Liberals looking at all out handgun/assault rifle ban!

Much better chance it will decrease their value, just like present day prohibs.
SteelFlint said:
Would there be flaw in my logic in thinking that any measure of tightening on availability and ownership of handguns say should increase their value over time?
Click to expand...
 
inky said:
How many millions will be spent on compensation, this is thief by government
Click to expand...

Britain and Australia are the other countries mentioned as examples. In both these countries, firearms were confiscated and destroyed, with substantial compensation being paid.
In the UK, the total was hidden behind the Official Secrets Act; in Australia, a surtax was added to the health care tax. Many millions were paid out in compensation.
If you assume that there are over a million restricted firearms and unregistered "assault rifles" in Canada, a ball park number for the cost of compensation can be estimated. Total would be at least 500 million, possibly a billion or more. Now Justin has never seen someone else's dollar that he is unwilling to spend, but that is a lot of money when a government is running deficits and heading into an election.
Far cheaper to just prohibit and grandfather. Its worked for them in the past. Delays the trip to the smelter, but with time and age, its inevitable.
 
tiriaq said:
Britain and Australia are the other countries mentioned as examples. In both these countries, firearms were confiscated and destroyed, with substantial compensation being paid.
In the UK, the total was hidden behind the Official Secrets Act; in Australia, a surtax was added to the health care tax. Many millions were paid out in compensation.
If you assume that there are over a million restricted firearms and unregistered "assault rifles" in Canada, a ball park number for the cost of compensation can be estimated. Total would be at least 500 million, possibly a billion or more. Now Justin has never seen someone else's dollar that he is unwilling to spend, but that is a lot of money when a government is running deficits and heading into an election.
Far cheaper to just prohibit and grandfather. Its worked for them in the past. Delays the trip to the smelter, but with time and age, its inevitable.
Click to expand...

That $500 million estimate of value is, I suspect, well short of reality. How many restricteds sell for less than $500 on the EE? Some do, for sure. But on average...? And if I'm not mistaken, the buy-back in Australia did include some attempt to compensate for scopes, rings, upgrades, etc. But alas, compensating gun owners has never been the Canadian way. If the Liberals have their way on this one, it will mean new classes of prohibs, almost certainly followed with an inability to get an ATT allowing them to actually be shot at a range. And the irony is that it virtually guarantees that as the years roll by, more and more of those prohibited firearms will end up reported stolen, or lost, or sold by grandpa to Mike in Canmore before he died, because there will be no other way to get economic value from them -- and how does that make the world safer? We went down this road before with the prohibition of full autos in Canada -- and unless someone can explain the "new math" to me, I'm thinking a rather significant number of FAs have never been turned in despite the fact that their grandfathered owners have long since passed away.
 
The UK compensation included holsters, ammunition, loading tools, etc.
Paying compensation would be politically unpalatable - that is why I suspect that grandfathered prohibition would be more likely, if they go ahead with a "ban".

Of course, the "study" may suggest that a ban of all handguns and assault rifles may not be necessary, and only modest enhanced restrictions would make everyone safe.

I must admit that I have no confidence in the current government. The only thing more disappointing than the current government is that people voted for them.
 
tiriaq said:
The Toronto Star is applauding Bill's appointment to this ministry, and the assignment of this task to him.
Click to expand...

Meh. That's on them if they want to eat that up. Bill was literally on TV last week saying he doesn't believe legal gun owners are the problem at all. If I recall correctly.. he was on CBC (I'm at work right now or I'd search it) and wouldn't have any reason to hide his true colors. The Star's article was a few months back if I recall correctly, and they're basing all of that on the couple of times he said he would consider looking at more gun control measures. I get that gun control is bad, but I could also see a Conservative telling us that they're "willing to consider more gun control measures" just to get the public and/or media to shut up about it.

I'm also going to say this: I'm new to this "hobby", so I'm not quite as jaded yet - so maybe I'm a little too optimistic about this since I haven't been screwed in the past like I assume most of you have. I can totally see that if I were in the hobby for 10 years, I'd only be looking at this with foggy glasses as well and expect nothing but the worst.

From my honestly uneducated point of view, again, it seems like Bill Blair was picked because he seems to be a little more logical when it comes to gun control than most Liberals and has some honestly valid experience in the field - but it doesn't seem like he has blindly supported a gun ban at all. Quite the opposite. I'm expecting more gun control, but right now, can't see a ban in our horizon.

I just hope I'm right... but please give me all the loathing I deserve if I'm wrong in a few months. I don't want to live in a fairyland and say it's not possible that a ban could happen.. I guess I'm just trying to convince myself that it's all going to be okay. Haha.


EDIT: Full disclosure: I can no longer find the interview I have referenced twice in which Blair seemingly wasn't jumping to a gun ban as a solution. I'll search for it later because it might ease some of our worries. I believe it's the interview that many articles are referencing from August 9th, but all of the articles leave out a lot of information that was very much in our favor (funny, eh?) and seems to have only included the less gun-friendly stuff. I swear this video interview exists, and it's very recent! Unless it was all just a dream..
 
They are for banning guns but against punishing criminals who use illegal guns to commit crimes I mean how can somebody think that way it does not make any sense on any level !

Criminals are already banned from having guns and when caught they are charged for it but since the sentences are pathetic they have no fear to keep being criminals and carrying and using illegal guns !

Increase of sentences is what is really needed ! Use a gun in a crime get a mandatory 20 year sentence a criminal found with a gun a 10 year sentence!

I mean seriously how hard is it to punish the criminals who are the problem!
 
The Liberals just gave the Conservatives their gun platform for 2019. No registration of any firearms, handguns included as the other parties can't be trusted not to steal the property of law abiding Canadians, guarantee they won't run with it but that's my issue if they want my vote, otherwise I stay home, just putting off the inevitable seizure at some point down the road otherwise, hey maybe Trump will declare Canadian gun owners as eligible refugees and we can move there. I wonder how many Canadian gun owners would pull up stakes and move down there for that reason alone, not many I would guess and that's why we will eventually lose we just don't care that much.
 
In north America we bury our heads in the sand and pretend nothing bad ever happens, this is how they do it in Russian schools.
 
tiriaq said:
The UK compensation included holsters, ammunition, loading tools, etc.
Paying compensation would be politically unpalatable - that is why I suspect that grandfathered prohibition would be more likely, if they go ahead with a "ban".

Of course, the "study" may suggest that a ban of all handguns and assault rifles may not be necessary, and only modest enhanced restrictions would make everyone safe.

I must admit that I have no confidence in the current government. The only thing more disappointing than the current government is that people voted for them.
Click to expand...

Wasnt it Blair suggested that an all out ban wouldnt be the best solution or was that the new boss over at the RCMP.. or both. cant remember
 
Squiggy said:
In north America we bury our heads in the sand and pretend nothing bad ever happens, this is how they do it in Russian schools.
Click to expand...
Ukraine invasions was gun confiscation of the public. The eastern Ukraine civilians got to keep their AK's, shotgun and a handgun. Are we willing to do the same to keep our firearms. Probably not.
 
Last edited:
Kanaskichuck said:
Ukraine invasions was gun confiscation of the public. The eastern Ukraine civilians got to keep their AK's, shotgun and a handgun. Are we willing to do the same to keep our firearms. Probably not.
Click to expand...

People are so brainwashed it's not funny, governments only purpose is self preservation. It's like a giant tick feeding of the population. The use fear and intimidation to keep you inline with threat of violence/imprisonment if you are not compliant with rules. Then they use our money to fight you in court with unlimited budget. How and why we think this is right is beyond me. We are no different than cattle being milked, one of the simplest explanations below yet most can't see!!


 
powerbench said:
IMHO and with all due respect to everyone and their comments but I doubt that there will be any compensation, just a ban and manatory confiscation and/or depository system at your local police... I hope I’m wrong, but public opinion is “en masse” against us.

This is NOT defeatism, or fear mongering or conspiracy thinking, just an observation that we are living in a post modernistic society for most sheeple, I mean people, have zero regard for handguns or semi autos.

Any “ intelligent” firearm discussion I attempt with “most”friends and family have showed that we are a tolerated minority with which will receive little if any sympathetic public support and are actually are being held at fault for the current gun problem.

Logical no, but logic is not needed when your looking for a scapegoat.


I wish it was not so but...


I guess I could always go winter in Texas ��...
Click to expand...

they will NEVER confiscate ####,they dont have the resources,and 99% of these guns would be reported as destroyed,and there's not a damn thing they can do about it,it's YOUR private property and you are in your full rights to destroy them,the only requirement is to report it,now whether or not it was actually done is anybody's guess.but i'm pretty sure they know where these things would wind up,LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom