Hard to believe this isn't a topic of discussion here. The Libs are attempting to bring in some pretty scary, over-reaching stuff. How do we stop this?
Originally Posted by Llama_Bob
I've seen more well-shot game lost with TSXs than any other premium bullet.
Wrongside; Top of the morning to you, I hope that the sun is up on your side of the big hills and it's warming up a wee bit.
Unless I'm terribly misreading something, I don't believe we can stop this bill at present. Mr. Dressup and his trust fund henchmen have the majority of seats, so will be able to ram more or less whatever they think they can get away with down our collective gullets. But...
There is apparently some dissension in the rural Liberal MP ranks, most especially the ones who were voted in by the slimmest margins. They know full well the precarious position this puts them in when the next election comes. There is a group - link below - who are working on this angle of attack and I for one think it's a worthwhile path to investigate.
Good to hear from you, Dwayne. We are indeed enjoying a small touch of spring over here recently! Much, much anticipated!
Unfortunately, I think you are correct about C71. We likely won't be able to stop it, but I do have hope for changes to the bill and perhaps us making a impression on Andrew Sheer and the CPC as far as how important we are to their success. Here's hoping that we still have some freedom loving people in this country.
Thank you for the link and video you provided. I do believe Ms. Rempel is and will be a rising star in conservative politics in Canada.
Hopefully we can continue to add resources for the fight against C71 here.
Wishing you and yours the very best in the coming season. May it be a blessed spring for you folks.
Regards,
David
Originally Posted by Llama_Bob
I've seen more well-shot game lost with TSXs than any other premium bullet.
Wrongside; Good evening to you David and thanks for the reply.
In my opinion you are spot on with regard to what's needed for Mr. Scheer - we need to have the CPC see lawful firearm owners as a key building block to their success.
We've done it previously and can repeat it if we have the will and I'm hopeful that the next young group of shooters and firearm owners will get on board with it.
Indeed between Ms. Rempel and Ms. Bergen - formerly Ms. Hoepner who was a key player in dismantling the long gun registry - I'm seeing two voices of reason who are the correct formula needed in our current political situation.
Anyway as always we'll continue to strive to change things for the better - better as we see it anyway David - and the other side can be counted on to do the same - of that I have no doubt.
Thanks again and all the best to you folks this spring again.
It looks like the Liberals are trying to limit debate on this controversial topic and ram it through as quickly as possible. If you're thinking of writing a letter to your MP or Andrew Scheer (leader of the opposition) now would definitely be the time. Goodale's office is a waste of time as letters go unanswered.
The bill (C71) is already in 2nd reading and there appears to be muted opposition from the conservatives. Get on their butts now or kiss your modern sporting rifles goodbye as this sets the stage for a massive amount of Grandfather prohibiting by the RCMP which is gradual slow motion confiscation with no compensation. This letter will be most effective for gun owners who live in Liberal ridings where the Liberal only won by a slim margin.
I believe the RCMP should concentrate more on terrorists who are mowing down people on the streets with vehicles rather than take away our guns. Gun rights. It's not about the guns its about the rights.
It is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
...There is apparently some dissension in the rural Liberal MP ranks, most especially the ones who were voted in by the slimmest margins. They know full well the precarious position this puts them in when the next election comes...
A few weeks ago I went to talk with my local MP (Jati Sidhu) here in Mission, who only narrowly sqeaked in in the last election and it was patently obvious that he was fully behind the Bill. He started answering questions even before I asked them ,ie had a prepared "script" for any such enquiries. He's in his mid-60s, having run a business in Abbotsford for many years so I doubt that he's worried about not being re-elected. If he were younger, perhaps he would have listened more carefully, but even so, I don't think there are many MPs who are risking contradicting the government on this.
When I went to see him I was expecting to make an appointment later in the week and returning with a clear list of questions, so wasn't fully prepared to actually talk to him at that point. One of the questions I did bring up was the proposed PAL-check when transferring non-restricted firearms. I should have asked him point-blank (as it were) to confirm that the ONLY information being collected would be the status of the PAL for each party., which is what the Bill suggests, and the subject of this thread. But I did bring up the question of the increased delays getting a response from the CFO (familiar to those of us who own handguns) as this will add a lot of traffic to the CFO's offices- like back in the long gun registry days - and he told me that "The phone lines willl be staffed 24-7". "When pigs fly" I thought to myself! (I read on Cdn. Gunnutz that the staff in the CFO offices are just as frustrated with the backlogs as we are; there just aren't enough of them to handle things expeditiously - and this is just for restricted transfers.)
I've signed the petitions etc. and belong to two of the organizations speaking on our behalf. There is a lot of opposition to this Bill, but the Government is clearly not interested in any discussion and only listens to its own circle of hoplophobes for advice.
There is just SO much wrong with this Bill. Very long on words, very hazy on details. (No doubt the fine details will be added later, after it's passed!) And largely targets the very people who are not the source of most of the problems it claims to address.
One of the real problems I think is that "Mr. Average Hunter" probably isn't too concerned. Most of the controversial stuff deals with so-called "assault rifles" and conditions attached to restricted firearms, so other than having to (possibly) register a new rifle, it won't make much difference to him.
One aspect of this onerous bill that isn't getting much discussion surrounds the life time background checks and how they will impact Serving Members of the Canadian Armed Forces, Veterans and First Responders of all kinds, including the RCMP, who will be "Making" laws dealing with gun ownership. We have all seen many disturbing things in our careers yet it appears that we will likely be tossed under the bus. Following particularly terrible call outs, there are often mandatory stress debriefs. These are run by social workers and shrinks quite often. How will these scenarios be handled? Serve your Country and or Community and lose your firearms? This bill is terrifying at the least. It doesn't even come close to targeting crime and gangs, only the low hanging fruit, law abiding citizens who peaceably own firearms!
...How will these scenarios be handled? Serve your Country and or Community and lose your firearms? This bill is terrifying at the least. It doesn't even come close to targeting crime and gangs, only the low hanging fruit, law abiding citizens who peaceably own firearms!
How will they be handled, indeed. The extended background checks could be useful if they were judiciously applied. I'm thinking of the recent shooting of the Abbotsford, B.C. police officer by someone who had been institutionalized for violent behaviour. In that case, no one seemed to ask "Does this guy own firearms?" (He did, and his PAL had expired between its last renewal and when he was institutionalized.) In that case, some digging might have saved a life.
However, I simply distrust this government to take a suitably judicious approach, given that it is obviously unhappy about citizens owning firearms in the first place, even though they won't come out and say it. Giving the RCMP final authority on firearms classifications, without civilian oversight, is a dangerous move as well.
I bet Goodale et al are carefully studying Australia and Great Britain for more "ideas."
You are absolutely right: C-71 will have little if any salutary effect on dealing with crime and gangs. Easier to make it look like they are "doing something" by wrapping the rest of us up in more and more bureaucracy, despite the fact that we are not the problem. And, like any government of any political stripe, they will never acknowledge failure when the desired result is not achieved, the Long Gun registry being a perfect example.
Our Liberal MP Mr Larry Bagnel got voted out of office for supporting the last gun control bill even though he knew most Yukoner's were against it. People forget though, and he got back in during our last election. He has already said he will vote in support of this bill, so I think its just wishful thinking to hope enough rural Liberal MPs will vote against it to kill the thing.
Our Liberal MP Mr Larry Bagnel got voted out of office for supporting the last gun control bill even though he knew most Yukoner's were against it. People forget though, and he got back in during our last election. He has already said he will vote in support of this bill, so I think its just wishful thinking to hope enough rural Liberal MPs will vote against it to kill the thing.
The thing is to target rural ridings where Liberals won by only a slim margin. I'm sure that the letters that get sent in opposition to Bill C71 will have the most effect in those ridings.
This paper from The Mackenzie Institute (whom I'd never heard of before) might be of interest, esp. for. rural AB and SK folks who have been the victims of burglaries.
Boy there must be a bunch of you law abiding Canadians running around and shooting poor innocents. More gun control needed? Sorry guys but here we have the same crap being thrown at us all the time. I don't see us as the problem. Ed k
Hard to believe this isn't a topic of discussion here. The Libs are attempting to bring in some pretty scary, over-reaching stuff. How do we stop this?
You need a 2nd Amendment & some upright citizens with backbone enough to enforce it.
"I never thought I'd live to see the day that a U.S. president would raise an army to invade his own country." Robert E. Lee
Hard to believe this isn't a topic of discussion here. The Libs are attempting to bring in some pretty scary, over-reaching stuff. How do we stop this?
You need a 2nd Amendment & some upright citizens with backbone enough to enforce it.
Is there an emoticon/emoji for "When pigs fly"? Fact is, this will never happen here, partly because our terms of independence did not require us to go to war with Great Britain as yours did, and so the need to have a militia to protect the fledgling country wasn't there. (One could argue that the US doesn't need a militia now, either, but that's a whole 'nuther can of worms; let's just not go there!)
However, I think many of us would be happy to have a government that is prepared to accept that the average, law-abiding gun owner is not a potential threat to the general populace, and thus needing the continual scrutiny of Big Brother. Those of us who own handguns are deemed even more untrustworthy. (Range use only, no carrying even in the bush, silly calibre and barrel length restrictions, etc.) We are fortunate that - at least so far - our level of inter-personal violence is pretty low, so we rarely need to defend ourselves. Most of our gun-related violence is gang-related and stays within the "family" as it were. We do have mentally-unstable people getting guns, and perhaps the enhanced background checks will help- if they are fairly and justly applied. We certainly need more/better mental-health care. The fewer crazies there are out on the streets, the fewer will get guns.
The problem is, many of us just don't trust the government, given the unnecessarily-draconian regs. that were inplemented in the 90s, plus the revelations of the papers I referrred to above, An additional fear is that, buoyed by the implementation of Bill C-71 and permitting the RCMP ultimate authority to categorize and ban certain firearms apparently without governmental oversight, Ottawa will begin to cast a lustful eye on the British and Australian models, all of which will be that much more to attenpt to undo should we be able to elect a government that is less hoplophobic.
Hard to believe this isn't a topic of discussion here. The Libs are attempting to bring in some pretty scary, over-reaching stuff. How do we stop this?
You need a 2nd Amendment & some upright citizens with backbone enough to enforce it.
Is there an emoticon/emoji for "When pigs fly"? Fact is, this will never happen here, partly because our terms of independence did not require us to go to war with Great Britain as yours did, and so the need to have a militia to protect the fledgling country wasn't there. (One could argue that the US doesn't need a militia now, either, but that's a whole 'nuther can of worms; let's just not go there!)
However, I think many of us would be happy to have a government that is prepared to accept that the average, law-abiding gun owner is not a potential threat to the general populace, and thus needing the continual scrutiny of Big Brother. Those of us who own handguns are deemed even more untrustworthy. (Range use only, no carrying even in the bush, silly calibre and barrel length restrictions, etc.) We are fortunate that - at least so far - our level of inter-personal violence is pretty low, so we rarely need to defend ourselves. Most of our gun-related violence is gang-related and stays within the "family" as it were. We do have mentally-unstable people getting guns, and perhaps the enhanced background checks will help- if they are fairly and justly applied. We certainly need more/better mental-health care. The fewer crazies there are out on the streets, the fewer will get guns.
The problem is, many of us just don't trust the government, given the unnecessarily-draconian regs. that were inplemented in the 90s, plus the revelations of the papers I referrred to above, An additional fear is that, buoyed by the implementation of Bill C-71 and permitting the RCMP ultimate authority to categorize and ban certain firearms apparently without governmental oversight, Ottawa will begin to cast a lustful eye on the British and Australian models, all of which will be that much more to attenpt to undo should we be able to elect a government that is less hoplophobic.
I believe I understand why it was implemented in the US, but we in Canada haven't "needed" the same legislation, as we have got along pretty well - until the mid 90's - with an understanding that we have traditionally owned firearms and not had particularly onerous legislation to deal with (IMHO, anyway)
Likewise the need to carry a gun for personal protection - not that I'm opposed to that if it is necessary. (As farmers in Alberta and Sak. know all too well, even legitimately defending your property will get you in hot water.) Many - perhaps most - American gun owners - don't understand that things are subtly different up here. They are not by any means ideal, but different. And many on the Left here try to drag American gun problems into the Canadian arena, the most recent and particularly egregious example being the Parkland massacre in Florida, a fortuitously "convenient" excuse for ramming Bill C-71 down our throats. Eveyone was horrified, so what better time to play to the hoplophobes than to introduce more (albeit largely ineffective) legislation to a grieving populace?
For good or ill, I am pretty sure that the chances of seeing anything like a 2nd Amendment or CCW here in Canada is pretty much nil/zero/zip/bupkis, at least in my lifetime (I'm 66). I, too, would like some basic legislation to protect gun owners, but I'm not holding my breath. Our Conservatives seem to agree that legitimate gun owners are not part of the problem, and would focus on dealing with the criminals and the mentally ill and leave the rest of us alone to pursue our hobby without undue interference. That seemed the case the last time, just as the Liberals will continually try to gnaw away at us, and the more they do so, the more difficult it will be for a Conservative government to undo the damage.
We'll never likely all see eye to eye on these things, any more than in the eternal argument over the effrctiveness of the 9mm vs the .45 or "the best calibre for bear defence" (groan). Hopefully we can respectfully disagree, though.
Condensed and easy to understand the Second gives us rights to defend..either external or internal aggression. It works no matter how many who or why they use their arms. It's sad that shootings in Chicago happen. If we could only teach them some basic marksmanship
