 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
I'm at a bit of a crossroads on this topic. I like the conservative stance on firearms however the fact that Fantino still has a job after screwing with veterans pensions really upsets me. I'm not sure that I would vote liberal anyway, but this issue really bugs me.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
"Lions need not concern themselves with the opinions of lambs"
Member of CCFR.
This really just vote buying in gun-disliking Quebec. As always it will come down to East vs. West with the Quebec vote playing a major role. As proven by the failed gun control initiative costing nearly 2 billion they are never concerned with cost. It would be nice to see concentration on real issues, but that doesn't garner enough votes. Polarize the country and hope your side is on the upside.
What they'll more than likely do is start with everything currently defined in the prohibited class. The media will have an easy time selling that to the ignorant masses since the word "prohibited" already sounds like something ~nobody~ should have. We'll see deadlines and probably a few high profile raids in the news but in the end, there will be full compliance. The government doesn't offer a buy back to criminals for their illegal firearms and I don't see that changing.
The next thing they'll do (and we're talking worst case scenario here) is to just sunset the whole restricted class all together. Revoke all current ATT's and stop issuing the endorsement on the PAL. In a few years, no one can legally own anything. They know who owns what and where they live thanks to registration. See above.
With the LGR gone, the last thing I could see them going after would be magazine capacity. Just reclassify ALL removable magazines as prohibited devices and limit internal or tube mags to 2+1. I could also see an "unrelated" change to the explosives legislation which further limits (read: absolutely castrates) the total number of rounds allowed to be stored on private property.
The final goal of the anti-gun lobby and the political parties who pander to them is the complete and total end of civilian firearm ownership. It has NOTHING to do with public safety or taking weapons out of the hands of violent criminals. It's not about saving children or preventing suicides either. Maybe they won't get what they want all at once but they're going to keep pushing and chipping away until they do.
Support the NFA and CSSA!
MONTREAL – Liberal delegates refused to touch the issue of gun control at their policy convention Friday, voting down a measure to reduce the number of firearms on Canadian streets.
The rejection highlights a desire by supporters to break away from a controversial issue that has divided Liberals in the past in favor of the unity politics leader Justin Trudeau advanced during his opening speech here Thursday.
A passionate majority of delegates voted down a Young Liberals resolution seeking to create a policy aimed at “reducing the number of firearms in Canada through initiatives inspired by the Australian model.”
The resolution was one of four that earned debate.
Wayne Easter, a Liberal MP from Prince Edward Island, was first to stand in against the measure.
“This resolution is not well thought out,” he said to a crowd of about 100. “We need the support of rural Canada.”
“It will open the Liberal Party up for attack.”
Plus, he asked rhetorically, what is the Australian model?
Easter’s comments resonate with Liberal gun owners, many in rural Canada, who don’t believe the party should meddle in the topic. Trudeau himself seems to be unsure of his position on guns, telling reporters in 2012 that he didn’t support the shelved long gun registry – but only because it was a failed policy.
Roger Buxton, a farmer from Wetaskiwin, Alberta, who spoke loudly against reduction of guns, said on the sidelines of the meeting that the policy would be “impossible to campaign on in Alberta.”
Pulling out his firearm training license, he told a reporter he supported the safe use of guns – not their gradual prohibition from society. And, he said, he wasn’t the only one.
People “need to know that The Liberal Party is no longer in favor of getting rid of guns,” he said.
Some Liberals, however, debated in favor of the resolution. One of the people was a criminal defense attorney who argued the resolution was aimed at urban gangs.
Another was Liberal Health Critic Hedy Fry, who said she supported the move because guns kill people.
She also urged the room not to read too broadly into the resolution, saying that its goal was to facilitate registration.
“It’s not whether people have a right to hunt, it’s just registration,” Fry said. “Use guns in an appropriate manner.”
Whether or not the delegates supported the safe use of guns or not at all, however, seemed to be less of an issue than what the inflammatory debate could mean for the party at a critical juncture.
“I want a gun registry, but not at any cost,” said delegate Patricia Pepper from Ottawa’s Nepean-Carleton riding.
“It would open up a can of worms.”
http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/02/21/l...ng-gun-debate/
Member: CSSA
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
They're Liberals...it's not like they'll actually do anything they say they will anyway...
There are things I like about the Liberal Party but in whole they are bad very very bad; and they take rights away from people more and more every time they are put in office... Trust me we a little girl like mine I have learned there are things I have to say no to no matter how cute the kid is... I could look a guy like him in the face and tell him to go f### himself and then take the fist that he hits me with.Originally Posted by trebor2880
Certified Paper Shredder Guns are just as much apart of me as duck tape or WD40.
I am thinking that I would rather risk voting for Hudaks "right to work" legislation than Trudeaus right to smoke and steal your guns plan.
Both are retards and I truly wish I have the opportunity to tell them that to there faces.
lol corrected my retarded spelling
If you took the time to research what the Australians actual did you would know that the buyback was voluntary.
As I said, only 25% of gun owners took the buy-back offer. Anything else you read here is fear-mongering.
CSSA/CCFR Member • An unjust law, is no law at all. ― Martin Luther (1483-1546)
There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest. ― Elie Wiesel
Week i don't know about you but any abolition would enrage me
Posting Permissions
