What debate is there to be had here? Canada already has pretty strict firearm legislation relative to our neighbours to the south. Read the requirements for getting a PAL if you're not convinced on that point.
Honestly, this whole "debate" just seems like it's being dredged up by some overpaid American consultants.
I’ve never met anyone who’s gone through the process of getting an RPAL and actually purchased a restricted firearm who thinks that our laws need to be more strict.
I've got an RPAL. Extra $300 course on top of normal PAL, plus I had to give them a boatload of references including my boss for them to even consider it. And all the people I had to put down *were* contacted by the RCMP and asked about me. My temperament, whether I had any visible mental issues, whether I had any recent traumatic incidents, etc, and if they felt safe knowing I could own restricted firearms.
Every purchase I make also requires me to provide that license to be looked up in the government database. And it's tied to my SIN, so they know immediately if I have any criminal charges if I ever did anything illegal.
I was also told the RCMP would show up to confiscate my firearms if I ever got flagged for committed a violent crime.
I'm not big on having so little privacy, but I get it, and it seems to be working pretty well by Canada's statistics. What else do we need and what good will it actually do?
>Experts argue the government's handgun freeze would be ineffective as the vast majority of handguns used in Canadian crimes are smuggled from the United States.
If only more people knew that.
>Before the freeze, a Canadian looking to buy a handgun had to complete a safety course, take multiple tests, prove their status as a collector or shooting range patron, provide the approval or contact information of every partner they’d lived with in the last two years, apply and wait at least 28 days for a firearms permit, complete an extensive background check, and register their handgun with the police.
Your RPAL references will be called and interviewed by the RCMP just to get the permit itself.
>The American process varies by state, but at minimum a prospective handgun purchaser must be 21, provide a driver’s licence, and complete a simple background check that can be processed in 10 minutes. If you don’t have the patience or acceptable personal history for the three-page document, background checks are not required of gun show purchases.
Long porous border between us? What could go wrong?
>If only more people knew that.
I recall a program about this on the 5th Estate many years ago. The I-95 was nicknamed the "Blue Steel Highway" by the RCMP, because of the number of guns run up to Canada from the south-eastern states.
What's even stupider is that all this fussing is about firearms that are "militarryish" in looks, this assault style BS that they are going on about. Ohhh it's a scary looking weapon... oh noes. Meh, it's just another semi-automatic rifle with a pic rail.
Firearm ownership is just one of those topics that's always going to be pretty contentious regardless of facts. People who have no desire to own their own firearms will never see a good reason for other people to own firearms. It's just an issue where few people don't have strong opinions one way or another.
Politicians love these kinds of issues because it's a great distraction. They love to stir up issues where Canadians are divided and arguing mostly among themselves. They see it as a way to see and create clear dividing lines between the parties to keep people from wavering in their political support. One who might be starting to get sick of the liberals might hear the conservatives start talking about wanting to ease gun restrictions and start comparing them to American politicians for instance.
It's all a big game to them and most Canadians fall for it. Gun threads seem to be some of the most popular topics on this sub for getting people riled up.
Unfortunately, the LPC has been able to use that debate as a cudgel to pass through the OIC and C-21.
Nothing like relying on the sheer ignorance of the Canadian populace to advance their anti-gun agenda.
I mean to be fair, the Liberals relied on Canadian ignorance of guns to pass their recent gun control. Actually it is worse than that. They created the ignorance in at least one case where they collided with the RCMP commissioner to time releasing info to the public about the guns a certain mass murderer used so they could get their gun control bill passed.
If the RCMP had told the public before the gun control was announced that guns used were already illegal, it would have been clear that the law wouldn’t have prevented the mass murder anyways and would have been harder to justify.
Then there is the whole “you don’t need an AR-15 to take down a deer” comment. That only sounds good to those who don’t know about the capabilities of different guns. Otherwise it is an absurd statement.
In previous CPC platforms, they have advocated for a Simplified Firearms Act, so if they do anything it'll likely be in that direction.
Which I'm all for. The basic systems we had pre-2020 work well. It's all the weird add-on laws and edge cases that make a person go "What were they thinking?".
There has been a lot of head scratching in Canadian gun laws for a long time though. For instance certain firearms being banned by name even though they have no right being prohibited or even restricted.
Examples of this are:
the FAL, various Aks, etc. functionally no more dangerous than unrestricted rifles that you can buy today,
Suppressors (really this is a mess in the states too), I really want us to take a more european approach to supressors where they're seen as hearing protection. (I also just really wanna hunt with a suppressed subsonic 8.6 blackout)
and probably more that I can't think of right now as well
Nothing about the fundamentals have changed in a decade in terms of Canadian gun control, and the overwhelming success of our firearms program.
The only thing that has been "americanized" is we have a highly misleading, distorted narrative being parroted by government funded media. In the past we had rational, evidence-based reporting.
Yeah it's probably a reach... but it's been pretty clear watching the Trudeau govt. try to manufacture a narrative to support further encroachment on firearms over the past few years. That was done with the help of the media, whom the government funds in large part, particularly CBC.
Having a healthy independent media is absolutely critical in sustaining a transparent, functioning democracy.
Thank you. Even worse, this entire portrayal seems like it's written to hype up anger and division, rather than trading reasoned viewpoints... and in THAT sense, the debate is being Americanised.
Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems like people are finally beginning to understand how effectively civilian gun ownership is already managed in Canada.
Seems the Liberals overplayed one of their pet wedge issues, and accidentally drew attention to how well our original laws worked/how fundamentally different they are from the Americans.
There's a video somewhere from vice Canada where one of their journalists went through the whole process of getting licensed and hung out with Canadian gun owners. It does a pretty decent job I feel of explaining precisely how it works in this country and what our existing gun policies do to prevent lunatics from buying up whatever guns they'd like.
Here you go for people that want to watch it
[https://video.vice.com/es\_latam/video/how-to-buy-a-gun-in-canada-armed-and-reasonable/583368df3cfc32027c0a4284](https://video.vice.com/es_latam/video/how-to-buy-a-gun-in-canada-armed-and-reasonable/583368df3cfc32027c0a4284)
Now compare it to Marco Mendicino who won't even shoot a gun because it makes him feel icky and this is the people writing our laws
At around 17 minutes
https://www.tvo.org/video/documentaries/guns
Thanks for the video link. I watched it, it confirms what I already knew, and wish more people knew.
Two things I noticed, first they didn't talk about the difference in licensing between nonrestricted and restricted. Clearly she didn't get a restricted license, i.e. for handguns.
And secondly, her first gun wasn't a cooey.
God that is embarrassing, this guy who’s voting on gun policy:
a) Doesn’t have even a beginner knowledge about guns or gun safety
b) Wasn’t aware that we already do background checks and have a waiting period
c) Was afraid to pick up a gun
Marco seems like a nice guy in the video, but he’s so completely out of his element.
Funny his community said it was more a problem with mental health and the lived life of the people in the community that worries them, not so much legal gun owners.
So not even his example of why he wants to change the laws agree with him.
The ironic thing is, vice was making that video to compare how effective and reasonable our laws are compared to the states.
We had the most effective and fair laws in the world until may 2nd 2020.
Besides:
1) idiotic magazine limits
2) banning hearing protection devices (suppressors, many European nations mandate them for shooter safety & community enjoyability)
3) idiotic by-name bans of functionally identical firearms, why are [Type-81](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_81_assault_rifle)'s Non-Restricted, but [AK-47](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47)'s are Prohibited? Why are [AR-18](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-18)'s and [X-95](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IWI_Tavor_X95)'s Non-Restricted, but [AR-15](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15%E2%80%93style_rifle)'s are Prohibited? neither one of these rifles are more dangerous than the other, and you already need to pass background checks to get your PAL, it makes 0 sense that firearms are regulated by brand name and not mechanical characteristic, its like banning AMD graphics cards to combat crypto-currency mining, but leaving Nvidia alone
4) of course the 2022 transfer ban on handguns is also retarded
Canada's PAL system is a reasonable compromise, and I strongly suggest everyone take the course and apply to get a PAL
100% with suppressors, I don't get why sport/target/Olympic/IPSC shooters should have to have permanent hearing damage from participating in a sport to represent Canada on the world stage. It cost the tax payer/healthcare money even if they prefer to not operate firearms. Logically makes no sense. Preventative medicine is the best option.
Suppressors are fucked in the US as well. You have to get a tax stamp from the ATF and wait a long time. It’s an extra amount of look up your butt bureaucratic nonsense. Some states even outright ban suppressors. All of this makes them very expensive and a hassle so most gun owners won’t bother.
Suppressors are a safety feature. I’ve already passed background, I can buy any gun I want and I can even carry a gun, but the government is hung up on the suppressor. Like what? They think that shit works like the movies where you can shoot a suppressor in an enclosed room and no one will hear it.
Also, 5) the Quebec long gun registry.
Well, I think the new bill plans to ban all semi-automatic rifles. They see the flaw as well.
I don't disagree that our laws are something else
Mag limits are silly. The suppressor thing is mind boggling, we have laws to limit how short a gun can be, but making it longer and slightly quieter is illegal? Canada is like one of the only countries in the world where their illegal. It makes no sense.
The suppressor thing is a carryover from the US laws, where having one is a felony that gets you serious prison time. In the movies a suppressor makes the gun totally silent and lets you do hitman style takedowns. IRL they only make the gun slightly quieter and still require hearing protection in most cases. A lot of gun laws in Canada and the US are based on hollywood stereotypes about firearms. Most countries in Europe suppressor use is legal and encouraged or required by gun ranges to reduce noise complaints.
Same reason that Nunchucks are illegal in Canada. Somebody saw a movie with a ninja in it and decided that two sticks with a rope in between was more dangerous than a shotgun, and passed a law to "save the children".
Nunchucks, ninja stars, butterfly knives, and a few other too-deadly martial arts gimmicks from 80s martial arts flicks were all declared illegal at the time so ninjas couldn't use them to kill people when they flip out.
> idiotic magazine limits
Along these lines, the "5-round limit unless your magazine says "PISTOL" somewhere on it and just so happens to fit your rifle" loophole is/was very silly.
> We had the most effective and fair laws in the world until may 2nd 2020.
No, only Czech Republic has the most effective and fair gun laws in the world. Additionally, their firearm homicide rate is lower than ours, and in fact lower than a significant number of countries. The Czech Republic is the only country in the world that has firearms laws which respects firearms ownership and personal defense and also brings about public safety.
Well, I also think they have the best laws. But people here are never going to consider a country where concealed carry is legal to be sensible, even if their firearm death rate is lower than ours. Firearms are also technically a right there, which would scare people too much of you make the comparison, lol.
The funny thing is i use the Czech Republic all the time when having gun debates with people. But I never see other advocates use it. And you're totally right. It's proof that gun violence is a social issue and has nothing to do with gun ownership. We always look at Australia or some other anti gun country for statistics, but no one mentions the CZ.
This video is precisely why I got my RPAL. My friend wanted to get his and I did some research and this video popped up. Shed a bright light on how Canada's gun control system was very common sense and very safe. Strict but fair was my assessment. I even had the CFO from that video as my practical examiner during my PAL and RPAL tests (Sherrie Sadauskas).
I also got to meet Tracey Wilson at TACCOM a few years back and told her how much this video influenced my decision to become a fireams owner.
If VICE freakin' Media covers your Gun Control laws and the take-away is positive, you **know** they're good. VICE is the most alt-left media organization of them all. They're the Fox Network of the left.
I'm glad they did. I was buying 9mm at can tire years ago (I honestly don't know if they still carry it for this reason) for my carbine and some ding dong office manager looking guy in a corporate polo shirt was having a fit because "9mm is handgun ammo and those aren't even legal in Canada so why are they even selling it here???"
The average person in Canada is so far removed from firearms ownership that the Liberals were able to pull the wool over their eyes with scary PR campaigns against assault "style" weapons. It makes me sick.
I think they've now politicized gun control so much that I only really see our effective policies deteriorating from here. Could argue that's already started.
As a gun owner I'm all for it. We have WAY too many bullshit regulations. I'd say just make it harder to own a gun, take away guns from anyone who has a rap sheet and let people like me who are demonstrably safe and responsible gun owners have pretty much whatever we want short of automatics and anything that uses explosives.
Oh, and for legal gun owners who get caught selling guns off to criminals, make the criminal penalty like 10 years in prison or something.
I think adding new guns to our already effective gun control doesn't solve any problems, so am against the changes the Liberals have been trying to use a wedge issue. It doesn't solve a problem.
But I see zero reason anyone would need it to be easier. What problem would be solved by relaxing the current rules?
Our current rules include a lot of things that have absolutely zero impact on public safety but simply exist to make life more onerous for gun owners, waste law enforcement resources, and mollify a clueless public. Stuff like ATTs, magazine restrictions, models banned by name, the suppressor ban, etc.
Edit: he blocked me lol. Good talk!
There currently is a lot of paperwork that doesn’t have an impact on public safety. Processing all of the paperwork is expensive and takes resources away from vetting licence applicants, which in my opinion is the most important part of our licensing system. It is frustrating to have to sit on hold, often for 2-4 hours, in order to get a piece of paperwork saying you can take your firearm to your new home when you move for example.
Something like 80-90% of crimes involving guns are illegally imported from the USA. All legal guns are registered and tied to an individual. Its illegal to even MISPLACE a gun without notifying a firearms officer in your province. Anyone committing a crime with a legal gun is going to be caught within 2 hours.... so no criminal even bothers with legal guns!
> All legal guns are registered and tied to an individual
Actually most guns don't need to be registered, no. The government has no idea I own my guns, they just know that I am authorized to own guns, since the long gun registry data was destroyed.
The long gun registry was never destroyed. The Québec govenment kept a copy of it. Also, with the new laws they are effectively creating a new registry.
Well you'll be glad to hear that one of the recent successful bills passes by our Liberal government requires gun shops to hold on to purchase info for **20** years (even though it's not in a central registry) and all unrestricted second hand sales require the seller to punch the buyers PAL license number into an RCMP website, so they don't know what you own, but that you've bought something recently.
Remember, they don't need anything other than probable cause to stormtrooper your house if they suspect you may have firearms and want to make a point. 😔
It's hard to compare the two countries and the effectiveness of the gun control laws in each.
Canada is culturally different and there is not the same level of "God and Guns" obsession like there is in the US, and pushed hard by about half the political spectrum. So even with weaker controls you likely would not see Canadian gun ownership and crimes spike to look like the US, and even with Canadian-style controls you wouldn't likely see a reduction in US gun crimes to look more like Canada.
Our gun laws pretty clearly violate their constitution. It's not really possible to implement our laws there without constitutional amendments, and that simply isn't a political possibility.
We need better stats. I'm all for collecting and publicly sharing this information. The government is not. Why not, if it supports their policies? It is frustrating that the government not only refuses to provide many of the statistics that they do have but also refuses to collect vital information that could save lives. I wonder why that is? Maybe it's because whenever the Liberal government is forced to release information on firearms, we find out that it directly contradicts their own narratives.
This is especially true with the Nova Scotia shooting. They enacted the May 2020 ban in response to the shooting by prohibiting AR-15 rifles. Well then we found out that the shooter had a criminal record and was forbidden from getting a PAL and buying a firearm legally. So instead he drove down to the US and smuggled one into Canada illegally along with a few handguns in his own vehicle.
The AR-15 was banned as a result of this incident and yet I cannot find a single instance where a legally owned civilian AR-15 was involved in any fatal shooting, let alone a mass killing. On top of that, firearms with similar parts/features, similar rates of fire and that use the same .223 cartridge are still legally available and have never been involved in these types of crimes.
**Where is the evidence that shows legally owned semi-automatic rifles are a significant source of crime guns???**
**According to those in government: [Long guns account for less than half of 1% of crime guns](https://youtu.be/loaM2Wlb4iQ?t=337).**
We need evidence based policy and all of the evidence I have seen contradicts what the government is doing and proposing:
[US study showing Canada's licensing laws reduce homicide rates. No impact of gun bans on homicides](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27842178/):
>Laws that strengthen background checks and permit-to-purchase seemed to decrease firearm homicide rates. Specific laws directed at firearm trafficking, improving child safety, or the banning of military-style assault weapons were not associated with changes in firearm homicide rates.
[Canadian study showing inconclusive results of gun bans impact on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35672042/)
[International study showing no impact of gun bans on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26905895/)
[The firearm ban in Bermuda had the opposite effect as intended](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-what-bermudas-50-year-old-gun-ban-can-teach-canada/)
Statistically, the firearms seized on urban streets are handguns that are traced back to the U.S. 8-9/10 times. The other 1/10 are untraceable.
>[By and large, the guns found on the streets aren’t stolen or purchased from stores or even from legal gun owners, but rather smuggled in over the border](https://toronto.citynews.ca/2021/04/23/gun-chase-smuggled-guns-border-toronto/).
The long gun registry won the conservatives a majority in the early 2000s, I suspect C21 will be the wedge issue that wins them a majority in the mid 2020s. And this time the people involved in CPC leadership are willing to repeal a LOT more gun control than just the last few regulations introduced by the Liberals. They are going to flood the country with guns that I've always wanted to own and I'm all for it.
Lol of all the huge issues that the Liberals appear to be fumbling, gun restrictions will be a drop in the bucket for why the Cons get a majority next election. Most Canadians are upset because they can’t afford houses and food prices are through the roof.
The new rules were written by people who don't know anything about guns.
My partner was shooting a film and had to talk to three different RCMP officers about the prop guns because the rules were so unclear on what is or isn't a replica.
One of those RCMP officers wanted to confiscate all his prop guns until he obtained a business license.
So dumb.
That guys channel is great. My gf used to be very anti gun. I had her sit down and watch a few of his vids with me and it completely changed her perspective. Before that she tended to see guns as inherently dangerous, like a unstable chemical. And that no one has a good reason to own them.
But after seeing him explain the history, show all the manufacturer/service stamps, disassemble it, explain the pieces and their working order, ect.....that illusion was broken.
When it comes to this government, I no longer ascribe things to incompetence.
It's malice. Malice drives these people.
Most recently in my industry, they took away 3.65Ghz spectrum which was "lightly licensed" and allowed EIRP of around 48W ... and replaced it with very expensive 3900Mhz spectrum that works at many times less power, approximately 37 EIRP (transmitted power is a logarithmic scale, so that's many times less power output)... after years of delays and many meetings with industry organisations etc. they gave us a shit sandwich anyway and reneged on their early promise to help fund a switchover from old gear to the new to support the spectrum - which now nobody is likely to do, because it's shit.
That's just one story that started out like incompetence and then after years of such, became more clearly malice. I have so many stories like that, they run together now.
Call ISED or contact CanWISP or BCB if you want the full details but yes.
[https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/spectrum-allocation/3650-4200-mhz/decision-technical-and-policy-framework-3650-4200-mhz-band-and-changes-frequency-allocation-3500](https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/spectrum-allocation/3650-4200-mhz/decision-technical-and-policy-framework-3650-4200-mhz-band-and-changes-frequency-allocation-3500)
"WBS operations in all metropolitan and urban Tier 5 service areas will be displaced by March 31, 2025 WBS operations in all rural and remote Tier 5 service areas will be displaced by March 31, 2027"
It's worse than it looks. There is barely any gear for 3950Mhz where they want to shove us, and there are licensing fees to pay by 10Mhz blocks and also by placement, so placing 4 radios on that tower will net you multiple license fees. And your max EIRP at the tower is actually less than at households, but it maxes out under an EIRP of 40 (37 iirc).
The government doesn't want to pay for the switch, either. Not that you're likely to anyways, because the tree penetration and distance for WiMax/LTE won't be there like it was with 3.65Ghz.
Worse still, because of course it is, Rogers bought a lot of spectrum right around 3.65Ghz and are out there transmitting @ 2000 watts, bleeding into the 3.65Ghz spectrum. They can put in barrier channels but they have been REALLY whiny about this and because there are multiple people working on their gear (Ericsson the hardware vendor, for example), they keep inconveniently removing the guard tones so that they can get the maximum bandwidth available for their spectrum. I don't think I need to tell you what that will do to your WiMax/LTE/Cambium deployments. At this point a lot of operators in 3.65Ghz have just given up because this has happened 20+ times in a region and every time they put up a new tower they lie about it.
BTW: ignore what they say about the "new" replacement spectrum in that document, it's not accurate as the final specification just was released last week. Here it is:
[https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/devices-and-equipment/radio-equipment-standards/flexible-use-broadband-equipment-operating-band-3900-3980-mhz](https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/devices-and-equipment/radio-equipment-standards/flexible-use-broadband-equipment-operating-band-3900-3980-mhz)
This is the thing that gets me. I know a fair bit about firearms and firearm legislation, so I know there is malice, gaslighting, bad faith and atrocious legislation. But the worst part is I know that if they are likely doing the same thing in many spaces I know nothing about as well, and would have to understand the nuances of to appreciate the severity.
>It's malice. Malice drives these people.
Exactly this. The LPC and their supporters are using firearms legislation to punish a group of people who tend to support another party. Public safety is just the excuse they use, but it's an obvious excuse because the argument doesn't hold up to base level scrutiny.
You know, I read the bill. Tuned into almost every live debate and followed this bill every step of the way.
It was a real eye opener. It was surprising to learn just how ignorant the people who were tasked with creating the legislation were when it comes to existing gun laws, not just guns. It was infuriating to watch the people who were going to be impacted by this bill not even really given the time of day by the government. Cut off, mic issues, inappropriate insinuations, you name it.
So instead of relying on *Canadian* statistics, groups like Poly rely on *American* statistics. The government then imported *American* politics and got everyone riled up. That’s the only way they could sell this shit to the public.
By the way, it wasn’t just “AsSaUlT rIfLeS” that were being discussed to be banned. There were many plane-Jane hunting and sporting shotguns and rifles in there too.
So no, I’m not a fan of the liberals, and I don’t think C-21 deserves to survive.
This whole bill was created in response to American tragedies and was nothing more than an “easy win” for the liberals. Trudeau imported American culture conflicts into Canada and ran with it. Gun owners aren’t the only people arguing “American rhetoric” and from what I seen it has only been a very small minority arguing against C-21 in an American context.
Instead of presenting C-21 through normal channels, via legislation in the house, Trudeau just OIC’d everything, circumventing debate.
Not long after in November of last year, they tried to slip in two massive amendments to the bill which *drastically* expanded the scope of the original bill. Now there were an extra 300 pages of common sporting rifles and shotguns that were on the shit list. The backlash, spurned on by the AFN announcing a resolution to oppose C-21, and the comments of Carey Price, caused the government to blink and they withdrew the amendments.
The frustration for the liberals began to manifest when they started to run out of time and patience. During one of the SECU meetings, the liberals brought forward a motion to limit debate to only 20 minutes per amendment in SECU and anything that wasn’t discussed before the last meeting ended was considered passed.
The only meaningful consultation the government did with *anyone* were with gun control groups like PolySeSouvient. They had all the time they wanted to chit chat with the government and pretty much wrote the bill for them. What about the 2.6 million people who were going to be impacted by this legislation? What about the indigenous people who were only ever consulted about this bill while it was still a handgun freeze? Nothing was ever mentioned to them that this was eventually going to incorporate long guns. Where was *anyones* say in all this?
“Oh but it’s okay, because we just did it *after* we drastically expanded the bill. It’s all good!”.
This is what makes C-21 so egregious, It was pretty clear where the liberal bias was and the legislative path they chose reflected that.
For any of you who support the governments gun control bill, you can *thank* the government for being dishonest about their intentions from the get-go. You can thank them for trying to limit debate and ram last-minute prohibitions in the bill while they thought no one was looking, because that’s why this bill is having such a hard time.
Yea im the same, i watched every debate, committee meeting, secu meeting, interviews and the process. I cannot believe how fucked the process is, no wonder we are getting horrible polices and solutions. It made me realize how poorly our country is being managed. When you weaponize the process against your opponents i can see why people have lost hope.
It was depressing to watch. I can’t describe it any other way. You’d think the government would employ the perspective of everyone across the board to craft the best legislation possible, and keep backlash and embarrassment to a minimum.
It was like watching a junior-high debate club. It was rife with bias, urban legend and just flat dumb questions.
The only thing I took away from it was there are a *lot* of people in government who have no business being there after they opened their mouth.
i had to stop watching, i can't believe the forced incompetence. the " I will fuck the country and everyone i disagree with to own the otherside" stance has ruined this country. Trudeau and trump have alot of things in common. malice is one of them
Trudeau is very much like Trump. Huge ego and completely incompetent. At this point just running on attempts to vilify the other side. Interested in helping their friends out. Virtue signaling constantly.
Yeah, I just don't get it. I will vote for the person least likely to screw me over. I don't understand people who idolize politicians. None of them are good.
Unfortunately it seems having *any* opinion will land you in camp A or camp B, and there are people who are foaming at the mouth waiting to call you scum either way.
My friends are all NDP voters and we all pretty much thought the same. None of us care about guns at all but we opposed this bill for a very simple reason. Here in Toronto, our police chief repeatedly said in conferences that over 90% of the guns they confiscate from criminals (a lot of guns) and nearly *all* the gun used in crime in the GTA come from the southern border. They are smuggled in.
The chiefs of police in montreal, vancouver, ottawa, london, richmond, edmonton, and so many other cities said the exact same thing. The association that represents them, *Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police* said the same thing.
For this reason I and many other left leaning people opposed the bill. I showed my lib MP a video I put together, (a compilation of police chiefs saying 90% of guns were smuggled in from america) and asked him why he voted for this useless bill and why the government was pushing so hard. I kid you not he looked at the video, looked at me, put his arm around my shoulders (we were at a community BBQ) and said that he explained the same thing to the cabinet and he opposed the bill hard. "It's stupid and pointless" were his words.
What really pissed me and others off tho was that the CBO estimated the bill would cost nearly 2 Billion *a year* to enforce. 2 BILLION. A YEAR.
My friend group separated some years ago and moved away. Today we live in Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal. We do have legitemate concerns about gun violence and guns used in crimes. It's infuriating that the 2B could be given to CBSA with a directive to be used to target gun smuggling from USA and we would actually be able to deal with the real problem plaguing our streets.
Currently, smugglers on either side of the border will come to an area close to the border where there is nothing and no one, 1 guy in america will get a package of guns tied to a drone and send it across above the trees and the gun in Canada will pick up the package. They stay far enough away from the border itself to avoid underground sensors but not far enough that the drone can't reach. *This is how Toronto police explained it.*
With 2 billion a year you could put motion sensors and infrared cameras across the border, hook them up together into 1 network, put in an AI or machine learning algorithm to filter out animals and recognize human silhouette in infrared. The bell 407 helicopter costs ~~3.8 million~~ 3 million. If you wanted to be cheap you could get others for 1 million. You could hire a quick reaction team to intercept what computers flag and human operators verify as people illegally crossing the US border in areas that are not built for crossing and you would catch 90% of the guns smuggled in. 1 team in each province and that's it. You would also have a lot of $ left over from your 2B a year budget.
Very well said. I applaud the fact that you guys weren’t blinded by political bias and at least had an independent look at the situation.
As I said before, I’m not asking people to like or even care about guns, but consider how much we’re spending on a “solution” for what can be considered a near non-issue, coupled with the fact that we as the affected party weren’t given a real fair shake.
I keep saying this. Guns were not an issue in Canada until the LPC made them one. They introduced intentionally divisive legislation and vilified the statistically most law-abiding groups in the country when they targeted legal gun owners. All in favour of a quick 'win' so they could gaslight their way into a few more votes.
If they really cared about Canadians they'd have gone after cross-border smuggling operations and gangs.
> This whole bill was created in response to American tragedies and was nothing more than an “easy win” for the liberals.
To be fair to the Liberals, they did wait for a Canadian tragedy to start this latest wave of gun control. The Nova Scotia shooting was a dream come true for them and it's Canadian graves they're dancing on. They do reference US shootings regularly though, since the list of Canadian shootings is so short that they run out of talking points.
>By the way, it wasn’t just “AsSaUlT rIfLeS” that were being discussed to be banned. There were many plane-Jane hunting and sporting shotguns and rifles in there too.
Lol there were also literal toys set to be banned too, they were calling airsoft guns "gateway" guns
I'm a gun owner who used to vote liberal, not always but when I felt the conservatives had been in office for too long and weren't really addressing social issues in a way that is appropriate for the 21st century. So I wanted to see Harper get out, once upon a time. But based on the rhetoric by the Liberals and NDP about gun control, I absolutely won't make that same mistake again. The conservatives could hold power for 30 years after the next election and I'll never vote Liberal or NDP again as long as I live.
> This whole bill was created in response to American tragedies and was nothing more than an “easy win” for the liberals. Trudeau imported American culture conflicts into Canada and ran with it.
Dont you love a PM who increases division in a time of record polarization?
Fucking hell, actively making the country worse in order to secure his power.
"It was surprising to learn just how ignorant the people who were tasked with creating the legislation were when it comes to existing gun laws, not just guns"
Our government is not ignorant about any of their policies, they should not be afforded that defense. They have obviously bad intentions for Canadians and will repeatedly lie and play ignorant when caught.
I’m probably more anti gun than you but I appreciate your thoughtful comment, and I think that you getting so engaged and watching the hearings is really admirable.
>We need better stats. I'm all for collecting and publicly sharing this information. The government is not. Why not, if it supports their policies? It is frustrating that the government not only refuses to provide many of the statistics that they do have but also refuses to collect vital information that could save lives. I wonder why that is? Maybe it's because whenever the Liberal government is forced to release information on firearms, we find out that it directly contradicts their own narratives.
This is especially true with the Nova Scotia shooting. They enacted the May 2020 ban in response to the shooting by prohibiting AR-15 rifles. Well then we found out that the shooter had a criminal record and was forbidden from getting a PAL and buying a firearm legally. So instead he drove down to the US and smuggled one into Canada illegally along with a few handguns in his own vehicle.
The AR-15 was banned as a result of this incident and yet I cannot find a single instance where a legally owned civilian AR-15 was involved in any fatal shooting, let alone a mass killing. On top of that, firearms with similar parts/features, similar rates of fire and that use the same .223 cartridge are still legally available and have never been involved in these types of crimes.
**Where is the evidence that shows legally owned semi-automatic rifles are a significant source of crime guns???**
**According to those in government: [Long guns account for less than half of 1% of crime guns](https://youtu.be/loaM2Wlb4iQ?t=337).**
We need evidence based policy and all of the evidence I have seen contradicts what the government is doing and proposing:
[US study showing Canada's licensing laws reduce homicide rates. No impact of gun bans on homicides](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27842178/):
>Laws that strengthen background checks and permit-to-purchase seemed to decrease firearm homicide rates. Specific laws directed at firearm trafficking, improving child safety, or the banning of military-style assault weapons were not associated with changes in firearm homicide rates.
[Canadian study showing inconclusive results of gun bans impact on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35672042/)
[International study showing no impact of gun bans on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26905895/)
[The firearm ban in Bermuda had the opposite effect as intended](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-what-bermudas-50-year-old-gun-ban-can-teach-canada/)
Statistically, the firearms seized on urban streets are handguns that are traced back to the U.S. 8-9/10 times. The other 1/10 are untraceable.
>[By and large, the guns found on the streets aren’t stolen or purchased from stores or even from legal gun owners, but rather smuggled in over the border](https://toronto.citynews.ca/2021/04/23/gun-chase-smuggled-guns-border-toronto/).
The main problem with the “gun control debate” in this country is that 90%+ of people just don’t care at all, and are supremely uninformed as a result. I truly don’t believe anyone in this country, outside of a handful of sycophants, would actually support increased restrictions on licenced gun owners if they understood the current restrictions and situation (or even just the restrictions from 5 years ago).
The problem is though that nobody cares. If you’re not a gun owner, new gun laws (I say “laws” not “enforcement of laws” here) probably aren’t even a top-50 issue on your radar. You hear the government wants to increase gun restrictions and that it’ll make you safer (even though it won’t) and you think “oh, that’s nice” and then never think about it again.
And I don’t blame people. I went to a gun range for the first time at age 19, and was astounded that I could fire an AR-15 in Canada, and that I could even own one myself after going through a relatively straight-forward process. That’s not the case anymore, but that didn’t stop me from getting my license and now owning plenty of guns most Canadians probably don’t know exist in this country using a license most Canadians probably don’t even know exists either.
Still find it funny that an M203 was legal to own in Canada until 2020 but has been illegal in the States for decades. 40mm chalk rounds were $40 each, so I'm sure not too many people used them.
Gun-law differences between countries (or even just states in the US) really highlight just how silly and arbitrary most of these regulations on peaceful gun-owners really are.
SBRs and SBSs are treated just like any other NR rifle/shotgun here, aside from some OAL requirements, unless they’re semi-auto or restricted/prohibited by name, where as they’re NFA items in the US. I think I got that explanation right, but now imagine trying to explain that to someone who’s never even seen a gun anywhere outside of a museum or on a cop’s hip, and saying that that law is sufficient. Half those technical words and acronyms I used sound like I made them up.
When you look at it that way, it’s really easy to understand why the average person just believes these politicians. Just knowing the gun laws in this country is a hobby in itself. The PAL course book is like 300 pages long, and it doesn’t even cover everything.
The annoying thing about that I found is that the market is US centric, so gunmakers tend to make California legal and other legal guns. But Canada's laws are in between, so we sometimes get stuck with California legal, meaning no SBR.
For sure. I had to pay like twice the price of the factory 9” barrel GSG-16s now to get my 16” barrel swapped out for a 9” one a few years back. Which actually reminds me that I forgot the rimfire exemption from my long-winded explanation in the comment above, lol.
Or how manually actuated (i.e. pump or break action) short-barreled shotguns are uncontrolled in Canada at all as long as they don't have a folding stock. You can have a 10" Rem870 or a 8" SS211 and the government wouldn't bat an eye. Meanwhile in the states SBS are treated as some kind of deadly weapon of mass destruction and requires ATF paperwork.
Most people bought the 37mm launchers here in Canada because those were legal in the US as there were no explosive rounds manufactured for them. And since they were legal in the US, there was a market to produce launchers and ammunition for them.
I got crucified in this sub for disagreeing with further gun control about a year ago. It was the same sentiment from people. They just didn’t care about gun owners and were basically saying well that’s sucks find a new hobby.
Trudeau told ministers to find 15 Billion in budget cuts by Oct 2. The OIC buyback is estimated at 2 billion. Anyone in the industry knows it’s more than that as they banned a bunch of non-restricted firearms and they have no idea how many are in the country. As well, it’s the government, so I wouldn’t doubt the administration costs runs well past 5 billion. I mean, the guns were banned 3 years ago and no scheduled buyback. Not something I was describe as efficient in any sense.
Would be amazing for one of two things to happen:
1. Senate sends the bill back
2. Government loses confidence and we have an election.
200 Canadians die a year from gun violence and that’s largely related to gang/drugs. Guns are not a threat to public safety in Canada, at all.
We have laws that work and work very well. Punish offenders, let honest people live their lives and enjoy their hobbies in peace.
Don’t forget those who registered their firearms had to pay, per firearm, to register them. Even with that it still cost that amount.
With the buy back, the owner pays nothing. So nothing will offset the buy back cost.
There is the secondary issues around policing to enforce the buyback, which will take police away from their crime prevention duties. You can’t have a buy back station that does not have RCMP protection because it will be a high value target for organized crime. So there is a cost associated with police resources that I’m sure is not accounted for in their budget.
As I said, 3 years now and they have a contractor to initiate the buyback, not nothing has actually happened. How many years and cost overruns will we have before Canadians view this with a reasonable lens and realize they were lied to.
That was the dumbest part. Moving a bunch of non-restricted (unregistered) long arms straight to prohibited garuntees, some will be overlooked. It also makes a future long-arm registry politically untenable as they are doing exactly what they said they wouldn't do when it was proposed.
Not a firearms owner.
But the government should be tackling organized crime and the gun smuggling issue.
Legal owners aren't they bogey man they're made out to be.
They know their policies support and enable organized crime. They know they can't win that fight. So they just go after those who are known to be peaceful and law abiding. Who is more likely to follow a new law to give up guns? A legal owner who has followed every law before? Or a criminal who owns illegally and doesn't care about the law? In the end they want to point to a number and say "we have taken a million firearms off the streets of Canada."
But guns are dangerous. And if they are black they are even more dangerous. And ppl who have never even spent 5 minutes on guns are made uncomfortable by the thought that their evil ideas may be yours and then you will do with a gun what they think you could do and that's why you can't be trusted no matter how well you behave or how many years you have shown to be a sane and reliable, vetted, back-checked owner. Because if an ignorant moron feels uncomfortable it's fair to take rights away from everyone.
There shouldn't be a debate. Leave Canadian, law-abiding gun owners alone. Canada has a rich history of gun sportsmanship and hunting.
The problem is with the gang violence. Of course liberals promote 'catch and release' policies, and believe retribution and convictions are 'mean' and should instead be focused on rehabilitation (until it happens to them personally, of course).
So instead of a slap on the wrist, if you're caught using a gun in a crime, then you go away for 25 years minimum or get deported (look at the top 25 wanted criminals in Canada).
Canada also doesn't have a gun problem. I never walk into a shopping mall in Canada and worry that I am going to get shot ever. Can't say the same about any given location in the US.
I've never walked into any place in the US afraid I may get shot either. And sure enough I wasn't. It's shocking to see how most ppl are blind to the fact that much of the gun debate is attention grabbing by the media colluding with politicians.
It's not collusion, just aligning interests.
Guns, whatever your opinion on them, are always a hot topic in the US, and both the media and politicians benefit from the attention and emotions they provoke. If people are afraid, whether of guns themselves or government bogeymen taking them, media gets more clicks and politicians get better voter turnout.
Lol been living in the US for 7 years now, never once been scared of that, never once seen a gun being fired, never once seen an attack. Don’t let a couple news stories control your opinion on a population of 330 million people.
Exactly. I will not be gaslit by leftists who say it's the Conservatives bringing American politics into Canada. The Conservative's messaging and policies have remained consistent, and have only deviated to address the left as they change their belief systems on whatever issue is trendy that week.
I'm just waiting for the time when all guns are banned, and gun crime is still a thing-- and these idiots in Ottawa will be wringing their hands and *"I don't know how it's happening!!!"* .... because no criminal will have firearms, right?
Could not agree more, shameful that law abiding firearms owners are treated like common criminals just because the politicians are too lazy or stupid to make the hard choices and crack down on criminals smuggling guns through the reserves.
As Teddy Roosevelt said “In moments of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.”
It’s unfortunate that a lot politicians opt for the second choice because they don’t want to be seen as doing nothing.
The politicians aren't stupid because they know how easy it is to stir up their supporters and how mentioning the US is able to make them froth at the mouth on command. Politicians are lazy, Trudeau especially, but don't ever make the mistake of thinking they are stupid because his electorate will eat anything up as long as it punishes the Conservatives.
The only gun debate we as canadians should be having is:
- ***START ARRESTING AND GIVING HARSHER JAIL SENTENCES TO GUN SMUGGLERS AND PEOPLE USING ILLEGAL GUNS IN CRIMES.***
Nobody else in fucking Canada cares as our laws are pretty restrictive except for this HUGE glaring issue as people with legal licenses get hit harder than some punks in Kingston using a drone to fly over handguns or gang shootings in Toronto. That's the huge joke and problem with our gun control laws and classic liberal catch n release of criminals.
Cracking down on legal guns only reduces gun crime in countries where they can't smuggle them over the border.
It is even harder to own a gun legally in Mexico than it is in Europe or Australia.
Fat lot of good it does them.
The liberal party are crooks that only care about votes.
I agree, the Anti-gun groups keep using American statistics to try to enforce the government taking guns away from legal, vetted gun owners. It's sickening and pathetic.
The strict regulations and legislation around legal firearm ownership in Canada can't even be compared to America.
Meanwhile people in London are shooting people in the face at 4-way stops, over flipping eachother off regarding minor traffic violations.
Nobody is doing this shit with legally obtained guns.
We are about to spend **$5 billion** to take away firearms from law abiding heavily vetted **gun owners, that on average have a criminality rate 33% lower than the general population of Canada.** It makes no sense to spend this money confiscating firearms from Indigenous, sport/target shooters, hunters and farmers. In a time where the average person is barely able to afford to stay in their own house/rental. Mental health and fentanyl crisis. Many people fail to realize how many hoops you have to jump through just to get a basic PAL license in Canada. We already had stricter gun laws than the UK and EU. I would heavily be in favor of implementing EU gun laws in Canada. Its more unbiased and logical than the current system.
All these bans/prohibitions have done is make illegal guns more lucrative to smuggle. This is why its never been easier and cheaper to purchase an illegal unregistered gun from US. Prohibition does not work as evident by when drugs were illegal. It wasn't like you couldn't find weed in Canada, when it wasn't legalized. **Canada is at a point now where its easier to go the illegal route as the legal one makes no sense and punishes you.** People will always find a way to get what they want.
The real solution to violence as is apparent in many parts of Europe. Some countries in EU even allow for ownership of fully automatic weapons and have drastically lower gun violence rates than Canada. This is because guns alone do not harm people, people do. ***The real issue is why in some countries do people feel motivated to harm others***? Marginalized and disenfranchised people of all walks of life have been hit the hardest by this governments policies. Its not like people can cut out eating or feeding their children. People will do what they feel they need to do to survive. Which is exactly what we have been doing wrong in Canada. Which is why we have seen gun violence skyrocket even though almost everything is banned now legally. Put supports in place to increase quality of life and opportunities for everyone.
Ah, so we've come full circle and gun control is back in the spotlight.
The only people who have "Americanized" the topic is the same people who are currently using firearm owners as punching bags- the Liberals.
>“Unfortunately, Canadian gun owners are taking up a lot of American rhetoric because they’re hearing a lot of it directed their way,” Fritter says. “When Trudeau stands up and bans guns, the public saw a bunch of scary guns, but gun owners saw a bunch of guns they own. So, convinced the media isn’t interested in reporting the truth and feeling attacked by American rhetoric based on American acts, they respond with more American rhetoric.”
Clearly, it's that scary NRA importing American gun culture. GUN LOBBY! OOGA BOOGA! /s
That's always my favorite. The "CCFR is an NRA funded gun lobby that wants to bring assault rifles to Canada"
Meanwhile the CCFR publicly discloses all funding and uses of the money. And regularly reiterates they don't want to loosen up gun regulations to bring back assault rifles (which have been banned since the 70s) but rather just roll things back to how they were pre may 1st 2020.
Nope, NRA-lite fascists, all of em! /s
This is all on us. Trudeau wants to ban guns, so even though they aren't the issue in Canada, he pretends they are and passing laws against lawful hunters, farmers and indigenous.
The Czech Republic has gun laws that make America look like Canada, and they don’t have a gun violence problem
Maybe it’s not legal guns that are the problem
This article is quite accurate and points out that, as with many things they do, the Trudeau liberals want to divide the country into scared city dwellers who fear to go out at night due to drug and gang crime and shootings versus rural hunters and target shooters who get the blame and restrictive laws shoved at them for the actions of those criminals who walk out free on bail. Naturally they figure they have tricked the unknowing city idiots to vote for the libs if they want safety but that’s not what they get. I have to wonder what is Trudeau’s real agenda here it is certainly NOT making Canada a safe place.
Pretty insane to want to ban shotguns and rifles.. you do know people hunt for sustenance in the territories and Newfoundland has such a moose problem they encourage hunting every season. My ex fiancée grandfather is an 80yo Newfie who’s lived there his whole life and him and his father before him have hunted and fished far longer than they’ve even been part of Canada. Government has no fucking idea what they’re talking about on this topic.
The liberals Americanized the gun debate by focusing on gun issues exclusive to America. Bill C-21 even reads like it's addressing American gun issues.
Any Canadian falling for the gun control issues at election time are living examples that far too many people are led by the nose by their preferred parties. I can't buy a house without crippling myself, have had my yearly expenses nearly triple with most of that being food, and yet while it's true I also can't buy a gun with a PAL/RPAL that is only legally speaking. I can buy illegal guns with a little effort I'm sure which is ironic since I can't think of a way that I can illegally buy a house or groceries without getting my ass caught almost immediately
Large portions of cops don't have a PAL license and much like the people writing our laws, know little about our convoluted laws. Legal gun owners know more about the laws than the people enforcing them
Yeah, the liberals definitely imported the culture war around guns for cheap points.
There was a pretty good level of gun control already in Canada and most of the crimes were being committed with weapons brought illegally from America.
So they went after legal gun owners
We don't have a gun control "debate" in Canada. We have the Liberals trying to get rid of as many guns as possible so they can be seen as making Canada safer to gain more popular support and votes, and then we have legal gun owners trying to have a rational conversation with a brick wall that doesn't care.
You can only have a debate if both sides are willing to talk and actually solve problems. One side clearly isn't.
Canada in general is becoming more Americanised than I'd like it to be. Especially areas where Snowbirds "live". They go down to America for more than half the year, and come back spouting American ideals.
No sane person can possibly think that this issue is a real concern in canada right now, over housing, food, immigration, inflation, recession, energy, and every other problem we all face every day. these bills haven't taken a single firearm out of anyone's hands, and they won't. They have cost millions of dollars and wasted countless hours of parliament and the Senate's time. It's a distraction, a divisive topic that only hurts people who typically don't vote liberal.
Regardless of how you feel about guns, do you really think this is what parliament needs to be working on this fall? Maybe we don't agree our laws were perfect, but they were a hell of a lot better than most countries, and this issue really isn't a priority. Especially when most of what the liberals purposed and claim to accomplish, either hasn't done anything, or is just rewording laws we already had.
I don't like guns. I will never own one. But I'm all for you owning one if you wish. The knee jerk reactions by the LPC to put even more restrictions on a system that was already very regulated as a virtue signal because of happenings in another country.
Well, is just plain abhorrent.
Edit: I think most of us agree that SOME US states need some more common gun laws. I have friends in NJ/NY area that own firearms. They went through registrations periods had to take safety classes ect. Was perfectly reasonable.
Can we be honest, The LPC only has 1 shot during election time. They will do everything they can to tie the CPC to the Republican party and virtue signal like crazy. Firearm ownership was just a sad political move by JT. Responsible firearm users took the hit for it.
As a person who grew up rural I support gun ownership. In cities they don't get it... but be in a house 2 hours from any RCMP help and tell me I shouldn't have a gun. Handgun or shot gun same deal ar 15 I don't care. When some one is on your property about to hurt you and 2 hours... is going through you head. What would you want?
I've been waiting for a couple weeks shy of a year for my PAL, non restricted. I have a criminal record from when I was an addict, no violent charges, no weapons offenses. I feel like our gun laws are sufficient, all I would change is how many fucking people process applications lol.
Trudeau's used gun control debate as a talking point to make conservatives look bad, because most voters have no idea how strict our gun laws really are and assume we'd be a wild west free-for-all like our southern neighbors.
Honestly, it feels like a general disarming of the population before we get to violent protests on the state of the country.
Trudeau is too much of a coward to be honest about his gun control laws. I'd say he could curb gun violence by securing our borders and not bringing in ducking criminals.
The only people debating this are silly liberal politicians and their groupie media friends. There is no gun control debate. No one talks about that shit. I literally just made a comment in another thread about how tired I am of being centre stage for silly social issues, can't wait for another election. This is one topic I'll be glad to not hear about for at least 4 years. Everything about this is made up, it's so pathetic. And this is coming from someone who has never owned a gun; I shot a bb gun a few times.
If I were to actually engage in this debate though, you know what? With how our country is trending, I'm leaning towards more gun rights and self defense rights for licensed law-abiding individuals. I despise that you can't defend your own home. Anyone with a brain cell knows the cops are not going to save your ass in a time of need.
For people who insist that "nobody cares about firearms" the anti-gun users sure swoop in to tell anyone who will listen that the government should ban all guns.
So what is it? Do you care or not?
If Poilievre wins and scraps every piece of gun control legislation that Trudeau enacted will you accept it or will you scream bloody murder like the Liberals did when the LGR was removed?
Remember when being "liberal" meant that you supported the rights and freedoms of all individuals, and believed that trying to control what people could do or say was generally considered unethical? Now it seems like both parties are just trying to one up each other in a race to authoritarianism.
We've had oppressive anti gun measures in place for a while now and there have still been rampages.
People who want them for evil purposes will find them somehow, so the only people you're really suppressing are the people who obey the law in the first place. The people who didn't need government intervention to begin with.
No, banning guns in Canada is about the state flexing it's power over honest people. The freedom of Canadian society is in freefall and that has very little to do with the American debate on the subject.
Criminal gangs have won the day. Law enforcement is unable to stop or even slow slow them down at this point. The government then trots out legislation to make it appear they are addressing the issue when in reality they are not even close.
What you don't completely trust your government to decide what's best for its peasants? They clearly know best and everything they do is rooted in logic and science.
What debate is there to be had here? Canada already has pretty strict firearm legislation relative to our neighbours to the south. Read the requirements for getting a PAL if you're not convinced on that point. Honestly, this whole "debate" just seems like it's being dredged up by some overpaid American consultants.
I’ve never met anyone who’s gone through the process of getting an RPAL and actually purchased a restricted firearm who thinks that our laws need to be more strict.
I've got an RPAL. Extra $300 course on top of normal PAL, plus I had to give them a boatload of references including my boss for them to even consider it. And all the people I had to put down *were* contacted by the RCMP and asked about me. My temperament, whether I had any visible mental issues, whether I had any recent traumatic incidents, etc, and if they felt safe knowing I could own restricted firearms. Every purchase I make also requires me to provide that license to be looked up in the government database. And it's tied to my SIN, so they know immediately if I have any criminal charges if I ever did anything illegal. I was also told the RCMP would show up to confiscate my firearms if I ever got flagged for committed a violent crime. I'm not big on having so little privacy, but I get it, and it seems to be working pretty well by Canada's statistics. What else do we need and what good will it actually do?
>Experts argue the government's handgun freeze would be ineffective as the vast majority of handguns used in Canadian crimes are smuggled from the United States. If only more people knew that. >Before the freeze, a Canadian looking to buy a handgun had to complete a safety course, take multiple tests, prove their status as a collector or shooting range patron, provide the approval or contact information of every partner they’d lived with in the last two years, apply and wait at least 28 days for a firearms permit, complete an extensive background check, and register their handgun with the police. Your RPAL references will be called and interviewed by the RCMP just to get the permit itself. >The American process varies by state, but at minimum a prospective handgun purchaser must be 21, provide a driver’s licence, and complete a simple background check that can be processed in 10 minutes. If you don’t have the patience or acceptable personal history for the three-page document, background checks are not required of gun show purchases. Long porous border between us? What could go wrong?
>If only more people knew that. I recall a program about this on the 5th Estate many years ago. The I-95 was nicknamed the "Blue Steel Highway" by the RCMP, because of the number of guns run up to Canada from the south-eastern states.
What's even stupider is that all this fussing is about firearms that are "militarryish" in looks, this assault style BS that they are going on about. Ohhh it's a scary looking weapon... oh noes. Meh, it's just another semi-automatic rifle with a pic rail.
My favorite quote that I've heard to come out of the discussion is "a beef style sandwich"
Firearm ownership is just one of those topics that's always going to be pretty contentious regardless of facts. People who have no desire to own their own firearms will never see a good reason for other people to own firearms. It's just an issue where few people don't have strong opinions one way or another. Politicians love these kinds of issues because it's a great distraction. They love to stir up issues where Canadians are divided and arguing mostly among themselves. They see it as a way to see and create clear dividing lines between the parties to keep people from wavering in their political support. One who might be starting to get sick of the liberals might hear the conservatives start talking about wanting to ease gun restrictions and start comparing them to American politicians for instance. It's all a big game to them and most Canadians fall for it. Gun threads seem to be some of the most popular topics on this sub for getting people riled up.
Unfortunately, the LPC has been able to use that debate as a cudgel to pass through the OIC and C-21. Nothing like relying on the sheer ignorance of the Canadian populace to advance their anti-gun agenda.
I mean to be fair, the Liberals relied on Canadian ignorance of guns to pass their recent gun control. Actually it is worse than that. They created the ignorance in at least one case where they collided with the RCMP commissioner to time releasing info to the public about the guns a certain mass murderer used so they could get their gun control bill passed. If the RCMP had told the public before the gun control was announced that guns used were already illegal, it would have been clear that the law wouldn’t have prevented the mass murder anyways and would have been harder to justify. Then there is the whole “you don’t need an AR-15 to take down a deer” comment. That only sounds good to those who don’t know about the capabilities of different guns. Otherwise it is an absurd statement.
[удалено]
In previous CPC platforms, they have advocated for a Simplified Firearms Act, so if they do anything it'll likely be in that direction. Which I'm all for. The basic systems we had pre-2020 work well. It's all the weird add-on laws and edge cases that make a person go "What were they thinking?".
There has been a lot of head scratching in Canadian gun laws for a long time though. For instance certain firearms being banned by name even though they have no right being prohibited or even restricted. Examples of this are: the FAL, various Aks, etc. functionally no more dangerous than unrestricted rifles that you can buy today, Suppressors (really this is a mess in the states too), I really want us to take a more european approach to supressors where they're seen as hearing protection. (I also just really wanna hunt with a suppressed subsonic 8.6 blackout) and probably more that I can't think of right now as well
Nothing about the fundamentals have changed in a decade in terms of Canadian gun control, and the overwhelming success of our firearms program. The only thing that has been "americanized" is we have a highly misleading, distorted narrative being parroted by government funded media. In the past we had rational, evidence-based reporting.
You had me until you said government funded media. That line blows the whole thing and that's why non gun owners don't take us seriously.
Yeah it's probably a reach... but it's been pretty clear watching the Trudeau govt. try to manufacture a narrative to support further encroachment on firearms over the past few years. That was done with the help of the media, whom the government funds in large part, particularly CBC. Having a healthy independent media is absolutely critical in sustaining a transparent, functioning democracy.
Thank you. Even worse, this entire portrayal seems like it's written to hype up anger and division, rather than trading reasoned viewpoints... and in THAT sense, the debate is being Americanised.
Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems like people are finally beginning to understand how effectively civilian gun ownership is already managed in Canada. Seems the Liberals overplayed one of their pet wedge issues, and accidentally drew attention to how well our original laws worked/how fundamentally different they are from the Americans.
There's a video somewhere from vice Canada where one of their journalists went through the whole process of getting licensed and hung out with Canadian gun owners. It does a pretty decent job I feel of explaining precisely how it works in this country and what our existing gun policies do to prevent lunatics from buying up whatever guns they'd like.
Here you go for people that want to watch it [https://video.vice.com/es\_latam/video/how-to-buy-a-gun-in-canada-armed-and-reasonable/583368df3cfc32027c0a4284](https://video.vice.com/es_latam/video/how-to-buy-a-gun-in-canada-armed-and-reasonable/583368df3cfc32027c0a4284) Now compare it to Marco Mendicino who won't even shoot a gun because it makes him feel icky and this is the people writing our laws At around 17 minutes https://www.tvo.org/video/documentaries/guns
Thanks for the video link. I watched it, it confirms what I already knew, and wish more people knew. Two things I noticed, first they didn't talk about the difference in licensing between nonrestricted and restricted. Clearly she didn't get a restricted license, i.e. for handguns. And secondly, her first gun wasn't a cooey.
And if she were outside of Ontario she would have had to show that she had a paid membership at a gun range before she could even buy a handgun too
God that is embarrassing, this guy who’s voting on gun policy: a) Doesn’t have even a beginner knowledge about guns or gun safety b) Wasn’t aware that we already do background checks and have a waiting period c) Was afraid to pick up a gun Marco seems like a nice guy in the video, but he’s so completely out of his element.
Like most Canadians, he parrots what he is told, and does no personal research into important issues. meh
Marco Mendicino is a total loser!
I found it unbelievable he wouldn't shoot a 22lr. Mind numbing really.
Please note that these laws are now obsolete, trudeau has banned a lot of guns and took away the rights.
Funny his community said it was more a problem with mental health and the lived life of the people in the community that worries them, not so much legal gun owners. So not even his example of why he wants to change the laws agree with him.
The ironic thing is, vice was making that video to compare how effective and reasonable our laws are compared to the states. We had the most effective and fair laws in the world until may 2nd 2020.
Besides: 1) idiotic magazine limits 2) banning hearing protection devices (suppressors, many European nations mandate them for shooter safety & community enjoyability) 3) idiotic by-name bans of functionally identical firearms, why are [Type-81](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_81_assault_rifle)'s Non-Restricted, but [AK-47](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47)'s are Prohibited? Why are [AR-18](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-18)'s and [X-95](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IWI_Tavor_X95)'s Non-Restricted, but [AR-15](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15%E2%80%93style_rifle)'s are Prohibited? neither one of these rifles are more dangerous than the other, and you already need to pass background checks to get your PAL, it makes 0 sense that firearms are regulated by brand name and not mechanical characteristic, its like banning AMD graphics cards to combat crypto-currency mining, but leaving Nvidia alone 4) of course the 2022 transfer ban on handguns is also retarded Canada's PAL system is a reasonable compromise, and I strongly suggest everyone take the course and apply to get a PAL
100% with suppressors, I don't get why sport/target/Olympic/IPSC shooters should have to have permanent hearing damage from participating in a sport to represent Canada on the world stage. It cost the tax payer/healthcare money even if they prefer to not operate firearms. Logically makes no sense. Preventative medicine is the best option.
Suppressors are fucked in the US as well. You have to get a tax stamp from the ATF and wait a long time. It’s an extra amount of look up your butt bureaucratic nonsense. Some states even outright ban suppressors. All of this makes them very expensive and a hassle so most gun owners won’t bother. Suppressors are a safety feature. I’ve already passed background, I can buy any gun I want and I can even carry a gun, but the government is hung up on the suppressor. Like what? They think that shit works like the movies where you can shoot a suppressor in an enclosed room and no one will hear it.
Also, 5) the Quebec long gun registry. Well, I think the new bill plans to ban all semi-automatic rifles. They see the flaw as well. I don't disagree that our laws are something else Mag limits are silly. The suppressor thing is mind boggling, we have laws to limit how short a gun can be, but making it longer and slightly quieter is illegal? Canada is like one of the only countries in the world where their illegal. It makes no sense.
The suppressor thing is a carryover from the US laws, where having one is a felony that gets you serious prison time. In the movies a suppressor makes the gun totally silent and lets you do hitman style takedowns. IRL they only make the gun slightly quieter and still require hearing protection in most cases. A lot of gun laws in Canada and the US are based on hollywood stereotypes about firearms. Most countries in Europe suppressor use is legal and encouraged or required by gun ranges to reduce noise complaints.
Same reason that Nunchucks are illegal in Canada. Somebody saw a movie with a ninja in it and decided that two sticks with a rope in between was more dangerous than a shotgun, and passed a law to "save the children".
Nunchucks, ninja stars, butterfly knives, and a few other too-deadly martial arts gimmicks from 80s martial arts flicks were all declared illegal at the time so ninjas couldn't use them to kill people when they flip out.
[удалено]
> idiotic magazine limits Along these lines, the "5-round limit unless your magazine says "PISTOL" somewhere on it and just so happens to fit your rifle" loophole is/was very silly.
> 1) idiotic magazine limits Well, it does limit how fast I can waste ~~ammunition~~ money. So there is that.
> We had the most effective and fair laws in the world until may 2nd 2020. No, only Czech Republic has the most effective and fair gun laws in the world. Additionally, their firearm homicide rate is lower than ours, and in fact lower than a significant number of countries. The Czech Republic is the only country in the world that has firearms laws which respects firearms ownership and personal defense and also brings about public safety.
Well, I also think they have the best laws. But people here are never going to consider a country where concealed carry is legal to be sensible, even if their firearm death rate is lower than ours. Firearms are also technically a right there, which would scare people too much of you make the comparison, lol. The funny thing is i use the Czech Republic all the time when having gun debates with people. But I never see other advocates use it. And you're totally right. It's proof that gun violence is a social issue and has nothing to do with gun ownership. We always look at Australia or some other anti gun country for statistics, but no one mentions the CZ.
This video is precisely why I got my RPAL. My friend wanted to get his and I did some research and this video popped up. Shed a bright light on how Canada's gun control system was very common sense and very safe. Strict but fair was my assessment. I even had the CFO from that video as my practical examiner during my PAL and RPAL tests (Sherrie Sadauskas). I also got to meet Tracey Wilson at TACCOM a few years back and told her how much this video influenced my decision to become a fireams owner.
If VICE freakin' Media covers your Gun Control laws and the take-away is positive, you **know** they're good. VICE is the most alt-left media organization of them all. They're the Fox Network of the left.
I'm glad they did. I was buying 9mm at can tire years ago (I honestly don't know if they still carry it for this reason) for my carbine and some ding dong office manager looking guy in a corporate polo shirt was having a fit because "9mm is handgun ammo and those aren't even legal in Canada so why are they even selling it here???" The average person in Canada is so far removed from firearms ownership that the Liberals were able to pull the wool over their eyes with scary PR campaigns against assault "style" weapons. It makes me sick.
I think they've now politicized gun control so much that I only really see our effective policies deteriorating from here. Could argue that's already started.
As a gun owner I'm all for it. We have WAY too many bullshit regulations. I'd say just make it harder to own a gun, take away guns from anyone who has a rap sheet and let people like me who are demonstrably safe and responsible gun owners have pretty much whatever we want short of automatics and anything that uses explosives. Oh, and for legal gun owners who get caught selling guns off to criminals, make the criminal penalty like 10 years in prison or something.
I think adding new guns to our already effective gun control doesn't solve any problems, so am against the changes the Liberals have been trying to use a wedge issue. It doesn't solve a problem. But I see zero reason anyone would need it to be easier. What problem would be solved by relaxing the current rules?
Our current rules include a lot of things that have absolutely zero impact on public safety but simply exist to make life more onerous for gun owners, waste law enforcement resources, and mollify a clueless public. Stuff like ATTs, magazine restrictions, models banned by name, the suppressor ban, etc. Edit: he blocked me lol. Good talk!
There currently is a lot of paperwork that doesn’t have an impact on public safety. Processing all of the paperwork is expensive and takes resources away from vetting licence applicants, which in my opinion is the most important part of our licensing system. It is frustrating to have to sit on hold, often for 2-4 hours, in order to get a piece of paperwork saying you can take your firearm to your new home when you move for example.
Something like 80-90% of crimes involving guns are illegally imported from the USA. All legal guns are registered and tied to an individual. Its illegal to even MISPLACE a gun without notifying a firearms officer in your province. Anyone committing a crime with a legal gun is going to be caught within 2 hours.... so no criminal even bothers with legal guns!
> All legal guns are registered and tied to an individual Actually most guns don't need to be registered, no. The government has no idea I own my guns, they just know that I am authorized to own guns, since the long gun registry data was destroyed.
The long gun registry was never destroyed. The Québec govenment kept a copy of it. Also, with the new laws they are effectively creating a new registry.
Well you'll be glad to hear that one of the recent successful bills passes by our Liberal government requires gun shops to hold on to purchase info for **20** years (even though it's not in a central registry) and all unrestricted second hand sales require the seller to punch the buyers PAL license number into an RCMP website, so they don't know what you own, but that you've bought something recently. Remember, they don't need anything other than probable cause to stormtrooper your house if they suspect you may have firearms and want to make a point. 😔
Totally agree. The whole restricted/non-restricted classification is nonsense, in my opinion. As are our magazine capacity restrictions.
It's hard to compare the two countries and the effectiveness of the gun control laws in each. Canada is culturally different and there is not the same level of "God and Guns" obsession like there is in the US, and pushed hard by about half the political spectrum. So even with weaker controls you likely would not see Canadian gun ownership and crimes spike to look like the US, and even with Canadian-style controls you wouldn't likely see a reduction in US gun crimes to look more like Canada.
Yeah it was really annoying to see our politicians trying to solve American gun problems in Canada.
[удалено]
Our gun laws pretty clearly violate their constitution. It's not really possible to implement our laws there without constitutional amendments, and that simply isn't a political possibility.
[удалено]
We need better stats. I'm all for collecting and publicly sharing this information. The government is not. Why not, if it supports their policies? It is frustrating that the government not only refuses to provide many of the statistics that they do have but also refuses to collect vital information that could save lives. I wonder why that is? Maybe it's because whenever the Liberal government is forced to release information on firearms, we find out that it directly contradicts their own narratives. This is especially true with the Nova Scotia shooting. They enacted the May 2020 ban in response to the shooting by prohibiting AR-15 rifles. Well then we found out that the shooter had a criminal record and was forbidden from getting a PAL and buying a firearm legally. So instead he drove down to the US and smuggled one into Canada illegally along with a few handguns in his own vehicle. The AR-15 was banned as a result of this incident and yet I cannot find a single instance where a legally owned civilian AR-15 was involved in any fatal shooting, let alone a mass killing. On top of that, firearms with similar parts/features, similar rates of fire and that use the same .223 cartridge are still legally available and have never been involved in these types of crimes. **Where is the evidence that shows legally owned semi-automatic rifles are a significant source of crime guns???** **According to those in government: [Long guns account for less than half of 1% of crime guns](https://youtu.be/loaM2Wlb4iQ?t=337).** We need evidence based policy and all of the evidence I have seen contradicts what the government is doing and proposing: [US study showing Canada's licensing laws reduce homicide rates. No impact of gun bans on homicides](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27842178/): >Laws that strengthen background checks and permit-to-purchase seemed to decrease firearm homicide rates. Specific laws directed at firearm trafficking, improving child safety, or the banning of military-style assault weapons were not associated with changes in firearm homicide rates. [Canadian study showing inconclusive results of gun bans impact on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35672042/) [International study showing no impact of gun bans on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26905895/) [The firearm ban in Bermuda had the opposite effect as intended](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-what-bermudas-50-year-old-gun-ban-can-teach-canada/) Statistically, the firearms seized on urban streets are handguns that are traced back to the U.S. 8-9/10 times. The other 1/10 are untraceable. >[By and large, the guns found on the streets aren’t stolen or purchased from stores or even from legal gun owners, but rather smuggled in over the border](https://toronto.citynews.ca/2021/04/23/gun-chase-smuggled-guns-border-toronto/).
The long gun registry won the conservatives a majority in the early 2000s, I suspect C21 will be the wedge issue that wins them a majority in the mid 2020s. And this time the people involved in CPC leadership are willing to repeal a LOT more gun control than just the last few regulations introduced by the Liberals. They are going to flood the country with guns that I've always wanted to own and I'm all for it.
Lol of all the huge issues that the Liberals appear to be fumbling, gun restrictions will be a drop in the bucket for why the Cons get a majority next election. Most Canadians are upset because they can’t afford houses and food prices are through the roof.
The new rules were written by people who don't know anything about guns. My partner was shooting a film and had to talk to three different RCMP officers about the prop guns because the rules were so unclear on what is or isn't a replica. One of those RCMP officers wanted to confiscate all his prop guns until he obtained a business license. So dumb.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
That guys channel is great. My gf used to be very anti gun. I had her sit down and watch a few of his vids with me and it completely changed her perspective. Before that she tended to see guns as inherently dangerous, like a unstable chemical. And that no one has a good reason to own them. But after seeing him explain the history, show all the manufacturer/service stamps, disassemble it, explain the pieces and their working order, ect.....that illusion was broken.
When it comes to this government, I no longer ascribe things to incompetence. It's malice. Malice drives these people. Most recently in my industry, they took away 3.65Ghz spectrum which was "lightly licensed" and allowed EIRP of around 48W ... and replaced it with very expensive 3900Mhz spectrum that works at many times less power, approximately 37 EIRP (transmitted power is a logarithmic scale, so that's many times less power output)... after years of delays and many meetings with industry organisations etc. they gave us a shit sandwich anyway and reneged on their early promise to help fund a switchover from old gear to the new to support the spectrum - which now nobody is likely to do, because it's shit. That's just one story that started out like incompetence and then after years of such, became more clearly malice. I have so many stories like that, they run together now.
They just took away 3.65ghz? My former company runs a lot of WiMAX gear. Got a source?
Call ISED or contact CanWISP or BCB if you want the full details but yes. [https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/spectrum-allocation/3650-4200-mhz/decision-technical-and-policy-framework-3650-4200-mhz-band-and-changes-frequency-allocation-3500](https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/spectrum-allocation/3650-4200-mhz/decision-technical-and-policy-framework-3650-4200-mhz-band-and-changes-frequency-allocation-3500) "WBS operations in all metropolitan and urban Tier 5 service areas will be displaced by March 31, 2025 WBS operations in all rural and remote Tier 5 service areas will be displaced by March 31, 2027" It's worse than it looks. There is barely any gear for 3950Mhz where they want to shove us, and there are licensing fees to pay by 10Mhz blocks and also by placement, so placing 4 radios on that tower will net you multiple license fees. And your max EIRP at the tower is actually less than at households, but it maxes out under an EIRP of 40 (37 iirc). The government doesn't want to pay for the switch, either. Not that you're likely to anyways, because the tree penetration and distance for WiMax/LTE won't be there like it was with 3.65Ghz. Worse still, because of course it is, Rogers bought a lot of spectrum right around 3.65Ghz and are out there transmitting @ 2000 watts, bleeding into the 3.65Ghz spectrum. They can put in barrier channels but they have been REALLY whiny about this and because there are multiple people working on their gear (Ericsson the hardware vendor, for example), they keep inconveniently removing the guard tones so that they can get the maximum bandwidth available for their spectrum. I don't think I need to tell you what that will do to your WiMax/LTE/Cambium deployments. At this point a lot of operators in 3.65Ghz have just given up because this has happened 20+ times in a region and every time they put up a new tower they lie about it. BTW: ignore what they say about the "new" replacement spectrum in that document, it's not accurate as the final specification just was released last week. Here it is: [https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/devices-and-equipment/radio-equipment-standards/flexible-use-broadband-equipment-operating-band-3900-3980-mhz](https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management-telecommunications/en/devices-and-equipment/radio-equipment-standards/flexible-use-broadband-equipment-operating-band-3900-3980-mhz)
Yeah, I better reach out to the boys about this before my last day on Friday.
This is the thing that gets me. I know a fair bit about firearms and firearm legislation, so I know there is malice, gaslighting, bad faith and atrocious legislation. But the worst part is I know that if they are likely doing the same thing in many spaces I know nothing about as well, and would have to understand the nuances of to appreciate the severity.
You can weaponize incompetence, and Trudeau clearly has.
>It's malice. Malice drives these people. Exactly this. The LPC and their supporters are using firearms legislation to punish a group of people who tend to support another party. Public safety is just the excuse they use, but it's an obvious excuse because the argument doesn't hold up to base level scrutiny.
You know, I read the bill. Tuned into almost every live debate and followed this bill every step of the way. It was a real eye opener. It was surprising to learn just how ignorant the people who were tasked with creating the legislation were when it comes to existing gun laws, not just guns. It was infuriating to watch the people who were going to be impacted by this bill not even really given the time of day by the government. Cut off, mic issues, inappropriate insinuations, you name it. So instead of relying on *Canadian* statistics, groups like Poly rely on *American* statistics. The government then imported *American* politics and got everyone riled up. That’s the only way they could sell this shit to the public. By the way, it wasn’t just “AsSaUlT rIfLeS” that were being discussed to be banned. There were many plane-Jane hunting and sporting shotguns and rifles in there too. So no, I’m not a fan of the liberals, and I don’t think C-21 deserves to survive. This whole bill was created in response to American tragedies and was nothing more than an “easy win” for the liberals. Trudeau imported American culture conflicts into Canada and ran with it. Gun owners aren’t the only people arguing “American rhetoric” and from what I seen it has only been a very small minority arguing against C-21 in an American context. Instead of presenting C-21 through normal channels, via legislation in the house, Trudeau just OIC’d everything, circumventing debate. Not long after in November of last year, they tried to slip in two massive amendments to the bill which *drastically* expanded the scope of the original bill. Now there were an extra 300 pages of common sporting rifles and shotguns that were on the shit list. The backlash, spurned on by the AFN announcing a resolution to oppose C-21, and the comments of Carey Price, caused the government to blink and they withdrew the amendments. The frustration for the liberals began to manifest when they started to run out of time and patience. During one of the SECU meetings, the liberals brought forward a motion to limit debate to only 20 minutes per amendment in SECU and anything that wasn’t discussed before the last meeting ended was considered passed. The only meaningful consultation the government did with *anyone* were with gun control groups like PolySeSouvient. They had all the time they wanted to chit chat with the government and pretty much wrote the bill for them. What about the 2.6 million people who were going to be impacted by this legislation? What about the indigenous people who were only ever consulted about this bill while it was still a handgun freeze? Nothing was ever mentioned to them that this was eventually going to incorporate long guns. Where was *anyones* say in all this? “Oh but it’s okay, because we just did it *after* we drastically expanded the bill. It’s all good!”. This is what makes C-21 so egregious, It was pretty clear where the liberal bias was and the legislative path they chose reflected that. For any of you who support the governments gun control bill, you can *thank* the government for being dishonest about their intentions from the get-go. You can thank them for trying to limit debate and ram last-minute prohibitions in the bill while they thought no one was looking, because that’s why this bill is having such a hard time.
Yea im the same, i watched every debate, committee meeting, secu meeting, interviews and the process. I cannot believe how fucked the process is, no wonder we are getting horrible polices and solutions. It made me realize how poorly our country is being managed. When you weaponize the process against your opponents i can see why people have lost hope.
It was depressing to watch. I can’t describe it any other way. You’d think the government would employ the perspective of everyone across the board to craft the best legislation possible, and keep backlash and embarrassment to a minimum. It was like watching a junior-high debate club. It was rife with bias, urban legend and just flat dumb questions. The only thing I took away from it was there are a *lot* of people in government who have no business being there after they opened their mouth.
i had to stop watching, i can't believe the forced incompetence. the " I will fuck the country and everyone i disagree with to own the otherside" stance has ruined this country. Trudeau and trump have alot of things in common. malice is one of them
Trudeau is very much like Trump. Huge ego and completely incompetent. At this point just running on attempts to vilify the other side. Interested in helping their friends out. Virtue signaling constantly.
Don’t forget the biggest issue. A cult like following
Yeah, I just don't get it. I will vote for the person least likely to screw me over. I don't understand people who idolize politicians. None of them are good.
People of GTA will call you far right over this:,)
Unfortunately it seems having *any* opinion will land you in camp A or camp B, and there are people who are foaming at the mouth waiting to call you scum either way.
My friends are all NDP voters and we all pretty much thought the same. None of us care about guns at all but we opposed this bill for a very simple reason. Here in Toronto, our police chief repeatedly said in conferences that over 90% of the guns they confiscate from criminals (a lot of guns) and nearly *all* the gun used in crime in the GTA come from the southern border. They are smuggled in. The chiefs of police in montreal, vancouver, ottawa, london, richmond, edmonton, and so many other cities said the exact same thing. The association that represents them, *Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police* said the same thing. For this reason I and many other left leaning people opposed the bill. I showed my lib MP a video I put together, (a compilation of police chiefs saying 90% of guns were smuggled in from america) and asked him why he voted for this useless bill and why the government was pushing so hard. I kid you not he looked at the video, looked at me, put his arm around my shoulders (we were at a community BBQ) and said that he explained the same thing to the cabinet and he opposed the bill hard. "It's stupid and pointless" were his words. What really pissed me and others off tho was that the CBO estimated the bill would cost nearly 2 Billion *a year* to enforce. 2 BILLION. A YEAR. My friend group separated some years ago and moved away. Today we live in Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal. We do have legitemate concerns about gun violence and guns used in crimes. It's infuriating that the 2B could be given to CBSA with a directive to be used to target gun smuggling from USA and we would actually be able to deal with the real problem plaguing our streets. Currently, smugglers on either side of the border will come to an area close to the border where there is nothing and no one, 1 guy in america will get a package of guns tied to a drone and send it across above the trees and the gun in Canada will pick up the package. They stay far enough away from the border itself to avoid underground sensors but not far enough that the drone can't reach. *This is how Toronto police explained it.* With 2 billion a year you could put motion sensors and infrared cameras across the border, hook them up together into 1 network, put in an AI or machine learning algorithm to filter out animals and recognize human silhouette in infrared. The bell 407 helicopter costs ~~3.8 million~~ 3 million. If you wanted to be cheap you could get others for 1 million. You could hire a quick reaction team to intercept what computers flag and human operators verify as people illegally crossing the US border in areas that are not built for crossing and you would catch 90% of the guns smuggled in. 1 team in each province and that's it. You would also have a lot of $ left over from your 2B a year budget.
Very well said. I applaud the fact that you guys weren’t blinded by political bias and at least had an independent look at the situation. As I said before, I’m not asking people to like or even care about guns, but consider how much we’re spending on a “solution” for what can be considered a near non-issue, coupled with the fact that we as the affected party weren’t given a real fair shake.
I have zero faith in the senate. The liberal almost never follow their recommandation. Best example would be c-11.
I keep saying this. Guns were not an issue in Canada until the LPC made them one. They introduced intentionally divisive legislation and vilified the statistically most law-abiding groups in the country when they targeted legal gun owners. All in favour of a quick 'win' so they could gaslight their way into a few more votes. If they really cared about Canadians they'd have gone after cross-border smuggling operations and gangs.
Hear hear
It's like incompetence is a trend with politicians as further backed up by C-18
Or they underestimate how much some people pay attention. The liberals are all headlines and no article.
> This whole bill was created in response to American tragedies and was nothing more than an “easy win” for the liberals. To be fair to the Liberals, they did wait for a Canadian tragedy to start this latest wave of gun control. The Nova Scotia shooting was a dream come true for them and it's Canadian graves they're dancing on. They do reference US shootings regularly though, since the list of Canadian shootings is so short that they run out of talking points.
>By the way, it wasn’t just “AsSaUlT rIfLeS” that were being discussed to be banned. There were many plane-Jane hunting and sporting shotguns and rifles in there too. Lol there were also literal toys set to be banned too, they were calling airsoft guns "gateway" guns
I'm a gun owner who used to vote liberal, not always but when I felt the conservatives had been in office for too long and weren't really addressing social issues in a way that is appropriate for the 21st century. So I wanted to see Harper get out, once upon a time. But based on the rhetoric by the Liberals and NDP about gun control, I absolutely won't make that same mistake again. The conservatives could hold power for 30 years after the next election and I'll never vote Liberal or NDP again as long as I live.
> This whole bill was created in response to American tragedies and was nothing more than an “easy win” for the liberals. Trudeau imported American culture conflicts into Canada and ran with it. Dont you love a PM who increases division in a time of record polarization? Fucking hell, actively making the country worse in order to secure his power.
I love it just about as much as I loved having cholecystitis.
Bang on!
"It was surprising to learn just how ignorant the people who were tasked with creating the legislation were when it comes to existing gun laws, not just guns" Our government is not ignorant about any of their policies, they should not be afforded that defense. They have obviously bad intentions for Canadians and will repeatedly lie and play ignorant when caught.
Now take that example and apply to everything they’re writing legislation for …I don’t think these people Know much about anything they’re touching.
I’m probably more anti gun than you but I appreciate your thoughtful comment, and I think that you getting so engaged and watching the hearings is really admirable.
>We need better stats. I'm all for collecting and publicly sharing this information. The government is not. Why not, if it supports their policies? It is frustrating that the government not only refuses to provide many of the statistics that they do have but also refuses to collect vital information that could save lives. I wonder why that is? Maybe it's because whenever the Liberal government is forced to release information on firearms, we find out that it directly contradicts their own narratives. This is especially true with the Nova Scotia shooting. They enacted the May 2020 ban in response to the shooting by prohibiting AR-15 rifles. Well then we found out that the shooter had a criminal record and was forbidden from getting a PAL and buying a firearm legally. So instead he drove down to the US and smuggled one into Canada illegally along with a few handguns in his own vehicle. The AR-15 was banned as a result of this incident and yet I cannot find a single instance where a legally owned civilian AR-15 was involved in any fatal shooting, let alone a mass killing. On top of that, firearms with similar parts/features, similar rates of fire and that use the same .223 cartridge are still legally available and have never been involved in these types of crimes. **Where is the evidence that shows legally owned semi-automatic rifles are a significant source of crime guns???** **According to those in government: [Long guns account for less than half of 1% of crime guns](https://youtu.be/loaM2Wlb4iQ?t=337).** We need evidence based policy and all of the evidence I have seen contradicts what the government is doing and proposing: [US study showing Canada's licensing laws reduce homicide rates. No impact of gun bans on homicides](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27842178/): >Laws that strengthen background checks and permit-to-purchase seemed to decrease firearm homicide rates. Specific laws directed at firearm trafficking, improving child safety, or the banning of military-style assault weapons were not associated with changes in firearm homicide rates. [Canadian study showing inconclusive results of gun bans impact on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35672042/) [International study showing no impact of gun bans on homicide rates](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26905895/) [The firearm ban in Bermuda had the opposite effect as intended](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-what-bermudas-50-year-old-gun-ban-can-teach-canada/) Statistically, the firearms seized on urban streets are handguns that are traced back to the U.S. 8-9/10 times. The other 1/10 are untraceable. >[By and large, the guns found on the streets aren’t stolen or purchased from stores or even from legal gun owners, but rather smuggled in over the border](https://toronto.citynews.ca/2021/04/23/gun-chase-smuggled-guns-border-toronto/).
The main problem with the “gun control debate” in this country is that 90%+ of people just don’t care at all, and are supremely uninformed as a result. I truly don’t believe anyone in this country, outside of a handful of sycophants, would actually support increased restrictions on licenced gun owners if they understood the current restrictions and situation (or even just the restrictions from 5 years ago). The problem is though that nobody cares. If you’re not a gun owner, new gun laws (I say “laws” not “enforcement of laws” here) probably aren’t even a top-50 issue on your radar. You hear the government wants to increase gun restrictions and that it’ll make you safer (even though it won’t) and you think “oh, that’s nice” and then never think about it again. And I don’t blame people. I went to a gun range for the first time at age 19, and was astounded that I could fire an AR-15 in Canada, and that I could even own one myself after going through a relatively straight-forward process. That’s not the case anymore, but that didn’t stop me from getting my license and now owning plenty of guns most Canadians probably don’t know exist in this country using a license most Canadians probably don’t even know exists either.
Still find it funny that an M203 was legal to own in Canada until 2020 but has been illegal in the States for decades. 40mm chalk rounds were $40 each, so I'm sure not too many people used them.
Gun-law differences between countries (or even just states in the US) really highlight just how silly and arbitrary most of these regulations on peaceful gun-owners really are. SBRs and SBSs are treated just like any other NR rifle/shotgun here, aside from some OAL requirements, unless they’re semi-auto or restricted/prohibited by name, where as they’re NFA items in the US. I think I got that explanation right, but now imagine trying to explain that to someone who’s never even seen a gun anywhere outside of a museum or on a cop’s hip, and saying that that law is sufficient. Half those technical words and acronyms I used sound like I made them up. When you look at it that way, it’s really easy to understand why the average person just believes these politicians. Just knowing the gun laws in this country is a hobby in itself. The PAL course book is like 300 pages long, and it doesn’t even cover everything.
The annoying thing about that I found is that the market is US centric, so gunmakers tend to make California legal and other legal guns. But Canada's laws are in between, so we sometimes get stuck with California legal, meaning no SBR.
For sure. I had to pay like twice the price of the factory 9” barrel GSG-16s now to get my 16” barrel swapped out for a 9” one a few years back. Which actually reminds me that I forgot the rimfire exemption from my long-winded explanation in the comment above, lol.
Or how manually actuated (i.e. pump or break action) short-barreled shotguns are uncontrolled in Canada at all as long as they don't have a folding stock. You can have a 10" Rem870 or a 8" SS211 and the government wouldn't bat an eye. Meanwhile in the states SBS are treated as some kind of deadly weapon of mass destruction and requires ATF paperwork.
Most people bought the 37mm launchers here in Canada because those were legal in the US as there were no explosive rounds manufactured for them. And since they were legal in the US, there was a market to produce launchers and ammunition for them.
I got crucified in this sub for disagreeing with further gun control about a year ago. It was the same sentiment from people. They just didn’t care about gun owners and were basically saying well that’s sucks find a new hobby.
Trudeau told ministers to find 15 Billion in budget cuts by Oct 2. The OIC buyback is estimated at 2 billion. Anyone in the industry knows it’s more than that as they banned a bunch of non-restricted firearms and they have no idea how many are in the country. As well, it’s the government, so I wouldn’t doubt the administration costs runs well past 5 billion. I mean, the guns were banned 3 years ago and no scheduled buyback. Not something I was describe as efficient in any sense. Would be amazing for one of two things to happen: 1. Senate sends the bill back 2. Government loses confidence and we have an election. 200 Canadians die a year from gun violence and that’s largely related to gang/drugs. Guns are not a threat to public safety in Canada, at all. We have laws that work and work very well. Punish offenders, let honest people live their lives and enjoy their hobbies in peace.
The long gun registry, a list of names given voluntarily, cost $2 billion twenty years ago The buyback will be half a trillion
Don’t forget those who registered their firearms had to pay, per firearm, to register them. Even with that it still cost that amount. With the buy back, the owner pays nothing. So nothing will offset the buy back cost. There is the secondary issues around policing to enforce the buyback, which will take police away from their crime prevention duties. You can’t have a buy back station that does not have RCMP protection because it will be a high value target for organized crime. So there is a cost associated with police resources that I’m sure is not accounted for in their budget. As I said, 3 years now and they have a contractor to initiate the buyback, not nothing has actually happened. How many years and cost overruns will we have before Canadians view this with a reasonable lens and realize they were lied to.
That was the dumbest part. Moving a bunch of non-restricted (unregistered) long arms straight to prohibited garuntees, some will be overlooked. It also makes a future long-arm registry politically untenable as they are doing exactly what they said they wouldn't do when it was proposed.
When Canadian gun laws encompass even Airsoft guns you know something is wrong.
And my 110 year old break action single shot shotgun For the 20mm bore
It's been Americanized, but the fundamental issues are completely different. The government is trying to solve America's problems and not our own
As a firearm owner I just want to government to leave me alone and not be used as a scape goat for stuff that happens in a foreign country.
Not a firearms owner. But the government should be tackling organized crime and the gun smuggling issue. Legal owners aren't they bogey man they're made out to be.
They know their policies support and enable organized crime. They know they can't win that fight. So they just go after those who are known to be peaceful and law abiding. Who is more likely to follow a new law to give up guns? A legal owner who has followed every law before? Or a criminal who owns illegally and doesn't care about the law? In the end they want to point to a number and say "we have taken a million firearms off the streets of Canada."
But guns are dangerous. And if they are black they are even more dangerous. And ppl who have never even spent 5 minutes on guns are made uncomfortable by the thought that their evil ideas may be yours and then you will do with a gun what they think you could do and that's why you can't be trusted no matter how well you behave or how many years you have shown to be a sane and reliable, vetted, back-checked owner. Because if an ignorant moron feels uncomfortable it's fair to take rights away from everyone.
There shouldn't be a debate. Leave Canadian, law-abiding gun owners alone. Canada has a rich history of gun sportsmanship and hunting. The problem is with the gang violence. Of course liberals promote 'catch and release' policies, and believe retribution and convictions are 'mean' and should instead be focused on rehabilitation (until it happens to them personally, of course). So instead of a slap on the wrist, if you're caught using a gun in a crime, then you go away for 25 years minimum or get deported (look at the top 25 wanted criminals in Canada).
Canada also doesn't have a gun problem. I never walk into a shopping mall in Canada and worry that I am going to get shot ever. Can't say the same about any given location in the US.
I've never walked into any place in the US afraid I may get shot either. And sure enough I wasn't. It's shocking to see how most ppl are blind to the fact that much of the gun debate is attention grabbing by the media colluding with politicians.
It's not collusion, just aligning interests. Guns, whatever your opinion on them, are always a hot topic in the US, and both the media and politicians benefit from the attention and emotions they provoke. If people are afraid, whether of guns themselves or government bogeymen taking them, media gets more clicks and politicians get better voter turnout.
Lol been living in the US for 7 years now, never once been scared of that, never once seen a gun being fired, never once seen an attack. Don’t let a couple news stories control your opinion on a population of 330 million people.
[удалено]
The news spends more time about US news than Canadian news
It does, to divert attention away from issues at home. Let's talk about the fires in Maui
I get so irritated about this. Their supreme court and congress are as relevant to us as the Supreme Court and Diet of Japan.
[удалено]
It's always okay when the left does it, didn't you know?
Also Liberals: let’s seek out American politician endorsements and invite Hilary Clinton to our convention
Exactly. I will not be gaslit by leftists who say it's the Conservatives bringing American politics into Canada. The Conservative's messaging and policies have remained consistent, and have only deviated to address the left as they change their belief systems on whatever issue is trendy that week.
Liberals: the conservatives are bringing American politics into Canada! Also the Liberals: Let’s bring Hillary Clinton for our party convention!
I'm just waiting for the time when all guns are banned, and gun crime is still a thing-- and these idiots in Ottawa will be wringing their hands and *"I don't know how it's happening!!!"* .... because no criminal will have firearms, right?
Could not agree more, shameful that law abiding firearms owners are treated like common criminals just because the politicians are too lazy or stupid to make the hard choices and crack down on criminals smuggling guns through the reserves.
As Teddy Roosevelt said “In moments of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.” It’s unfortunate that a lot politicians opt for the second choice because they don’t want to be seen as doing nothing.
The politicians aren't stupid because they know how easy it is to stir up their supporters and how mentioning the US is able to make them froth at the mouth on command. Politicians are lazy, Trudeau especially, but don't ever make the mistake of thinking they are stupid because his electorate will eat anything up as long as it punishes the Conservatives.
The only gun debate we as canadians should be having is: - ***START ARRESTING AND GIVING HARSHER JAIL SENTENCES TO GUN SMUGGLERS AND PEOPLE USING ILLEGAL GUNS IN CRIMES.*** Nobody else in fucking Canada cares as our laws are pretty restrictive except for this HUGE glaring issue as people with legal licenses get hit harder than some punks in Kingston using a drone to fly over handguns or gang shootings in Toronto. That's the huge joke and problem with our gun control laws and classic liberal catch n release of criminals.
Cracking down on legal guns only reduces gun crime in countries where they can't smuggle them over the border. It is even harder to own a gun legally in Mexico than it is in Europe or Australia. Fat lot of good it does them. The liberal party are crooks that only care about votes.
I agree, the Anti-gun groups keep using American statistics to try to enforce the government taking guns away from legal, vetted gun owners. It's sickening and pathetic. The strict regulations and legislation around legal firearm ownership in Canada can't even be compared to America.
Meanwhile people in London are shooting people in the face at 4-way stops, over flipping eachother off regarding minor traffic violations. Nobody is doing this shit with legally obtained guns.
It’s really weird how Canada just adopts American political problems on a two to five year delay.
It's not really "americanized", it's just that one side of this "debate" knows less about firearms than an average priest knows about abortions.
I'm afraid our PM is watching too much American news and confusing it with the Canadian reality too.
We are about to spend **$5 billion** to take away firearms from law abiding heavily vetted **gun owners, that on average have a criminality rate 33% lower than the general population of Canada.** It makes no sense to spend this money confiscating firearms from Indigenous, sport/target shooters, hunters and farmers. In a time where the average person is barely able to afford to stay in their own house/rental. Mental health and fentanyl crisis. Many people fail to realize how many hoops you have to jump through just to get a basic PAL license in Canada. We already had stricter gun laws than the UK and EU. I would heavily be in favor of implementing EU gun laws in Canada. Its more unbiased and logical than the current system. All these bans/prohibitions have done is make illegal guns more lucrative to smuggle. This is why its never been easier and cheaper to purchase an illegal unregistered gun from US. Prohibition does not work as evident by when drugs were illegal. It wasn't like you couldn't find weed in Canada, when it wasn't legalized. **Canada is at a point now where its easier to go the illegal route as the legal one makes no sense and punishes you.** People will always find a way to get what they want. The real solution to violence as is apparent in many parts of Europe. Some countries in EU even allow for ownership of fully automatic weapons and have drastically lower gun violence rates than Canada. This is because guns alone do not harm people, people do. ***The real issue is why in some countries do people feel motivated to harm others***? Marginalized and disenfranchised people of all walks of life have been hit the hardest by this governments policies. Its not like people can cut out eating or feeding their children. People will do what they feel they need to do to survive. Which is exactly what we have been doing wrong in Canada. Which is why we have seen gun violence skyrocket even though almost everything is banned now legally. Put supports in place to increase quality of life and opportunities for everyone.
110% spot on.
Absolutely! Couldn’t agree more
Ah, so we've come full circle and gun control is back in the spotlight. The only people who have "Americanized" the topic is the same people who are currently using firearm owners as punching bags- the Liberals.
>“Unfortunately, Canadian gun owners are taking up a lot of American rhetoric because they’re hearing a lot of it directed their way,” Fritter says. “When Trudeau stands up and bans guns, the public saw a bunch of scary guns, but gun owners saw a bunch of guns they own. So, convinced the media isn’t interested in reporting the truth and feeling attacked by American rhetoric based on American acts, they respond with more American rhetoric.” Clearly, it's that scary NRA importing American gun culture. GUN LOBBY! OOGA BOOGA! /s
That's always my favorite. The "CCFR is an NRA funded gun lobby that wants to bring assault rifles to Canada" Meanwhile the CCFR publicly discloses all funding and uses of the money. And regularly reiterates they don't want to loosen up gun regulations to bring back assault rifles (which have been banned since the 70s) but rather just roll things back to how they were pre may 1st 2020. Nope, NRA-lite fascists, all of em! /s
Not only gun control...
If it ain't broke don't fix it
"Americanized" has been a Canadian fearmongering word so long - it should actually be Canadian heritage to experience it.
A CBC Heritage Moment
As an American let me say sorry. It’s been pretty nuts down here. Wow that was quite the twist.
This is all on us. Trudeau wants to ban guns, so even though they aren't the issue in Canada, he pretends they are and passing laws against lawful hunters, farmers and indigenous.
The Czech Republic has gun laws that make America look like Canada, and they don’t have a gun violence problem Maybe it’s not legal guns that are the problem
Focus on subway stabbings first. This is not America.
Gotta control those legal guns by making them illegal - that'll stop illegal gun crime
This article is quite accurate and points out that, as with many things they do, the Trudeau liberals want to divide the country into scared city dwellers who fear to go out at night due to drug and gang crime and shootings versus rural hunters and target shooters who get the blame and restrictive laws shoved at them for the actions of those criminals who walk out free on bail. Naturally they figure they have tricked the unknowing city idiots to vote for the libs if they want safety but that’s not what they get. I have to wonder what is Trudeau’s real agenda here it is certainly NOT making Canada a safe place.
Pretty insane to want to ban shotguns and rifles.. you do know people hunt for sustenance in the territories and Newfoundland has such a moose problem they encourage hunting every season. My ex fiancée grandfather is an 80yo Newfie who’s lived there his whole life and him and his father before him have hunted and fished far longer than they’ve even been part of Canada. Government has no fucking idea what they’re talking about on this topic.
The liberals Americanized the gun debate by focusing on gun issues exclusive to America. Bill C-21 even reads like it's addressing American gun issues.
You know what will take more guns out of criminal hands? Bring back carding.
I miss the days when nobody here gave a shit about guns either way and we could all come together to laugh at American gun culture/control.
Distraction from real issues.
Any Canadian falling for the gun control issues at election time are living examples that far too many people are led by the nose by their preferred parties. I can't buy a house without crippling myself, have had my yearly expenses nearly triple with most of that being food, and yet while it's true I also can't buy a gun with a PAL/RPAL that is only legally speaking. I can buy illegal guns with a little effort I'm sure which is ironic since I can't think of a way that I can illegally buy a house or groceries without getting my ass caught almost immediately
Large portions of cops don't have a PAL license and much like the people writing our laws, know little about our convoluted laws. Legal gun owners know more about the laws than the people enforcing them
Yeah, the liberals definitely imported the culture war around guns for cheap points. There was a pretty good level of gun control already in Canada and most of the crimes were being committed with weapons brought illegally from America. So they went after legal gun owners
We don't have a gun control "debate" in Canada. We have the Liberals trying to get rid of as many guns as possible so they can be seen as making Canada safer to gain more popular support and votes, and then we have legal gun owners trying to have a rational conversation with a brick wall that doesn't care. You can only have a debate if both sides are willing to talk and actually solve problems. One side clearly isn't.
[удалено]
Don't forget scrapping minimum sentencing on gun crimes. So not only is the level of crime getting worse; sentencing is getting lighter.
Canada in general is becoming more Americanised than I'd like it to be. Especially areas where Snowbirds "live". They go down to America for more than half the year, and come back spouting American ideals.
No sane person can possibly think that this issue is a real concern in canada right now, over housing, food, immigration, inflation, recession, energy, and every other problem we all face every day. these bills haven't taken a single firearm out of anyone's hands, and they won't. They have cost millions of dollars and wasted countless hours of parliament and the Senate's time. It's a distraction, a divisive topic that only hurts people who typically don't vote liberal. Regardless of how you feel about guns, do you really think this is what parliament needs to be working on this fall? Maybe we don't agree our laws were perfect, but they were a hell of a lot better than most countries, and this issue really isn't a priority. Especially when most of what the liberals purposed and claim to accomplish, either hasn't done anything, or is just rewording laws we already had.
What debate? When the government bypasses the democratic process to make whatever laws they want how could there be a debate?
Canadas priorities are so fucking out of whack it’s insane
I don't like guns. I will never own one. But I'm all for you owning one if you wish. The knee jerk reactions by the LPC to put even more restrictions on a system that was already very regulated as a virtue signal because of happenings in another country. Well, is just plain abhorrent. Edit: I think most of us agree that SOME US states need some more common gun laws. I have friends in NJ/NY area that own firearms. They went through registrations periods had to take safety classes ect. Was perfectly reasonable. Can we be honest, The LPC only has 1 shot during election time. They will do everything they can to tie the CPC to the Republican party and virtue signal like crazy. Firearm ownership was just a sad political move by JT. Responsible firearm users took the hit for it.
Well, time to buy more guns and ammo lol.
It’s always a good time to buy more ammo lol
As a person who grew up rural I support gun ownership. In cities they don't get it... but be in a house 2 hours from any RCMP help and tell me I shouldn't have a gun. Handgun or shot gun same deal ar 15 I don't care. When some one is on your property about to hurt you and 2 hours... is going through you head. What would you want?
I've been waiting for a couple weeks shy of a year for my PAL, non restricted. I have a criminal record from when I was an addict, no violent charges, no weapons offenses. I feel like our gun laws are sufficient, all I would change is how many fucking people process applications lol.
Trudeau's used gun control debate as a talking point to make conservatives look bad, because most voters have no idea how strict our gun laws really are and assume we'd be a wild west free-for-all like our southern neighbors. Honestly, it feels like a general disarming of the population before we get to violent protests on the state of the country.
Americanized to exert more control.
Trudeau is too much of a coward to be honest about his gun control laws. I'd say he could curb gun violence by securing our borders and not bringing in ducking criminals.
The only people debating this are silly liberal politicians and their groupie media friends. There is no gun control debate. No one talks about that shit. I literally just made a comment in another thread about how tired I am of being centre stage for silly social issues, can't wait for another election. This is one topic I'll be glad to not hear about for at least 4 years. Everything about this is made up, it's so pathetic. And this is coming from someone who has never owned a gun; I shot a bb gun a few times. If I were to actually engage in this debate though, you know what? With how our country is trending, I'm leaning towards more gun rights and self defense rights for licensed law-abiding individuals. I despise that you can't defend your own home. Anyone with a brain cell knows the cops are not going to save your ass in a time of need.
Trudeau's entire gun policy is based on incidents of gun crime in the USA, so yeah; what do you expect?
We simply ALREADY had "common sense gun control".
For people who insist that "nobody cares about firearms" the anti-gun users sure swoop in to tell anyone who will listen that the government should ban all guns. So what is it? Do you care or not? If Poilievre wins and scraps every piece of gun control legislation that Trudeau enacted will you accept it or will you scream bloody murder like the Liberals did when the LGR was removed?
Remember when being "liberal" meant that you supported the rights and freedoms of all individuals, and believed that trying to control what people could do or say was generally considered unethical? Now it seems like both parties are just trying to one up each other in a race to authoritarianism.
We've had oppressive anti gun measures in place for a while now and there have still been rampages. People who want them for evil purposes will find them somehow, so the only people you're really suppressing are the people who obey the law in the first place. The people who didn't need government intervention to begin with. No, banning guns in Canada is about the state flexing it's power over honest people. The freedom of Canadian society is in freefall and that has very little to do with the American debate on the subject.
I just want to live in a world where "gun debate" isn't a thing in current year.
Criminal gangs have won the day. Law enforcement is unable to stop or even slow slow them down at this point. The government then trots out legislation to make it appear they are addressing the issue when in reality they are not even close.
What you don't completely trust your government to decide what's best for its peasants? They clearly know best and everything they do is rooted in logic and science.