Proposed Black powder storage regs

The Ontario incident occured around the London area maybe up to 5 years ago. It was a house fire and no injuries.
 
Dennis retired, probably in disgust, around last winter when all the giggery pockery was taking place with bill S5 and C 391 and the bill that Gary introduced. After Dennis retired the first time, his replacement did not seem to communicate with the public like Dennis did. Perhaps because of that Dennis came back and was assistant number 2 for a year or so then retired a second time

cheers mooncoon
 
theDuck said:
The Ontario incident occured around the London area maybe up to 5 years ago. It was a house fire and no injuries.
Click to expand...

that was one, but there was a second incident probably before that, and I think the fellow was in a different room and may have been injured although not particularly seriously.

In the house fire incident, I think no one was home at the time

cheers mooncoon
 
CanAm said:
BTW I know for a fact that these are new regs/consultations. The senior admins from the gun groups were meeting with the heads of NRCAN to discuss, as recently as last month. Why this has not been announced, I do not know.
Click to expand...

One thing that disturbs me about this, is that it has long-term implications that are far worse than any existing firearms legislation. I mean really, here's another organization preventing us from enjoying our sport by eroding our ability to keep powder/ammunition. Keep the guns, but not have any ammunition.

More importantly, is that there appears to be some stakeholder group lobbying on behalf of all gun-owners (and dare I say firearms dealers) in Canada without imput from either.

Absurd.......
 
s there no way we can find out who the stakeholders are that they are consulting? Could Mr. Breitkreutz or any of our MLA's force this information out of the bureaucrats? This is really where we need to start. Let people know that the users of the products are not the ones being consulted. It seems to be agenda driven. Who is driving it? They need to be outed.
 
Gun5tuff said:
s there no way we can find out who the stakeholders are that they are consulting? Could Mr. Breitkreutz or any of our MLA's force this information out of the bureaucrats? This is really where we need to start. Let people know that the users of the products are not the ones being consulted. It seems to be agenda driven. Who is driving it? They need to be outed.
Click to expand...


The stakeholders, if they are a gun org, should be making this public.
 
gunlaker said:
There are a fair number of us still. Likely there would be significantly more if it was easier to get a hold of BP.

Chris.
Click to expand...

Granted ,its not nearly as prominant as smokeless,but there is still a large demand for it.Black powder rifles are an excellent training tool for offhand shooting,especially flintlocks.The delay in the main charge ignition forces you to hold on target. Its helped me with centerfire for sure.
 
buster said:
Granted ,its not nearly as prominant as smokeless,but there is still a large demand for it.Black powder rifles are an excellent training tool for offhand shooting,especially flintlocks.The delay in the main charge ignition forces you to hold on target. Its helped me with centerfire for sure.
Click to expand...

Some folks like the BOOM and others just like the smoke....
 
Pete04 said:
I think it's called e-mail
If you're an org member, they likely have your addy.
Click to expand...

Exactly......
Which then draws 2 conclusions in my mind;

1. despite reliable sources, this current situation is likely not formal enough (at this time) to warrant concern, or

2. they are purposefully keeping things quiet in order that people like "us" won't start to sound-off and foil their plans.

Things that make you go hmmmmm.........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom