My stupid off-topic reference to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights was a direct response to Colby, who confuses Merica Freedumb bullshiyte with reality so much, he's threatening war with the RCMP as if he's a member of some angry Yank Hillbilly militia out in the desert.
New federal gun control bill expected this week
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
My stupid off-topic reference to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights was a direct response to Colby, who confuses Merica Freedumb bullshiyte with reality so much, he's threatening war with the RCMP as if he's a member of some angry Yank Hillbilly militia out in the desert.
"he's threatening war with the RCMP"
Go take your medication.
Well, back to the topic:
The most egregious thing in the Canadian bill is the removal of the cabinet's ability to over rule the RCMP classification of guns.
I know the "progressives" love it, because the idea of a police state just thrills them to the bone.
The reality is that the RCMP push out beyond the limits of the law to ban things they just don't like, in fact to ban whatever they think they can get away with..........
Examples from the CSSA:
Six Cases of RCMP Discretion Gone Wild
Ruger 10/22 Magazine Ban
The Ruger 10/22, created in 1964, is the most popular .22 calibre rifle in Canada. This durable rifle sparked an entire companion industry of parts, including 25, 50 and 100 round magazines. By law, there is no magazine capacity limit on .22 calibre rifles.
Over one million 10/22 magazines were estimated to have been imported into Canada over the past five decades.
On July 21, 2016, the RCMP’s absurd misinterpretation of Part 4, Section 3(1)(b) (definitions of prohibited devices) banned all Ruger 10/22 magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition.
3 (1) Any cartridge magazine… (b) that is capable of containing more than 10 cartridges of the type for which the magazine was originally designed and that is designed or manufactured for use in a semi-automatic handgun that is commonly available in Canada.
The RCMP declared Ruger 10/22 magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds were not designed for the Ruger 10/22 rifle back in 1964 but were designed for the little-known Ruger Charger handgun first manufactured for sale in 2007.
The Ruger Charger was, in fact, designed to fit the Ruger 10/22 magazine. It defies logic to claim the magazine was designed for a gun which did not exist for another 43 years. Yet this is the RCMP’s public position - Ruger 10/22 magazines were designed or manufactured for use in a semi-automatic handgun created 43 years later by invoking the clause “for use in a semi-automatic handgun that is commonly available in Canada.”
Naturally, the RCMP refuses to say how many Ruger Charger handguns exist, as that would shine the light of truth on their “commonly available in Canada” lie.
Owners of Ruger 10/22 magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition are now subject to 10 years in prison – the penalty for possession of a Prohibited Device.
Armi Jager AP80 Ban
In 2012, the RCMP reclassified the Armi Jager AP80 from Non-Restricted to Prohibited with the ridiculous claim the .22 calibre rifle is a “variant of the design of the firearm commonly known as the AK-47 rifle” as mandated by Prohibited Weapons Order, No. 13, section 64.
The AP80 is not a variant of the AK47. Not a single part of the AP80 is interchangeable with the AK-47. The AP80 is a totally different semi-automatic .22 rifle. It cannot fire fully-automatic. The AP80 fires the .22LR cartridge, not the larger .30 calibre 7.62x39 cartridge.
Noted journalist, Matt Gurney, perfectly describes the RCMP’s intentional application of the will of Parliament.
“The decision to ban the AP-80, however, has no logic behind it at all. The RCMP is banning the AP-80 because it looks scary.”
Even though individuals bought the AP80 legally, with the stroke of an RCMP bureaucrat’s pen, owners of this .22 rifle are now criminals subject to 10 years in prison – the penalty for possession of a Prohibited firearm.
Prohibited Mossberg Blaze-47 vs Non-Restricted Mossberg Blaze
In 2015, the RCMP classified the Mossberg Blaze-47 as a Prohibited rifle by perverting the same classification rationale used to ban the Armi Jager AP80 three years earlier.
Like the AP80, the Blaze-47 fires a .22 calibre rimfire cartridge in semi-automatic only and no parts are interchangeable with the AK-47.
The Non-Restricted Mossberg Blaze and the Prohibited Blaze-47 firearms are absolutely identical. The ONLY difference between these two rifles is the stock. One is a simple, black polymer stock, the other is cosmetically designed to look like the AK-47.
With the stroke of an RCMP bureaucrat’s pen, any owners of the Blaze-47 rifle are now criminals subject to 10 years in prison – the penalty for possession of a Prohibited firearm – if they do not turn their firearms over to the RCMP for destruction.
However, it is perfectly legal to buy a Mossberg Blaze, add a Blaze 47 stock as an unregulated plastic Blaze 47 stock to it and make your own Blaze 47 rifle. No sweat, you just can't buy it assembled.
.50 Beowulf Magazine Ban
On November 17, 2015, the RCMP reclassified the .50 Beowulf magazine as a Prohibited Device because it can function using two different calibres of ammunition in the AR-15 platform. The following is a quote from an unidentified manager at the Canadian Firearms Program.
The 50 Beowulf cartridge is centrefire and the AR platform rifles which use that calibre are semiautomatic. Thus, cartridge magazines for 50 Beowulf calibre firearms are prohibited if more than five 50 Beowulf cartridges can be contained in the magazine (subparagraph ii, as above).
Magazines for the AR platform which contain four or five 50 Beowulf calibre cartridges present a more complicated situation. Such magazines will generally contain 11 and 14 cartridges respectively of 5.56x45 mm NATO (or 223 Remington) calibre. Since the 50 Beowulf calibre magazines are adapted from the original 5.56x45 mm NATO design and the ability of the magazine to perform as originally designed has not been compromised by the adaptation, such magazines are prohibited if they contain more than five 5.56x45 mm NATO cartridges. The magazines are in effect dual calibre magazines and will be prohibited if they exceed five shots capacity of either calibre.
If you’re confused, you are not alone. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have to make sense. It’s government policy. By the way, in Canadian law, there is no such thing as a dual-purpose magazine.
CZ-858 Spartan Prohibited but CZ-858 is Non-Restricted
In one of their stupidest decisions, the reclassified the CZ-858 Spartan from Non-Restricted to Prohibited, not because of its functionality, but because of cosmetic engravings added onto the receiver.
The CZ858 Tactical-2P rifle is legal and classified Non-Restricted but the “CZ858 Tactical-2P Spartan Limited Edition Proofed 2007 Or Later” is classified Prohibited because it is not specifically named as an exempted item in the Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and Other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridge Magazines, Ammunition and Projectiles as Prohibited, Restricted or Non-Restricted, SOR/98-462.
The RCMP also claims the “CZ858 Tactical-2P firearm proofed 2007 can be converted to a fully automatic firearm in a relatively short period of time with relative ease.” Right...no proof...just take our word on it...
Swiss Arms Rifles
In February 2014 the RCMP made the “discretionary call” to ban the Swiss Arms family of semi-automatic rifles, turning thousands more law-abiding citizens into criminals. The Conservative government reversed the ban but not before drawing fire for not reigning in the RCMP and its overzealous bureaucrats
Yep, that one.
And, by the way, the comment of yours to which I responded was not a response to Colpy's comment about the U.S. Constitution, it was a response to Colpy's comment about the school shooting in Maryland today.
Don't lie to me. I check.
It was a security officer:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...tained-statement/ar-BBKsWWG?OCID=ansmsnnews11
Won't the state need to do that over their dead bodies?
Perhaps a solution would be to allow municipalities to introduce their own firearms rules ranging from total prohibition to total freedom. That way, those who'd rather live in a more gun-free zone would have a more civilized place to move to. Those who drool over guns could move to the hell-hole municipalities. However, let each municipality pay for its own crime enforcement so that the no-gun municipalities don't end up subsidizing the rest.
Damn right. Don't bother insulting me for being a lawyer, either. People have been doing that for 25 years. And believe me, I weep bitter, salt tears over it.
All the way to the bank.
I will give up mah gun when the pry my cold, dead tongue outta the trigger guard.
Hmmm... just don't stick your tongue on their in minus zero weather or you might regret it.
Perhaps Canada and the US should establish an open-border agreement. Gun lovers could move south while the rational could move north. FREEDOM!
Why the hell would I want to move down there? I was thinking more along the lines of Colpy.
I doubt you'd want to move up here either. Let Canadians with no sense of reason move south and wise Americans move north.
Nah, you misread me. My motive for opening the borders is to make it easier for foolish Canadians to head south.
Like I said, I have no interest in heading south... or at least not across the border to the US... or at least not without a bullet-proof vest, helmet, and visors.
You clearly have a rather skewed sense of risk. Kinda like the guy who stockpiles dehydrated food for the collapse of civilization, and drives without a seatbelt.
How so? Even with open borders, US nationals crossing into Canada would still be disarmed at the border. Then the sane might continue on while the crazy would turn back home because they'd feel naked without their guns.
Meanwhile, foolish Canadians would cross the border and head to the nearest gun shop.
Because only an id. . . um. . . a person with a skewed sense of risk would think you need "a bullet-proof vest, helmet, and visors" to be safe in the U.S.
I'm not a "man of law," whatever that means. I'm a lawyer.
Great sense of humor. And compassion. And the compassion leads me to advise you not to give up your day job.