Is the Dream Dead?

Is the Dream Dead?

  • Yes. Done as in dinner.

    Votes: 180 35.1%

  • Maybe. Only time will tell...

    Votes: 205 40.0%

  • No! Alive and kicking!

    Votes: 128 25.0%
  • Total voters
    513
I think there are two realistic changes that are achievable:
• Decriminalization for expired PALs
• Integrated ATT (your RPAL becomes your ATT)

I don't see licenses expanded to 10 years as being in the cards, or decriminalization for storage and transport infractions (although that would obviously be preferable).
 
If anyone thought that there was going to be a time in Canadian history when we got what we wanted, declared victory and the debate was over...well, that dream was a pipe dream to beign with.

As we have done in the past...and will have to do in the future, we have to stay the course, remain politically relevent, fund the orgs and pay the politicians and keep pushing for rational, incremental change.
 
elicitone said:
This about sums up my feelings as well..

Licence extension seems like a no brainer. The prosecution of people charged for poss'ng with an expired licence is expensive and pointless. Its money that politicians can waste on their other pet projects.

And the ATT will be the step after that I think. I have now heard from more than one person closely affiliated with the CFO's office that there is a shake up on the way there. No one is ready to talk about what exactly it is, as none know for sure. But I have been told that there have been a lot of suits in and asking lots of questions and taking away lots of files Along with an audit team going over each persons duties... Make what you will out of that. To me, I forsee a budget cut in the CFO's future. And ATT's are time consuming and pointless so are an easy way to cut the budget.. just guessing though..
Click to expand...

Well, lets all hope you are on the money with your guess!
 
effinggoof said:
If anyone thought that there was going to be a time in Canadian history when we got what we wanted, declared victory and the debate was over...well, that dream was a pipe dream to beign with.

As we have done in the past...and will have to do in the future, we have to stay the course, remain politically relevent, fund the orgs and pay the politicians and keep pushing for rational, incremental change.
Click to expand...

They just announced that VP Joe Biden will be heading up an inter-agency force tasked with implementing their recommendations by no later than January. And that they support the AWB-renewal bill that Senator Feinstein is pushing ahead with. So, in summary: renewed AWB, restrictions on magazine capacity and increased background checks (probably eliminating the gun show or state-to-state loops).

In addition, several insiders have indicated an expanded NFA tax stamp on all tactical semi-automatic firearms will probably become a reality, essentially killing the idea of owning more than one (some estimates are placing this as high as $2,000 per firearm). Yikes...!
 
blaxsun said:
I think there are two realistic changes that are achievable:
• Decriminalization for expired PALs
• Integrated ATT (your RPAL becomes your ATT)

I don't see licenses expanded to 10 years as being in the cards, or decriminalization for storage and transport infractions (although that would obviously be preferable).
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this. Licences that don't expire for twice as long, means half the income is collected from the licencing. It's not going to happen for that reason alone.
 
I really dont think the gov will do anything now after recent events but maybe after this cools down.
But if the awb happens in the u.s im pretty certain it will happen here.
This makes me wanna get my pre order t97 or get a tar21 now so I have something if the ban happens.
 
Tikka223 said:
Here are my 2 cents.

1) The dream never existed in any realistic way.
2) We are extremely lucky no one has thought of revisiting the Criminal Code and updating it. If someone does, and realizes the amount of little loop holes in it (ex Tavors and XCRs and LAR15 mags, etc.) more things will be thrown onto the restricted list. It is very easy to read between the lines and see where they were trying to go with the prohib and restricted lists, I wouldn't be surprised if someone were to try to add anything with a flash suppressor to the restricted list (like in California).
3) ATTs are the only thing making the idea of restricted weapons possible. The vast majority of the public has no idea that you can carry a cased Glock or 1911 on the bus or train or subway on the way to your local gun range if you have an ATT. As for storage, I hope we can all agree that our storage laws make perfect sense and I'm willing to bet money that they have saved lives.
4) Mag capacity. That bank robbery in LA way back when is the perfect reason why the public would never agree with large capacity mags. It sucks having to re-load at the range ever 5-10 rounds but but again, it's a small concession for actually being able to own and use weapons that were designed for more.
5) The reality is that us gun nutz are a relatively small community, I strongly suspect that the overwhelming majority of Canadians has absolutely no appetite for laxer gun laws. Why? Because on paper they appear to be working. Look at all the developed countries in the world that have strong (restrictive) gun laws, the rates of gun-related homicides are minuscule per-capita when compared to that one big developed country with almost no rules: the USA.
6) Mass shootings are THE trump card for Antis. What politician is going to be willing to stand up to push a de-restriction agenda when the first question they will be asked is "what about Ecole Polytechnique? What about Dawson?" Etc. again, we are not the majority who realize that anyone on a homicidal mission can make do with out without our laws.
7) This is more food for thought: in Halifax, the large majority of firearms used in gang related crime have been stolen from lawful owners. If 1 out of every 10 houses has firearms there would be a decent chance of stumbling across one as a criminal doing B&Es. Now if there were firearms in 1 out of every 1000 houses (Britain comes to mind), then B&Es may be a harder way to get guns. Would criminals just start looking to smuggle from the South? Probably, but like I said, food for thought.
8) Who here an come up with a sound argument (that will appeal to more than say 60% of Canadians) that civilians should be able to own weapons that at one time or another have been issued to militaries for the purpose of going to war and killing people? Look at the Middle East and Africa and even parts of South America. When everyone has access to an assault rifle and people suddenly become upset with the government you end up with very serious problems. I would argue that one of the reasons Egypt hasn't descended into civil war, like Lybia and Syria have, is because they were forced to use civil disobedience rather than the AK to push for change.
9) I am skeptical that anything will change in the USA. I think they firearms problem has hit critical mass. There are just too many mags and firearms out there for anyone to control. No to mention, as we speak, every single Amermican that feels the need to armed to the teeth is going out to buy a gun before it's too late. Every time there is a shooting their gun sales surge.

My thoughts for the day.

And for the record, I am not an Anti but I am pro-control simply because it forces a certain amount of responsibility and accountability onto gun-owners. I have always likened it to owning and driving a car. You want the priveledge? Get a license.

Oh, and I also own an XCR, 10 round mags, an SR-22 and other scary toys that I have great fun using.
Click to expand...

I always drive to the range but can you axctually take the bus to the range with restricted firearms with an att and proper storage?
 
adrian118 said:
I always drive to the range but can you axctually take the bus to the range with restricted firearms with an att and proper storage?
Click to expand...

Good question. It says most direct route, but doesn't say you need to own a car. I'll assume it is ok (but I could be wrong) as long as it is locked and not visible to passengers around you. I'd definitely like to know the answer to this.
 
Yup, we are done. It would be political suicide to lax laws. I'm buying as many NR black rifles I can afford before the ban hammer comes down. Truth hurts, I'm sorry:(
 
It's pretty much a guess on my behalf but I've never heard of any regulation specifying the mode of travel. It's certainly not written in the criminal code. I just can't see how they could "discriminate" against people that don't own cars.
 
TV-PressPass said:
I know a lot of people will disagree with you on the licensing issue, but I always felt fine with taking a course.

In fact, when the conversation comes up with non-shooters I put it this way:

I want more controls and more options:

I want to be able to own 12.X class firearms. And I would be happy to pay a fee and take a course and go through a background check to make that happen.

Same thing with prohibited devices. Let me go through an application process for suppressors and high caps. I'm okay with that.

I've been having more gun control talks with non-shooters lately, and the point I try to impress on them is that:

* In America, they believe their guns are for shooting other people. They list defence as a legitimate reason to own a firearm.

* In Canada, we don't. Thats the end of it. If you go to the government when you apply for your license and say "I need this gun because I might have to shoot someone who wants to harm me" you won't get your license.

And all the non-shooters I've told that feel good about it. Because it says that we're in a different mindset than the Americans.

Now there may be lots of Canadians who talk about CCW and bear defense and all kinds of other purposes for their firearms. But in an official capacity, my guns aren't for shooting anyone.
Click to expand...

I agree with this 100%.
 
Glenfilthie said:
I disagree with our forum management about dealing with anti-gunners. Our tone should not be one of courtesy and respect because they will not reciprocate. Our tone should be 'SHOVE YOUR GUN CONTROL' and we should mean it. We should cancel subscriptions to hostile media outlets, we should boycott their advertisers and lean on them and we shouldn't back down or compromise.
Click to expand...
I am happy there are people who think this way.

There is a definite border between "being open to negotiation" and prostitution.


While I appreciate the efforts of some people
(who write letters to the media and to politicians,
the efforts of NFA and of Mr. Bernardo and generally
the efforts that try to bring common sense on the "negotiation table"),
lets not forget for one second
the wicked power of a clear and loud fa'qyou.
 
Common man!! you guys gotta believe! Do I gotta give you guys a pep talk or something? Maybe play some Rocky music well we go out there and touch some guns. Or should I just play some clips of sweet and glorious zombie shooting from walking dead to get are blood pump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom