No one is more blind than he who will not see
Did you notice how AR is about to be prohibited?
- Thread starter guess_kto
- Start date
No one is more blind than he who will not see
The general "Grandfather" clause in the bill sure makes it look like they're setting themselves up for more bans in the future- could be ARs, Tavors, SKS- who knows. I've already spent a small fortune this year on gear and clothing in preparation for hiking/camping season. I figured that I was all done spending my money, but nope- just picked up a Tavor X95 as "Grandfather Insurance". Might have to get a couple of AR lowers too...
The Libs are obviously setting the pieces in motion to let the RCMP ban whatever they want without repercussions (legal as well as political).
I wish people who think "this isn't so bad" would open there eyes and see that!
What's the point of having grandfathered status if all you have is a safe queen!?
And no, there's nothing stopping the CFO from not giving you an ATT to the range. It's all at the whim of government
I wish people who think "this isn't so bad" would open there eyes and see that!
What's the point of having grandfathered status if all you have is a safe queen!?
And no, there's nothing stopping the CFO from not giving you an ATT to the range. It's all at the whim of government
My money would be on Bullpups and the AR. It not hard to see.
That is the foundation laid down when Bill C-68, Firearm Act of 1995 became law. The eventual elimination of civilian firearm ownership in Canada. "Gun control" is incremental. It can be halted, it can be reversed. All it takes is a government with the will to do the right thing. That government will NOT be socialist. Meaning any lefty government.
So, why would they do it? It's not done for fun. They brainstormed it for month. What's the purpose?
a) do not assume they are idiots. They had a legal department working on it for months.
b) CZ may be the easy part, but Swiss is not. If you claim Swiss is a variant, it does force the owner to go the court. At the end, nothing to lose. The crown has to prove it a variant.
c) Another hint, did you notice that original version did not have CZ or Swiss, but they added them later. The original intent was only 12(9).
12.8 allows an owner with a certificate on day X, a license to own firearms prescribed as prohibited that have a registration certificate.
12.9 is not superfluous because it allows application for a registration certificate for the non restricted CZ firearms that do not have one which would not be included under subsection 8.
Likewise with the Swiss arms under subsection 10.
Edit: I also don't think they are alluding to any new class, when they say "prohibited firearm of a prescribed class". I think it just means that the firearm does not necessarily fall under the prohibited class defined in the firearms act.
ie. non restricted prescribed as prohibited or restricted prescribed as prohibited by OIC.
The wording also prevents grandfather licenses for owners of prohibited firearms that are not prescribed as prohibited but prohibited by their nature as defined in the firearms act even if they have a registration certificate.
Eg. Rcmp revoke restricted status of firearm x for being a variant of ak47
Last edited:
So, why would they do it? It's not done for fun. They brainstormed it for month. What's the purpose?
Well, by putting the regulatory changes into a bill, I guess you couldn't make changes to the new regulations without an act of parliament...?
This has been a living document for some time now, I know someone who had seen it on Parliament Hill and at Christmas he had mentioned to me it specifically named AR-15's in the document. We had chatted about having a look at the document, but due to obvious reasons I never got a look.
After reading the Bill I am worried about the 12(9), and agree that it certainly looks like a big ominous pit to throw other models into. Why specifically set classes for the 858 and the Swiss Arms, yet leave the 12(9) open and ambiguous?
Something is not as it seems, calling my MP today, how about you?
After reading the Bill I am worried about the 12(9), and agree that it certainly looks like a big ominous pit to throw other models into. Why specifically set classes for the 858 and the Swiss Arms, yet leave the 12(9) open and ambiguous?
Something is not as it seems, calling my MP today, how about you?
ComradeVlad
Regular
- Location
- To the West
Drama queens will be drama queens... I'm willing to bet my AR that nothing happens. Best thing we can do is relax... Write letters, make phone calls and vote PC.
--------------------------
The RCMP with MORE Power? ---But they just Love gun owners don't they ? As proven in "The Gun Grab at High River " This is the start of a Police state regarding firearms With politicians having to take NO future heat from the electorate .
Think again if any "12- (crap )"class of firearm is something great? Just ask any 12(X) owner for their opinion ( with all the range fun they've been enjoying over the years).
Sure there's no real evidence that they are going to reclassify anything in the new Bill, but if passed -- It's just that they CAN Anytime they want!!
-------------------------- YES , Buy one or some--I would Safety(somewhat) in Numbers at least . Will they become safe queens ? With the current Govt , have a good supply of Gun socks at the ready!
Last edited:
