 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
People in Canada have used all manner of firearms, not just ARs, to defend themselves with but aside from that their trips though the legal system have been "mixed".Originally Posted by Diamondback Six
Trying to put it delicately that here in Canada it's a harder decision to turn to a firearm or not than it is what firearm to grab if that's the way you choose to go.
Let's follow the USA example: https://project2025.afsp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Toolkit_Safe_Firearm_Storage_CLEARED_508_2-24-20.pdf
[/QUOTE]
Ownership of firearms per se may not be a right in Canada, but property ownership is a long established right in this country, and we as a country should all be deeply concerned when a government is planning to confiscate rightfully owned property from law abiding citizens based on nothing but lies and misinformation and for no demonstrable benefit, against the demonstrated will of the majority. That in itself is already tyranny. Based on the whim of the muppet PM, they're going to confiscate your rightful property. How long until they decide you don't need to own two cars, or any car at all? How long until they decide you don't need a house, a government issued apartment will do? If anyone thinks these things can't happen, you're dreaming. One look at the hysteria and fear mongering over climate change and the depths of corruption and arrogance of the lieberals ought to convince you.[/QUOTE]
Property rights keep coming up as an avenue forward and that would be nice.
But first off, we don't have them and second trying to get them, after you take the time to research the possibilities as I did, leads one to conclude that it is a fruitless battle mainly because it will probably require a constitutional amendment.
Last edited by scout_289; 11-04-2019 at 03:00 PM.
Let's follow the USA example: https://project2025.afsp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Toolkit_Safe_Firearm_Storage_CLEARED_508_2-24-20.pdf
QUOTE]
property rights? since when. property rights are not covered by our charter in a nut shell.
"an armed society, is a polite society"
You are correct, I goofed in quoting the poster and my answer is in the last two lines saying basically same as you.
Let's follow the USA example: https://project2025.afsp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Toolkit_Safe_Firearm_Storage_CLEARED_508_2-24-20.pdf
WExit
A proposed game-plan for Alberta and Saskatchewan:
https://nationalpost.com/diane-franc...box=1572893337
Mark C
I don't want to poop on anyone's party, but if JT came with a pipeline in one hand and no buyback/no new gun law/scrapping C-71 in the other, pretty much all of alberta would choose the pipeline. Of course a few "no comprise" would choose neither.
As for western alienation, what exactly can JT do about it? Think about it for a second, what would make you vote liberal in the next election? For most people in Alberta/SK, the answer is simple: nothing. God could come down from heaven to tell you to vote liberal and you would change religion. Even if JT builds a golden pipeline and give everyone in the west a BJ, he will still not win a single riding in the 2021 election. So why bother? Electorally speaking, why lose 100 votes to the greens and the dippers on the left to gain (maybe)1 on the right? That would equal a net loss of ridings.
Actually, JT's only chance at taking a few seats in the west is the emergence of an actual federal wexit party. That party would take vote from the PCC, and the PCC only, so liberal candidates would stand a chance to get through, a bit like how Notley got through when the wildrose and the Alberta conservatives divided the votes.
On the other hand, if the PCC made some modifications to its platform to get into 2019, it might lose a few votes in AB and SK, which would be inconsequential riding-wise, but win a lot more in the urban and suburbians areas int the GTA. Those changes would be:
1-Become pro-choice. And I'm not talking about some BS position like "we're not gonna talk about it" and then try every crap move in the book (like, for example, taking away funding from pro-choice organisation in thrid-world countries). I'm talking about taking an official pro-choice position in the part status;
2-Same thing about gay marriage;
3-Have an actual position on climate change. Nobody outside of the oil patch accept that global warming is a made-up story to frighten children. Denying scientific consensus is electorally destructive, at least in Canada.
Doing that wouldn't mean an easy landslide victory in 2021, but it would be the first step on a path to victory. Some urban and suburban ridings were close calls, and in those ridings, having social positions that pre-date the internet is about as destructive as spraying the candidate with voter-deterrent bodyspray. Of course, the heavily english-speaking ridings of Montreal and the pot-smoking brigade of Vancouver will keep voting liberal (or ndp/green), there's nothing to do about that. But the goal is the suburbian areas around those metropolitan areas.
Global warming is not a made up story. What made up about it is that it is mostly due to a human activity. Not the sun activity, not the volcanoes, not the methane from the ice and the bottom of the ocean.
But lets play along. 75% of manmade CO2 is generated by 100 global companies. Want to reduce their CO2? Make them build carbon capture plants. No? No taxes to collect and redistribute? how sad.
If they truly wanted to reduce Canadian CO2 emission they just need to stop the immigration and by 2050 Canada will cut emission in half via population reduction.
What left want us to do is to continue to emit carbon, feel guilty about it and pay for it. Similar to how Catholic church made you feel guilty about living your life and pay for your sins to get to heaven.
For those that were not shooting ARs back in the early 90s - they tried to prohibit them back then to.
The DCRA came out and said they had thousands of target shooters using them right in Ottawa. An exaggeration - it was only a small group of us out there. But nobody checked. They bumped it down to restricted.
If the DCRA can do this again and this time actually prove there are thousands - that may help. Maybe the Libs can just remove the collector reason for owning one and only allow target shooting. Which is 99% of us anyways.
However the DCRA and their sub orgs like the ORA have done a very poor job of growing the sport the last few years. They changed their guest policy - for civilians you have to be a member to compete. It pretty much shut down things overnight in Ottawa since many were from out of town and couldn’t justify joining a club they couldn’t use. Without AR target shooters we may eventually lose our ability to justify owning them. I really hope I am wrong, but i am quite worried we are in a pickle now.
UNPROFOR 94/95, SFOR 2001
Member of the CCFR and CPC.
If you are not donating $20/month to the CPC then you are not serious about owning and keeping your guns.
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...-Home-Invasion
Posting Permissions
