Rumors of a Spring Election

Newfoundland Liberal MP just states she uses a “22 guage” for moose tarmigan and black bear

Also claimed 99% of hunters do not use semi-autos.
 
The Conservative-leaning crowd will again split the vote between the Conservative Party of Canada and the People's Party of Canada. This will cause a minority Liberal government again. Unity and victory are synonymous.
 
Dmitri_W said:
The Conservative-leaning crowd will again split the vote between the Conservative Party of Canada and the People's Party of Canada. This will cause a minority Liberal government again. Unity and victory are synonymous.
Click to expand...

Basis that recent by-election, the Liberals can win on their own just fine.

It may take some much worse economic news before that changes.

Trudeau may very well try to get the election in before that happens.
 
Scout. Your idea of using a US template is flawed. It's the fundamental assumption that the lieberals are simply a government trying to better Canada, just coming at it from a different direction.

They are not. They want to destroy the Canada we know, needing to destroy to replace the dominant culture, economy, method of governance, and even people. Getting rich through their corruption and setting themselves up as future saviors from their own policies is just a happy coincidence.

Such people can't be reasoned with or swayed with facts. It's ideological not logical.

Stay on point.....corruption, inflation, economy. Turn every attempt to make it about guns back there. Corrupt/paid media will twist any soundbite explaining gun policy. A simple well thought out policy plank, refer to that, back on point.....economy, inflation, corruption......scoop in ndp as collaborators while your at it.
 
This is a repeat of a thread started in another forum but also belongs here because the CPC is proposing a committee to involve all stakeholders in consultation. A quasi objective tool will be needed to maintain order and this is one suggestion:


Trudeau says society has to agree on which guns should be banned but no idea how to do that. In the absence of any challenge for the "how" he will do as he pleases.

The CPC undertakes to form a committee to objectively classify firearms. They need to propose a credible system to do that.

This issue is going to be on the table forever and will spike every time there's a firearms incident or a LPC government or when Poly puts on another push for symbolism..

Spare me the "Scrap the FA response" and "we should have any gun we want" - we need an idea how to deal with this in a way which is more advantageous to us otherwise we will get a more onerous FA and only get the guns that the politicians want us to have.

So.

Agree on a points system.

Negative points would be awarded for features that "Canadians" are concerned about like hi cap mags, semi, bayonets, pistol grip, colour (I know, give me a break; points should be based on functionality only), design (conventional or bullpen) etc then total those. Anti gun reps can be at the table but would have to objectively justify what the negatives should be and the number of points each of their concerns should be awarded.

Positive points will be awarded for functionality like collection, hunting, firearms competitions like 3 gun, target shooting and then these will be subtracted from the total of negative attributes.

If the total falls within a prohibited, restricted or non restricted band you have your classification.
 
scout_289 said:
This is a repeat of a thread started in another forum but also belongs here because the CPC is proposing a committee to involve all stakeholders in consultation. A quasi objective tool will be needed to maintain order and this is one suggestion:


Trudeau says society has to agree on which guns should be banned but no idea how to do that. In the absence of any challenge for the "how" he will do as he pleases.

The CPC undertakes to form a committee to objectively classify firearms. They need to propose a credible system to do that.

This issue is going to be on the table forever and will spike every time there's a firearms incident or a LPC government or when Poly puts on another push for symbolism..

Spare me the "Scrap the FA response" and "we should have any gun we want" - we need an idea how to deal with this in a way which is more advantageous to us otherwise we will get a more onerous FA and only get the guns that the politicians want us to have.

So.

Agree on a points system.

Negative points would be awarded for features that "Canadians" are concerned about like hi cap mags, semi, bayonets, pistol grip, colour (I know, give me a break; points should be based on functionality only), design (conventional or bullpen) etc then total those. Anti gun reps can be at the table but would have to objectively justify what the negatives should be and the number of points each of their concerns should be awarded.

Positive points will be awarded for functionality like collection, hunting, firearms competitions like 3 gun, target shooting and then these will be subtracted from the total of negative attributes.

If the total falls within a prohibited, restricted or non restricted band you have your classification.
Click to expand...

Still sounds like this is pretty subjective. Especially from people who know nothing about guns.
Can't we rate guns (if we have to) on their objective characteristics: muzzle velocity, calibre, action, etc.
These are items that can't be disputed by any committee member no matter their background.
 
scout_289 said:
This is a repeat of a thread started in another forum but also belongs here because the CPC is proposing a committee to involve all stakeholders in consultation. A quasi objective tool will be needed to maintain order and this is one suggestion:


Trudeau says society has to agree on which guns should be banned but no idea how to do that. In the absence of any challenge for the "how" he will do as he pleases.

The CPC undertakes to form a committee to objectively classify firearms. They need to propose a credible system to do that.

This issue is going to be on the table forever and will spike every time there's a firearms incident or a LPC government or when Poly puts on another push for symbolism..

Spare me the "Scrap the FA response" and "we should have any gun we want" - we need an idea how to deal with this in a way which is more advantageous to us otherwise we will get a more onerous FA and only get the guns that the politicians want us to have.

So.

Agree on a points system.

Negative points would be awarded for features that "Canadians" are concerned about like hi cap mags, semi, bayonets, pistol grip, colour (I know, give me a break; points should be based on functionality only), design (conventional or bullpen) etc then total those. Anti gun reps can be at the table but would have to objectively justify what the negatives should be and the number of points each of their concerns should be awarded.

Positive points will be awarded for functionality like collection, hunting, firearms competitions like 3 gun, target shooting and then these will be subtracted from the total of negative attributes.

If the total falls within a prohibited, restricted or non restricted band you have your classification.
Click to expand...

The Antis and Liberals will fight any innovative system that doesn't track with American Anti efforts. There's no virtue signalling if you're not jumping on a bandwagon.
Also, the Antis would likely characterize the nuances and complexities of any point system as an attempt to "get around" gun control.

As for how they'd contrive the points, they will just continue their attempts to delegitimize target shooting because if they don't then they'd have to concede there's a reason to own guns you can't hunt with (such as ARs and handguns) so they'll insist on stacking the penalties for any remotely modern features.
In effect, we'd have to throw target shooters under the bus as the next compromise.
 
Wallenstein said:
Basis that recent by-election, the Liberals can win on their own just fine.

It may take some much worse economic news before that changes.

Trudeau may very well try to get the election in before that happens.
Click to expand...

Mississauga-Lakeshore has been a LPC stronghold for 25 years so it comes as no surprise that they won again. Areas like this will not change unless something very significant happens that impacts the majority of voters in this area. Due to the area itself, its a very well off and prominent area that has probably noticed very little economic impact.
 
Steve_B said:
The Antis and Liberals will fight any innovative system that doesn't track with American Anti efforts. There's no virtue signalling if you're not jumping on a bandwagon.
Also, the Antis would likely characterize the nuances and complexities of any point system as an attempt to "get around" gun control.

As for how they'd contrive the points, they will just continue their attempts to delegitimize target shooting because if they don't then they'd have to concede there's a reason to own guns you can't hunt with (such as ARs and handguns) so they'll insist on stacking the penalties for any remotely modern features.
In effect, we'd have to throw target shooters under the bus as the next compromise.
Click to expand...

This is probably what's going to happen. Look at all the 'hunting' gun debate going on right now. Nothing about sport shooters. Sport shooters like me will be the next sacrificial lamb...
 
scout_289 said:
So what do you think about destabilizing Trudeau with an entirely different approach to "the gun problem" on the eve of an election?
Click to expand...

I think that's the way to go. Take his 4 billion + dollars in buy back money and invest it in the borders. I would think twice about hiding guns in my car if there were 4 or more dog handlers at any time with gun sniffing dogs working the lanes at the border crossing while I'm waiting in line. Or maybe I would not persue coming across a reservation if i can hear or see surveilance drones in the air gor example. All of this would be possible and more with the kind of money that would otherwise be spent on a useless buy back. IMHO
 
Steve_B said:
The Antis and Liberals will fight any innovative system that doesn't track with American Anti efforts. There's no virtue signalling if you're not jumping on a bandwagon.
Also, the Antis would likely characterize the nuances and complexities of any point system as an attempt to "get around" gun control.

As for how they'd contrive the points, they will just continue their attempts to delegitimize target shooting because if they don't then they'd have to concede there's a reason to own guns you can't hunt with (such as ARs and handguns) so they'll insist on stacking the penalties for any remotely modern features.
In effect, we'd have to throw target shooters under the bus as the next compromise.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think there are more collectors and sport/target shooters than hunters. Many hunters shoot maybe 5 rounds a year. With all the BS going on I do see less and less target shooters and am constantly challenged by the “fudds” who only claim a bolt action is needed. Pumps and lever guns will be next and then central storage. It’s a long game and focusing simply on hunters is starting to seem like the CPC may not want to fight that battle. The fact is most firearm owners could own anything and would never break the law. It’s only going to take 1 more incident and we will lose most of our guns… As always Quebec is going to ruin it for the west. I hope I am wrong but know I am not.
 
Most Canadians believe whatever Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon and Ian Hanamansingh blab about. Only hope is western provinces will hold firm with provincial challenges.
 
9mmGunGuy said:
Still sounds like this is pretty subjective. Especially from people who know nothing about guns.
Can't we rate guns (if we have to) on their objective characteristics: muzzle velocity, calibre, action, etc.
These are items that can't be disputed by any committee member no matter their background.
Click to expand...

You have an excellent point, I agree that simpler is best. There was an excellent post on a recent thread where the parameters that you note were actually worked intern example.

The point of these posts that actually go to the meat of the problem is that we have to recognize that to break the impasse there has to be a process that all participants can agree upon, it is repeatable, audible and must work for 99% of the complexities represented by the infinite combinations of firearms configurations.

Now and for the future! You see if semis are gone after this round, next round will be pump or lever action. Some anti keener will cite the mad minute and bolt action will be vulnerable and so it goes.

These decision processes based on some degree of numerology leave discussions open to everyone having their say, pressure them to defend their "points" and record the logic (replacing emotion) and provide the public with a multi stakeholder consensus. Remember, Ms. Provost was at the table trying to work with the gun community and as I understand it left whence felt bullied and ignored?

Bottom line though is that collectively we should be looking at innovation in our approach because everything that has been tried before has failed to one degree or another and hashing over all the old crap while hoping for a White Knight CPC leader to save us is a fool's game.

Use al the old tools but recognize reality and juice up our game or lose the battle.

In an ideal world we'd be spending our time and energy generating new ideas, experimenting with them using actual examples to see how they work fo bus and then distilling them down to 10 second sound bites to show the public that we're reasonable people willing to work in favour of public safety while with a rational approach. In short, put a spotlight on the incompetent, scatter brained, idealogical driven Trudeau who works with ready, shoot, aim.
 
The simplified categories based on objective characteristics: muzzle velocity, calibre, action, etc. are great ideas and work with knowledgeable gunnies.

But how do you fold in, and dispense with, the other fearful characteristics like pistol grips, colour and tactical features that in no way affect a firearm's lethality when a gun is used in competent hands but are being used by Trudeau today to push his agenda???

One way to do that is to put these "features" on the table and through a rational process sweep them off again and record how we did it.

Remember, this isn't just a battle to be fought in Q1 2022; this is a forever battle.
 
wrangler4867 said:
I think that's the way to go. Take his 4 billion + dollars in buy back money and invest it in the borders. I would think twice about hiding guns in my car if there were 4 or more dog handlers at any time with gun sniffing dogs working the lanes at the border crossing while I'm waiting in line. Or maybe I would not persue coming across a reservation if i can hear or see surveilance drones in the air gor example. All of this would be possible and more with the kind of money that would otherwise be spent on a useless buy back. IMHO
Click to expand...

Standalone ideas that have merit do not have a place with the Liberals.

Before the LGR I wrote to Chretien suggesting that the LGR was going to cost far more ethan $2 million and the money would be better spent funding 14 police helicopters for cities across Canada and name each one for one of the victims as a memorial.

Didn't even get an answer and the rest is history.

Ironically, the lack of a police helicopter is one of the factors in the high death toll in the NS massacre ...............
 
ravenzoom said:
This is probably what's going to happen. Look at all the 'hunting' gun debate going on right now. Nothing about sport shooters. Sport shooters like me will be the next sacrificial lamb...
Click to expand...

The points system that I suggested would require that every current and likely future uses of firearms be listed and discussed with points awarded accordingly, even self defence.

No shooter left behind if you will.
 
From what I see, like the SKS, anytime a gun is used in a crime it will go on the table for banning.

We need a robust system that provides a defence against knee jerk reactions solely for cynical vote grabbing.
 
powerbaitron said:
I agree. I think there are more collectors and sport/target shooters than hunters. Many hunters shoot maybe 5 rounds a year. With all the BS going on I do see less and less target shooters and am constantly challenged by the “fudds” who only claim a bolt action is needed. Pumps and lever guns will be next and then central storage. It’s a long game and focusing simply on hunters is starting to seem like the CPC may not want to fight that battle. The fact is most firearm owners could own anything and would never break the law. It’s only going to take 1 more incident and we will lose most of our guns… As always Quebec is going to ruin it for the west. I hope I am wrong but know I am not.
Click to expand...

Bolt action will be gone when the antis start posting clips of the mad minute and scary sniper rifles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom