So where are we now?

There was a thread running that was an open discussion on the current political climate here regarding firearms culture, community, and the state of the industry in general. It was closed due to some individuals using this platform to throw digital feces at each other in a form that is best left away from here. Be adults, have a civil discussion, the other thread became very comprehensive and long, to which my own failure of moderating allowed it to succumb to the condition it was left in.

I will do my best to keep an eye on this one better, please feel free to have a discussion, but please refrain from the name calling and childish behavior.

October 21st --> Did not go the way we wanted, could have been better, could have been worse. We find ourselves almost at the edge holding onto a rope. We haven't fallen over yet but that doesn't mean we should let go. We need to continue to be vocal, the CCFR did an good job at this the best they could prior to the election. We are not defeated.

November 20th --> Rumors, mumbling, and general hearsay claim that this is the day that the Liberal Party will announce whats what on firearms and legislation. Nothing concrete however.


So where are we now? What is our next move?

Well I guess we kind of know where we are at. Bill C71 made sure of that. I would suppose the biggest question is what do we do next?

We need to keep fighting.

If you live in a non-conservative riding call your new MP, congratulate on their recent win (even if it wasn't your choice) and segue into asking them to not support any further legislation that does not affect crime.

Write letters, visit offices. Do not go unheard but be polite.

The Nov 20 bit read:

Blog Q: When will we hear more from LPC on firearms?
LPC A: Cabinet not announced/Govt not back to work till Nov. 20
Blog: Guns banned Nov 20!

I didn't get anything further from the article than a rehashing of LPC announcement during blackface days that read like a staffer put it together on the fly in the back of a mini-van to give Sock boy something to say.

Where are we now? Ready to push back.

Hoping for Western Canada to tie firearms to national unity and for Native groups to say 'taking our guns? not going to happen!'.

From reading the election analysis, this is what seems interesting:

Canada has seen the rise of the city states--like in Europe in the Middle Ages.
The population centres and knowledge industry and service jobs are
increasingly centred in just three places: Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver.

These are populations that are younger, more educated, ethnically diverse, and tolerant
socially of issues like ### marriage, abortion, and the environment.

You cannot win a majority government without winning a substantial number of these seats.
This is the political reality of Canada today.

The Conservative message is not resonating with voters in these areas. The CPC lost something like
37 of 50 seats in the Toronto area. Changing leaders would help, but would not solve the lack of appeal
of the party's platform to these voters.

So, this is where we are now. If the Conservatives want to win majorities they will have to do some serious
rethinking of their platform beyond smaller government and lower taxes--items that hold little interest
to voters of the the three biggest cities--according to polling done in the election by (if I remember correctly) the Globe and Mail.

This is a serious, long-term problem--the Conservative message is not selling. Can it change and still be conservative?
I don't know. But endless leadership changes alone, will not solve the systemic issues.

Once they drop the Legislation (Bill) they're committed to defending what's in it.
Will Bill C-71 they defended it with lies -- lies that were caught by newspapers -- and they didn't care.

So,
a) what can we do between now and Nov 20 to convince them not to, or to lessen what they put into it.
b) once dropped, what can we do to convince to low priority it (beyond 18 months), or the NDP & Bloc to abandon it.

I don't see much we can do about (b), other than to hope that justin screws up again. However his handlers probably stopped him from costuming for Halloween.

For (a), there are probably several things that can be done

1. we know the usual suspects. We could discredit the articles that the Doctors For Protection From Guns are using
2. hit twitter and facebook with arguments of various sorts, especially emotional ones, stats graphs whatever. [ur=https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1720573-Meme-fight!-Infographic-Meme-Repository]Doug_m's meme fight[/url] thread might be useful -- a lot of that is aimed at Bill C-71 but some of it relates to more recent concerns or gun control in general.
3. I've been looking at a study by Siegel which says that banning assault weapons, and more home ownership, have no effect on public safety in the USA. And the USA has more of both than we do. He suggests universal background checks and permitting would help, but Canada has both of those already, and we have Langmann and Mauser's studies that show that Canada's Firearms Act experience has been pointless. ""Determining the legal effects of a law involves considering how the law will operate and how it will affect Canadians. The Attorney General of Alberta states that the law [C-68] will not actually achieve its purpose. Where the legislative scheme is relevant to a criminal law purpose, he says, it will be ineffective (e.g., criminals will not register their guns); where it is effective it will not advance the fight against crime (e.g., burdening rural farmers with pointless red tape)." (Supreme Court of Canada, Firearms Act Reference 2000)
4. Folly and waste $. If Canadians are really living paycheck to paycheck, the waste of a billion dollars has to still mean something. Bank of Canada announced concerns of dropping GDP in 2021, combined with Liberal deficit plan never to end and following GDP is 'safe' but obviously the moment GDP dips the Liberals will want to spend our way out of it.
5. Strategies that will work. (Operation Ceasefire, etc) Enlist the assistance of corresponding groups (e.g. One By One).
6. Lots of emails and letters to new MPs from all parties. (not the ones that were around with Bill C-71)
7. Stress the problem is gangs. Gangs shot girls in Toronto playground. Gangs shot another 7-year-old girl on Halloween in Chicago this week.
8. Liberals promised hundreds of millions in policing, border guards, anti-gang activity groups. Keep their feet to the fire on those. Get the public to demand to know when that money has been given to front line groups, not merely promised and ignored.
9. recruit physicians
10. Counter every 70% of canadians want no guns with: (i) mob rule is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner, and (ii) facts don't care about your feelings.

Anything else?

---

“I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.”
-- Milton Friedman, 1975

If you think you are too small to make a difference, try to sleep with a mosquito in a room.
-- Dalai Lama

I am a [Canadian] resident physician, and member of two of the alleged endorsing groups (I say alleged as I haven't confirmed the endorsement myself, or seen any position statements passed through emails etc). In the time I have spent caring for victims of GSW on the trauma service I have yet to see anyone who would have benefited from this plan. The simple reductionist thinking of ban all guns therefore no guns = no gun crime will not reduce the illegal use of firearms. Every GSW I have seen has been gang related firearm use or improvised firearms (bump guns). I am quite confident, although not law enforcement, that these firearms were not legally acquired.
This also is far from a universally accepted consensus amongst physicians. Amongst my resident peers there is a fairly significant gun ownership rate, and there are several staff physicians I know that are firearms owners. I do my best to take out other physicians shooting, especially those from the big cities who are clueless to firearms. It is sad that as a profession, many have chosen to speak up on a matter that they know so little about. We pride ourselves on evidence, and knowledge, yet some can be so ignorant on this matter. At the end of the day, the best thing is to take a doc shooting. My goal this month is to take two out!
-- nic404;15656497, Feb 2 2019

Toronto Police Chief Saunders stressed that the proliferation of shootings in the city should be defined as street gang violence, not the anonymous “gun violence.” The vast majority of shootings are associated with the roughly 725 known gang members and affiliates in the city, he said.
-- May 18 2019, TheStar, https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...-another-summer-of-the-gun-in-2019/ar-AABxU42

Most of the money in those (here) doesn't address the two things that work.

“What Ms. Chow doesn’t seem to understand is that criminals and gang members don’t obey the law. Calling for such a ban (a handgun ban) isn’t leadership. It’s an empty gesture.”
-- John Tory, 2014 when running against Chow for Mayor

Mexico has a large gang problem, 33,341 homicides a year (26 per 100,000, 96% attributed to gangs), and 1 gun store.
America has a medium gang problem, 15,129 homicides a year (4.6 per 100,000, 90% attributable to gangs DOJ BJS 2008), and 140,000 gun stores.
Canada has a small gang problem that's getting larger, 660 homicides a year (1.8 per 100,000, 25% attributed to gangs), and 2,456 gun stores.

We have found it doesn't affect the communities that we directly work in. Myself, being an ex gang member, we didn't follow laws. The way those guns are coming in, are not going to change by the people who are using them legally. So that's not the road to take, unfortunately.
Guns are one element to the whole picture. We focus on the root causes. Poverty. Mental Health (weak). Education (differences between communities). Social media plays a huge role on the shootings that you see now. What makes a person want to pick up a gun and kill another person. It's an on-line ego, that's different than the reality. Social media allows these kids to interact in ways they couldn't before. An argument could steam into a kid getting murdered. In my time that wasn't an issue that we had to face. Out of 100 kids we asked, 100% of them said that social media plays a significant role in the violence we're seeing now. They've dubbed a term 'cyber banging'. If we tackle those issues, we'll see a huge decline. We're bringing forth an awareness campaign to teach our elders how to navigate the specific social media that their kids are using, and maybe they can 'police' from home.
I grew up at a time when there were lots of social programs, that kept us busy especially during the summer. I can pinpoint the time I entered a gang. Our social programs were all cut. They took down our basketball rims, they cut programming, and it started with small crimes, theft, which affect the community, but the boarder we got the angrier we got. The more we weren't getting paid attention to, the more serious the crimes got. And then gangs started to form. Our whole point was to make money to get out of the areas we lived in. But we're not seeing that any more. Now you become popular being a gang member. Or you become popular being a shooter. Everyone wants to be insta-famous. It's no longer about escaping poverty. It's this idea that this is a cool thing to do.
[taking down basketball rims] If you keep taking away from people who have less, they're going to feel boxed in. And we're seeing the results of this now.
Let's get people from these communities, who live within this climate, and hear what they have to say.
-- paraphrased from Marcell Wilson, founder One By One (Toronto); on CBC 2019/09/20 near 1:39 pm

"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA — ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State."
-- SS Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler.

The reasoning is that different approaches work on different committee members. Sometimes more than one technique is needed to get those votes or give the legislators the political cover they need to vote for the bill in question. Most of us political-types like to think we are pretty left-brained decision makers: we use the logical statistical side of our brain to make those tough voting decisions. The truth is we all make our decisions at the gut level. But we do not want to tell anybody that, so we have to have the statistics to back up what our gut told us. That is why statistics can be twisted in various ways to make them support what you already want to believe.
A good lobbyist will make certain to have both types of testimony on hand, statistical and emotional, not only for the committee members, but also for the inevitable media who attend gun-control debates. If you are testifying, and unless you are the numbers guy, speak from the heart, quote very few statistics unless you want to put everyone to sleep, and do not read your speech. The members can read just fine and probably faster than you can say it out loud. Feel free to use notes so you do not lose your message to nervousness. Outlines work well for many people. Make sure you have a beginning, a middle, and an end.
-- "From Luby's to the Legislature" pg 163 by Suzanna Gratia Hupp, former Republican member of the Texas House of Representatives

18 days left to convince them to delay further, or to back off their promises. I wouldn't be surprised if the liberals were looking for a way out of this. It's a shame that there's no will among us to try and give them that excuse.



Massive letter campaigns, maybe? This only works if they get sent in by the truckload, so they have no way of hiding it or ignoring it.

Rallies? Hard to do, as we're so spread across the country; and separate rallies at individual city halls don't have the same 'OOMPH factor' as forty thousand pissed off gun owners, straining at the barricades.

IMo, no action is better than weak action. Nothing worse or more pathetic than a failed show of strength.



Identify and single out those responsible. Without it being threatening, let these people know that they are the faces of the gun ban, and there might be a bunch of angry ex-gun owners after the fact, looking for someone to blame. I'm not sure these people understand the can of worms they are opening up? How can it be made clear to these individuals behind this movement, that things may not go the way they imagine for them, without it coming across as provocative or threatening..... or without giving them an unnecessary heads up, haha! .


It's funny, but I've already moved on in my thinking, to how to proceed once the ban has been made official. We have to remember that we aren't there quite yet, and it's still best to not make enemies where we don't have to. Though I will say, that once my guns have been taken from me, then all bets are off.

What bugs me most is when I read on a piece of Liberal document telling me what I don't use or need... How Dare you...!!!

Look at new zealand, 50 days left to comply and most of their now prohibited firearms have not been turned in. Im sure ole Bill Blair is watching closely, when hes not getting piss drunk and raging at his wife.
They know the can of worms theyre opening up, people will simply not comply.

The more I think about it the more I don't see a good outcome.
Trudeau needs a diversion from the west pushing out all the liberals they could find and guns will probably be that diversion.
Months and months of e-mails/letters/phone calls/social media and still C71 passed
Buying every stripped lower/AR/ upper/AR Parts in the country and still nothing changes.
I think we're talking to people who aren't listening.
This country ignored every single wrong thing Trudeau has done and still voted him back into power this is the current mentality.
Sorry if I sound pessimistic but I've seen the UK fall, NZ is falling and Canada's on the same path, there's an agenda at work and words aren't going to prevent it.

I think there are no convincing left to do. Once that day drops and a bill is announced, we have to fight it through the court and use their assets and resources to undermine what they want to accomplish.

The choice will be to surrender your firearms in compliance with an illegitimate governments agenda whose leader should be criminally charged with obstruction of justice at the very least (not to mention he’s a fool) or to not comply and deal with the outcome. Choice is yours, no one else’s.

I wonder if the ban will also affect First Nations communities? A major point of contention will be a two tiered application of the law if it doesnt, and we should definitely consider using that angle as well to our favour.

I know most of the major media outlets if not all in Canada are run by the governing party but there must be a way to broadcast real answers and statistics to the majority of un-informed of the truth Canadians to debunk the myths and lies that the Liberal Party have spun on their move forward ban documentation and firearms platform in general. Just the comments and information above is excellent material! But who looks for this type of information? Not the Liberals or the ill informed Doctors, who are probably Liberal party members. The CCFR does a great job but the message is only resonating with gun owners who are seeking out factual information and the truth, not the sheep who believe the Liberals will keep the cities safe and green and the handouts flowing! Would a full page add from the CCFR pointing out the lies and some actual facts end up in a major city newspaper or on a non firearms related media website, would our money be taken, would it even be accepted and ran for the general public to be informed? I don't know that it would? All the articles in all the firearms sports magazines and on firearms websites in Canada and beyond only target the people that know the Liberals are lying! If we can't get something on the cover page in a major city newspaper our message will not be heard by the people who need to hear it!

Our velvet glove needs it's iron fist.

Do you think it would help to have a collection of videos of people hunting with semi-auto ?
(or would it hurt)

rangebob said:

Do you think it would help to have a collection of videos of people hunting with semi-auto ?
(or would it hurt)

Click to expand...

I'm hunting deer next week with my stag 10. It's lighter then my bolt gun. More accurate then I need. Is confortable to carry and is basically waterproof. Semi auto for any follow up shots that might be needed it is a fantastic hunting platform. I want to believe if everyone was using them it would get better but I think it would hurt us because of the media going full out scare tactics

"Gun owners shooting deer with assault rifles"

"Gun owners using machine guns on deer are people next???"

And all that bs

follow ups are easier and more "humane".

I’m making Pancakes. Anyone want some?