So where are we now?

[scout_289]

Just the fact that Wolverine is asking for constructive input sets them (CSAAA) head and shoulders above the other orgs; each of which gives the appearance of being "the group to save us" if we just follow their lead to the letter and oh, send lots of money ..........

[Vishnu]

Just the fact that Wolverine is asking for constructive input sets them (CSAAA) head and shoulders above the other orgs; each of which gives the appearance of being "the group to save us" if we just follow their lead to the letter and oh, send lots of money ..........

I guess we’ll all know where everybody stands on December 6th.

[scout_289]

I guess we’ll all know where everybody stands on December 6th.

All that may do is reaffirm, one more time, the perceptions that people have of them already. And those perceptions should have been pretty much already nailed down in the runup to C-71 and their performance during the heat of election ..........

In other words, how many times do we put our faith in them and in the old ways before we realize that they are yesterday's people - with the exception of the CSAAA (https://www.csaaa.org)?

[captainamazing]

All I'm saying is he left the windows of the cruiser wide open and walked the 30 yards into the gas station to pay. That was wrong.

As far as not being able to defend my family and home. Come try and harm them and see what happens. Your odds are absolute zero, you're not walking away.

Easy there Keyboard Commando. My very simple point is that the law is not designed to let citizens protect themselves or their property with guns; only politicians and rich people get that luxury.
As for the cop, yup he should have rolled his windows up and have his long gun taken away until he learns proper safety techniques, if in fact the windows were down.

[scout_289]

Wolverine originally asked about the political culture. Well in the case of the CPC they are, or better be, casting around for new ideas and with respect to guns it would be a good time to present something new and different to them.

Like the declaration states, there are many good reasons for responsible people to have guns and in recognition of those "rights" we are prepared to act in a concrete manner to enhance public safety - and not by giving up our guns.

All we would have to do to make that happen would be for those among us who are well connected in the party to use this teachable moment to build an entirely new approach into the firearms debate that would be unassailable by the progressives.

[rangebob]

As one poster has / had as their sig line (paraphrased) "if you want to see what is successful, use the American example".

To demonstrate that people can actually go to the moon and back, you use the American experience.
To demonstrate that public safety is not adversely affected by responsible people carrying to protect life, you use the American experience.
-- CLW.45

[rangebob]

Another topic for letters/comments.


It's taking the RCMP longer than anticipated to digitize Canada's national database of criminal records
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...nal-database-o

[Redmaple]

I think your assessment is more or less correct. Canada has moved to the left somewhat on social issues, and the environment. Unfortunately, the CPC is out of step and will have to accept the reality that it needs to rebrand itself if it is to reclaim government.

The issue for the conservatives has always been trying to retain support of the more right learning elements. It is not going to be an easy challenge, especially in time for the next election. I suspect that if Trudeau can manage to get a pipeline built, he may appease enough western voters to get elected with a majority, barring more colossal missteps.

Trudeau is the big concern. The anti-gun lobby has found a friend with Trudeau. If he was not at the head of the Liberal Party, our problems would be greatly reduced. Unfortunately, he is here for the next number of years. And I doubt he will listen to reason. He simply hates gun owners, notably those who favour "assault rifles." He knows he will never get our vote, and is prepared to write us off in favour of securing votes in urban areas.

Where does this leave the pro-firearms agenda? I think that preserving the current rights and privileges of firearms owners will mean a massive education campaign in the major cities. People need to understand that indigenous peoples with just 5% of the population account for a third of gun violence ad that gangs account for the bulk of the rest. Taking guns from mainstream population will solve nothing. Money from buyback programs is best spent handling social issues facing indigenous people and getting tough on crime.

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 gay 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.

[scout_289]

I think your assessment is more or less correct. Canada has moved to the left somewhat on social issues, and the environment. Unfortunately, the CPC is out of step and will have to accept the reality that it needs to rebrand itself if it is to reclaim government.

The issue for the conservatives has always been trying to retain support of the more right learning elements. It is not going to be an easy challenge, especially in time for the next election. I suspect that if Trudeau can manage to get a pipeline built, he may appease enough western voters to get elected with a majority, barring more colossal missteps.

Trudeau is the big concern. The anti-gun lobby has found a friend with Trudeau. If he was not at the head of the Liberal Party, our problems would be greatly reduced. Unfortunately, he is here for the next number of years. And I doubt he will listen to reason. He simply hates gun owners, notably those who favour "assault rifles." He knows he will never get our vote, and is prepared to write us off in favour of securing votes in urban areas.

Where does this leave the pro-firearms agenda? I think that preserving the current rights and privileges of firearms owners will mean a massive education campaign in the major cities. People need to understand that indigenous peoples with just 5% of the population account for a third of gun violence ad that gangs account for the bulk of the rest. Taking guns from mainstream population will solve nothing. Money from buyback programs is best spent handling social issues facing indigenous people and getting tough on crime.

I respectfully suggest that the best way to show "them" that money can be better spent is by rolling up our sleeves and making it happen. Now there's an example to follow.

[captainamazing]

Wolverine originally asked about the political culture. Well in the case of the CPC they are, or better be, casting around for new ideas and with respect to guns it would be a good time to present something new and different to them.

Like the declaration states, there are many good reasons for responsible people to have guns and in recognition of those "rights" we are prepared to act in a concrete manner to enhance public safety - and not by giving up our guns.

All we would have to do to make that happen would be for those among us who are well connected in the party to use this teachable moment to build an entirely new approach into the firearms debate that would be unassailable by the progressives.

I think we are in a stronger position then most of us think. Considering the tenuous grip that the Liberals have on the government and how radially divided the country is presently; any strongarm tactics pushed by the liberals regarding gun seizures will likely blow up in their faces.
Massive noncompliance mixed with a divided country will plunge Canada into legal choas.

The turd has two choices: limpwrist his banning of "scarry looking guns" thus appeasing Lib croud or attenpt an ernest mass seizure of firearms across a polarized country that dont give a damn about his policies.