68 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

For those of you who may not be following the Bill C-21 issue, the Liberals are being accused of pulling a fast one with their handgun ban by quietly extending it to a large assortment of long guns, many of which are used for hunting or shooting fowl, or even self-protection in the wilderness. This has upset Canada’s hunting community, and indigenous communities that rely on those firearms. Both NDP and Conservative MPs are objecting to this and calling for a re-think, including one Liberal MP that has broken rank.

That we are a country with a vast wilderness, with lots of large predators in huge areas with no cell coverage and no ability to seek medical aid or otherwise, and we cannot carry sidearms for self protection, to then turn around and expand a full-on handgun ban to a large cross spectrum of hunting rifles and shotguns is hard to understand.

For those who may not know, Canada banned fully automatic guns in the 70s. And our semi-auto firearms are limited to five cartridges in a magazine. The federal government also banned approximately 1,500 “assault style” guns under the current government, which itself was controversial as a bunch of guns were banned because they looked a certain way but performed like grandpa’s hunting rifle. Just the other month, the Liberals froze the acquisition and trading or handguns, full on.

Now they want to extend the earlier “assault style” ban onto old school rifles and shotguns that are the back bone of hunting, and tools for self-protection in the wilderness.

Circle back to the vast wilderness with large predators and no cell coverage over large expanses of land, and tell me how that makes sense, under the guise that the Liberals say their only goal is to make the streets of Canada safer but they don’t admit that the vast majority of guns used in criminal activity in Canada are illegally imported by criminal organizations, many of which (guns) are already banned in Canada and have been for a very long time.

In other words, criminals are not going to stop importing illegal firearms, because hunters are banned from using the best tools for the task at hand, or people in the wilderness who rely on specific firearms for protection must now figure out alternate firearms, which may not be sufficient to protect them, depending on where Bill C-21 lands.

Which leads us to this interesting scenario for a political party:

On the bright side for Justin Trudeau’s gang, even now they have a constituency that will applaud every new package of gun control measures as a “step in the right direction,” even if the step is much smaller than promised or in an unanticipated or nonsensical direction. Case in point: The AR-15 rifle, favourite of mass shooters, has been top of this constituency’s gun-ban list for nearly 30 years. The Liberals were always happy to nod along with them, but it wasn’t until 2020 — immediately after the massacre in Nova Scotia — that the Liberals finally got around to banning it.

(You can see the problem, strategically: Now that they’ve banned it, they can’t raise money by promising to ban it anymore.)



The Liberals still have that constituency even now — especially in Quebec — even as Bill C-21 falls to pieces. An editorial in Tuesday’s La Presse perfectly summed up this viewpoint: Vincent Brousseau-Pouliot conceded the bill had been “poorly explained”; that defining the “assault weapons” to be banned “in the middle of the legislative process (was) frankly bizarre”; and that only “a small percentage of crimes committed with firearms are committed with legal weapons.” Nevertheless, he concluded, C-21 “sends a clear message: we want to reduce as much as possible the risk of another killing.”

…

It’s at odds with the Assembly of First Nations, which on Thursday passed an emergency resolution in defence of Indigenous hunting rights and opposing the Liberal gun bill.

It’s at odds with some in the NDP, the party currently supporting the Liberals in a supply-and-confidence motion. (The NDP has always had a better read on rural and north-of-60 life than the Liberals. The fate of the long-gun registry was a key point of division under Jack Layton’s leadership.)

And it’s at odds with the normally quiet majority of Canadians who think gun control is good but that hunting is a perfectly legitimate activity — i.e., the status quo, the many virtues of which the Liberals can never seem to accept on this issue. That majority is now uncommonly engaged in and informed about this issue, because the Liberals have made such a hash of it. It’s not just conservative media outlets reporting on it, and it calls very much into question the Liberals’ basic competencies as a government.

…

By rights, a similar reckoning awaits the Liberals on firearms. We all know the vast majority of “crime guns” come across the border — and that’s after countless pledges over the years by Conservative and Liberal governments alike to crack down on it. Demonizing Conservatives or gun control advocates won’t stop it. Only stopping it will stop it. That seems to be a very difficult task, but going after legal gun owners is no substantial substitute.

- https://nationalpost...iberal-shambles

[sebberry]

I think by the time you realize you're being charged by a bear, you'll be reaching for bear spray before your rifle. 

[Mike K.]

You’ll be reaching for a shot gun, most likely, but if you have bear spray and no shot gun, you’ll likely reach for it and incapacitate yourself.

[Mike K.]

A good list of how the Liberals have been untruthful in recent days about their last minute changes to Bill C-21.

Bill C-21 started off as a pretty routine bill to codify some earlier Liberal orders banning the sale and transfer of handguns. But then, in an 11th hour amendment, a Liberal committee member slipped in a 400-page schedule of long guns to be criminalized. Another amendment promised to criminalize most types of semi-automatic firearms (these are guns that automatically reload after each pull of the trigger, but under existing Canadian law are limited to five-round magazines).

By any measure, this is the most sweeping firearms prohibition in history and will ban whole categories of firearms that have only ever been marketed and sold as hunting arms. In response, the primary Liberal defence has been to simply deny that any hunting arms will be caught by the ban, even though this is easily debunked by even a cursory reading of the amendments.

All of these comments were later found to be Pinnochios:

“Don’t believe the hype. We are focusing on assault-style firearms, not hunting rifles.”

“We are not targeting law-abiding gun owners. We are not targeting guns that are commonly used for hunting.”

“We respect the sustenance rights of Indigenous peoples. We are not targeting those rights whatsoever.”

“Let’s be clear: we’re not banning hunting rifles & shotguns.”

The bill will only “go after those AR-15-style firearms that were used in the likes of Polytechnique.”

“The government has been very clear that it is not targeting the guns commonly used for hunting.”

More: https://nationalpost...iberals-gun-ban

[Ismo07]

So is there an actual list to discuss or are we just hearing what other people think?

[Mike K.]

Yes, there’s quite the list: https://firearmright...t-G46-final.pdf

It’s massive.

[Mike K.]

This pink bolt action (so you have to physically reload the chamber, it’s not semi-auto) Montana SCR Princess Warrior little hunting rifle will be banned: https://www.personal...incess-warrior/

When the government said they weren’t going after hunters, they could not have been any more disingenuous.

[Ismo07]

Yes, there’s quite the list: https://firearmright...t-G46-final.pdf

It’s massive.

 

Ah yes, is there a list of what seems unreasonable?  Like granpa's hunting rifle?

[Mike K.]

You’ll have to dig for that yourself. It’s hard to settle on what’s ridiculous and what’s asinine, and what’s reasonable.

But when the spirit of the bill is to go after assault weapons, you’ve lost the cart if you’re a government that thinks that pink bolt action I linked is in the same league as an AR-15.

Why don’t we ban knives? There are more knife crimes in Canada than gun crimes. Even mass killings using knives, like the recent one in Saskatchewan.

“But Mike, dude, 99% of knives are used to cook food!”

[lanforod]

maybe to cut food, not so much to cook it .

[Mike K.]

You don’t have knives that cook your food? Dude.

[Ismo07]

You’ll have to dig for that yourself. It’s hard to settle on what’s ridiculous and what’s asinine, and what’s reasonable.

But when the spirit of the bill is to go after assault weapons, you’ve lost the cart if you’re a government that thinks that pink bolt action I linked is in the same league as an AR-15.

Why don’t we ban knives? There are more knife crimes in Canada than gun crimes. Even mass killings using knives, like the recent one in Saskatchewan.

“But Mike, dude, 99% of knives are used to cook food!”

 

Not a gun guy at all, so I don't know.  I imagine this list has been set up for whatever reason but maybe it's not a final list.  Like is the list of guns that will be allowed like 3 or 4, that would be bad, but if there are still 100s of hunting rifles then I guess that's enough.  You'd think the restrictions would limit caliber and fire rate mostly.  So you wouldn't need a list of specific names of guns only a few limiting things.  I don't know what else would be important?  Laser sights?  I'll have to talk to my gun guy.  The guy I rely on if sh*t hits the fan and the zombies come.

[lanforod]

You don’t have knives that cook your food? Dude.

 

I look forward to trying them out once I get the annual VV christmas gift.

[Mike K.]

I look forward to trying them out once I get the annual VV christmas gift.

You want to eat the knives? Dude.

[lanforod]

Stop calling me dude, dude!

[Mike K.]

Not a gun guy at all, so I don't know. I imagine this list has been set up for whatever reason but maybe it's not a final list. Like is the list of guns that will be allowed like 3 or 4, that would be bad, but if there are still 100s of hunting rifles then I guess that's enough. You'd think the restrictions would limit caliber and fire rate mostly. So you wouldn't need a list of specific names of guns only a few limiting things. I don't know what else would be important? Laser sights? I'll have to talk to my gun guy. The guy I rely on if sh*t hits the fan and the zombies come.

It’s a little more complex than that. The ban is controversial because it targets so many guns, of which alternatives are not that easy to come by if an entire spectrum of guns is banned.

Also, not all guns are created equal. A well built rifle won’t jam on you, whereas a cheap knock off could, etc. That’s why there is such a brouhaha over the list as alternatives may be inferior.

Admittedly I’m not familiar with the entire list because I’m not a versed in guns but what I’m hearing is from people who are.

[Ismo07]

This is an interesting take (old white man take ... Does someone hunting feel they need to shoot over and over?

 

The amendment proposes to ban “a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed.”

 

Millroy: Bill C-21 Amendments To Canada’s Gun Laws | SaultOnline.com

Edited by Ismo07, 13 December 2022 - 09:40 AM.

[Ismo07]

It’s a little more complex than that. The ban is controversial because it targets so many guns, of which alternatives are not that easy to come by if an entire spectrum of guns is banned.

Also, not all guns are created equal. A well built rifle won’t jam on you, whereas a cheap knock off could, etc. That’s why there is such a brouhaha over the list as alternatives may be inferior.

Admittedly I’m not familiar with the entire list because I’m not a versed in guns but what I’m hearing is from people who are.

 

But should it be this complex?  I'm surprised they name specific guns rather than the basic restriction.    Seems gun manufacturers can just make new guns or change names and away you go.  A friend of mine who is a hunter says he would lose 8 guns to this.  I don't know how many guns he has lol.  

 

How Bill C-21 turned from banning handguns to hunting guns | CBC News

 

A few other restrictions...

 

The list also names guns that fall afoul of two rules nominally intended to ban powerful military weapons such as .50-calibre sniper rifles and mortars. One rule bans long guns that can generate more than 10,000 joules of energy, and the other bans guns with a muzzle wider than 20 millimetres. Critics say those rules would ban everything from antique blunderbusses to the Nine O'clock Gun in Vancouver's Stanley Park.

Edited by Ismo07, 13 December 2022 - 09:49 AM.

[lanforod]

This is the Liberals instead of registering long guns, taking them away. Next step will be allowing single shot only...

[Mike K.]

This is an interesting take (old white man take ... Does someone hunting feel they need to shoot over and over?

The amendment proposes to ban “a firearm that is a rifle or shotgun that is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner and that is designed to accept a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity greater than five cartridges of the type for which the firearm was originally designed.”

Millroy: Bill C-21 Amendments To Canada’s Gun Laws | SaultOnline.com

There’s a good chance you miss, and spook the animal, so taking two immediate shots can make a big difference.

If you have to reload you’re done. Worse yet, if you injured the animal and spooked it before you can reload, now you have that on your conscience.

Most hunters become proficient in their craft and can usually shoot their game with one bullet. But it takes time to get that good.

But then in comes self-defence in the bush. Reloading a bolt action when a moose is charging you is not helpful. Or having to load the shotgun between rounds.

Just for self defense alone the 5 cartridge limit was tricky, and now they want to limit it to one cartridge. It just makes no sense in a nation with such a vast wilderness with large game and predators.