Liberals looking at all out handgun/assault rifle ban!

Tacticalmedic said:
You’re right about two things, registered voters don’t equate to votes cast. I could only find stats from a couple years ago which said 20 million voters and 17 million votes cast. I don’t know where you went to school but that’s no where close to 2.5 million registered firearm owners even if the were to get some friends and family to take a strong stance against some sort of firearms ban. The other thing you’re right about is that JT won’t be in power next election but that’s because it’s a culmination of his poor political prowess not because firearm owners are going to oust him.

You’re over simplifying the issue. The Liberals aren’t tabling an all out firearms ban they’ve tasked a former Toronto police chief who is now a cabinet minister to report back to the cabinet whether there should be some sort of a firearms ban. Based on similar commonwealth countries if the report is in favour of a ban it would likely include semi-autos, pump shotguns, and handguns.

You’re suggesting that it’ll never happen just because. I’m suggesting it maybe a possibility because polls, statistics, and history have shown that Canadian people support some form of firearm reform. I’ll wait to see what Mr. Blair’s conclusion is before I’m getting worked up.

Although I don’t agree with a ban I would conform with the law because if I didn’t I would be no better than the gangsters and ISIS idiots out there. If you feel the need to stockpile firearms and ammo then fill your boots but I find it troubling that you claim that a ban would never happen because you can simply cross the US border illegally? So you’re for illegally crossing the border and trafficking and illegally importing firearms?

I’m just suggesting that we all review Mr. Blair’s report before going all tin foil hat in the forum.
Click to expand...

so you dont think that a possible 5 million votes can't affect an election with about 17 million votes,LOL.,my math is pretty good,and i'd say a 25% rate of voters can EASILY change election results,VERY easily,
 
N Wansbutter Esq said:
I agree.

I’m going to get a CCFR shirt: https://shop.firearmrights.ca/collections/clothing

They’re nothing flashy but buying one supports CCFR directly and a shirt like that is much more likely to encourage reasonable conversation. Trolling liberals may be fun but ill advised at this time ... they are in the driver’s seat. We need to promote an image of firearms owners as being normal reasonable people.
Click to expand...

Very much agreed. Thank you for that link, I have just purchased a shirt.
 
Tacticalmedic said:
I’m just suggesting that we all review Mr. Blair’s report before going all tin foil hat in the forum.
Click to expand...

This.

There are only three possible outcomes, although there maybe some slight variations.

1. We never see the report, because asking him to do the study was just paying lip service to public outcry in the hope that the issue will go away without the government having to take any decisive action. Public demand for action may sustain, or diminish and then reappear after the next shooting, but the liberals will continue to reference the study as proof of action without ever actually doing anything noteworthy.
2. The report comes out, and it basically states that there is insufficient data to justify a ban, more study is needed, not sure it will work, or the government will make some claim that its not worth the expense. This will be timed with some other Distractasaurus like funding for new police cars or border security measures to show that while they won't be banning handguns, they are doing something.
3. The report will claim that a handgun is justified and recommended, but this report will be utterly devoid of any actual research or study, just consultation with gun banners whose mind was made up decades ago. In this scenario, the study is a white wash for a predetermined policy, and its lack of scientific rigour will be on full display, and we can go into over drive criticizing its lack of veracity from the moral high ground, rather than the paranoid speculation that is currently rampant.

In any event, there isn't much point debating the finer points of what a ban will look like or what we should do about until it comes out.

IN the mean time we should be encouraging the government to actually study the issue properly, and to not pass any other legislation, such as C71, until such a study can demonstrably show that the measures are justified, and to continue to communicate our opposition the any further restriction on our ability to protect ourselves in the face of all this criminal, gang and terrorist danger.
 
Purchased two t-shirts, tnx for sharing the link.

On to the subject in discussion, I'm coming from a European/MiddleEast country where people can own and with a permit can concealed carry handguns, but is around $2500 per 5 years for every gun one would have in his/her possession. There are limitations on semi-autmatic rifles and again very expensive to licence one. Owning shotguns way easier, i.e. $250 per gun for 5 years. Everything is registered on your name. Having a handgun for target shooting would require a different licence and a new ATT is required for each trip to the range.

Coming to Canada, of course, I saw much better rules and regulations and as I moved here in 2007, I never benefited the times with fewer limitations of the past. I naturally compare what I now have here and what I had in the past and what I have here is way better for sure so I'm thankful.

I own a considerable number of restricted and non-restricted firearms, I compete in different disciplines. I also have three kids not even teenagers yet. If not 50% but 10% of the crimes somehow utilized guns obtained in Canada that were owned initially by law abiding citizens, I think that is still a concern.

I would be ok if Just-In and his buddies bring regulations around storage inspections for restricted and prohibited firearms and better funding to stop illegal guns passing through the border. Storage inspections should be around inspection of the safe/cabinet/gun-room and restricted/prohibited only; by appointment.

I understand many may not like that idea, seeking more freedom and I support that as well. However, if there is a problem I think we should be part of the solution before others will solve it on our behalf in a manner none of us will like.

That is my 2 cents...
 
MoMoney said:
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.
Click to expand...

If you want to know where Bill Blair stands on banning guns and gang violence, watch his presentation that he delivered at the guns and gangs summit in Ottawa earlier in the year. Its almost as if Goodale didn't even attend.

But lets be clear. Blair didn't get tapped for this job because he is logical, has good ideas, or is a good speaker. He got the job for one reason and one reason only. Credibility.

Justin Trudeau has none. When Bill C68 was turning an entire generation of gun owners off of the Liberal party, Trudeau was busy smoking pot, substitute teaching and stuffing inappropriate ###ual conduct skeletons in to the closet. When the Conservatives were unwinding the Long Gun Registry Justin was busy not going to work as the leader of the 3rd rate opposition party. He inherited their gun policy as part of the 2015 mandate without much discussion. I think the blowback from C71 caught him completely off guard. He is clueless. Goodale is clueless. But Canadians, especially Torontonians, remember bill Blair as an intelligent and credible voice, steady handed and not afraid of dangerous criminals.

God the job, because whatever the Liberals decide to do, Blair will be the one most likely to sell it. If he can sell it, he will probably get Goodale's job when Goodale announces his retirement next year, or loses his seat, whichever happens first. If he can't sell it, then as a relatively new MP he can easily be thrown under the bus as political fodder.

But at the end of the day, Blair's ideas won't really count for squat, because he is going to tow the party line, or he will be out of a job.

Ithaca Lever said:
Wasn't it Hitler that banned guns as well for safety?
Click to expand...

Only for the Jews. Kind of the same way that Canada tried to ban guns for Eastern Europeans in the 20s. Governments only try to disarm people they consider a threat to themselves.

MBaker said:
Will there be outright confiscation or grandfathered and you won't be able to take these firearms to the range or buy/sell them.
Click to expand...

Impossible to say for sure. Technically anything is possible. If you let whats been done in the past be your guide, which is a pretty good guide, there may be prohibitions but the jackboots will not be doing door to door confiscations. 0% of compensation. Grandfathering in some form will likely be part of it. You may or may not be allowed to use them as you did before, but you will likely be the last legal owner.

Wiskey1 said:
only the wooses give up their guns,i can garantee you,,there a lot more hidden guns than they know of,LOL.and with the times we live in now,expect 1000's of guns to go dark,not to mention how easy they are to build now,guns will never go away,it's just a fact now,the Libs just want to pretend like everything is safer for their little anti-gun ladyboys,
Click to expand...

More like Millions MORE will go dark. And you are right, the liberals won't actually care about removing guns for previously legal owners or not. The political value it entirely in the ban itself. The RCMP will cook the books to make compliance look great, and no one will hold them to account.

RoughneckRico said:
So if they ban handguns, does that mean pistol shooting ranges will cease to exist? Possibly

If shooting ranges cease to exist, where will our police practise shooting their handguns? There are more than 300 police and military ranges across the country. Your tax dollars will be used to fund new ones

If our police don't practise shooting, does this mean they will be poor shooters? Police will not stop practicing just cause commercial ranges close

If our police are bad shooters, does this mean they will need more bullets/shots to subdue their subject? Not much will change from what we see now. Police aren't marksmen, but they do a pretty job of only hitting what they want to hit.

If more shots miss their subject, will more innocent bystanders be hit by stray bullets? Possibly, but show me a Canadian example where this has happened already?

If more innocent lives are ended by stray bullets, will public safety no longer be important? Public Safety is not important now, at least not in so far as it means keeping the public safe.

Oh no, Im stuck in a loop, I thought banning handguns was supposed to make the public safer..................:confused:
Click to expand...

You know that banning handguns has nothing to do with safety because it only gets talked about during election years.

ZeroRooter said:
Sry I am still trying to get over the Quebec long gun registry
Click to expand...

I already registered all my hair dryers, and I don't even live in Quebec. Its not so hard, whats giving you trouble?

inky said:
How many millions will be spent on compensation, this is thief by government
Click to expand...

Thats an easy one. $0. The liberals will never pay one dime to a gun owner for their property, because it doesn't buy votes, and it doesn't create jobs.
 
longrangethumper said:
Our country is being run by a drama teacher. Literally. We are all doomed. He will defend us with his leotard.
Click to expand...

this drama teacher is censoring our anthem, stifling free speech and opening our borders to ANYONE.

I’m not giving up my guns.

its time for non compliance guys, seriously.... govt has left Us no choice.
 
Last edited:
inky said:
How many millions will be spent on compensation, this is thief by government
Click to expand...

Not a single solitary dime.
Just like the SPAS-12s and Feather 22s and other prohibited without grandfathering firearms Kim Campbell banned with c17 back in 1991.
 
torontogungal said:
Too bad his Quebec lieutenant is planning on forming a splinter party and splitting the right.
Actually there is no right in Canada.
Just left, far left and ultra left.
Click to expand...

I think it was actually really good. I was getting totally disgusted with Andrew. All the abandoned policies and what he was becoming.
If Maxim platform will be what I think it will be. We will not only get most of the conservatives from current party. Will also get allot of people who stopped voting because it was meaningless. Plus you will get allot of liberals that can think outside of media pushed slogans. It might even turn out as bad for liberals as it was in Ontario in last elections. Just keep your mind open to possibilities.
 
Seems the CPC is caught between 2 choices.
Abandoning true blue conservative principles and the appearance of a pro gun stance or embracing them and repeating the failed Manning Reform party experiment.
Harper walked that tight rope from 2006-2015.
Most voters are left-leaners and will reject republican style politics out of hand federally at least.
Any political party that ignores this hard truth will never rule Canada.
Ontario and Quebec will stop them dead in their tracks like they did the Reform party.
 
torontogungal said:
Seems the CPC is caught between 2 choices.
Abandoning true blue conservative principles and the appearance of a pro gun stance or embracing them and repeating the failed Manning Reform party experiment.
Harper walked that tight rope from 2006-2015.
Most voters are left-leaners and will reject republican style politics out of hand federally at least.
Any political party that ignores this hard truth will never rule Canada.
Ontario and Quebec will stop them dead in their tracks like they did the Reform party.
Click to expand...

"true blue conservative principles" ???? What are they? Is freedom of speech in it? Andrew no longer interested in that that was just for election date. How about banning of Rebel Media because Liberals are upset with it? Side kick in trade war with US? Support for liberal version of multiculturalism? What principles are you talking about?
 
We need to change it from within.
Get involved in the PC riding associations.
Be a policy delegate at conferences.
As said before some Conservatives are career politicians who see an opportunity to be on the winning side.
Weed them out.
More at stake here than firearm laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom