More details from the Globe and Mail

MBaker said:
If they do grandfather, we ALL must grandfather! Do not turn in any firearms. The more of us that take their chump change is more stats for them to use and tell the sheep-le that we are "agreeing" with their "program"
Click to expand...

Accepting Grandfathering for the already restricted firearms might be an option since Govt. already knows that you have them . If you have to register your non restricted in order to get Grandfathering , then you are better off not too as the govt. has NO IDEA who owns the non restricted , or where they are .
 
Restricteds will be grandfathred by my choice. NR's are not available for either buyback or grandfathering. Period.
 
Chuckbuster said:
I suspect they'll pull the same stunt as they did with FALs; where they say "yes, of course you can take it to the range", and then arbitrarily pull the rug out from under your feet and change their minds "in the interest of public safety".
Click to expand...

Just a guess but they would have to reimplement the ATT paper requirements through the CFO or change the act again. The act states that only prohib pistols and 12(9) firearms are allowed at ranges. The requirements for 12(9) that should in theory apply are the first section before the CZ:

Grandfathered individuals — regulations
(9) An individual is eligible to hold a licence authorizing the individual to possess prohibited firearms of a prescribed class if the individual
(a) possesses one or more firearms of that class on a day that is prescribed with respect to that class;
(b) holds a registration certificate for one or more firearms of that class in the circumstances prescribed with respect to that class; and
(c) was continuously the holder of a registration certificate for one or more firearms of that class beginning on the day that is prescribed — or that is determined under the regulations — with respect to that class.

All that said IANAL and I might be missing something nuanced within
 
Here we go boys and girls

The Prime Minister will speak with the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern.

11:15 a.m. The Prime Minister, accompanied by Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada David Lametti, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Bill Blair, and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Joël Lightbound, will deliver remarks and hold a media availability.
Click to expand...

https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/itineraries/2020/05/01/prime-ministers-itinerary-friday-may-1-2020
 
rikkards said:
Looking at the law it appears that assuming these will fall under 12(9) would in theory be allowed to go to the range but all of this is speculative until we see how the dust settles.
Click to expand...

12(9) also suggests that transfers not yet approved will be rejected because it would not meet the "held a reg cert on the day the gun was prohibited" clause...
 
fattz said:
Why dont you pointed out to them?f:P:
Click to expand...

If you think they don't know about the Tavor and accidentally skipped them you are greatly mistaken. It will be a continuous ratcheting down on all guns as they get used in some event or another.

They could just as easily have just said "all semi-auto centerfire firearms configured with removable magazines from the factory or through customization" and just got rid of everything including the SKS. They chose not to so they have something they can use later on to show that they are doing something and that they have some level of restraint (lol).
 
2dOrDKX.png


8oreR8J.png
 
FyreFighter said:
12(9) also suggests that transfers not yet approved will be rejected because it would not meet the "held a reg cert on the day the gun was prohibited" clause...
Click to expand...

Which is why after C71 passed and they won their minority I stopped buying. There are no NR guns I was interested in buying and me buying yet another AR really doesn't do much. I encouraged others who hadn't bought one to as if they ever pondered getting one now was the time but in the grand scheme it will only increas the amount of toner they are going to use to include an extra line on the automated form they will send out to all owners informing them of how to proceed.
 
rikkards said:
If you think they don't know about the Tavor and accidentally skipped them you are greatly mistaken. It will be a continuous ratcheting down on all guns as they get used in some event or another.

They could just as easily have just said "all semi-auto centerfire firearms configured with removable magazines from the factory or through customization" and just got rid of everything including the SKS. They chose not to so they have something they can use later on to show that they are doing something and that they have some level of restraint (lol).
Click to expand...

What they know and what they dont is all assumption so why keep harping on specific makes...maybe some should shut their pie hole for possibly our benefit.......
 
Bfranklin said:
How can you attempt to logic with people who use incorrect terminology.

See what propaganda does?
Click to expand...

You can't - but 90% of people will eat this up, including live news. They're broadcasting this everywhere, we have to be aware of the misinformation being spread. Unfortunately, angusreid polled the "south of bloor" crowd which may have influence in the media. This poll is all over live news.
 
fattz said:
What they know and what they dont is all assumption so why keep harping on specific makes...maybe some should shut their pie hole for possibly our benefit.......
Click to expand...

You telling me that if they banned the Tavor, owners are going to be taking them out anywhere while potentially risking jailtime?

There is no benefit, they know perfectly well what guns are legal to own in Canada, what is relatively out there through import requests and what isn't and will further ratchet down as they go, they may not know who has what but at some point if you take out a Tavor and it has been banned, you better be grandfathered with it if you don't want to be going to PMITA prison.

It comes down to if it is sitting locked up in your house and not going anywhere they don't really care. Out of sight out of mind. They have a check list and will be proceeding through it. Some nutbar shoots up a place with a specific model of gun it goes to the top of the list.
 
Classic_Cool said:
Dude, knock off with that "disarming you" crap. That's the kind of talk that gives gun owners a bad rep.

Let's be clear: The government is not "afraid" of your stupid AR-15. They have way better guns than you do, and they have way more of them.

Politicians in Canada like to attack guns for one reason, and one reason only. Because it gets them elected. Because someone voted for it. Because someone wrote more letters than you did.

THAT is the reality. Now stop acting like it's all a big conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Wake up.

You are wrong on so many counts.
 
rmyguy said:
If you think for a second they don't fear an armed citizenry, you are sadly mistaken. If society falls apart, which we could well be on the verge of, the last thing the elites want is an armed common folk. It's been that way for 1000s of years. If you think we as a species have evolved past class revolt, you are mistaken. They know the world is in an economic bubble. They know it's going to pop sooner or later. The last thing that they want is you hungry, uncomfortable, angry and armed. They know the have nots will go for the haves. It's happened many times in history.
Click to expand...


Spot on
 
fattz said:
What they know and what they dont is all assumption so why keep harping on specific makes...maybe some should shut their pie hole for possibly our benefit.......
Click to expand...

This is the logic of the guy at Costco complaining about how crowded Costco is...
 
1oldfart said:
I don't recall being asked what I think of a ban on hand guns and so called assault weapons
Click to expand...

It's called sampling, and when it is done correctly, is incredibly powerful. With 1,581 respondents you can get better than +/- 3% for our population of 37M people.

The issue is that they likely did a phone survey which skews towards older folks and families with young children, who are more likely to keep a landline for emergencies. Toss in differences between provinces, and you've got the possibility of systematic biases being introduced. That said, the numbers are likely roughly true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom