M&p15-22

cpynch said:
Personally, I've never seen anyone with an Uzi in Canada, because they're illegal and you get a hefty sentence for having one. If they were legal, the guns would be readily available for criminals to chose from. So instead of Mr. 711 robber buying a pistol he buys an automatic weapon instead, it's supply and demand. If they're available, people will buy them. And yes it sucks for law abiding citizens who want a machine gun for whatever reason, but It's a sacrifice I'm personally willing to live with.

I can do anything I want to do with a Semi-Auto rifle\pistol\shotgun, and so can anyone else IMO.
Click to expand...

Uzis exist in Canada. They are legal. They are not full auto mind you, but I've seen them for consignment sale at Epps...you need the proper 12(X). There are full autos in civilian hands in Canada...again, you need the proper licensing. Also, while you believe you can do whatever you wish to with what our overlords have allowed us to own, you cannot speak for the rest of us. I for one would love to be able to have a place to go and legally demo an old car and line of pumpkins a la Knob Creek. Gun laws in Canada are harsh and they suck.
 
I can't read anymore of this thread. Fast-forward the problem isn't guns.

The problem is drugs.



Back on topic I hope that .22LR is non restricted
 
Last edited:
cpynch said:
I'm not anti gun whatsoever... I was shooting before I could ride a bike.

Then answer this question, where should the line be drawn at legal firearms to own? Should anyone be allowed to own any firearm regardless of shape, size, or intended purpose of the gun? What defines a firearm? Should there be regulations on ammo? Please answer, and try to be respectful. I was trying to have a legitimate convo on this topic, but some people get awfully offensive quickly.
Click to expand...

Intended purpose of the gun? :rolleyes:

So because my AR15s came from a design originally built with the INTENDED PURPOSE of providing soldiers a more efficient tool for offensive and defensive ops (OMG, those include KILLING!!!), I shouldn't be allowed to have them?

Ya right.

I'd like to see a 22LR non-restricted AR lookalike/clone/copy/facsimilie too.
 
cpynch said:
Agreed. On both parts...
Click to expand...

I understand your logic and I'm not going to dump on you like everyone else here. I don't think anyone here could honestly say that they would be comfortable with anyone being able to walk up to a store, buy a full auto with no checks or registration. Yes criminals can get there guns other ways and no full autos have been used in crime in however many years, but if it was that easy to acquire one, don't you think they would all go buy them? Fine they don't have training and can't hit s**t, still doesn't mean a bunch rounds flying around in gang wars isn't going hit someone.

Personally I think if they had some sort licensing/registration system for FA's and you jumped through all the hoops, passed all the checks, I don't see why a law abiding citizen, who wants to own and use a FA at a range or on their own private property, couldn't own a FA if they could afford it and feed it.
 
bussche said:
I understand your logic and I'm not going to dump on you like everyone else here. I don't think anyone here could honestly say that they would be comfortable with anyone being able to walk up to a store, buy a full auto with no checks or registration. Yes criminals can get there guns other ways and no full autos have been used in crime in however many years, but if it was that easy to acquire one, don't you think they would all go buy them? Fine they don't have training and can't hit s**t, still doesn't mean a bunch rounds flying around in gang wars isn't going hit someone.

Personally I think if they had some sort licensing/registration system for FA's and you jumped through all the hoops, passed all the checks, I don't see why a law abiding citizen, who wants to own and use a FA at a range or on their own private property, couldn't own a FA if they could afford it and feed it.
Click to expand...

I tried conveying a similar message to extremist americans with no success. It seems we're being unreasonable by requesting that people be given mandatory training and education, along with a basic psychological/legal assessment, prior to giving them free access to any firearm of their choosing...

I'd rather inconvenience people in a minimal manner than have them just walk into a 7/11 to buy a gun, simply because they (apparently) can acquire them elsewhere without a license. Nevermind that it's probably a lot easier said than done.
 
And just so we're clear, my position is the following: once person X has been licensed, no limits shall be placed on what he can own, whether that be semi-automatic or automatic firearms, along with items like suppressors and "the shoulder things that go up". I just want a minimal check and training in place so we don't have random nutjobs walking in and out of sporting goods stores with whatever they want. I think that's reasonable...
 
cdnredneck_t3 said:
But Joe criminal in Canada can get whatever he wants. If 70% of guns used in Crime in Canada come from the US what makes you think they don’t have Uzi’s, MP5’s P90’s and anything else under the sun. The reason you don’t hear about it is because the media does not want to report these types of firearms being confiscated. It would show how big of a phuck up the registry is since FA has been banned for over 30 years. They want people to believe all crime firearms are from Canadian people.
Click to expand...

I heard rumours that some years ago several crates of C7 and C9 rifles were hijacked... or rather vanished and it was suspected that the Hells Angels were responsible.

There any truth to that or is it just someone's overactive imagination?
 
Soli said:
I tried conveying a similar message to extremist americans with no success. It seems we're being unreasonable by requesting that people be given mandatory training and education, along with a basic psychological/legal assessment, prior to giving them free access to any firearm of their choosing...

I'd rather inconvenience people in a minimal manner than have them just walk into a 7/11 to buy a gun, simply because they (apparently) can acquire them elsewhere without a license. Nevermind that it's probably a lot easier said than done.
Click to expand...

YOU ARE MY HERO. SOMEONE GETS IT!!

You want the gun? Jump through the hoops to get it if it means that much to you. Fingerprints, crim checks, psych tests.... FOR FA WEAPONS.

Extraordinary weapons require extraordinary precautions IMO.

I most certainly feel that firearms are a privledge, not a right.
 
bussche said:
I understand your logic and I'm not going to dump on you like everyone else here. I don't think anyone here could honestly say that they would be comfortable with anyone being able to walk up to a store, buy a full auto with no checks or registration. Yes criminals can get there guns other ways and no full autos have been used in crime in however many years, but if it was that easy to acquire one, don't you think they would all go buy them? Fine they don't have training and can't hit s**t, still doesn't mean a bunch rounds flying around in gang wars isn't going hit someone.

Personally I think if they had some sort licensing/registration system for FA's and you jumped through all the hoops, passed all the checks, I don't see why a law abiding citizen, who wants to own and use a FA at a range or on their own private property, couldn't own a FA if they could afford it and feed it.
Click to expand...

Whoa careful saying anything like that - you'll get hate mail.... FA weapons SHOULDN'T be given to anyone who wants one? You Nazi! lol...
 
cpynch said:
YOU ARE MY HERO. SOMEONE GETS IT!!

You want the gun? Jump through the hoops to get it if it means that much to you. Fingerprints, crim checks, psych tests.... FOR FA WEAPONS.
Extraordinary weapons require extraordinary precautions IMO.

I most certainly feel that firearms are a privledge, not a right.
Click to expand...

This is not too far removed from what is currently in place here and now...but we normally only fingerprint criminals. But I digress...In all fairness though, that was not the tone of your earlier posts on the subject...it was FA was bad and should be unavailable to the common man...arguing that nobody should have it because you are uncomfortable with it is the same thing we have been hearing from Wendy for many years with regard to most other firearms.

Also, I also have to ask, why it is you feel that firearms are to be relegated to the status of a privilege rather than a right. Yes, most of us don't "need" them, but "need" doesn't often come into play in the myriad things that people do in a free society outside the basic necessities of life. I think most people would find it distasteful to be told what they can and cannot do, by faceless bureaucrats, in a free society. The state really has no business dictating to those who have done no wrong.
 
cpynch said:
YOU ARE MY HERO. SOMEONE GETS IT!!

You want the gun? Jump through the hoops to get it if it means that much to you. Fingerprints, crim checks, psych tests.... FOR FA WEAPONS.

Extraordinary weapons require extraordinary precautions IMO.

I most certainly feel that firearms are a privledge, not a right.
Click to expand...

I don't believe fingerprinting is necessary. In fact, I think the licensing system we have in place takes care of my requirement...

Now that we have been licensed, acquiring automatic firearms and suppressors should be perfectly legal and without hassle. None of this ATT bullsh*t either: you pass the test, you play with the best.

In a manner of speaking ;)
 
And it looks like the thread was high jacked by an idiot early on, so I stopped reading. Now I even forgot what is was about. Anyone who can't be trusted with a F/A can't be trusted with a single shot. Anyone who can't be trusted with a single shot can't be trusted with a F/A. Anyone who only trusts themselves or those appointed by others with a particular one can't be trusted with either.
 
cpynch said:
YOU ARE MY HERO. SOMEONE GETS IT!!

You want the gun? Jump through the hoops to get it if it means that much to you. Fingerprints, crim checks, psych tests....

Extraordinary weapons require extraordinary precautions IMO.

I most certainly feel that firearms are a privledge, not a right.
Click to expand...

That's not that issue that's the problem... It's the fact that such measures are often slippery slopes that are always exceedingly difficult to climb up from. Last I checked, I can only think of a handful of instances where law has been relaxed in favor of gun ownership and use. None of them have been in Canada, we've only maintained the status quo.

Plus the fact that gun control after the handgun registry has always been about politics rather then safety...

http://www.lowe.ca/Rick/FirearmsLegislation/AGangThatCouldn'tShootStraight.html
 
Prestwich said:
And it looks like the thread was high jacked by an idiot early on, so I stopped reading. Now I even forgot what is was about. Anyone who can't be trusted with a F/A can't be trusted with a single shot. Anyone who can't be trusted with a single shot can't be trusted with a F/A. Anyone who only trusts themselves or those appointed by others with a particular one can't be trusted with either.
Click to expand...



I agree to disagree.
 
Starscream said:
That's not that issue that's the problem... It's the fact that such measures are often slippery slopes that are always exceedingly difficult to climb up from. Last I checked, I can only think of a handful of instances where law has been relaxed in favor of gun ownership and use. None of them have been in Canada, we've only maintained the status quo.

Plus the fact that gun control after the handgun registry has always been about politics rather then safety...

http://www.lowe.ca/Rick/FirearmsLegislation/AGangThatCouldn'tShootStraight.html
Click to expand...

IMO Handguns should be non-rstricted and taught at the same time as long guns. FA should be restricted, and have extra measures associated with them

If it seems like my stance has changed a little, it's because it has. That was the point of this discussion to get other people opinions, interpret what they say and revise my way of thinking.
 
Chuckbuster said:
This is not too far removed from what is currently in place here and now...but we normally only fingerprint criminals. But I digress...In all fairness though, that was not the tone of your earlier posts on the subject...it was FA was bad and should be unavailable to the common man...arguing that nobody should have it because you are uncomfortable with it is the same thing we have been hearing from Wendy for many years with regard to most other firearms.

Also, I also have to ask, why it is you feel that firearms are to be relegated to the status of a privilege rather than a right. Yes, most of us don't "need" them, but "need" doesn't often come into play in the myriad things that people do in a free society outside the basic necessities of life. I think most people would find it distasteful to be told what they can and cannot do, by faceless bureaucrats, in a free society. The state really has no business dictating to those who have done no wrong.
Click to expand...

IMO it's the same as driving a car, do it responsibly you keep the privledge. Act like an ass, lose the privledge. You need a licence to drive because it's potentially dangerous, so are firearms. That's why I see it as a privledge.
 
cpynch said:
If it seems like my stance has changed a little, it's because it has. That was the point of this discussion to get other people opinions, interpret what they say and revise my way of thinking.
Click to expand...

Quite admirable. Many people would never in a million years admit to having a change of opinion like that...
 
cpynch said:
As far as Im concerned, yes they do.

As AWESOME as they are, full auto weapons have no practical purpose other than killing people.

And Armor piercing rounds are the same, no purpose except to kill humans wearing armor.
Click to expand...

failed_2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom