They cannot denounce a contract they willingly- negotiated and signed with the Liberals to manage their gun grab program, while their President in videos all over the net, state they done it.
A Message from Matt Hipwell
- Thread starter Yuri_Wolverine
- Start date
- Status
They cannot denounce a contract they willingly- negotiated and signed with the Liberals to manage their gun grab program, while their President in videos all over the net, state they done it.
They are not managing the gun grab program. They signed a contract to organize the confiscation and reimbursement of newly prohibited firearms from retailers only. Many of these firearms were either restricted or imported before becoming prohibited. In other words, there was already paper on them.
There has been a lot of handwringing and catastrophizing with this news, but it really doesn’t change much. Either we win at least some of the court battles AND elect a Conservative government before C21 is passed with an evergreen definition of ‘assault style weapons’ or firearms rights in Canada take a big hit. If C21 with amendments becomes law, it will be much harder for a future Conservative government to undo.
We need to keep the pressure on the Liberals, NDP and Bloc not turn on other members of the firearms community.
Forest1488
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of Toronto
I might have missed something or be just plain ignorant, but is there a reason why retailers can't return or sell their inventory to vendors outside of Canada? They would be hit with restocking fees and/or other losses but would be an alternative to the unfortunate situation that is unfolding.
So the distributors made a deal to get reimbursed for their current inventory of newly prohibited firearms? That’s it? Or did they sell everyone down the river by releasing their sales records? If they only agreed to get reimbursed for their stock what is to be so upset about? I’m trying to figure out the upset, I may be missing some brain cells lol so help me understand please!
- Location
- ON, North of GTA
All this time Marco spouting they were working with Industry Stakeholders... I thought bull####, what business would help them with their gun grab.
I guess now we know.
Watching MM's CSAAA announcement literally turned my stomach.
I guess now we know.
Watching MM's CSAAA announcement literally turned my stomach.
Yep, that’s it. It did give the Liberals some political cover to say they were making progress on the gun ‘buyback’ which has otherwise gone nowhere. They did not provide customer info or agree to help with the ‘buyback’ of firearms in general.
This is an illegitimate rogue WEF cabal masquerading as a government.
Nothing they do is for the benefit of society.
They are evil and you never deal with the devil.
NEVER
They are the enemy of the people and must be removed by any and all means.
Singh and the Turd have sold out the country just like the CSAAA have sold out their ethics for 30 pieces of silver.
You fight................you never give up or cooperate with those that want to destroy you.
My freedom and my property is not for sale at any price and I will defend that to the death.
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
A former government enforcement agent. Associated with Wolverine Supplies.
Yuri_Wolverine
New member
I think we've probably reached maximum heated opinion saturation for this thread. I'm locking it down.
Yuri_Wolverine
New member
A response to some of various arguments made on this thread and others:
#1) “The CSAAA is helping the Liberals take MY guns away!”
The CSAAA did not negotiate to help confiscate guns from of individuals, they negotiated on behalf of businesses so that if the buyback program did go ahead they would receive a proper market value, rather than whatever the liberals dream up.
#2) “Why don’t they just send them back to the USA?”
A majority of firearms once exported out of the USA cannot be returned to be resold. This is due to US export regulations.
#3) “They shouldn’t have brought so many guns in just to be stuck with them.”
I can assure you that we did not bring in more guns than there was demand for. In fact our backorder lists indicate quite the opposite, we couldn’t bring enough in fast enough to keep them on the shelf most of the time!
#4) “They are just greedy and don’t care about the rest of us!”
That is simply an untrue statement (and an ad hominem assumption of motive). Our goal is to get as many guns into as many law abiding Canadians hands as possible. To do this to the best of our ability the business must be profitable. Yes there is money being made as this is a business. That money is being used to buy more inventory (more guns for the Canadian public), keep people gainfully employed and able to support their families, keep the lights on, and lobby for firearms rights.
#5) “You should never surrender your guns or cooperate in any way”
With this statement I can empathize. Every man or woman must have a line in the sand that they draw and say “enough is enough”. A proverbial Alamo if you will. Everyone’s life is different, and they have different priorities and responsibilities pulling them in different directions. The line in the sand for a single man living on his own might be different than the man who has a wife and kids he needs to care for, even if they 100% share all the same values. Drawing a line in the sand over your own ability to use and keep your own personal individual pieces property, is something I do respect. However are you willing to extend that line in the sand to include a business? There are implications to what I’m saying here that I’m going to avoid stating plainly.
So the choices becomes simple, do you:
A) Do everything you can to continue the business cycle as outlined above and get as many guns into Canadian hands as possible, and recoup costs incurred from frozen inventory as best you can.
B) Sit on the dead inventory out of principle and do your best to continue doing business despite the losses (if your business is able get past the financial detriment, not all can).
In my opinion I wouldn’t think any less of a business owner for take either of these options. Only they have the complete picture and the answers to all the variables with which to make an informed decision. I don’t think our first reaction should be to grab pitch forks and torches.
#1) “The CSAAA is helping the Liberals take MY guns away!”
The CSAAA did not negotiate to help confiscate guns from of individuals, they negotiated on behalf of businesses so that if the buyback program did go ahead they would receive a proper market value, rather than whatever the liberals dream up.
#2) “Why don’t they just send them back to the USA?”
A majority of firearms once exported out of the USA cannot be returned to be resold. This is due to US export regulations.
#3) “They shouldn’t have brought so many guns in just to be stuck with them.”
I can assure you that we did not bring in more guns than there was demand for. In fact our backorder lists indicate quite the opposite, we couldn’t bring enough in fast enough to keep them on the shelf most of the time!
#4) “They are just greedy and don’t care about the rest of us!”
That is simply an untrue statement (and an ad hominem assumption of motive). Our goal is to get as many guns into as many law abiding Canadians hands as possible. To do this to the best of our ability the business must be profitable. Yes there is money being made as this is a business. That money is being used to buy more inventory (more guns for the Canadian public), keep people gainfully employed and able to support their families, keep the lights on, and lobby for firearms rights.
#5) “You should never surrender your guns or cooperate in any way”
With this statement I can empathize. Every man or woman must have a line in the sand that they draw and say “enough is enough”. A proverbial Alamo if you will. Everyone’s life is different, and they have different priorities and responsibilities pulling them in different directions. The line in the sand for a single man living on his own might be different than the man who has a wife and kids he needs to care for, even if they 100% share all the same values. Drawing a line in the sand over your own ability to use and keep your own personal individual pieces property, is something I do respect. However are you willing to extend that line in the sand to include a business? There are implications to what I’m saying here that I’m going to avoid stating plainly.
So the choices becomes simple, do you:
A) Do everything you can to continue the business cycle as outlined above and get as many guns into Canadian hands as possible, and recoup costs incurred from frozen inventory as best you can.
B) Sit on the dead inventory out of principle and do your best to continue doing business despite the losses (if your business is able get past the financial detriment, not all can).
In my opinion I wouldn’t think any less of a business owner for take either of these options. Only they have the complete picture and the answers to all the variables with which to make an informed decision. I don’t think our first reaction should be to grab pitch forks and torches.
- Status
