Prohibited ar15

[aakoksal]

It was 30Sep38 when PM Neville Chamberlain came home to England after negotiating with the Germans.

He gave away 'only a small part of Europe'. WW2 happened anyway.

Appeasing thugs does not work.

Standing up to them does.

Jason is correct.

Jason maybe correct in his argument, doesn't make him right to call other's ideas stupid though...

I have more than a handful of ARs, handguns etc and worried about this ban talk for sure, and I also see there is a problem with how society is reacting to firearm ownership. I don't think to push full steam forward and doing nothing else is going to fix that, just like it never fixed it so far... We should be talking about things calming rest of the society that doesn't understand firearm ownership, not spreading the gap furhter...

[Steve_B]

Protesters at the Ontario Legislature are being led away in handcuffs to become folk heros.

Now picture the reaction of Joe Public if a gunnie is collared and ushered out of a group when you add the extra layer of the audience knowing that this very militant person has access to deadly force. Yup, "take his guns away before he hurts someone".

Well I guess you’re right. Instead we can all convince each other in this virtual circle-jerk that we’re hard done by.
I’m sure all the other initiatives and ideas will get just as much attention as our Stop C71 petition.
Enjoy the crickets.
Maybe you can house them in your empty gun vaults.

[Mr Wolverine]

Milleageman please send me an e-mail John@wolverinesupplies.com

[DaveMachine]

As far as communication and outreach is concerned, reaching out to the CCFR might not be a bad idea as they have experience in that area. No sense if duplicating efforts.

[VinnyQC]

Theres is 2 different problems here. One is that too many people have started to take the frt table as law, which it isn't. The mere fact that it isn't public disqualify it as being part of any law, bylaws, or anything more official than an apple pie recipe. Fighting anything in or about the FRT can be done in courts, which "only" takes money, and in most cases these are fight that are fought on a battleground ruled by reason and the rule of law.

The problem is the political reaction to everything and anything. Even a win in a court of law can easily be of very short term, since politicians can change the law at almost any time. The best example is the 25 rounds 10-22 magazine: the rcmp has declared them illegal, and they obviously are not, given the current law. If any case ever makes it in front of a judge, the magazines will be deemed legal, obviously. All it takes is money in this case. But it's what happens next that might very well suck: politicians changing the law to make butler creek magazines illegal, and maybe a bunch of other ones at the same time. A win in a court of justice could quickly turn out into a political loss if the parliament decides, for example, to restrict the capacity of every rimfire magazine to 10 rounds, regardless of anything, just to "plug a loophole".

So if we go back to that particular AR15 that's prohibited, which kinda sucks, the problem isn't really that this one is prohibited, the problem is twofold:
1-A law that was meant to ban full automatic firearm is used to ban a semi-automatic firearm;
2-Should the court decide to reverse that particular ban on the ground that the XM177E2 is a semi-automatic and isn't "easily converted to full automatic", parliament could act in a reactionnary manner and simply prohib every AR15 in the country by name.

Although the first problem could be solved in a court of law, the second one is very political. The first problem can be solved by a single person in a courtroom, no matter if the rest of the country disagrees. The second one, not so much.

So although we can collectively fight stupidity in courtrooms and win every single time, at some point a political problem will arise and the whole firearm act will have to be re-written from scratch. A lot of effort should be made by gun owners and businesses to make sure than when this time comes, the right people are sitting in ottawa, because otherwise we could find ourselves with nothing but airsoft and paintballs.

[My450]

I'm newer to the whole shooting sports thing.

Being a data based guy I did a little fact checking ( a full 15 minutes on my coffee break for all the politico spouting rhetoric to the contrary) and came up with the following:

7,100,000 non-restricted firearms in the last year of registration (2011) growing at anywhere from 5-9.5% per voting cycle.
Near 800,000 restricted and growing more rapidly in the same time frame
This was a 1 in 4 households legally owning firearms

2017 data shows 34.7/100 people owning firearms with enhanced licensing and more difficult to purchase conditions which by my rather simple math seems to show almost 5,000,000 (to well over 13,000,000 total) more firearms in circulation (based on sales figures)

"Although violent crime is generally decreasing, the rate of firearm-related violent crime is decreasing at a faster pace than violent crime that does not involve firearms. There were about 1,800 fewer victims of firearm-related violent crime in 2012 than there were in 2009, resulting in a 27% decrease in the rate of firearm-related violent crime (Chart 1).2 Since 2009, the rate of violent offences involving other weapons has decreased 9%, while the rate of offences involving the use of physical force, threat, or no weapon has decreased 14%." From Statscan itself. So ownership is rising rapidly yet firearms violence is decreasing at a faster rate

What's my point?

With legally and responsibly owned firearms both on the rise and a near 35% of population I don't get why we as group are not voting as a block to help keep Ottawa closer to the facts and chasing far more dangerous and deadly segments of the population

[Rebel Rouser]

The thing I don't understand with the Troy rifles is that the Colt Reissue Rifle is similar, but the FRT descriptions are total different.

[Bartok5]

The thing I don't understand with the Troy rifles is that the Colt Reissue Rifle is similar, but the FRT descriptions are total different.

It might help the rest of us without FRT access to comprehend your post if you were to cut and paste the text from the relevant Entries. Just saying....

[jiffx2781]

Forgive me if this has been mentioned already, I haven't time to read the whole thread yet.

The pattern is plain to see, slowly, step by step we are moving towards the prohibition of the AR15 family of firearms. This should be of concern to every owner of an AR15 firearm and every dealer who markets them.

What is the next step?

If you think the "concern" is limited to the AR-15 wait and see what's going to happen when they start applying the same abuse of power to every other firearm platform that uses an AR-15 trigger group.

[bigplinker]

Theres is 2 different problems here. One is that too many people have started to take the frt table as law, which it isn't. The mere fact that it isn't public disqualify it as being part of any law, bylaws, or anything more official than an apple pie recipe. Fighting anything in or about the FRT can be done in courts, which "only" takes money, and in most cases these are fight that are fought on a battleground ruled by reason and the rule of law.

Just an idea as far as setting up a go fund me, but maybe we could set one up for when the first time someone gets lynched by the law over the seemingly random changes to frts the rcmp keep coming up with, so that we can get the dream legal team behind the popo's first scape goat? Just an idea though, and I'm hoping it's not me