The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[OldSolduer]

No, I don't discount smuggling, but even those weapons had to have belonged to a legal owner somewhere right?

At some point yes but not all states have firearm registries nor the stringent conditions we have.

Now think about this. You have registered your firearms and stored them IAW the law. The registry is compromised in some way, shape or form. It could be a hacker or someone on the inside selling the list to nefarious people - criminals. Your house is broken into and all your firearms are gone.
Who is at fault there? Not the legal owner who obeyed the law.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Red and Yellow flag laws already exist. Anyone can contact their police or provincial CFO to report a firearms safety concern with a licensee, who then gets their say in court. C-21 makes it so prohibition orders can be granted without the subject being aware or given the chance to refute the evidence on which the order may by based.

Magazine capacity restrictions already exist. C-21 creates offences that build upon existing offences. Possessing an "overcapacity" magazine is an offence now. C-21 proposes that modifying a legal magazine so it's now "overcapacity" will be illegal.

C-21's limited handgun exemption, intended to protect Olympic shooting, will ultimately kill the sport as it eliminates the feeder sports by attrition.

It's a bad bill.

I'm not sure what this has to do with what I posted. Can you clarify?

 

[Haggis]

I'm not sure what this has to do with what I posted. Can you clarify?

It was meant to be illustrative of the "game changing" laws C-21 is supposed to bring in that already exist. Laws that the antis either don't know about or willfully and conveniently ignore.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

extend it until the Conservatives get in as it looking promising for them right now

 

[Quirky]

If you believe Trudeau should press to have the RCMP also disarmed.

I’ll support this when trudeaus personal bodyguards can’t carry either.

 

[Haggis]

I’ll support this when trudeaus personal bodyguards can’t carry either.

They are RCMP.

 

[Fabius]

I would support treating firearms and automobiles the same however we need to look at exactly what we do with automobiles and drivers now.
We regulate the vehicle and driver essentially to operate on public roadways.
The vehicle is registered and insured for operation on public roadways.
The driver is trained and tested on ability to operate on public roadways.

There are no restrictions on the purchase of any type of vehicle and if you only drive it on the dirt tracks on your ranch or at a private race track etc. you don’t need insurance or registration nor a license.

An ATC is closer in concept to a drivers license than just a PAL or RPAL.

 

[Haggis]

I would support treating firearms and automobiles the same however we need to look at exactly what we do with automobiles and drivers now.
We regulate the vehicle and driver essentially to operate on public roadways.

PAL/RPAL with registration certificate for restricted firearms.

The vehicle is registered and insured for operation on public roadways.

Registration Certificate and homeowners coverage for your property. Many club memberships come with liability coverage as well.

The driver is trained and tested on ability to operate on public roadways.

CFSC and CRFSC, club level training requirements, IPSC Black Badge, handguns restricted to licensed shooting ranges only. Once you do your driver's test, it doesn't take a year to get your license in the mail.

There are no restrictions on the purchase of any type of vehicle and if you only drive it on the dirt tracks on your ranch or at a private race track etc. you don’t need insurance or registration nor a license.

You can purchase almost anything (a dealer near me is selling a used airport fire truck), but you can't drive it on public roadways unless you have the proper class of license and the vehicle is roadworthy. Of note, QC wanted to ban "military style" vehicles, such as Hummers, in that province.

It's a simplistic comparison, particularly where restricted firearms are concerned.

• Nobody faces jail time for leaving their Bronco unlocked.
• Nobody faces the seizure of all their vehicles because a neighbour or a vindictive ex anonymously called the police on you.
• Drivers are not subject to lifetime background checks every time they renew, or Continuous Eligibility Screening every day or possible random inspections of their garages for compliance with laws written like North Korean stereo instructions.
• Mustang drivers don't have to demonstrate a need to own a specific vehicle or join a Mustang club in order to prove that need.
• There are no time of day restrictions on when you can drive.
• You do not have to take only the most reasonably direct route between your home and destination.
• ON driver's don't need permission from QC to drive their cars into QC.
• You don't need a special permit to take your car to the US and bring it back into Canada.
• You aren't restricted as to what tires you can put on your car.
  

 

[Remius]

PAL/RPAL with registration certificate for restricted firearms.

Registration Certificate and homeowners coverage for your property. Many club memberships come with liability coverage as well.

CFSC and CRFSC, club level training requirements, IPSC Black Badge, handguns restricted to licensed shooting ranges only. Once you do your driver's test, it doesn't take a year to get your license in the mail.

You can purchase almost anything (a dealer near me is selling a used airport fire truck), but you can't drive it on public roadways unless you have the proper class of license and the vehicle is roadworthy. Of note, QC wanted to ban "military style" vehicles, such as Hummers, in that province.

It's a simplistic comparison, particularly where restricted firearms are concerned.

• Nobody faces jail time for leaving their Bronco unlocked.
• Nobody faces the seizure of all their vehicles because a neighbour or a vindictive ex anonymously called the police on you.
• Drivers are not subject to lifetime background checks every time they renew, or Continuous Eligibility Screening every day or possible random inspections of their garages for compliance with laws written like North Korean stereo instructions.
• Mustang drivers don't have to demonstrate a need to own a specific vehicle or join a Mustang club in order to prove that need.
• There are no time of day restrictions on when you can drive.
• You do not have to take only the most reasonably direct route between your home and destination.
• ON driver's don't need permission from QC to drive their cars into QC.
• You don't need a special permit to take your car to the US and bring it back into Canada.
• You aren't restricted as to what tires you can put on your car.

I think you missed his point. I think he was saying he supports making gun ownership similar to vehicle ownership not the other way around nor was it a point of comparison.

 

[Fabius]

PAL/RPAL with registration certificate for restricted firearms.

Registration Certificate and homeowners coverage for your property. Many club memberships come with liability coverage as well.

CFSC and CRFSC, club level training requirements, IPSC Black Badge, handguns restricted to licensed shooting ranges only. Once you do your driver's test, it doesn't take a year to get your license in the mail.

You can purchase almost anything (a dealer near me is selling a used airport fire truck), but you can't drive it on public roadways unless you have the proper class of license and the vehicle is roadworthy. Of note, QC wanted to ban "military style" vehicles, such as Hummers, in that province.

It's a simplistic comparison, particularly where restricted firearms are concerned.

• Nobody faces jail time for leaving their Bronco unlocked.
• Nobody faces the seizure of all their vehicles because a neighbour or a vindictive ex anonymously called the police on you.
• Drivers are not subject to lifetime background checks every time they renew, or Continuous Eligibility Screening every day or possible random inspections of their garages for compliance with laws written like North Korean stereo instructions.
• Mustang drivers don't have to demonstrate a need to own a specific vehicle or join a Mustang club in order to prove that need.
• There are no time of day restrictions on when you can drive.
• You do not have to take only the most reasonably direct route between your home and destination.
• ON driver's don't need permission from QC to drive their cars into QC.
• You don't need a special permit to take your car to the US and bring it back into Canada.
• You aren't restricted as to what tires you can put on your car.

I’m not comparing the current system for firearms and vehicles in Canada in its specifics but am interested in the overall approach to regulating private property and how that changes for use on public property, aka roads.

All your points on the differences in how we treat private property of different types are facts unfortunately in our current state.

Basic firearms ownership could be more in line with vehicles, being unregulated for purchase with corresponding registration, insurance, training requirements for firearms use for public activities such as an ATC.
Use on private property as with vehicles would not necessitate any registration etc. same as for vehicles.

It’s would be fundamental redefinition of how we treat ownership of firearms in Canada.

Middle ground between current system and the above, could be the above but with a PAL requirement for basic ownership and possibly something like the US NFA for suppressors etc.

 

[Haggis]

I think you missed his point. I think he was saying he supports making gun ownership similar to vehicle ownership not the other way around nor was it a point of comparison.

It's an oft used comparison and a shallow one. There are no other recreational activities (and driving is a recreational activities) that are as heavily regulated as the gun ownership and the shooting sports except, maybe, flying. But the government will not villanize and criminalize drivers and pilots for political points.

 

[Remius]

But that is it.

It's an oft used comparison and a shallow one. There are no other recreational activities (and driving is a recreational activities) that are as heavily regulated as the gun ownership and the shooting sports except, maybe, flying. But the government will not villanize and criminalize drivers and pilots for political points.

Why not treat gun ownership the same way we treat car ownership. It isn’t about vilainizing car owners it would be more about normalizing gun ownership. I think that was his point. I stand to be corrected though.

But I doubt there is an appetite for that here though.

 

[Good2Golf]

Although ICE-powered vehicles are supporting commission of mass murder in the eyes of the current Gibernment, so let’s mot underestimate how stupid the Government to go towards eliminating vehicles…

 

[Fabius]

That is my point, treat cars and firearms the same with cars as currently set up being the standard.
I agree that the appetite is not there.

 

[captloadie]

Not to poke holes but flying hobby drones is now heavily regulated pass time.

And while yes you can drive your motorized vehicle any way you want on your private property, he likelihood of causing harm to anyone but yourself is usually restricted to the immediate neighbours, and you'll likely get caught. Firing weapons any way you want on your property can impact people at a much farther distance with potentially no trace back to the negligent shooter.

That said, I'd love to be able to use some of my 40 acres to set up a safe range to ping cans with various calibres.

 

[Fabius]

You can fire non restricted on private property or crown land now as is subject to to local bylaws. It’s only restricted that you can’t for some unclear reason.
Unless prevented by local bylaws you can shoot on 40 acres to your hearts content as long as you do so in a safe manner.
We already have laws to deal with unsafe and irresponsible activities.

 

[Good2Golf]

That said, I think they’re beginning to feel some heat with the continuously increasing violent crime rate that *hasn’t a single lawful firearm owner implicated, so JT risks being savaged by PP with a “show me a single case where a lawful firearms owner committed a violent act that contributes to the turnaround to increasing violence since you become Pm in 2015!”

And the polls have spoken…perhaps…Liberals set to reverse their previous “let them all go” methodology and are signaling that they’re going to try to get serious in the actual source of violent crime in Canada…maybe…

Justice Minister tables legislation to reform bail system

Update to the law aims to deal with repeat violent offenders and offences involving firearms and other dangerous weapons

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[Good2Golf]

…but the cynic in me thinks that PMJT will sooner prorogue Government so that he can say he’s making a difference while not really making a difference.

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

I did not want to direct this topic sideways with my comparisons to driving a car.
Both are legal activities but the rules are not exactly on the same scale or side.

You can kill someone with a car and can get a very light sentence, but have a chance of being legal to drive again. You accidently kill a person with your firearm, you are never owning one again, no matter what.
Gun owners are not the evil people the government is making them out to be. They are voters too but their vote does not count.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Ah ha!

Marie Oakes on Reels |

401K views, 7.2K likes, 396 comments, 11K shares, Facebook Reels from Marie Oakes.

www.facebook.com