Gun Control is Completely Useless.

taxme

Time Out
Feb 11, 2020
2,349
973
113
I am really on the outside looking in on this one but it doesn’t pass the smell test…

Bill C-71 — which includes additional verification for acquisition and possession licenses for non-restricted firearms, and additional bookkeeping for businesses — will be ineffective in keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and doesn’t give those affected by it enough time to prepare, said Alberta chief firearms officer Teri Bryant.

“Despite the federal government claiming Bill C-71 is important to our public safety, distressingly little has been done to prepare individuals, businesses or my staff,” Bryant said in a news release.

“Our office has been inundated with calls since news of the deadline emerged because Alberta firearms owners do not understand the changes and are concerned about the potential for a new backdoor long gun registry.”

Ottawa should either delay implementing the legislation for a year or scrap it altogether, she said.

In a letter to federal Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino, Bryant said there are additional fears that under Bill C-71, firearms described by Ottawa as assault weapons that were purchased legally before the legislation could be confiscated.

“This concern has been heightened by your government’s plans under the May 2020 order-in-council to use the existing registry of restricted firearms to confiscate the property of owners who acquired firearms in full conformity with the law at the time of acquisition,” Bryant stated.

The bill was passed in June 2019, but Bryant said those licensing provisions were only announced May 11, giving those affected little time to either adopt or understand them.


Canadian gun control groups contend the legislation is needed to enhance public safety by keeping better track of gun licences and sales, and banning what they call “military assault weapons.”

The Coalition for Gun Control argues the federal government isn’t doing enough to clamp down on firearms amid a rise in shootings in recent years and is calling for a national ban on handguns with limited exceptions.

“Canada is one of only a few nations in the world to have moved backwards with gun control reform,” states the group’s website.

“Few Canadians know that the AR-15, a military weapon used in many mass shootings, is sold to civilians in Canada. Many Canadians think handguns are virtually banned — there are now almost 1 million legally owned handguns in Canada.”

Acccording to RCMP, which oversees the verification system, individuals and businesses need to obtain a reference number from the Registrar of Firearms confirming the validity of the buyer’s firearms licence before transferring a non-restricted firearm.

Businesses will also be required to retain sales and inventory records related to non-restricted firearms for a minimum of 20 years.

“This is not the return of the Long Gun Registry. The records created by businesses will be held by businesses — not government — and the police will require judicial authorization to access them,” states the RCMP’s website. (???)

What happens to these records if a business goes “out of business” due to retirement or bankruptcy? The minimum 20 years of records so far that have to be maintained??

One Calgary gun store owner said the new legislation is burdensome, ineffective and a threat to privacy.

But James Cox said he’s seen a huge bump in sales in the past week as customers try to beat the clock before Bill C-71 takes effect.

“I’m going to send (Prime Minister) Justin Trudeau thanks for all the extra business,” said Cox of the Shooting Edge, at 510 77th Ave. S.E.

“People want to get the semi-autos before the registry kicks in.”

But Cox said his gratitude toward the Liberal government ends there, adding responsibility for additional verification is being downloaded on businesses.

And he said the demand for more personal information from firearms purchasers will put their privacy at risk, for no good reason.

“It’s just Liberal talking points that it’s going to get weapons off the street, but how is that?” said Cox.

“These guys are out of control . . . it’s going to be a nightmare.”

A number of Alberta gun shops, he said, are shutting down to better prepare for the legislation’s implementation.

The use of firearms like the AR-15, he said, is already highly-restricted and that particular rifle has never been used in crimes in Canada.

“This isn’t the U.S. — the reason we have fewer firearms deaths in Canada is because of (mandatory) training,” said Cox.

In 2020, there were 19,350 gun-related homicides in the U.S. — 70 times the 277 recorded that year in Canada.

The U.S. population is about 10 times that of Canada.

Public Safety Canada didn’t comment on the Alberta government’s request to halt the legislation’s implementation.


“They’re only going after people with a PAL,” said Schemenauer. “It’s going to be a pile of money, a pile of paperwork, a pile of numbers and stuff that really is not going to do anything to stop a bit of crime.”

Christine Tell, Saskatchewan’s Minister of Corrections, Policing and Public Safety, had a similar reaction. She said the provincial government doesn’t like the law changes coming into force.

“It doesn’t address the crime and public safety issues that we’re facing, whether it’s in this province or in this country,” argued Tell.

And Tell said the changes are “eerily familiar” to the long-gun registry that she called a “billion-dollar boondoggle”.

Then even from the CBC:
In addition, the legislation expands background checks that would determine eligibility for a firearms licence to a person's entire life, not just the last five years.

Then you need to stop voting for the liberals or the NDP communists, bimbo. If you want all of those stupid commie gun laws to come to an end, then you must vote those liberals and NDP out for ever. Try voting conservative for a change in the next election. You can either vote for the PPC party or for the conservative party if they hopefully vote for and elect Pierre Poilievre as their leader. By now, you must know that the liberal and NDP parties are both the real enemies of Canada and not the real and true conservatives like the PPC or Pierre are. You pinko liberals or conservatives need to woke the hell up. :rolleyes:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: taxslave

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
50,965
4,294
113
Washington DC
Ya, and so now you can go out there and start shooting all of those crazy in the head racists conservative white folk out there. Of course, I might just regret saying that to a woke lefty like you. Oh boy, what have I done? :unsure:
Pulled your head partway out of your ass for a second, looked like to me. But got it back up there easy enough.
 

taxme

Time Out
Feb 11, 2020
2,349
973
113
Pulled your head partway out of your ass for a second, looked like to me. But got it back up there easy enough.

Are you certain that you are not one of those brown nosed butt kissers who have their own heads shoved up their own ass or someone else's ass, eh Chief? The only thing that enters my ass is when my doctor sticks a finger in my ass and does a prostate check. Gawd only knows what your boy friend does. Just wondering. :unsure:
 

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,284
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com

Canada's Trudeau Announces Legislation to Prevent Buying and Selling of Handguns​


 
  • Wow
Reactions: taxme

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,777
452
83
Holy shit, if there ever was a Conservative core belief, it's this one being pulled out of your chest and stomped on with an army boot.

I almost want to look into stats and shit just to see if this isn't going too far.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
50,965
4,294
113
Washington DC
Interesting. It does pose the question "You like to say that banning new guns is useless cuz there's already millions in the country and guns last forever. So why do we need new ones? Just trade around the ones that we have."
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,523
4,249
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Interesting. It does pose the question "You like to say that banning new guns is useless cuz there's already millions in the country and guns last forever. So why do we need new ones? Just trade around the ones that we have."
From the link you quoted:

Current handgun owners will not be affected by the federal government’s “national freeze,” although they would only be allowed to sell or transfer the weapon to an authorized business. The freeze is set to last indefinitely.

Can’t sell or trade the ones already here. Can’t buy one, & can only sell them (or trade them?) to an authorized business, who can’t sell them. The only new ones coming in will be the ones that get smuggled in. Canada being physically connected to only one other country that happens to have more firearms per capita that pretty much any other country on the planet. Interesting.

Wasn’t there an analogist situation on this continent that created the Kennedys & the Bronfmans during a different prohibition? Might be more lucrative than bitcoin for some.

Easily the biggest difference between Canadian and U.S. gun owners is cultural. American firearms rights are guaranteed in the U.S. constitution for the explicit purpose of arming the citizenry as a check against tyranny. And when you ask gun owners why they possess firearms, the vast majority of them report that it’s for personal protection.

But in Canada, the government allows civilians to own guns only for three main reasons: Killing animals, collecting, and shooting tiny holes in paper targets for fun.

There are obviously plenty of Canadian gun owners who will fudge this condition in an emergency, but Canada mandates a pretty strict storage regime for firearms which makes them hard to whip out at a moment’s notice.

Unless you’re in a wilderness area, your gun needs to be stored unloaded and separate from its ammunition. In addition, it either needs to be in a locked vault or, at the very least, fitted with a trigger lock.

There is a very, very rare exception to the above wherein a Canadian citizen can be authorized by the RCMP to carry a concealed handgun for protection if they can prove that they face regular threats to their life. As of 2018, only two Canadians had this certification.

(NOBODY LEGALLY BUYS GUNS OR AMMUNITION IN CANADA WITHOUT AN RCMP-APPROVED LICENSE ALREADY)

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has a developed a bit of a habit of taking domestic political stances that are seemingly targeted for a U.S. audience.

After word leaked earlier this month that the U.S. Supreme Court was set to overturn federal guarantees on abortion, Trudeau immediately issued a statement touting how “every woman in Canada has a right to a safe and legal abortion.” When Black Lives Matter protests roiled the United States last summer, Trudeau was quick to “take a knee” for photographers on the streets of Ottawa. And now, after a mass shooter killed 19 at an elementary school in Texas last week, Trudeau has responded with a slate of new restrictions on Canadian gun ownership.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,523
4,249
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
I don’t own a gun. Have never owned a gun. Probably will never own a gun. I don’t hunt (I don’t need to & don’t see the “sport” in it) and when my girl who loves to fish goes fishing…If I go with her…I take a book and not a Rod (I don’t need to & don’t see the “sport” in it).

That said, my issue isn’t guns and gun ownership, but government overreach. Handguns in Canada have been highly regulated for about a century already before Justin decided to do what he’s doing in response to this school shooting in Texas that didn’t use a handgun.

Now this question is from the outside looking in, what is America’s second amendment about? (The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right to keep and bear arms. It was ratified on December 15, 1791, along with nine other articles of the Bill of Rights.)
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
50,965
4,294
113
Washington DC
I don’t own a gun. Have never owned a gun. Probably will never own a gun. I don’t hunt (I don’t need to & don’t see the “sport” in it) and when my girl who loves to fish goes fishing…If I go with her…I take a book and not a Rod (I don’t need to & don’t see the “sport” in it).

That said, my issue isn’t guns and gun ownership, but government overreach. Handguns in Canada have been highly regulated for about a century already before Justin decided to do what he’s doing in response to this school shooting in Texas that didn’t use a handgun.

Now this question is from the outside looking in, what is America’s second amendment about? (The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right to keep and bear arms. It was ratified on December 15, 1791, along with nine other articles of the Bill of Rights.)
Short primer. The Bill of Rights is taken, lock stock and barrel, from the Virginia Bill of Rights. Therefore, it reflects issues that were of concern in the mid-18th century. There was a huge debate at the Constitutional Convention as to whether a bill of rights should be included at all.

The thinkers of the day did not trust national armies, because their experience was that armies were tools of the central government, used more often to oppress the people than to do anything constructive, like defend the country. Remember, this was in a context of a general philosophy that viewed the United States more like the current EU than like the single country it now is: a close alliance of independent, sovereign states (at the time "states" meant what we now mean by "countries").

Our solution was state militias. How each militia would be organized, trained, paid, and equipped was up to the state. In the rare case of a legitimate national emergency (oceans east and west, remember?), the President could "Federalize" the militias to form an army.

Remember that this was at a time when, technologically, there was no difference between thirteen corps of 1000 men each and one army of 13,000 men. Muzzle-loading muskets and smoothbore cannon were the rule of the day. The model was actually not dissimilar to the location-based regiments of the British army. It is worth noting that the Constitution provided for a navy on a completely different, national model. Because ships are expensive, and you can't have a functional navy cobbled together from thirteen state coastal-patrol flotillas.

The problem that the Second Amendment was intended to address was the problem of central governments occasionally passing laws banning private ownership of weapons (shortly afterward, Napoleon would do just that, as an example). This was intended to ensure the ability of a frontier people to fight Natives (I'll save my "genocide" rants for another day), to form posses to fight bandits and pirates, to enforce such things as tax laws against towns or regions that refused to pay, etc. But the central reason for the Second Amendment was to facilitate the formation of state militias. It was beyond the means of most states to provide muskets and ammunition to a large body of men, so given that it was a frontier society and people needed their muskets anyhow, the militias did not issue weapons. Each man was expected to show up for militia duty with his own musket, his own ammunition, and his own equipment (bedroll, tin plate and utensils, coat, etc.).

Remember that there were no police, no army, no band of armed men under discipline and full-time employed to exercise state authority by violence. Each county had one guy, the sheriff. The most populous counties might have a few paid full-time or part-time deputies. If a larger force was needed temporarily, the sheriff would form a volunteer posse. If Natives needed killing or there was a particularly strong gang of bandits or pirates hanging around, the governor would call up the militia (which was composed of ordinary, working citizens, not full-time professionals).

That is the reasoning behind the Second Amendment. And I would suggest it's as relevant to the here-and-now as the Third Amendment, which forbids the quartering of troops in private homes in peacetime without compensation. The Army doesn't WANT to quarter troops in private homes, and if it's stuck in a place where it doesn't have a base, it's happy to compensate the owners of private businesses and residences for using them as quarters.

NONE of this was intended to allow the citizenry to band together and take up arms against their own government. It was intended to allow the governments to raise armies on the cheap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron in Regina

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
50,965
4,294
113
Washington DC
If you want to talk about handguns as personal-defense weapons, that's a conversation I'm perfectly willing to have. But it has nothing to do with the Second Amendment or the purposes for which it was passed in the first place in Virginia, or later added to the Constitution.

And a handgun is not an effective military weapon, which is why they don't issue them to infantry. A handgun is underpowered and inaccurate. It's sole benefits are ease of deployment (being light and short) and concealability (if that's a benefit).