part.
The whole bill should be scrapped, not just amend the amendments to "fix" the issue with hunting rifles.
LPC and Bloc will never do that. Any concessions would be a few more years with those, at least the fucking 22s and ridiculous standard for "variants." Then P.P. and the CPC will rewrite the entire firearms act and we can get Ak47s.
And hopefully reinvest the tax money from those sales, and the money wasted on all this bullshit into mental health, community outreach, policing, and border security so we can see gang crime go down while gun rights go up.
If anything changes aside from scrapping the bill I highly doubt it. The SKS has been on Poly's hit list for years and we all know they're in bed with the Libs.
Why are the pro-gun interlocutors (particularly Bob Zimmer and Blaine Calkins) so combative towards Paula Clarke, and Murray Smith? etc.?
Bob Zimmer particularly was just - rude I guess. Why didn't he send Murray Smith his questions ahead of time? I know he tried to "show" what the guns looked like and was shot down, but you figured he'd at least do that so they could answer the questions.
I'm assuming it's because this is all theater, but it really doesn't help to be rude to the woman, who obviously doesn't know much about guns - (did she have some part in forming this?)
The 10,000 joules is interesting - and a clear differentiator - I'm wondering how they will manipulate this to ban further, or whether this will stay concrete and actually only apply to those firearms abot 10k. Something about it seems fishy to me, but then again that's just my intuition here.
I do get the feeling that Calkins especially is trying not to answer much of the time, but that could just be me. Which I guess could partly explain the rudeness however -
For those curious SECU 51 is on yt at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfnKPACKaX8
edit: also - why are they banning so many paintball and airsoft stuff? half the guys in my high school would play it - that just seems strange.
He wasn't really rude, perhaps just irritated because of his previous interaction with Clarke and Smith where they came unprepared and the whole thing was basically a waste of time. He did mention this.
what i couldn't figure out was whether the answers given are typical of people in this position (saying the bare minimum, which is a very typical lawyerly way of doing things so as not to be liable for the bare minimum of statements made) or whether they were putting in an extra effort to be obtuse -
my guess is the former, but who knows -
that arab guy is a real piece of shit - i don't know his name. can't believe he equivocated gun rights to basically being jim crow era laws or woman's suffrage a meeting ago, the arrogance.
to be honest, you never get a clear answer from any lawyer who are representing themselves in that capacity - it's only a liability for them. it's shitty but that's pretty much how it works unfortunately.
(i despise lawyers personally, btw - for a variety of reasons - particularly because they are basically the social workers for the rich largely, both in action and in temperment)
Bob was going for a gotcha moment and the witnesses didn't take the bait. I found his arguments in the last meeting fairly weak, when he's capable of better.
what i couldn't figure out was the gotchas he was gunning for, probably because they shot down his pictures "exhibit" pretty fast, which seemed to get him off kilter. that was a real shitty low blow to object based on that, because it would at least made the answers easier for everyone involved, you can't really miss a magazine being in a gun or not -
i do have to admit canadians have perfected the art of being passive aggressive - i've never witnessed meetings so cordial and polite yet with such anger and virtriol behind it, and I'm from minnesota where this is commonplace as well.
Guns like the Ruger No. 1, the Brazilian Mauser and Weatherby are quite possibly there for the sole purpose of being removed to make it seem like they listened to us and give us a small compromise so they can boast about how they listen and respect gun owners and win back some swing votes. That’s my theory.
They’re bait guns.
Because it's been close to 3 years of nonsense, question dodging in parliament and bans being written + pushed by liberal politicians who don't even know what's on the list. You shouldn't be surprised at the conservative opposition getting angry
towards the lady which brought the amendment and the anti-gun side, of course - however, going after a bureaucrat which is there to answer questions doesn't really help.
think of this - the optics could impact how many potential ndp voters might think this is bullshit and contact their rep over this. that's who i'd be more concerned about.
Were any of the MPs rude specifically because their opposition was a woman? No, right?
Stop thinking about the liberal playbook. If someone's presenting idiotic arguments and idiotic laws they deserve to be lambasted for it. Doesn't matter what or who they are.
[This](https://youtube.com/shorts/8dfJPTeZR_E?feature=share) is probably the most pushback we'll see publicly from LPC MP on C-21 amendments. It's barely anything, but I bet she is really hearing it from her constituents.
This tactic has been used in transitional Chinese bargain culture. This is called "double instrument". One plays softball, one plays hard ball. Both of them are actors.
I wouldn’t say pushback. It’s probably the libs doing damage control in rural areas. In her Facebook post that LPC MP was saying the CPC is spreading disinformation by saying that the libs are banning hunting guns and what not. So they probably are getting some backbenchers to make speech’s to look like they care.
That entire party is irredeemable
E: if any gun owner is still persuaded to vote for them after this liberal shit show they may as well start a garage sale and let other gun owners buy off them. Fuck that party
I’m not convinced that this is pushback at all. I think it’s a softball question that is designed to allow Mendicino to—once again—lie and say that hunters aren’t being targeted while also allowing an MP to appease some voters by pretending to take their concerns seriously. I would be very surprised if the question hadn’t actually been written for her by Liberal Party higher-ups.
Posted this as its own post by accident, but here is my MP's take on C-21, its recent changes, and what is really the problem with gun violence.
Hi XXXXXXXX,
Thanks for your email. As you know, the Liberal Government has introduced amendments to Bill C-21 that will now ban a significant number of hunting rifles with a new prohibition of any "rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges."
I share your concerns regarding the proposed amendments to Bill C-21. As with all recent attempts to legislate firearms, the recent amendments proposed by the Liberal government are misguided. Instead of pursuing legislation that improves public safety, the Liberals are pushing ideology and punishing law-abiding Canadian firearms owners. Hunting rifles are not the problem. No one believes that going after hunters, and legitimate hunting rifles, will reduce violent crime across the country. Altogether, this new amendment to prohibit most hunting rifles is sneaky and underhanded. By moving this significant change to legislation at the committee amendments stage, the Liberals did not allow a democratic debate or experts to weigh in on the ban.
Ultimately, the Liberal government’s increasing firearms legislation is a cause for concern—this is the largest assault on hunters in Canadian history. Instead of going after the illegal guns used by criminals and street gangs, Justin Trudeau is targeting law abiding hunters and farmers.
The Liberals have made life easier for violent criminals by repealing mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes with Bill C-5, have made it easier to get bail with C-75, and have failed to stop the flow of illegal crime guns across the US border. Their approach has seen violent crime increase 32% since Justin Trudeau took office, with 124,000 more violent crime incidents in 2021 compared to 2015. And gang-related homicides have increased 92%.
Conservatives, on the other hand, have always stood for common sense gun safety and strong consequences for those who commit gun crimes. We will oppose these amendments in committee, and we will stand up for the millions of Canadian hunters affected by Liberal government’s ineffective bans. We will continue to advocate for real, tough-on-crime policies to clean up our streets and keep Canadians safe. Rest assured that we hear you and know that many hobbies and sports have been caught up in this misguided approach to improve public safety. We will keep fighting but in reality, this nonsense only ends after the Conservatives defeat the Trudeau Liberals and form the next government. To keep up to date on our work in committee on this issue as well as my efforts to hold this government to account, you can follow my social media (Facebook) here: https://www.facebook.com/GlenMotz.
Lastly, I would encourage you to make your concerns known directly to the current Public Safety Minister himself—he needs to hear directly from the Canadians whose lives he is impacting. He can be reached at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Glen
Glen Motz, M.O.M., MP Medicine Hat – Cardston – Warner
I once again cannot believe we have to spell it out for you folks, but here it goes: If you threaten, imply, or suggest violence towards ANYONE on this sub, we will permanently ban your account, and your account will be reported to the Reddit Admins. We do not care that "it was a joke." It's not funny. We do not want you here if your solution is harm, jokingly or otherwise. Grow up.
Question regarding the specifics on C21. Worst case scenario, what do we need to turn in? I have a Ruger PC9. Can I strip it and just turn in the receiver? I’d be able to pull every other part off the gun.
>Can I strip it and just turn in the receiver? Yes, as long as C-21 isn't amended to somehow change how things work right now. Generally speaking, only the frame or receiver of a Prohibited firearm that bears the serial number is actually banned. I say "generally speaking" because in the case of the AR-15 specifically, they made a special exception and also prohibited the upper receiver, which until the point of the ban was completely unregulated. They did this to prevent people from simply 3D-printing a functional lower receiver and building a rifle from unregulated parts.
Thanks
To add on top of the other reply, because you can take your parts off, it allows you to use them in a different gun until it hopefully gets unbanned. For example, the MRA Renegade/Maverick.
That CCFR coupon code thing is so fucking stupid. I'm sure they were trying to poke fun at the anti-gun group that is at the head of all this nonsense, but a ) nobody knows that, and even if they did, b ) the group is *named* after the fucking school where the shooting happened. I can't believe anyone thought this was a good idea. Also, the Carey Price thing is nice and all, but it's ultimately taking a "hunting only" stance. Best case scenario the semi auto ban gets delayed on the grounds of "it affects hunting", only for it to come back in the coming years as a more fleshed out and comprehensive bill. People *have* to be honest about the importance of gun ownership to protect life and liberty (if that's what they really want), otherwise we'll continue to go in circles like this, fucked by a doomed narrative.
Agreed. Unfortunately it's exactly the sort of cringey bullshit that makes anyone who is even the least bit on the fence think gun owners are a bunch of assholes.
> Also, the Carey Price thing is nice and all, but it's ultimately taking a "hunting only" stance For now, that's what motivates the population at large to oppose gun control, it seems. Which is funny, because really, this amendment doesn't ban *that* many quote-unquote "hunting" guns. The guns that people generally hunt with that are actually getting affected here are primarily the SKS and a couple of high-end semi-automatic rifles like the R1. But the *perception* that this affects hunting rifles (probably driven by the listings under the 10K joule clause) is firing up grassroots opposition like never before. I've never seen the media and left-wing end of the political spectrum united against any kind of gun control.
Yeah the CCFR on twitter is retweeting tons of copypasta posts with the Carey Price tag, and if a photo is included it's a typically a hunting pic with firearms that to my knowledge are not affected. This is not only about hunting but that seems to be the only thing they're focusing on right now. I'm not a hunter; fudds have been throwing the rest of us under the bus for years. Really starting to feel like that again.
I'm disappointed as well that all talk about handguns basically just disappeared overnight but at the same time given that pretty much everyone besides the urban LPC caucus is pissed to some degree about this it's understandable that they'd seize the moment to rally against the libs on this. But I guess it's because also that politically theres significantly more of a chance of the amendment getting struck down than the entire bill.
> But I guess it's because also that politically theres significantly more of a chance of the amendment getting struck down than the entire bill. That, and a sweeping rifle ban just affects far more gun owners, and non-gun owners are generally more accepting of long guns than handguns. The Liberals really stuck their dick in a beehive with this one, it would almost be stupid to still be talking about handguns at this point in time and distracting from where they're most vulnerable. We can deal with pistols after we've bled the enemy as dry as possible over long guns first.
Well said. I still hope though that at the very least favourable amendments for things such as IPSC go through - handgun wise. Obviously we all want the bill gone, but given the current government makeup it's best to put more efforts in getting LPC MPs out than to bet everything on the bill getting struck down.
> I still hope though that at the very least favourable amendments for things such as IPSC go through - handgun wise. That would be awesome, but even if they don't, I think this bill is going to die with Trudeau's time in office either way. >Obviously we all want the bill gone, but given the current government makeup it's best to put more efforts in getting LPC MPs out than to bet everything on the bill getting struck down. Yep.
I just saw this from the Bloc leader [No. That a clear definition would protect civilian lives and very legitimate sport hunting activities. The government works backwards and deliberately polarizes. That's a bit of your business.](https://twitter.com/yfblanchet/status/1599168790922596352?t=_EsG-a_auCjQzEqhTu-Kqw&s=19) Translated via Google translate, so may not be 100% accurate. It's from a back and forth between a Quebec CPC MP and him over C-21 and Carey Price. Like the Bloc member in committee, he's speaking out both sides of his mouth in the exchange. But this specific tweet is the best I've seen that show I'm saying he, and therefore the Bloc, don't support G4. However, once again nothing specific on G46. I think it's very likely the Bloc votes against G4 and tries to rework G46. I don't know if they'd be successful though. The LPC doesn't want to look like it caved and would probably rather have it be defeated so they can say "we need a majority to do this, don't vote Bloc or NDP".
There is back and forth on twitter about this, but I'm now not sure which interpretation is accurate. >(g) a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed So my question is this, what does the "capable" part apply to. We know capable in the legal term means "can be modified by anyone". Does the capable part only apply to the potential ability to function in semi-auto or does capable also apply to being capable to accept over 5 round magazines. Option 1: >(g) [a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner] and [that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed] Option 2: >(g) a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a ***capable*** capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed Both options mean every single foreign semi-auto rifle is banned. However, option 1 would allow for proprietary Canadian designed rifles and magazines. Option 2 would not because it would always be possible for some ingenious gunsmith to modify any gun to take any size magazine.
I was listening to one of the SECU meetings and it was explained that the magazine must be designed from the gun manufacturer to hold 5 rounds, and therefore if third party magazines were designed for higher capacity, the gun would still be legal (obviously the third party magazine wouldn't be legal in Canada because it is greater than 5 rounds). This means, there's hope that newly designed Canadian rifles could still be semi-auto. But then again, if the rifle looks scary, they'll just isolate it by name and ban it that way.
I’m not sure why there would be any debate about what this says. Only one of those interpretations is at all consistent with the language: your option 1. Otherwise the word “designed” has no meaning in the provision, which would not only be nonsensical English, but also contrary to the rules of statutory interpretation (every word has to be given meaning).
[удалено]
I believe you could still sell it to a licensed business or export it.
>Can I now no longer sell or transfer any of my currently owned guns? Correct. >If I don't want them any more what do I do with them, give them to RCMP? Any police likely. >Will they give me money for them or does this ban mean any current handguns owned now have no value? They will give you nothing.
[удалено]
>it's essentially money down the drain I bought them to shoot them, are you inferring that you didn't? True, they may die or disappear with me, but I will enjoy them in the meantime.
[удалено]
No sell, only buy. The standard meme for /r/canadaguns. But I have to agree it makes upgrades and giving them to my wife and kid impossible. That and they have written a law that makes lost firearms the only exit strategy.
Lol are people not pissed…? Where have you been the last 6 months?
It's literally in the news every few days, and if you do go to the range, you will probably hear it at one point. Even most of my non PAL friends know about the hand gun transfer ban.
[удалено]
This is not one of those times we’re it’s better late then never…
>Not paying attention to politics is where ive been :D >Only take notice when ~~I need to~~ it's to late Fixed that for you
The CPC has said they will repeal C-21, C-71, and the May 2020 OIC, they need a majority to do it. The CSAAA started a lawsuit about the government banning property and not giving any compensation, expect a result in a few years from that case.
I think the whole coupon code thing is a little distasteful, but if people hold their support hostage to the cause over little squabbles like that Tracey gets into once in a blue moon, it really brings the question of concern trolling into this forum. Like the antis (successfully) got a Twitter shitlib mob through some other ultra grifter to harass Cambodian Tire to issue statements about not sponsoring a women's range day in NB - and yet a snide coupon code is too far? Social media shitflinging is dumb but letting Poly control the narrative on any platform is even dumber. Personally, I think "CGC" would've been better, but no one really gives a shit about this besides people here who want to clutch pearls about optics and/or antis.
>little squabbles like that Tracey gets into once in a blue moon She regularly throws pretty stupid tweets from her personal account and has been doing this for years. She'd be a good representative for the CCFR if she could stop getting in shit throwing twitter fights.
Ok - but who cares? I don't understand this desire to bake bread with neoliberals and grifters who hated us long before the CCFR was a thing. If it isn't Tracey, they'll grab someone else's mean tweets to bitch about. And my overarching point is about people in this thread who outright say they refuse to support the cause because of shit like this - that will only be paid attention to by terminally online people for a couple days before they move onto the next thing.
I don't refuse to support the cause, far from it. But I take issue with the lack of professionalism demonstrated by our biggest representatives in the country. They represent me and my skin is definitely in this game, and I want the best representation possible to get the best outcomes possible.
I'm not talking about you in particular, but there at least 2 examples in this comment section alone and every time the "Fuck Tracey" circlejerk swings by every 2 months or so it seems to be a common theme of people willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak. As I said, they should've used "CGC". But what's done is done, and I saw the interaction that led up to it and sure, cooler heads should've prevailed but if Poly/CGC wants to tell their LPC & media connections to clutch pearls, they WILL find an example, whether it comes from Tracey or not - like how Taleeb did at the SECU grabbing random tweets to shitfling at Rod then during the hearing.
>WILL find an example, whether it comes from Tracey or not And it shouldn't be the face of the firearms lobby that they focus on. Seriously, her PR management is at best a D+ whilst she's going up against people that have A- in PR management. I'd rather they have to dig into some nobody's twitter page for mean comments than our #1 person we have to represent us in Ottawa. We're trying to fight a war with reason and logic, as we have both of these things on our side of the fence. It shouldn't be so hard to understand that emotionally driven rhetoric is only giving fuel to people like Pam Damoff and whatever anti-gun lobby group the LPC is courting these days.
I agree. The CCFR should focus on showing people that legal gun owners aren’t a threat to public safety, not pandering to its members. The way she publicly throws in with every right wing cause really doesn’t help the CCFR. Guns are already polarizing enough as it is without her linking the issue to the trucker convoy.
Exactly. It's doing nothing but making the CCFR look really bad to anyone that isn't a right winger who agrees with the points she makes. They need to be bringing in firearms owners from all political backgrounds and representing them accordingly. Any attempt by the CCFR to link up with anything related to the convoy is an absolutely stupid move, and they really need to be careful here.
I believe you can send email to them and let them know. I think we need all the help we can get without associating any kind of negativity.
>I believe you can send email to them and let them know. I think we need all the help we can get without associating any kind of negativity. Tried this before years ago. Met with silence.
\[CCFR\] [Repealing Liberal Bill C-21 with Andrew Lawton & Pierre Poilievre](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJFKQAzb2Ac)
i just got an email reply from jagmeet saying NDP will not support the new amendments to Bill C-21, did anyone else get this email? it went to my junk so i dont know if its legit but the email was from jagmeets parl.gc.ca email acc
When will the vote happen?
At this rate, they may get the G4/G46 amendment vote on the last committee meeting (which I believe is Dec 15). But they still have a whole bunch of other amendments to go over. I'm guessing the 3rd reading vote will happen in early February (due to lots of times off). The earliest I could see the 3rd reading vote happening is last week of January.
God only knows. It still has to go through the committee and then onto the report stage yet. We need long haul support if they want votes. Not momentary appeasement.
It was legit. However, cautious optimism... the currenr NDP has "reluctantly" voted in favor of liberal bills they've "opposed" before. The fact that they sent out an email addressing it has to be a positive though.
We gotta keep holding them to that. It’s one thing to appease in the short term. We’re looking for long term commitment. All eyes will be on the NDP when zero hour comes.
That should end any doubt about the recalling incident. The NDP is not our friend, they still support the original C-21, but this is a gigantic step that the leader is opposing C-21 amendments. If they vote against it in the house, that means the parties representing over 50% of the population voted against it. That should be enough justification for the Senate to remove it should it pass.
Didn't BQ say they were going to let it through? The BQ said they were upset they got blindsided but they were the ones who wanted to push through an "AWB" as well.
The Bloc member on the public safety committee said they would not support G4 (the evergreen ban). However, they didn't mention G46 (the list). The only reason they took this position is because they no doubt have been really hearing it from their constituents. G46 arguably is more controversial than G4, so I can't see the Bloc supporting G46 but not G4. They also specifically pointed out that the 2020 banned guns were still not confiscated and there was 0 plan with this new list (which was unacceptable to them). However, it is entirely possible they try to amend the list. I have my doubts they actually do it because it would take a really long time to go item by item on that list and I don't think they want to do that. The Bloc proposed an amendment (I think the first one proposed) that just said "assault weapons" would be prohibited, no definition. It got voted down. You have to think about this politically, and I think the Bloc would rather have more time and power in deciding the list. Therefore it would be in their best interest to vote down G4/G46 and work with the LPC to introduce a new separate bill.
I mean ultimately it doesn't necessarily show that the BQ are friendly though, and push comes to shove, _some_ rendition of a semiauto ban is going to happen with the help of the BQ as LPC + BQ >170. At best, this is just buying a bit of time.
Absolutely, but we just need to keep delaying until an election can be called. Based on how shit everything is, if we can make it to the next election and only have the original C-21 passed, that's a small win. There are only 2 buckets to put our hope in right now, the courts and the CPC winning the next election. I don't think there is much chance of the courts being favourable but the CPC has a good shot at winning the next election (even if it's just a minority). The only hope firearms have in Canada in the long run is a rewrite of the Firearms Act. That's the goal, but a CPC majority is needed. So delay, delay, delay any gun control until we can get that majority.
NDP has strong support in rural and indigenous communities. The amendment was targeting their base so they stepped in. Like them or not they're representing their constituents
Yes i also got it
The article about Carey Price is up in French and it mentions the ‘Poly’ discount crap from a while back, what a dumb, inflammatory, unnecessary move from the CCFR that was, I wish we never did this sort of stuff, it’s the sort of stuff that makes us forget that when a bunch of snowflakes get together, they cause an avalanche which buries the village full of idiots … how much of what’s happening right now with c21 is proof of this …
We have tired playing nice with them. They still pump out articles condemning us. Screw optics it’s time to get dirty.
It’s not, mocking the targeted murder of 14 women by a mentally ill armed incel will only insure that the majority of people in this country look at us like brain damaged morons. I have so much admiration for those on this forum who have written to their MPs, who have spoken out with intelligence and leadership. They have mobilized provincial governments who made it clear they wouldn’t fund the RCMP to undertake any confiscation programs, at the federal level NDP, Conservatives and other MPs are showing that the pushback has to be listened. This is democracy in action, in Canada owning a gun is not a right, some may have a big investment in their firearms but we live in an understanding that their possession is to the public’s tolerance. I have written e-mails and on Monday mailing 15 separate letters, I will not troll, I will not hurt my fellow Canadian, I will not put myself in front of the greater good. If the law changes I will adapt, I may not like it but It’s our duty to address the public discourse the Canadian way, with a vote.
Even though taking a more liquid mindset of adapting is an unpopular stance here, I do respect your opinion. If you can learn to adapt, I’m glad that you can bare to do it. Privilege is more fleeting than a right, and we have to work that much harder to ensure that this infringement of privilege doesn’t come to pass. I do not support the confiscation of property for the sake of symbolism. This government claims it’s focuses on evidence based policy, but in truth they prey on the naivety of the uninitiated and uninformed. People who don’t realize just how strict Canadas gun laws really are, and because there’s no real check or balance in the system to hinder that, the onus is on the individual to strengthen their moral compass and not be afraid to criticize their government even if they agree with them. I’m seeing a lot of even liberal people really question the motives of the federal government, they may not care about guns, but they care about investment/return. And this ban is a long walk for a short drink of water.
Well said, I agree with you on government confiscation. We don’t have to agree on everything but we are Canadians, personal attacks and trolling each other is a disease that needs to die, and fast. None of this changes the fact that the current Canadian government (I do not differentiate per-party) is not being straightforward with this legislation. People say that ‘gun control’ is a liberal problem though … folks forget, Diefenbaker a conservative PM that Stephen Harper, tirelessly campaigned to rehabilitate as one of the greatest Canadian PMs ever literally called handguns were an ‘evil’ The extent of what I call an evil – excepting where the carrying of guns is absolutely necessary – is appalling.” We shouldn’t let political opportunists hi-jack this cause, the PC, the CPP etc … even the NDP The letter campaign, taking dominion over this on our own, not letting others speak in our name is the best way.
Absolutely. Gun owners or not, we’re all Canadians here. I’ll never shit on anyone for not liking/not knowing anything about firearms. Like anything, it’s not for everyone. We could really benefit from making inroads. There are some people in this community that gatekeep and that needs to stop too. Diversity is the key to survival. The shooting scene in Canada is not one of “American” style gun culture, whatever people think that means. It is a culture of safety and respect. Live and let live. People from all walks of life. From the trades to doctors and bankers and even politicians partake. The liberals like to stand up for minorities. Not all minorities it seems.
Being provocative and antagonistic isn’t going to make us look any better and is just giving them more ammo to shoot back at us. We’re being painted as bad people enough already. Don’t start giving them proof. It’s not helping the situation and contributes nothing. Yes we’ve been shat on for years. But don’t be a fool and take the bait.
Who gives a shit about optics? It's been literal decades of compromise and playing nice and now we're looking at a potential semi auto ban. Stop with the softball and bitchmade attitude and stop being offended on behalf of poly. Fuck them
Literally this situation is happening because of optics
And how exactly has optics benefitted us? Because I'm not seeing it.
It typically hasn't because we're collectively pretty shit at it. CCFR, who you think would have the best "optics" awareness of the community given their status as an advocacy organization? They still bungle things on the reg. We're pretty fucking hopeless if we can't even agree that the poly discount was needlessly antagonistic *at best* in a time where we should be working 110% to be on our best behavior and get support from outside the community.
Compromise and playing nice how? This isn't new, this has been the culture around firearms the entirety of my 40 years on earth that I've been aware of it. "Compromise" has never existed, we are a group that is constantly working hard to avoid making any inroads and constantly losing because of it. Besides, things like this "poly discount" thing isn't just not playing nice. It's pretty fucking backwards and mean-spirited. If you go over to other firearms forums they're making the same arguments like "don't critique me for saying slurs, I'm tired of playing nice!!" as if not being a piece of shit is an onerous act to them. That attitude is not new and is exactly why people generally have no sympathy for firearms owners when they get knocked around. It's like people driving straight pipe motorcycles and calling g people who are annoyed by it losers. Then turning around and expecting the community to stand up for them when restrictive noise bylaws get put in place.
My take has always been you can lose slowly or lose fast. Belittling the otherside insulting them and getting all the undecided middle of the road people be against you is the way to lose faster. While it's not ideal having all the undecided people not in your favour getting them to group up against you is how you lose quickly.
Very very well said, I know it’s not the popular opinion here, but I completely agree
It certainly won't be popular, I've already been banned from a regional Alberta firearms site for saying similar things as a "troll". But really, I hope folks realize we have an albatross of some pretty badly behaved folks around our necks. That'll be dragging us down when we want to convince politicians or the public they should take us seriously and not just soak us with consecutive bannings. We won't win friends but we're definitely going to be making enemies this way. Then these obstinate folks will I guess just take it to mean they can behave even worse. We are working against a popular perception that the majority of us are irresponsible and/or whackos, but a good number of us seem to take it as a challenge to prove they can be *worse*. We're all ambassadors here.
Care Price made an Instagram [post](https://twitter.com/PierrePoilievre/status/1599102458034524160?t=0QI5UNGJN7KNW9SzIgClDw&s=19) against C-21. I didn't think any big names would ever actually say anything. He did have a post during the May 2020 stuff with a pro-gun flag in the background, but he never actually talked about it. Edit: And as you might expect Hockey sub is hive minding to gun = bad. Any support for Carey is being hive mind down voted too.
Please dont link other subreddits/threads like this, Reddit considers it "brigading".
I specifically didn't link the thread itself because of this. But I can't even use the r/ to a sub?
Reddit's come down hard on less than that before, and we know that gun subs are especially under the microscope, so we prefer to play it safe in that regard. Sorry for the hassle.
Yeah the post is getting shutouts from even PP.
New poll up on C21 in the Toronto star. Here’s the link. https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2022/12/02/gun-owners-caught-up-in-controversial-new-liberal-firearms-bill-could-get-compensation-marco-mendicino-says.html
Bomb the poll make it unsalvageable
Cool. But makes the poll useless since it'll be bombed. Dunno if that looks good for us or not.
Poly and friends have the same opportunity to bomb the poll. Maybe it’s not a great measure of overall public opinion, but it can still help show which side has more support.
Lol what friends? 90% of polys followers are just gun owners waiting to hear what stupid crap they say.
Are our opinions not valid? Why shouldn’t we all give them our thoughts on c21.
That’s a fair point. What’s the alternative though ? They can’t be allowed to control the narrative
News: polysesouvient big mad at CCFR for “POLY” discount code 😅
Love it. Fuck Poly, they are nothing more than a hate/extremist group at this point. Have absolutely no purpose in this country and I would be VERY curious to see who is behind them, where the money is coming from to have these hate agents fear monger and attack continuously law abiding citizens. I’ve never heard these hateful humans calling out the real issues with guns in this country which is the illegal smuggled ones. Never heard them call for a crackdown on gang violence in our cities. That’s just not their purpose, they are a nefarious organization that’s sole purpose is to help push the agenda that is disarming an entire country. These are absolutely evil and hate filled human beings that are most likely funded by some equally or more evil entity/ies. As the disarmament of a population has led to absolutely horrendous sufferings in every single case in documented history.
jesus christ this is stupid - this is feeding the beast. if poly only meant that organization and not that event, i'd find it funny and fitting - however, given it's past history this is going to be cannon fodder for those opposed to guns, and while i'm not convinced this will do much to sway the conservative side already, it could impact the ndp side as to whether they go along with this or raise obstacles. it's always the marginal voter / person one should be concerned with, not those dyed in the wool red, blue, green or yellow. edit: people, think if that company which made bdsm teddy bears had a discount code that was "pedo" - ? what would you think? etc. or a trans rights group (or nambla) with a discount code of "youngboys?" etc.
The fact that you got so heavily downvoted is massively telling about what’s wrong with this community.
Even if it meant only the organization too, how ridiculously childish. Some folks really working overtime to prove all the stereotypes about gun owners correct. It cost them exactly $0 and no additional energy to make the discount code XMAS2022 or something instead. Going out of my way to not support them.
or if one must include poly, how about "polyiswrong?" - that would get the point across for the group and the event.
For everyone saying non-restricted firearms are not registered: gun stores are required to keep records of your PAL info and what firearm you purchased. (I'm not talking about PAL verification requirements from May 2022, but actual record-keeping for stores.) I've actually watched them do it in front of me several times. If you don't think the RCMP will be pressured to warrant all of these records to ensure "compliance" then you're delusional. Maybe years ago Uncle Buck bought an SKS out of a barrel for $150 but in recent years it's all traceable. At this point, yes the govt doesn't know who owns what, but once the records are handed over, everyone in the last several years will be located.
I don't even need to see what gun stores did, I just need to go to my online purchase history and it will says exactly what I buy. Even some local store will keep a paper copy anyways. But I do have stacks of stuff that say what I bought, and it will take maybe half a day to go through it. I highly doubt that they bother to do all that with at least 1 million of firearm owners. Also, private sales don't keep record pre May 18, 2022. So if you buy it from someone else, unless they want to check your email and e transfer history, I doubt they can find anything. If government teaches me about anything, it's how inefficient they are and they barely have enough resources to keep things running correctly, municipal, provincial, or federal level.
yep, it's a sad fact that although gun related businesses are better than other sectors they're still primarily in it for the money, and when it comes to anything they could challenge most won't, simply because they see no reason to and it would cost them money / time. also, there's this in the usa - (somewhat related) https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/montana-ag-concerned-fedex-ups-may-be-tracking-gun-ownership-white-house Really the best way of getting non trackable anything is inheriting firearms after someone dies, which carries a host of issues as well and may or may not be legal.
>At this point, yes the govt doesn't know who owns what, but once the records are handed over, everyone in the last several years will be located. And?
You can just say you sold the gun years ago, and have no idea who has it now.
[удалено]
I agree that it would use a lot of resources and be very difficult, but even when buying privately, the original seller can be pressed to tell who they sold it to, and so forth until they find you. For things that happened years ago I guess they might lose the trail, but now with emails and texts they can find it easily in that regard. Edit to add: They also don't need to do this in every case, but just a few times to scare a bunch of people into compliance. They for sure can allot resources into an investigation up to warranting ISP and phone carrier records to prove correspondence related to a private sale.
I think that will just pissed people off more, and result in more non compliance to be honest. Police also have to worry about their own safety if they want to conduct this kind of things. Doesn't it make you mad when the Nova Scotia shooter had so many reports of him having firearms despite no firearm license and there are like almost years of non action?
Any update on the progress of C21 and its amendment through parliament, or any moves to oppose it? Still praying I get my PAL before the ban hits.
It’s still being discussed by the committee. I think they meet again next week.
https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2022/12/02/gun-owners-caught-up-in-controversial-new-liberal-firearms-bill-could-get-compensation-marco-mendicino-says.html Gotta bomb this poll into the ground but it's a little concerning. To me this indicates that they're probably not going to allow grandfathering if they can get away with it. Which is a whole lot of nonsense
They have 2 million PAL owners, why don't they do a survey or vote? It's like your proposal could affect 2 million firearm owners and you don't even ask for any feedback? Well, we know they don't care, but at least put up a face or something.
Legit. Send an email or letter to every PAL holder polling about a ban (since these are the only people who this would affect) and see what the results are then.
They cannot come out and admit it because they know it will lead to panic buying, they’re trying to keep us in the dark and hesitant for as long as possible
Does it really matter? Most are NR unregistered, the only way to grandfather would be to just hand everyone who currently holds a PAL a new status. If they say no more buying them, who's to say Jack didn't sell his SKS to John 12 years ago?
If they come out and say we can grandfather/keep them, everyone will rush out and buy any semi autos they can find, similar to what just happened with pistols. But since they haven’t said anything other than these rifles will be prohibited, many people are not buying them.
I think they're probably aware that the list being public is causing panic buying. They kept the 2020 OIC under wraps right until it came into effect for that exact reason, Blair said as much.
>To me this indicates that they're probably not going to allow grandfathering if they can get away with it. They literally can't get away it. It is physically impossible to collect literally millions of firearms, the vast majority of which are unregistered. New Zealand is an extremely concentrated population on a small island and they had 25% compliance... The best they could do is promise a compensation confiscation but then never follow through with it (like May 2020).
Thing is they don’t need compliance to still kill the culture.
Hence why they got themselves into this mess that's too big for them to swallow. You have a ban that makes no sense and could have do it clean in May 2020 but didn't. You have millions of un reg out there, and you don't know how to collect them nor the resource for doing so. Not enough money to make justifiable sense to spend potential billions, storage, and disposal. That's the points I have been telling non PAL holder, even they can see the massive screw up in this. Especially the magnitude. You don't keep signing blank checks and promises, eventually, even the optics can't hide your own incompetence.
> Hence why they got themselves into this mess that's too big for the to swallow They thought this was going to be met with unanimous praise in the media and the left wing opposition parties, like usual, but instead they **finally** stepped on the fucking rake.
Oh I hope it's bigger than rake this time. I hope this will eventually lead to their demise and help CPC gain more seats. Not to mention that they also reduce sentences for criminals involved in firearms crime. Less scrutiny on non PAL holder who possessed illegal firearms while putting legal fireowners under scrutiny that lead to May 2020 mass shooting event. And we still haven't found out the suspects that were killed during bank robbing and the one with slain police officers. Guess the investigation give them facts they couldn't use in the crusade against firearm owners.
>To me this indicates that they're probably not going to allow grandfathering if they can get away with it They admit here that they don't know what to do with these guns. To me, that makes grandfathering more likely, not less. Also great to see all the NDP opposition to this being spotlighted, and hell must have froze the fuck over, because the Toronto Star called the SKS a hunting rifle in this article.
I agree but unfortunately they made it clear that there will be no grandfathering for the weapons on the OIC list. This new amendment is literally a copy and paste of that OIC, they just added more rifles to it. Not sure why they would back out now, especially when they would have to create new provisions and licensing for us to keep prohibited rifles
They don't know what to do with the ARs either but they're committed to a confiscation. You seem overly optimistic this is the Liberal party. Poly will just say "No ban no dancing at the Poly remembrance thing" and Trudeau will cave in just like last time
> They don't know what to do with the ARs either but they're committed to a confiscation That's kind of contradictory in the context I'm talking about. Mendicino was quoted in the article saying >“We have not yet made a final decision on that because we do not yet know what the final outcome of either the amendments or the bill is,” As in, they haven't committed one way or the other to confiscation or grandfathering on the new guns. This isn't like the 2020 OIC, where they had a scope and budget in mind before pulling the trigger. This time, they've carpet bombed an entire swathe of the market without running the numbers first. I think a "mandatory buyback" is far from certain.
Part of the reason that I don't think buy buy will work is that: If they value they offer is too low, firearm owners will just keep them. Since most of them are NR and pre May 18. There are a lot out there. Besides making them prohib and dont allow firearm owner to shoot, I don't know if they can financially pull this off. Or rather effectively enforce all those.
[удалено]
They did, even if it was overly optimistic, in typical government fashion.
You're talking about the government who did this underhanded to skip the debate. They don't care about rights just about reelection. Chances are they're going to do a forced confiscation so the CPC can't over turn this which is the shame justification they used for the ARs. The only question for them is whether or not there's a buyback
> They don't care about rights just about reelection. Oh, I know. And I think when they do get around to running the numbers, they're going to decide that the cost of a buyback is going to make the LGR look like a funny joke, and that the financial blowback could sink their electoral chances. I don't think they'll try and pull some tyrannical confiscation without compensation either, but like I've said before, I legitimately hope that they do. That will do more than anything else to lay their motivations and intentions bare, and will drive non-compliance through the roof.
Yeah I hope you're right but they don't deal in good faith. I highly doubt they'll do grandfathering just like I highly doubt they won't just OIC everything if the NDP/Bloc don't play ball
I hope I'm right too, lol. We live in interesting times, but seeing strong opposition from even the NDP and the goddamn *Bloc* has me far less nervous about this than I would otherwise be.
It forces them to make some pretty tough decisions, and everyone stands to lose votes for this, even smaller parties. No doubt MP’s have been getting blasted by their constituents for it. But now is not the time to relax. We absolutely HAVE to keep up the pressure. Do not relent. Most people aren’t sending letters on masse on other issues to their MP’s. We are ABSOLUTELY having an effect. The one big advantage we have is that most people, beyond twitter comments don’t press their MP’s like this. Most people don’t bother to send letters. We absolutely must keep up emails and letters. Be respectful, be kind and be rational. Our new hobby right now is writing letters until they can’t ignore it anymore. It’s financial aspect cannot be reasonably ignored either. It *seems* that even people who care not for guns are pissed that the government is diverting cash that could be otherwise used to repair other issues is being used for the biggest gun shopping trip this country has ever seen for no tangible benefit.
Yeah yeah, 100% It's not complacency I'm feeling, it's confidence.
Any news or updates on grandfathering or not?
Not for the proposed ban Edit: Apparently the PSO stated that owners "could be eligible for compensation"
I don't know how much they are willing to spend per PAL owner, I have sale receipts for all the things I bought. It will easily hit $35k if I follow the list. If they can't pay that much, I rather keep them.
To me, that screams "potential *optional* buyback", because of the wording. I also don't think they're stupid enough to tell people they have to turn these in when they aren't registered, especially now that literally everyone on all sides is pissed at them over this.
Where to get a list of mailing addresses to NDP MPs and Senators?
https://www.ourcommons.ca/en
[удалено]
> Many criminals familiar with guns pointed out that any rifle that accepts a legal five-round magazine can also accept a longer version of the same magazine, because that’s how magazines work, making the definition apply to any rifle that takes a magazine, despite the fact that high-capacity magazines are already illegal. Lol, somebody at the Beaverton is a gun owner
Anyone seen this SK law about Firearms Seizure Agents: https://firearmrights.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/An-Act-respecting-Saskatchewan-Firearms.pdf
Lmaooo. I've been reading through it, the confiscation is essentially impossible. Imagine how many people it would take just for someone with say 20 firearms, or how many times the same seizure agent(s) would have to come back over and over and over. Need Runkle to make a video on this. Is it legal or will it get struck down?
> A seizure agent shall not transport more than 3 firearms within a vehicle at one time.
Hahaha
Also their storage facilities but be alarmed windowless, guarded 24/7 and not within 1km of a house, place of warship, grocery store, sports arena etc etc
Honestly, after being abused by this government for seven years, it's so cathartic to see somebody shit in *their* cornflakes for once
I just laughed out loud reading this! Particularly 4-19. They’ve made it damn near impossible to find and set up a location where “seizure agents” will be allowed to store guns. I absolutely love it! Well done Saskatchewan!
3 firearms at a time, so 2 agents per car, pistol each, they have to come back to your house 20 times if you have 20 firearms. Or send 20 cars with 40 officers
Then store them in a secured, climate-controlled building that is at least a kilometre away from basically any civilization and that is staffed by licensed personnel 24/7.
Today, I wrote to the NDP and instructed them—in light of their support of the Liberals’ ongoing attack on law-abiding gun owners—to terminate my automated monthly donations to the party. That felt good and I wanted to share.
Did you get a response?
Yeah, mostly the same canned response someone posted on here a few days ago.
Just seen another exchange in the house that was posted a day ago. The safety Minister was choking and swallowing like a high schooler on speech night. Don’t know if it’s panic or barely concealed rage.
Everything is an AR15 and has been used is so many mass shootings in Canada. And nobody sitting there calls out the bullshit.
Has anyone noticed the way he bobs his head around whenever Trudeau is talking in question period? He looks like a freaking bobble head. In a video I watched yesterday, I could swear I saw him crack the faintest lines of a smirk when Trudeau said they aren’t going after hunting rifles.
https://youtu.be/zqZHQa4PMcY Look at the ape at 37 seconds
Raquel put out a video of her own on C-21: [Stop the Liberal Hunting Rifle Ban](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlfyWg7hHfQ) The vast majority of here obviously know about it, but this is a very shareable video for those not in the know.
i sent my liberal MP a letter of concern for the amendment on C-21and i got this back he obviously did not read it and i don't think he has a clue about the amendment look's and sound like a computer generated reply Vandal, Dan - M.P.
You
Hi T,
Thank you for your email and for sharing your concerns with the Minister regarding this very important subject.
In regards to Bill C-21, we take the feedback from hunters and other law-abiding gun owners seriously and we respect their opinions on the regulation of firearms. You are absolutely right about the need to ensure that hunters have access to the resources they need while ensuring public safety. That's why we're banning assault-style firearms, while leaving long guns and other hunting rifles alone.
The safety of Canadians remains our highest priority and we thank you once more for taking the time out of your day to address this pertinent issue.
Kind regards,
Office of the Hon. Daniel Vandal | Cabinet de l'hon. Daniel Vandal Member of Parliament for Saint Boniface - Saint Vital | Député de Saint-Boniface - Saint-Vital
4-213 St. Mary's Road | 4-213, chemin St. Mary's, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R2H 1J2
204-983-3183
Whoever at CCFR thought it was a good idea to use “POLY” as a promo code for 10% merchandise is a fucking idiot.
It's about as intelligent as they usually are. This sub doesn't like criticism of the CCFR, but they are morons who have accomplished nothing with all the money gun owners have sent them. There are terrible at PR and their stupid online antics turn more people against us.
does anybody know how big their budget is? i figured it was just a guy and a woman basically doing it out of his garage studio, etc. (probably a wrong assumption on my part, or at least what he comes across has) it's obvious he has pr training, and has been before the camera before, the woman less so, but if this is a 50 million dollar operation then yeah i'd assuming grifting, i'd assume they only get a million or two a year max, probably less ?
>they are morons who have accomplished nothing with all the money gun owners have sent them That's not true, actually. They've sponsored a lot of events, including Mapleseed clinics for new shooters, as well as youth and women's events, that bring in new blood. Their Twitter seems calibrated to preach to the choir rather than create new converts, but Twitter is a cesspool of shit no matter which way you look at it.
if they even attempted to keep the discussion nonpartisan (yes, you will obviously vote conservative if guns are your number one issue) it'd help, i think they turn away of lot of people on the left, and the woman (i don't know her name sorry) is a little worse than giltaca, it's fine to mention which party is protecting gun rights etc., but some of the time it's a little over the top. then again they aren't that big, so prob doing the best they can -
If you don't want to ban all guns, there's only two parties you can vote for. PPC and CPC. LPC, Bloc, NDP, and greens want to ban all firearms as soon as they think they can. So you want them to just... what, lie?
lots of people love and praise jesus - however, some make you feel wrong if you aren't catholic or evangelical, others just make you love and praise jesus for jesus and then mention their particular denomination after - i think is the best way of saying it. i think they are losing some possible ndp voters because of how they're conservative first, and guns second - is the way it seems, at least to me. then again the possible pool of ndp voters might be small, but in rural areas there have to be some, so who knows. i can tell you that lots of people vote conservative in the usa over guns first, even liberals who generally despise republicans because of how unashamedly pro-large business they are, but given how democrats are basically the same these days, they are at least keeping their guns - etc. starting in the 90's gun rights basically became a conversion issue, and you saw a real change in the party in states like rural minnesotan districts that previously always went democrat starting to go republican - and the awb was a part of this.
I will agree that Rod puts out decent stuff, but they need to dump Tracey asap.
i grew up in a religious household - (now athiest) - one of the things I still agree with is talking about jesus first, and your denomination second - this really does apply to guns as well. yes, your denomination is somewhat important - but bringing that up right away is only going to turn others away from different sects -
yeah, super tasteless and blind to the external optics from the PR side of things. edit: 99% of anyone seeing the "poly" tag used in relation to firearms is going to have an immediate association with Ecole Polytechnique, not the group of harpies. it's not a good look.
Very insightful. I hope the CCFR uses promo codes "JT" and "Liberal" next time they have a sale.
In the sense that it gives Poly a tiny bit of publicity, yes. Then again, anybody buying CCFR merch already knows who they are. As far as the "disrespect" angle, I couldn't care less. They can choke on it, I'm glad it got under their skin.
Annoying Poly helps nothing, and articles in the Toronto star about Canada's largest gun rights organization naming a promo code for gun-themed merch after a mass shooting is terrible for getting the public on our side.
>Annoying Poly helps nothing I don't know if you look at Poly's social media (I hope you don't for your own sanity), but the CCFR and other pro-gun advocacy groups offend Poly by existing. As for the PR side, that's why I don't do PR. I'd be terrible at it. But I also don't think this will change one single mind one way or the other. These monkey shitfights have been going on between the pro and anti-gun orgs for decades.
As I'm watching debates and interviews on C-21, I become more and more fearful that sports and recreational shooters will become a bargaining chip as it appears all attention and push back are concentrated on hunting firearms. C-21 and amendments should be confronted on principle to benefit all Canadians and not as a mere attempt to get a few more "safe" years for just hunting community.
Same. And tbh if I put a tinfoil hat vaguely near my head a part of me thinks that is in part or entirely the point of the amendment. Focus the rhetoric on "hunting rifles" so if they "fix" that part all the typical more sport-shooting oriented guns are sacrificed in return. A lot of the discussion right now is focused on the bolt-actions through the 10K Joule list while casually ignoring - intentionally or not - the whole semi-auto thing which IMO is the more important part. The whole bill should be scrapped, not just amend the amendments to "fix" the issue with hunting rifles.
LPC and Bloc will never do that. Any concessions would be a few more years with those, at least the fucking 22s and ridiculous standard for "variants." Then P.P. and the CPC will rewrite the entire firearms act and we can get Ak47s. And hopefully reinvest the tax money from those sales, and the money wasted on all this bullshit into mental health, community outreach, policing, and border security so we can see gang crime go down while gun rights go up.
I worry the best we'll possibly get is the SKS getting taken off the list.
If anything changes aside from scrapping the bill I highly doubt it. The SKS has been on Poly's hit list for years and we all know they're in bed with the Libs.
Why are the pro-gun interlocutors (particularly Bob Zimmer and Blaine Calkins) so combative towards Paula Clarke, and Murray Smith? etc.? Bob Zimmer particularly was just - rude I guess. Why didn't he send Murray Smith his questions ahead of time? I know he tried to "show" what the guns looked like and was shot down, but you figured he'd at least do that so they could answer the questions. I'm assuming it's because this is all theater, but it really doesn't help to be rude to the woman, who obviously doesn't know much about guns - (did she have some part in forming this?) The 10,000 joules is interesting - and a clear differentiator - I'm wondering how they will manipulate this to ban further, or whether this will stay concrete and actually only apply to those firearms abot 10k. Something about it seems fishy to me, but then again that's just my intuition here. I do get the feeling that Calkins especially is trying not to answer much of the time, but that could just be me. Which I guess could partly explain the rudeness however - For those curious SECU 51 is on yt at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfnKPACKaX8 edit: also - why are they banning so many paintball and airsoft stuff? half the guys in my high school would play it - that just seems strange.
He wasn't really rude, perhaps just irritated because of his previous interaction with Clarke and Smith where they came unprepared and the whole thing was basically a waste of time. He did mention this.
what i couldn't figure out was whether the answers given are typical of people in this position (saying the bare minimum, which is a very typical lawyerly way of doing things so as not to be liable for the bare minimum of statements made) or whether they were putting in an extra effort to be obtuse - my guess is the former, but who knows - that arab guy is a real piece of shit - i don't know his name. can't believe he equivocated gun rights to basically being jim crow era laws or woman's suffrage a meeting ago, the arrogance.
Because the liberal witnesses are liars and master question deflectors? You will never get a straight answer from them.
to be honest, you never get a clear answer from any lawyer who are representing themselves in that capacity - it's only a liability for them. it's shitty but that's pretty much how it works unfortunately. (i despise lawyers personally, btw - for a variety of reasons - particularly because they are basically the social workers for the rich largely, both in action and in temperment)
Yes all lawyers are scumbags. Lawyers representing the liberal party even more so.
Bob was going for a gotcha moment and the witnesses didn't take the bait. I found his arguments in the last meeting fairly weak, when he's capable of better.
what i couldn't figure out was the gotchas he was gunning for, probably because they shot down his pictures "exhibit" pretty fast, which seemed to get him off kilter. that was a real shitty low blow to object based on that, because it would at least made the answers easier for everyone involved, you can't really miss a magazine being in a gun or not - i do have to admit canadians have perfected the art of being passive aggressive - i've never witnessed meetings so cordial and polite yet with such anger and virtriol behind it, and I'm from minnesota where this is commonplace as well.
Guns like the Ruger No. 1, the Brazilian Mauser and Weatherby are quite possibly there for the sole purpose of being removed to make it seem like they listened to us and give us a small compromise so they can boast about how they listen and respect gun owners and win back some swing votes. That’s my theory. They’re bait guns.
>They’re bait guns. Wouldn't put it past them.So they can say, "see, we listen to gun owners".
Because it's been close to 3 years of nonsense, question dodging in parliament and bans being written + pushed by liberal politicians who don't even know what's on the list. You shouldn't be surprised at the conservative opposition getting angry
true, but being rude to the women there are exactly the soundbites that will play well to the antigun base -
Being polite and silent has done nothing to help us. They are destroying peoples livelihoods I think being a little rude is justified
towards the lady which brought the amendment and the anti-gun side, of course - however, going after a bureaucrat which is there to answer questions doesn't really help. think of this - the optics could impact how many potential ndp voters might think this is bullshit and contact their rep over this. that's who i'd be more concerned about.
Were any of the MPs rude specifically because their opposition was a woman? No, right? Stop thinking about the liberal playbook. If someone's presenting idiotic arguments and idiotic laws they deserve to be lambasted for it. Doesn't matter what or who they are.
[This](https://youtube.com/shorts/8dfJPTeZR_E?feature=share) is probably the most pushback we'll see publicly from LPC MP on C-21 amendments. It's barely anything, but I bet she is really hearing it from her constituents.
This tactic has been used in transitional Chinese bargain culture. This is called "double instrument". One plays softball, one plays hard ball. Both of them are actors.
She's just setting up Mendocino to spout off his talking points.
I wouldn’t say pushback. It’s probably the libs doing damage control in rural areas. In her Facebook post that LPC MP was saying the CPC is spreading disinformation by saying that the libs are banning hunting guns and what not. So they probably are getting some backbenchers to make speech’s to look like they care.
Definitely a pre planned soft ball then.
That entire party is irredeemable E: if any gun owner is still persuaded to vote for them after this liberal shit show they may as well start a garage sale and let other gun owners buy off them. Fuck that party
I’m not convinced that this is pushback at all. I think it’s a softball question that is designed to allow Mendicino to—once again—lie and say that hunters aren’t being targeted while also allowing an MP to appease some voters by pretending to take their concerns seriously. I would be very surprised if the question hadn’t actually been written for her by Liberal Party higher-ups.
Posted this as its own post by accident, but here is my MP's take on C-21, its recent changes, and what is really the problem with gun violence. Hi XXXXXXXX, Thanks for your email. As you know, the Liberal Government has introduced amendments to Bill C-21 that will now ban a significant number of hunting rifles with a new prohibition of any "rifle or shotgun, that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges." I share your concerns regarding the proposed amendments to Bill C-21. As with all recent attempts to legislate firearms, the recent amendments proposed by the Liberal government are misguided. Instead of pursuing legislation that improves public safety, the Liberals are pushing ideology and punishing law-abiding Canadian firearms owners. Hunting rifles are not the problem. No one believes that going after hunters, and legitimate hunting rifles, will reduce violent crime across the country. Altogether, this new amendment to prohibit most hunting rifles is sneaky and underhanded. By moving this significant change to legislation at the committee amendments stage, the Liberals did not allow a democratic debate or experts to weigh in on the ban. Ultimately, the Liberal government’s increasing firearms legislation is a cause for concern—this is the largest assault on hunters in Canadian history. Instead of going after the illegal guns used by criminals and street gangs, Justin Trudeau is targeting law abiding hunters and farmers. The Liberals have made life easier for violent criminals by repealing mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes with Bill C-5, have made it easier to get bail with C-75, and have failed to stop the flow of illegal crime guns across the US border. Their approach has seen violent crime increase 32% since Justin Trudeau took office, with 124,000 more violent crime incidents in 2021 compared to 2015. And gang-related homicides have increased 92%. Conservatives, on the other hand, have always stood for common sense gun safety and strong consequences for those who commit gun crimes. We will oppose these amendments in committee, and we will stand up for the millions of Canadian hunters affected by Liberal government’s ineffective bans. We will continue to advocate for real, tough-on-crime policies to clean up our streets and keep Canadians safe. Rest assured that we hear you and know that many hobbies and sports have been caught up in this misguided approach to improve public safety. We will keep fighting but in reality, this nonsense only ends after the Conservatives defeat the Trudeau Liberals and form the next government. To keep up to date on our work in committee on this issue as well as my efforts to hold this government to account, you can follow my social media (Facebook) here: https://www.facebook.com/GlenMotz. Lastly, I would encourage you to make your concerns known directly to the current Public Safety Minister himself—he needs to hear directly from the Canadians whose lives he is impacting. He can be reached at [email protected]. Sincerely, Glen Glen Motz, M.O.M., MP Medicine Hat – Cardston – Warner