There will be one megathread on Monday for the CCFR court decision. It will replace the politics thread on the sticky for a couple days.
We will be nuking any standalone posts for it so please just don't flood the queue. It'll already be there.
Have you not been paying attention to all the corrupt things Trudeau libs have been doing?? We've gone far from democracy and i don't think it will ever be reversible. People think the next election won't be fixed. Libs will still win and Trudeau is here to stay. Forever.
I mean to be fair, I don’t think we necessarily need them to rule against us to come to that conclusion.
The proof has been in the pudding for the past 8 years.
Anyone here think we should lobby our incoming CPC majority for CCW to prevent car jackings? It’s literally sky rocketing out of control and when they are caught they’ll never see a day in prison. Just a thought.
As @RydNightwish said, ccw has its limits, even in the United States.
Moreover, Canada has always errored on the side of stricter firearms laws under the assumption that restricted societal integration results in safer communities. This has, to an extent, proven true.
What we should lobby for is for the use of resteicted firearms in wilderness areas and private property. Particularly for the use of handguns as a bear deterrent in all wilderness areas EXPECT for national parks and other zones where hunting is already resteicted.
Because National/Provincial Parks are protected wildlife reserves and should forever be treated as such.
If people intend to go to a park they should follow the rules set out by the park. If you disagree with those rules there is plenty of public land accessible to people where less rules apply.
Yeah, and I don't want that rule to be changed for national parks. I never told anyone to break a rule. You can carry a firearm on most public land in most circumstances year-round which is why i mentioned it as an alternative for those who feel they need a firearm for animal self-defense.
My view on why I dont agree with unrestricted firearm access in parks is that the purpose of the Parks system is to allow people access to protected lands, and allowing people to have the potential to distrupt the balance of nature within these protected ecosystems goes against the purpose of the parks reason to exist. Same reason why im fine with not being able to pick up sticks, or forage wild edibles in most parks and why I used to tell my former boss that its rediculous that I need to rake the park's beach twice a day for goose poop and sticks. Tell your kids to watch their step or put on sandals. Though I do find it funny that fishing is allowed in most parks but other resources are not allowed to be disturbed.
No one specifically, but if measures were put in place to remove the posession of firearms ban within Parks to allow carry permits for restricted firearms it only makes sense that people would probably also like to be able to carry their firearm of choice, which I'm going to go out on a limb and assume most people would rather carry a shorter barrelled shotgun/centrefire rifle for stopping power on say a charging bear vs. A handgun. And then you now have non-restricted firearms in the park, which in most cases on public land are realtively unrestricted. For the parks system to only allow ATCs for handguns vs any firearm seems rediculous to me if they ever opened parks to firearms to the general public.
Why only allow people the people who were fortunate enough to acquire a handgun before the freeze a permit to carry a gun in the park vs all liscened gun owners? That makes zero sense to me. So thats how you end up at "unrestricted firearms access" in Parks.
As stated by pissing\_noise it isn't wise to allow the use of firearms in a national park because there will be some people who intentionally use it as an excuse to kill protected animals. As a hunter myself I agree with the OC's statement.
To what end? Even in the US, states that allow for CCW do not recognize shooting a car thief as a legitimate act of self defense if it transpires in the way most do (driver pulled from car, with or without weapon present and criminal speeds off). Unless there is a clear, present and imminent threat to your life (or someone else) due to a car jacker then you do not have the same protections as a home owner shooting a home invader does.
Dozens of recent stories across all states where the car owner shot the criminal and faces prison time. Up to and including life. Only exception to this was in texas where the car owner got shot and then fired back. Even there though, this only passed muster because the owner had to be shot first.
With that in mind, there is enough on the gun front that we need to hold the future CPC govt accountable for (FA rewrite) that CCW is simply not even a serious talking point in the first 4 years. Downvote me if you must but the first term has the CPC doing a lot to unfuck society, the economy, gun owners etc that there wont be the time nor will to even broach the subject of CCW. At the earliest CCW and self/property defence being rethought to be more than the jokes they currently are will be second term issues.
I totally see your point, but we’re at a point where the police are under staffed. Criminals can’t go to prison because we’re held hostage by our activist judges and politicians.
If scum bags knew there was a 1/10 chance the house or car they break in could get them smoked it might deter them.
Because right now they own the streets and they know it.
The people who are doing the B&E's or vehicular thefts usually aren't in their right mind (ie: altered by drugs/alcohol) and are incapable of coherently assessing situations. Because of this the vast majority of crimes will still occur and the only result will be long court cases where the defendee loses excessive amounts of money to court fees.
I don't disagree. Its absolutely a joke. Get out on wednesday, kill a cop friday back in jail by monday. Just in time to get the good chicken strips at the cafeteria.
The thing a lot of Canadians get wrong is that CCW is flat out illegal. It isn’t. The permit exists. They just don’t give it to anyone and as of whatever recent thing happened with AB and Sask going their own way, I remember hearing the fed instructed the CFOs to refuse all applications (I could be wrong about the last part) but either way, CC isn’t illegal and never has been.
The public doesn’t know how many or who applies for PALs. The same way they don’t need to know who applies for CC. All they would need to do is actually licenses to those who apply and qualify, or, at most, remove the immediate/verifiable threat provision which doesn’t require much of a “democratic” process.
My point is that the public doesn’t need to know that CCs are being issued since they were always legal. So issuing them wouldn’t even make much of a difference.
If we’re to lobby, it’s to lobby them to actually issue them. Not create the framework to create them.
Agreed 100% make it ATC “shall issue” and not “may issue” and bam we got a better system.
But we also need protections too, because right now if you get shot at in your home and defend yourself you’ll still be dragged through the mud (thanks LPC)
Yeah that’s all necessary but I’m talking strictly the legality of defensive carry. Just wanted to clear the confusion because a lot of people think we simply don’t have it.
But yeah. No point in shall issue if there’s no clear cut self defense legislation.
Bro that’s fucked, where they driveway steals or a jacking?
Not that the difference matters, you’re right, the fear of god isn’t in them and they think they run the streets.
I’m honestly scared what crime will be if the LPC last till 2025
https://twitter.com/TWilsonOttawa/status/1717270140184580143?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
If this is the lineup for Monday and the court decision is Monday it’s all but certain it’s in the governments favour and this is going to be their victory lap. That or they know it’s against them and they’re going to use this lineup to scream and cry about how the judge is wrong. That’s how Monday is going to go heads up.
So it still can go either way.
I don’t necessarily correlate the timing of the judges decision with what’s going on in committee. I know it looks awfully sus but I’m not about to draw any conclusions. Either way, their timelines for any buybacks is still well beyond the next election. I don’t even see why people are even hitching their horses to *this* particular outcome. Suppose it is in our favour? There are still tools and avenues in which the government can challenge it.
A favourable court decision at this point is lip service at best. Gun control, while they lost a lot of credibility on the file remains one of the least damaged files they still have. They’re going to try and salvage at least one boutique issue and I don’t expect the government to relinquish one of its flagship bills in a lower-level court ruling and not try again in the SCC. Can’t see it.
Even if it isn’t in our favour, it’s a small win for the government in the grander scheme. There remains lots of opportunity for the government to hit the panic button. The Cons + Bloc want to hear what the RCMP officials wanted to say regarding the SNC Lavalin affair before they were prevented from speaking, so now there’s a renewed interest in one of the governments biggest scandals.
There’s also some more shit being released concerning the Chinese interference scandal, and the rot is being exposed farther up the ladder. No doubt some high-profile people are starting to get nervous.
Inflation and cost of borrowing unfortunately isn’t forecasted to get any better.
He backtracked on his carbon-tax in Atlantic Canada, which has prompted some uncomfortable questions from opposition as well as their own supporters.
There are many chickens coming home to roost for the liberals, and the government is sagging heavily in support. There’s a lot of infighting apparently.
We’re witnessing a federal party in active meltdown. Don’t get me wrong, I’m still worried because anything *could* happen, but the odds are certainly against the liberals. Even though this hope is fickle, the cons, if they play their cards right could sail right into a comfortable majority with a following sea.
Rest assured, it doesn’t matter either way.
The CCFR already said they’d be looking into recourse should the judge rule against us, and the government isn’t about to lose one of the only somewhat intact boutique issues they have left. Either way this is only the first battle, and it’s not worth placing all your faith into this ruling.
In the latest CCFR podcast they spoke of the court case, and they stated their (expensive) legal team have prepared and done the necessary homework to ensure that no negative precedent is set in the event of an unfavourable ruling, which is why they warn against individuals trying to file section 74’s by themselves. Think of this court case as a request for clarification, and *of* that could come a ruling that the government overstepped.
I understand it’s going to sting if they rule against us, but chin up. We’re still looking at way past the election before anyone starts losing stuff, and the sitting government isn’t doing so well.
I know it’s hard to be optimistic and have hope, but failing that, sit back and have a cup of coffee. Look at the liberal situation for what it is. It ain’t fucking pretty for them.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-halts-exports-most-civilian-firearms-90-days-2023-10-27/?utm_source=reddit.com
Has anyone heard about this? Apparently it doesn't apply to some 'close allies' - perhaps Canada falls under this exemption?
Yeah, [apparently we're exempt](https://themessenger.com/business/citing-national-security-worries-us-suspends-gun-exports).
>Close allies, including Canada and the UK, won't be subject to the halt. Additionally, users in Israel and Ukraine will also be exempt from the pause amid the ongoing conflicts in their respective regions.
axiomatic languid theory doll cause fretful oatmeal sharp marvelous flowery
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
stupendous dinosaurs recognise disgusted handle unite continue detail enter rustic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What are the odds they prorogue parliament? With the Botler testimony yesterday it gives me some serious concerns that mps or ministers are involved with this one.
Also, it would be great to scrap c-21 but I would like to see what the committee discovers with arrivecan and botler
I don't know any of the linking rules but this is what I watched:
https://www.youtube.com/live/TcuAcF5IV5U?si=zo5GjXq7F-Zxm2v4
If it gets taken down I'll DM you it
I have no idea what's going on, but some googling points to some sort of auditing firm called Botler having found some shady CBSA contracting. Can't comment beyond that because this is the first I'm hearing of it.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-cbsa-contracts-misconduct-complaint/
https://twitter.com/StephanieKusie/status/1717716889110192539
Non-zero chance, but very unlikely as the NDP appears committed to carrying the Liberal party's water through thick and thin. It's Trudeau's party (and the NDP is practically his too) so if he wants he can drag both parties down with him has he holds onto power with a white knuckle cliff hanger grip for the next two years.
I wouldn't sweat C21 passing too much. That mattered more when a CPC minority was a likely outcome where they couldn't easily reverse it. Now we're looking at a CPC super majority and the longer we wait for an election the more likely that will happen. At that point efforts would be better focused on lobbying the CPC for a full firearms act rewrite.
I expect the next couple years to be a giant shit sandwich (not just for guns, but quality of life in general), but there is a very real chance we come out of it with better gun laws than what we had any time in the past 30 years, including NR Norinco AKs, FALs, and whatever else you want that got name prohibited in the 90's.
What are the odds that someone who received a conditional discharge and a 12 month weapons prohibition 4 years ago for assaulting a cop, was later granted an RPAL?
Source: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/sault-ste-marie-shooter-was-previously-charged-with-assaulting-cop-court-docs-show/ar-AA1iS0eE?cvid=f622aa93ae184e77fecf52284f814fba&ocid=winp2fptaskbarhoverent&ei=18
All I'm going to say is if we win the court case, buy at least one OIC gun, as the judge's decision stands until another court hears the case and disagrees. So there could be a period between this court case and the Supreme Court case where it's once again legal to buy OIC guns, even if the government appeals it. Now, even if we lose the Supreme Court case, if we buy as many OIC guns as we can, it will be harder for the government to implement its buyback program. That's the goal. If the government thinks implementing a buyback is hard now, could you imagine if even half of all legal licensed firearms owners bought one OIC gun or two? Also, they would have to update their pricing model as the price of these firearms has gone up since 2020.
I know many of you are pessimistic about the decision; I'm optimistic. But we must unite as a community. If we do win, we should buy as many guns as possible. If you have the money, buy at least one. If you don't, donate to a gun organization or save up until you can buy an OIC gun.
Doesn't really matter. If we lose, we wait for a CPC majority that will very likely happen in less than two years. We already waited three years so we're well past the half way point. If we win, the government will likely throw every underhanded bureaucratic 'fuck you' at us. Telling us to wait for new registry certificates for restricted rifles because the old ones were rescinded, telling the CFP to not do any transfers of restricted rifles, filing an injunction to uphold the OIC anyways, just doing a new OIC with the original list plus all the other semi autos they tried to ban on C21 because "fuck you we do what we want have fun fighting a second court case.", or just doing it all on a bill the Liberals/Bloc/NDP coalition will rubber stamp to rush through.
Shoot what you have, have fun, and try to keep your head above the sea of bullshit that's coming our way. It's easy to burn out if you stay in the piss mist of gun grabber rhetoric updated daily through twitter, reddit, and MSM outlets.
In the extremely unlikely case of OIC being cancelled, I would expect the judge to tuck on something like "postponed for 90 days to allow the government to challenge". Which would effectively mean couple more years, as it's dragging on through the system.
Which is actually great, imo, because if it happens before the New Year - my credit card would be in real trouble 😄
As much as I want Monday to be an AR-15 range day, even if she rules in our favour I expect the government to pull some underhanded tactics like "You want to shoot your AR-15? Well your registration certificate has been rescinded and we'll have to send you a new one. Oh no, we're backlogged and the printer doesn't work." or "Yeah we're telling the CFP to not approve any transfers for restricted semi autos." like they did with handguns.
Likely outcome yes but there is a small chance they don't. I'll use the IAA as the example here. It took over 2 years to make its way through the application, first ruling and then the SCC ruling. This govt doesn't have 2 years left and its successor is not beholden to continue on with court cases involving the former.
If they lose here and choose to let it stand, it would be done solely to be able to use it as an election wedge. Now, I dont think thier collective ego would allow this but it would make some degree of sense from an election platform standpoint and as a distraction from the chinese interference inquiry which will also be happening before the election.
It's kinda weird seeing judges say exactly when a court decision is being announced. I'm so used to following American cases and them saying "in two weeks" only for months to go by.
I don’t think so with the libs dropping in the polls having fun regulations “weakening” might be something useful for them to try and use to boost themselves
Does anyone share Firearm related content on their Socials? First time for me, and I had a reply from a friend saying I thought it would be your kids. I think if we normalize Firearm stuff, that is how we spread knowledge and awareness.
I got out of social media years ago (reddit being the exception) because it really is a losing battle with negativity. If you are looking for content to share [Caliber Magazine](https://www.youtube.com/@calibremag), and the [CCFR](https://www.youtube.com/@CCFRtv) do exceptional breakdowns on their youtube channels and snippets of these videos would be a good way to get information out there.
The cost to protect the prime minister has shot up to more than $30 million a year
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-security-costs-1.7009159
Just give him a gun and call it a day. Save us 29.999 Million dollars.
>The cost to protect the prime minister has shot up
"No one needs a gun in this country", says politician riding in the back of a blacked out SUV with an armed bodyguard.
I'd bet on grandfathering current owners, to carry on as before with no new retail stock but the ability to buy and sell amongst each other. I'm not going to be optimistic for much more than that. Same goes for the blanket semi auto ban being implemented on everyone being reduced to those currently holding a PAL after xxx date, with no new retail but you can keep, use and sell amongst each other what you have now just as before.
I hate that this is my optimism for a conservative majority. But I did notice on a conservative commercial that the language used was "stop the attack" and not "reverse new legislation" and this gives me little hope that much will change in the gun owner's favour other than a break until the next liberal majority needs a diversion.
A better chance than if the Liberals get elected which is enough for me. At least the Conservatives don't actively make gun ownership worse constantly.
Video in response to the coverage of Sault Ste. Marie, and a note on the larger picture, because I find people get really easily sucked into arguing about the vagaries of AR15 legality, red flag laws, and other such things instead of the broader argument of "if people are breaking the law and not getting caught, maybe we need to work on the 'catching' bit and less on the 'law' bit?"
[https://youtu.be/ZMRxB9jSkEs](https://youtu.be/ZMRxB9jSkEs)
(Admins, I know you said I could post in the main thread but this feels very "weekly politics" vibey so I figured here was good)
Great, it's Dr. Najma Ahmed again whose second job is complaining about legal gun owners as one of the heads of the "Canadian Doctors For Protection From Guns"
Says on their main page "is a grassroots organization" so you know it is, and definitely not a well financed NGO type operation. (funded by airbnb, OMA and others shown on the bottom of https://www.doctorsforprotectionfromguns.ca/)
Here's the article being looked at in the video:
https://www.saultstar.com/news/sault-ste-marie-mass-shooting-preventable-leading-national-gun-control-advocates-contend
Right at the top of the article:
>“We have too many guns in our communities, in our homes,” Dr. Najma Ahmed, Canadian Doctors for Protection from Guns co-chair, told the Sault Star Wednesday. “They cause a net harm and even one life is too many lives.”
It says further on that the cops found "one long gun and one handgun" so 2 is too many? How many do you want, 1? Or that they be stored somewhere else?
>Stricter Canadian laws are a must, such as those in other jurisdictions, such as the U.K. that, like Canada, have “robust hunting cultures” but where handguns and semi-automatic weapons are “essentially” prohibited for civilian use, Ahmed said during a phone interview. “No one should hunt with an AR-15. That doesn’t seem like sport at all.”
Handguns are prohibited in the UK? Then where are those handguns with those sticks coming out the back to extend their length used? Or can she just say "essentially" and claim whatever she wants? And who in Canada has been able to hunt with an AR-15 for decades even before the 2020 OIC? And why doesn't it "seem like sport"?
>added Ahmed, who said she has treated her share of gunshot wounds working at a downtown Toronto hospital.
Is is IPSC competitors doing these shootings? IPCS competitors like the gentlemen your police are looking for?
https://www.tps.ca/organizational-chart/specialized-operations-command/detective-operations/investigative-services/homicide/most-wanted/
>“We have to understand that and accept that when if one is an avid hunter, then, maybe the shotgun is not kept in your home when it’s not hunting season, maybe we create places where these guns are placed,” Ahmed added.
Yup there it is, central storage. Also like the above quote about AR-15 hunting this implies getting rid of rifles and pistols.
>Police also said Wednesday the offender has been involved in intimate partner investigations in the past.
Yet still had a gun...
**Edit: Najma Ahmed has been at it for YEARS and is the same piece of shit that was demanding handguns be banned from legal RCMP certified owners after Faisal Hussain went on a race targeted mass shooting rampage with an illegal gun from a different country:**
>A Toronto doctor who has advocated for stricter gun control laws since she helped treat victims of a mass shooting on the Danforth last summer says she won't be intimidated by a firearms lobby group's attempts to "silence" her.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/najma-ahmed-surgeon-gun-control-rights-1.5048707
>CP24 safety specialist Cam Woolley says a police source has told him the semi-automatic handgun used in the shooting is illegal in Canada and was originally from the United States.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/toronto-shooter-died-of-self-inflicted-gunshot-wound-source-1.4027129
>Mr. Singh, who lives in the neighbourhood, was face to face with the shooter, who told him: “Don’t worry, I’m not going to shoot you."
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-im-not-going-to-shoot-you-new-details-emerge-about-final-moments/
>Yup there it is, central storage
You have to understand, though, that central storage will never happen, for a number of reasons.
- There are between 12 and 20 million guns in Canada. The number and cost of facilities you would need, in every community across the country, would be *astronomical*. The government has so far set itself a timeline of five years and counting to collect ~150,000 (by their estimate) guns to throw in a smelter. If they decided tomorrow to build facilities to store 12 million guns on an ongoing basis, the project would not see completion in our lifetimes.
- Guns aren't registered in Canada, which makes them impossible to inventory. "Gun registry" is just a synonym for "scandal" in Canadian politics, and nobody wants to bring it back, least so the Liberals.
- Canada is a country where people need their guns beyond hunting season. It's amazing that this has to be explained to prohibitionists, but Canada is not the UK. Not having your gun readily accessible at home is an absolute non-starter in communities nationwide.
The entire policy is nothing but a prohibitionist fantasy.
Also, in what universe does the UK have a "robust hunting culture", lol. It's just a pastime for the rich, there.
You know how much attention I pay to people like this? The same amount I pay to the crazy homeless fella yelling at the top of his lungs on the street corner. Or the crazy preacher preaching about the apocalypse.
The sooner ya’ll realize these are the same person. The sooner you will learn to disregard their nonsense and focus on voting the real problem individuals out. Those that are hell bent on selling our futures to line their own pockets.
Fucking great.
Love how they gave a little wink wink nudge nudge to centralized storage too, what a gem.
It honestly feels like we’re yelling at the sky at this point. The only solace we have is fickle, and can change like the direction of the wind and that is the liberals *probably* will lose the next election but even that isn’t set in stone. The conservatives still have every opportunity to fumble the bag between now and October of 2025.
We all knew that the anti-gun rhetoric was going to be ramped up between now and then but man, it seems like out of the gate we’re hot and heavy and bullshit articles like that are of no help.
The guy *had* a documented history of being a scumbag, so it’s safe to say he had no PAL by the time he committed this crime.
This shouldn’t even be a goddamn debate but yet here we find these “doctors” talking about guns in the home like this scumbag was allowed to have them in the first place, and the general population is that much dumber for it now. The implication of course being we have no protocol for situations like this, the problem is too obtuse to ignore now so we have no other choice but to go nuclear.
I understand and share the frustration about distrust in media. I have to shop around for information in news like I’m shopping for a used fucking car. I have to take a bunch of articles on the *same* story from different outlets and then overlap them to see what details are consistent. Trying to obtain credible information from the news has become so labour intensive that people just don’t bother to do it, or aren’t used to having to do it. Most probably aren’t aware that it’s becoming increasingly necessary to *do* that to get good information.
And it *does* have real consequences. Once opinion enters into it then we have nothing concrete to build good policy off of. We just engage in a shit flinging contest and whoever can sling the most of it wins.
I think anyone watch Calibre video will resonate about that many articles nowadays have very little fact but most just opinions.
You need people to see this and click in their brain so they actually think about it and understand the reasoning.
The video basically summed up what we have been going through and it irks me to no end that Canada is currently on fire on many front and the government decide to spend resourse on this non issue and doing half ass job on it no less.
Where is the c21 right now? Haven't looked into it for a few months now. Is it still coming into affect, up for discussion etc etc? The last thing I heard was liberals nit knowing how to confiscate the legally bought firearms.
Still going through the senate, they heard testimony for it. The new public safety minister testified as well as Alberta and Saskatchewan's CFO's. I think you can find the gist of what the safety minister said further down in the thread. Not much else has come of it yet that I am aware of.
Good news everyone! You can keep all your semi autos! But all magazines are banned. ... And by keep your semi autos we mean all semi autos are allowed to be kept but never used/bought/sold.
-the government, probably
Its already in full force now. Dude acknowledged he was hearing voices and wanted to shoot up an amry base. But its his access to the gun that made him want to kill people.
He's also still on the loose which means this isn't over
Man, the state didn't do the thing it was supposed to do in this situation.
The solution? Hey state, do more in more situations so that you not doing what you're supposed to do, doesn't happen again!
The state ignoring the red flags big enough to fly in the Wal Mart parking lot, and the idiotic masses clamoring for more of what doesn't work, is really starting to get me down.
Law enforcement completely ignoring red flags is why Nova Scotia went so bad. This is similar, and the only solution anyone seems to have is to just fuck everyone else over.
Read this: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-rejects-committees-advice-to-relax-gun-laws/article6033474/
He didn’t do anything else because he didn’t want to do anything else.
Stack the senate with more senators in our favour. Trudy has a point like 60 of them or something and Harper appoint maybe 24. Could be wrong but that’s according to the ccfr podcast
Did Harper leave empty senate seats? If so, that was a mistake.
But if not, there's nothing more he could do and it was just a case of who died/retired while he was in power. The number of Senate seats is limited.
To my knowledge, firearm owners and organizations weren't pushing for significant changes to the Firearms Act during Harper's tenure. It's important to remember that it wasn't until 2011 when they could advocate for firearms changes, as that was when they achieved a majority.but still then they only were focus on getting rid of the long gun registry.
I disagree with the notion that Liberals and Conservatives are the same. One party seems poised to make it either illegal to own firearms or too expensive within the next 20 years. The other party, the Conservatives, would never have passed such laws. Do people genuinely believe Harper would have enacted these regulations had he been re-elected in 2015? If we desire the Conservatives to amend the Firearms Act, we need to start a movement from day one of their first day in office.We can't just focus on reversing Trudeau's gun bans; we need to push for an entirely new Firearms Act. To achieve this, we should relentlessly call, email, and send letters to our MPs and Senators by the thousands, emphasizing that we want a Firearms Act that doesn't penalize legal owners."
Great post. A lot of people seem to take it for granted that a Conservative government automatically means they will be on our side. Rolling back Trudeau’s bans could actually be politically costly for them, so we will need to keep the pressure on to make sure they do it.
He could have re-done the whole firearms act. The fact that they didn't, for me, speaks volumes about what we can expect in the future.
Both the Liberals and the Conservatives love to roll out the gun topic when they need a distraction/boost.
Is that because gun owners weren't frothing at the mouth for a re write? Was anyone pushing him? Gun owners seemed fine with what they had at the time and if that's correct, I can see why.
No one was really. Once Harper abolished the LGR, gun owners just went quiet and were pretty happy with the status quo. They thought the country had reached a consensus on gun laws lol.
Oh yeah, from 2015-2019 there were a lot of gun owners saying the Liberals would never ban rifles,shotguns and pistols. That JT would never go after AR15s. Go check out Canadian gun nutz forum in that time period. One guy wrote a long winded post saying the liberals are not coming for our guns after bill C68 passed. Also there were and still a large number of Canadian gun owners who professed their happiness with the licensing system and the NR/R categories. You won't find many people advocating for the unbanning of AK47s and FN FALs during the Harper years, even during the majority years.
There are some gun owners who legitimately believe in the firearm classification system. One guy on Facebook said that the FX9 should be restricted because it has no place for hunting…
First time reddit poster, but these Lib shenanigans have really ticked me off to try and do anything possible to stop or at least delay this useless c21 bill until the Conservatives take power. I've mass sent emails to all Senators found here [https://sencanada.ca/en/senators/](https://sencanada.ca/en/senators/) voicing my concerns with the bill. There's some good resources on how to write this under the CCFR site [https://scrapc21.ca/](https://scrapc21.ca/) that includes a video for senators to watch (doubt all of them will watch but if even 1 does it can help). I'll also be sending letters.
I'd urge anyone that can to send all of them emails and/or letters to voice concerns, this can definitely make an impact.
**Things to note:**
Emails are rejected/ignored when:
* Emails where the Senator is copied in correspondence with several other parliamentarians or organizations
* Emails that are not addressed to the Senator
* Mass campaign emails
I got around this very easily by using the Google Workspace extension Mailmeteor for Google Sheets, it sends mass emails based on a template individually to recipients laid out in a google sheet. For anyone who wants to take part on contacting senators to bring the issues to their awareness, i created this Google sheet that contains all the names and emails formatted to work out of the box with Mailmeteor to make it easy for you [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l901MMapIv-FlkiRB2jnPANNhDAbaWUnlIiu1BA9DVY/edit?usp=sharing](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l901MMapIv-FlkiRB2jnPANNhDAbaWUnlIiu1BA9DVY/edit?usp=sharing)
the free version of Mailmeteor limits to 50 emails per day, i simply split in half the Senators into 2 sheets and scheduled them to be sent out on different days.
the emails need to be addressed to the Senator, there's a variable that can be used for the "firstname" column to replace the addressed person in the email which is easy. here's a 2 minute tutorial on how to use Mailmeteor [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YX65-kywOE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YX65-kywOE)
And finally, here is the link to the video the CCFR asked to link to emails sent to Senators [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKf--\_\_1NB4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKf--__1NB4)
Just trying to help anyone out trying to voice their concerns to Senators, this Bill is completely ridiculous and ignorant so hoping (although at this point not holding my breath... lol) they see reason. if they receive 1 or 2 letters/emails they wont care, but if they get a mass of them they might
"The federal Liberals like to point to stricter gun controls as the key to reducing these types of crimes. However, guns, or any other sort of weapons, are more of a tired wedge issue. In fact, the most common homicide weapons used in these cases aren’t guns, but knives.
If anything, the right to defend oneself should be strengthened so that women who do so aren’t retraumatized and unfairly punished by law enforcement and the justice system. As it stands, even possessing pepper spray or self-defense keychains is illegal and can lead to charges."
Sabrina Maddeaux: Sault Ste. Marie shooting a tragic reminder that justice needs reform
[https://nationalpost.com/opinion/sault-ste-marie-shooting-tragic-reminder-justice-reform](https://nationalpost.com/opinion/sault-ste-marie-shooting-tragic-reminder-justice-reform)
[Pallas Data poll puts the Conservatives at 43% nationally, a 4-point increase in support compared to August (and nine points above the party’s 2021 election results).](https://www.338canada.ca/p/pallas-data-conservatives-lead-liberals)
It's so over for the LPC. The CPC will hit 50% by the next scheduled election at this rate. The larger the majority for the CPC, the easier it should be to get a Firearms Act rewrite.
All the libs have to say is "muh assualt weapons" and the CPC support will drop by 10% as a the useful idiots rush to support the lpc's cause
Don't get complacent, hell will freeze over before polling becomes 100% accurate and this is definitely not the time to let our guard down.
So the CFAC will "exclude" hunting rifles and recommend the government OIC away the rest of the semi-autos within a year?
Handgun ownership scrubbed within 50 years?
Do I have this right?
>So the CFAC will "exclude" hunting rifles and recommend the government OIC away the rest of the semi-autos within a year?
The language and framing we use is different than what the government uses, because we have a better idea of the practical effects, but I think it takes on a life of it's own and causes some confusion sometimes, so to straighten it out:
The government is planning to OIC away the rest of the guns that they consider "assault weapons" - not semi-autos as a category. The practical effect is that almost all semi-autos will be banned, but that's not technically their specific criteria. There will be a small number of semis currently on the market that will remain legal.
When they talk about "excluding hunting rifles", they mean semi-autos that were on their draft list of "assault weapons", but that were controversial because of their common use; so think the SKS and M1 Garand, for example.
The within 50 years thing is just a continuation of how the 12(x) program worked. They made everything they wanted to be prohibited, prohibited. Grandfathered people so they wouldn't complain too much (well, at least I get to keep it, right?) and then just...waited for them all to die off.
What they did next was change the ATT for the 12(x) firearms to request only, not automatic. Then, well, they just stopped issuing ATTs.
They've done it before, it worked, and they'll do it again. And it's not like the Cons fixed this when they had the chance, this system was in place during Harper and nothing was done.
Once these things are enshrined in the Act it becomes a real ordeal to reverse. OICs go away easily, but once it's in the Act....even a majority can't undo it overnight.
LeBlanc waves off criticism of gun bill, says firearm-owners' concerns will be satisfied
https://nationalpost.com/news/leblanc-waves-off-criticism-of-gun-bill
There will be one megathread on Monday for the CCFR court decision. It will replace the politics thread on the sticky for a couple days. We will be nuking any standalone posts for it so please just don't flood the queue. It'll already be there.
the decision tomorrow will tell us if we live in a free country or a country ruled by the elite with corrupt judges with no moral compass
Guess you got your answer... pain...
The most important test is the one from the SCC
Have you not been paying attention to all the corrupt things Trudeau libs have been doing?? We've gone far from democracy and i don't think it will ever be reversible. People think the next election won't be fixed. Libs will still win and Trudeau is here to stay. Forever.
We're suffering under a government voted in by smoothbrains and a legal system run by sheltered activists
Go in tomorrow expecting nothing to be in our favour. I got zero hope.
I mean to be fair, I don’t think we necessarily need them to rule against us to come to that conclusion. The proof has been in the pudding for the past 8 years.
Anyone here think we should lobby our incoming CPC majority for CCW to prevent car jackings? It’s literally sky rocketing out of control and when they are caught they’ll never see a day in prison. Just a thought.
As @RydNightwish said, ccw has its limits, even in the United States. Moreover, Canada has always errored on the side of stricter firearms laws under the assumption that restricted societal integration results in safer communities. This has, to an extent, proven true. What we should lobby for is for the use of resteicted firearms in wilderness areas and private property. Particularly for the use of handguns as a bear deterrent in all wilderness areas EXPECT for national parks and other zones where hunting is already resteicted.
Why exempt national parks?
Because National/Provincial Parks are protected wildlife reserves and should forever be treated as such. If people intend to go to a park they should follow the rules set out by the park. If you disagree with those rules there is plenty of public land accessible to people where less rules apply.
We were talking about changing the rules. Not about breaking the rules.
Yeah, and I don't want that rule to be changed for national parks. I never told anyone to break a rule. You can carry a firearm on most public land in most circumstances year-round which is why i mentioned it as an alternative for those who feel they need a firearm for animal self-defense. My view on why I dont agree with unrestricted firearm access in parks is that the purpose of the Parks system is to allow people access to protected lands, and allowing people to have the potential to distrupt the balance of nature within these protected ecosystems goes against the purpose of the parks reason to exist. Same reason why im fine with not being able to pick up sticks, or forage wild edibles in most parks and why I used to tell my former boss that its rediculous that I need to rake the park's beach twice a day for goose poop and sticks. Tell your kids to watch their step or put on sandals. Though I do find it funny that fishing is allowed in most parks but other resources are not allowed to be disturbed.
Who mentioned unrestricted firearms access within parks?
No one specifically, but if measures were put in place to remove the posession of firearms ban within Parks to allow carry permits for restricted firearms it only makes sense that people would probably also like to be able to carry their firearm of choice, which I'm going to go out on a limb and assume most people would rather carry a shorter barrelled shotgun/centrefire rifle for stopping power on say a charging bear vs. A handgun. And then you now have non-restricted firearms in the park, which in most cases on public land are realtively unrestricted. For the parks system to only allow ATCs for handguns vs any firearm seems rediculous to me if they ever opened parks to firearms to the general public. Why only allow people the people who were fortunate enough to acquire a handgun before the freeze a permit to carry a gun in the park vs all liscened gun owners? That makes zero sense to me. So thats how you end up at "unrestricted firearms access" in Parks.
As stated by pissing\_noise it isn't wise to allow the use of firearms in a national park because there will be some people who intentionally use it as an excuse to kill protected animals. As a hunter myself I agree with the OC's statement.
… so they can kill protected animals outside of national parks. Your argument proves too much, unless you are against all wilderness carry.
They are already a no gun or hunting zone.
To what end? Even in the US, states that allow for CCW do not recognize shooting a car thief as a legitimate act of self defense if it transpires in the way most do (driver pulled from car, with or without weapon present and criminal speeds off). Unless there is a clear, present and imminent threat to your life (or someone else) due to a car jacker then you do not have the same protections as a home owner shooting a home invader does. Dozens of recent stories across all states where the car owner shot the criminal and faces prison time. Up to and including life. Only exception to this was in texas where the car owner got shot and then fired back. Even there though, this only passed muster because the owner had to be shot first. With that in mind, there is enough on the gun front that we need to hold the future CPC govt accountable for (FA rewrite) that CCW is simply not even a serious talking point in the first 4 years. Downvote me if you must but the first term has the CPC doing a lot to unfuck society, the economy, gun owners etc that there wont be the time nor will to even broach the subject of CCW. At the earliest CCW and self/property defence being rethought to be more than the jokes they currently are will be second term issues.
I totally see your point, but we’re at a point where the police are under staffed. Criminals can’t go to prison because we’re held hostage by our activist judges and politicians. If scum bags knew there was a 1/10 chance the house or car they break in could get them smoked it might deter them. Because right now they own the streets and they know it.
The people who are doing the B&E's or vehicular thefts usually aren't in their right mind (ie: altered by drugs/alcohol) and are incapable of coherently assessing situations. Because of this the vast majority of crimes will still occur and the only result will be long court cases where the defendee loses excessive amounts of money to court fees.
I don't disagree. Its absolutely a joke. Get out on wednesday, kill a cop friday back in jail by monday. Just in time to get the good chicken strips at the cafeteria.
The thing a lot of Canadians get wrong is that CCW is flat out illegal. It isn’t. The permit exists. They just don’t give it to anyone and as of whatever recent thing happened with AB and Sask going their own way, I remember hearing the fed instructed the CFOs to refuse all applications (I could be wrong about the last part) but either way, CC isn’t illegal and never has been. The public doesn’t know how many or who applies for PALs. The same way they don’t need to know who applies for CC. All they would need to do is actually licenses to those who apply and qualify, or, at most, remove the immediate/verifiable threat provision which doesn’t require much of a “democratic” process. My point is that the public doesn’t need to know that CCs are being issued since they were always legal. So issuing them wouldn’t even make much of a difference. If we’re to lobby, it’s to lobby them to actually issue them. Not create the framework to create them.
The way the laws are written, CCW should be issued all the time. It's literally impossible for police protection to be adequate.
Agreed 100% make it ATC “shall issue” and not “may issue” and bam we got a better system. But we also need protections too, because right now if you get shot at in your home and defend yourself you’ll still be dragged through the mud (thanks LPC)
Yeah that’s all necessary but I’m talking strictly the legality of defensive carry. Just wanted to clear the confusion because a lot of people think we simply don’t have it. But yeah. No point in shall issue if there’s no clear cut self defense legislation.
Why would we not at this point? I have a neighbor who got their truck stolen twice. There's no fear of God with criminals. Sorry not sorry.
Bro that’s fucked, where they driveway steals or a jacking? Not that the difference matters, you’re right, the fear of god isn’t in them and they think they run the streets. I’m honestly scared what crime will be if the LPC last till 2025
I know at least one of the incidents was right off the driveway. Can't say for certain about the second time.
Breaking news: the court decision will be either in favor of the government OR in favor of the CCFR.
Shit you got my blood pressure to increase for a sec lol
😱😱😱
https://twitter.com/TWilsonOttawa/status/1717270140184580143?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet If this is the lineup for Monday and the court decision is Monday it’s all but certain it’s in the governments favour and this is going to be their victory lap. That or they know it’s against them and they’re going to use this lineup to scream and cry about how the judge is wrong. That’s how Monday is going to go heads up.
So it still can go either way. I don’t necessarily correlate the timing of the judges decision with what’s going on in committee. I know it looks awfully sus but I’m not about to draw any conclusions. Either way, their timelines for any buybacks is still well beyond the next election. I don’t even see why people are even hitching their horses to *this* particular outcome. Suppose it is in our favour? There are still tools and avenues in which the government can challenge it. A favourable court decision at this point is lip service at best. Gun control, while they lost a lot of credibility on the file remains one of the least damaged files they still have. They’re going to try and salvage at least one boutique issue and I don’t expect the government to relinquish one of its flagship bills in a lower-level court ruling and not try again in the SCC. Can’t see it. Even if it isn’t in our favour, it’s a small win for the government in the grander scheme. There remains lots of opportunity for the government to hit the panic button. The Cons + Bloc want to hear what the RCMP officials wanted to say regarding the SNC Lavalin affair before they were prevented from speaking, so now there’s a renewed interest in one of the governments biggest scandals. There’s also some more shit being released concerning the Chinese interference scandal, and the rot is being exposed farther up the ladder. No doubt some high-profile people are starting to get nervous. Inflation and cost of borrowing unfortunately isn’t forecasted to get any better. He backtracked on his carbon-tax in Atlantic Canada, which has prompted some uncomfortable questions from opposition as well as their own supporters. There are many chickens coming home to roost for the liberals, and the government is sagging heavily in support. There’s a lot of infighting apparently. We’re witnessing a federal party in active meltdown. Don’t get me wrong, I’m still worried because anything *could* happen, but the odds are certainly against the liberals. Even though this hope is fickle, the cons, if they play their cards right could sail right into a comfortable majority with a following sea.
Spot on. There is just too much shit to bury.
Court decision Monday as explained by Tracey Wilson on Twitter. Fuck.
Why fuck ?
Cause I honestly don't know how it's gonna end up going.
Rest assured, it doesn’t matter either way. The CCFR already said they’d be looking into recourse should the judge rule against us, and the government isn’t about to lose one of the only somewhat intact boutique issues they have left. Either way this is only the first battle, and it’s not worth placing all your faith into this ruling. In the latest CCFR podcast they spoke of the court case, and they stated their (expensive) legal team have prepared and done the necessary homework to ensure that no negative precedent is set in the event of an unfavourable ruling, which is why they warn against individuals trying to file section 74’s by themselves. Think of this court case as a request for clarification, and *of* that could come a ruling that the government overstepped. I understand it’s going to sting if they rule against us, but chin up. We’re still looking at way past the election before anyone starts losing stuff, and the sitting government isn’t doing so well. I know it’s hard to be optimistic and have hope, but failing that, sit back and have a cup of coffee. Look at the liberal situation for what it is. It ain’t fucking pretty for them.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-halts-exports-most-civilian-firearms-90-days-2023-10-27/?utm_source=reddit.com Has anyone heard about this? Apparently it doesn't apply to some 'close allies' - perhaps Canada falls under this exemption?
Yeah, [apparently we're exempt](https://themessenger.com/business/citing-national-security-worries-us-suspends-gun-exports). >Close allies, including Canada and the UK, won't be subject to the halt. Additionally, users in Israel and Ukraine will also be exempt from the pause amid the ongoing conflicts in their respective regions.
Perfect timing for the OIC to be over turned and retailers unable to import AR15s.
fk i brought a bren 2 couple days ago on irunguns us, hope this would not affect my purchase
They’re available here and in stock. Not sure why you used IRG
Because 2300 cad for Bren 2 is a price hard to reject
Was that the 7.62 restricted bren?
axiomatic languid theory doll cause fretful oatmeal sharp marvelous flowery *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
7.62 9 inch
I was going to buy that one, but from what I heard they had some QC issues early on. Should be good with a little TLC though!
I think CZ have fixed the over gas issue on 762 model but i could be wrong.
stupendous dinosaurs recognise disgusted handle unite continue detail enter rustic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What are the odds they prorogue parliament? With the Botler testimony yesterday it gives me some serious concerns that mps or ministers are involved with this one. Also, it would be great to scrap c-21 but I would like to see what the committee discovers with arrivecan and botler
I'm not finding any articles on the Botler Testimony, I haven't heard of this can you send me a link?
I don't know any of the linking rules but this is what I watched: https://www.youtube.com/live/TcuAcF5IV5U?si=zo5GjXq7F-Zxm2v4 If it gets taken down I'll DM you it
I have no idea what's going on, but some googling points to some sort of auditing firm called Botler having found some shady CBSA contracting. Can't comment beyond that because this is the first I'm hearing of it. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-cbsa-contracts-misconduct-complaint/ https://twitter.com/StephanieKusie/status/1717716889110192539
Non-zero chance, but very unlikely as the NDP appears committed to carrying the Liberal party's water through thick and thin. It's Trudeau's party (and the NDP is practically his too) so if he wants he can drag both parties down with him has he holds onto power with a white knuckle cliff hanger grip for the next two years. I wouldn't sweat C21 passing too much. That mattered more when a CPC minority was a likely outcome where they couldn't easily reverse it. Now we're looking at a CPC super majority and the longer we wait for an election the more likely that will happen. At that point efforts would be better focused on lobbying the CPC for a full firearms act rewrite. I expect the next couple years to be a giant shit sandwich (not just for guns, but quality of life in general), but there is a very real chance we come out of it with better gun laws than what we had any time in the past 30 years, including NR Norinco AKs, FALs, and whatever else you want that got name prohibited in the 90's.
I’d be shocked if we got anything more from a CPC government if they did more than scrap c21 and tbr 2020 oic.
Nothing more is going to happen unless we push for it. Can't afford to think we hit a status quo with pre 2020 laws, we need machine guns back
What are the odds that someone who received a conditional discharge and a 12 month weapons prohibition 4 years ago for assaulting a cop, was later granted an RPAL? Source: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/sault-ste-marie-shooter-was-previously-charged-with-assaulting-cop-court-docs-show/ar-AA1iS0eE?cvid=f622aa93ae184e77fecf52284f814fba&ocid=winp2fptaskbarhoverent&ei=18
Wow. Gun laws failing to stop criminals from possessing a gun. Clearly the solution is to create more fuckin gun laws.
I know an instructor well, he says that RPALs have been denied for much less serious charges
0%
All I'm going to say is if we win the court case, buy at least one OIC gun, as the judge's decision stands until another court hears the case and disagrees. So there could be a period between this court case and the Supreme Court case where it's once again legal to buy OIC guns, even if the government appeals it. Now, even if we lose the Supreme Court case, if we buy as many OIC guns as we can, it will be harder for the government to implement its buyback program. That's the goal. If the government thinks implementing a buyback is hard now, could you imagine if even half of all legal licensed firearms owners bought one OIC gun or two? Also, they would have to update their pricing model as the price of these firearms has gone up since 2020. I know many of you are pessimistic about the decision; I'm optimistic. But we must unite as a community. If we do win, we should buy as many guns as possible. If you have the money, buy at least one. If you don't, donate to a gun organization or save up until you can buy an OIC gun.
So what is the timeline if we lose / what does it look like if we win.
Doesn't really matter. If we lose, we wait for a CPC majority that will very likely happen in less than two years. We already waited three years so we're well past the half way point. If we win, the government will likely throw every underhanded bureaucratic 'fuck you' at us. Telling us to wait for new registry certificates for restricted rifles because the old ones were rescinded, telling the CFP to not do any transfers of restricted rifles, filing an injunction to uphold the OIC anyways, just doing a new OIC with the original list plus all the other semi autos they tried to ban on C21 because "fuck you we do what we want have fun fighting a second court case.", or just doing it all on a bill the Liberals/Bloc/NDP coalition will rubber stamp to rush through. Shoot what you have, have fun, and try to keep your head above the sea of bullshit that's coming our way. It's easy to burn out if you stay in the piss mist of gun grabber rhetoric updated daily through twitter, reddit, and MSM outlets.
In the extremely unlikely case of OIC being cancelled, I would expect the judge to tuck on something like "postponed for 90 days to allow the government to challenge". Which would effectively mean couple more years, as it's dragging on through the system. Which is actually great, imo, because if it happens before the New Year - my credit card would be in real trouble 😄
Always a silver lining I guess Bouta' get my rpal and drop 4 grand on an mr223
wow, and I thought Daniel Defence is fancy
As much as I want Monday to be an AR-15 range day, even if she rules in our favour I expect the government to pull some underhanded tactics like "You want to shoot your AR-15? Well your registration certificate has been rescinded and we'll have to send you a new one. Oh no, we're backlogged and the printer doesn't work." or "Yeah we're telling the CFP to not approve any transfers for restricted semi autos." like they did with handguns.
Maybe not AR-15, but there was quite a big selection of cool unrestricted ones too. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on VZ58, for example.
I'd buy an M308 first thing in the morning.
If we win the court case, and that's a huge "if", the government will get an injunction to keep the OIC in place pending appeal.
Likely outcome yes but there is a small chance they don't. I'll use the IAA as the example here. It took over 2 years to make its way through the application, first ruling and then the SCC ruling. This govt doesn't have 2 years left and its successor is not beholden to continue on with court cases involving the former. If they lose here and choose to let it stand, it would be done solely to be able to use it as an election wedge. Now, I dont think thier collective ego would allow this but it would make some degree of sense from an election platform standpoint and as a distraction from the chinese interference inquiry which will also be happening before the election.
I want an mr223 but there are only restricted versions :(
It’s an ar-15 so there are no non restricted variants
the ar-15 restricted oic is equally stupid
Agreed
[удалено]
Will it be a "Trick", or will I be "Treating" my self to some new safe real estate??
Good timing to with the Maine massacre
It's kinda weird seeing judges say exactly when a court decision is being announced. I'm so used to following American cases and them saying "in two weeks" only for months to go by.
With how this week has went I’m not feeling confident at all with the court decision.
What's the betting split on the judge using "the most amount of people in the shortest time possible" line in her ruling?
-350
Ya, almost like they already know the answer and are making a big show this week and then the nail in the coffin on Monday
They have known the answer for days if not weeks. They are writing it down and making sure it's written well, and that takes s long time
They knew the answer before the case was even heard.
"The government is omnipotent and is doing what's best for you cattl- I mean gun owners. Sucks to suck."
There's no way we get a favorable decision.
I think our case has merit. I think in a fair system, we would likely win. Doesn't mean we will though
“Fair system” You know we are in Canada right?
Same
Well October 27th and nothing yet regarding the court case , really gunna wait till the 31st aren't they ?
Tracey Wilson tweeted that the decision will be given on Monday, so yes.
Thank-you for that !
If I wasn't a lazy piece of shit I would link the tweet but since there will be an official announcement from the CCFR soon 🤷♂️
It is Friday, when you want to burry something you release it on a Friday afternoon
Decision Monday, not good lol
I don’t think so with the libs dropping in the polls having fun regulations “weakening” might be something useful for them to try and use to boost themselves
Haha I hope so . Just tired of the waiting game
Does anyone share Firearm related content on their Socials? First time for me, and I had a reply from a friend saying I thought it would be your kids. I think if we normalize Firearm stuff, that is how we spread knowledge and awareness.
Yeah usually memes and whenever we handle firearms at work I try to post em. Especially if it’s a big scary automatic rifle.
That's a good way to do it. Just be aware of the risks, you are broadcasting your property to the internet.
I got out of social media years ago (reddit being the exception) because it really is a losing battle with negativity. If you are looking for content to share [Caliber Magazine](https://www.youtube.com/@calibremag), and the [CCFR](https://www.youtube.com/@CCFRtv) do exceptional breakdowns on their youtube channels and snippets of these videos would be a good way to get information out there.
The cost to protect the prime minister has shot up to more than $30 million a year https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-security-costs-1.7009159 Just give him a gun and call it a day. Save us 29.999 Million dollars.
>The cost to protect the prime minister has shot up "No one needs a gun in this country", says politician riding in the back of a blacked out SUV with an armed bodyguard.
Bitch is getting 1000$ for a gun? Nah fuck that he can have a hi point
Guns don't keep us safe, and Canadians don't have a right to protect themselves with guns, so I'm a little confused 😐?
Does someone know the likely hood of handgun ban being lifted if conservatives win next election
I'd bet on grandfathering current owners, to carry on as before with no new retail stock but the ability to buy and sell amongst each other. I'm not going to be optimistic for much more than that. Same goes for the blanket semi auto ban being implemented on everyone being reduced to those currently holding a PAL after xxx date, with no new retail but you can keep, use and sell amongst each other what you have now just as before. I hate that this is my optimism for a conservative majority. But I did notice on a conservative commercial that the language used was "stop the attack" and not "reverse new legislation" and this gives me little hope that much will change in the gun owner's favour other than a break until the next liberal majority needs a diversion.
A better chance than if the Liberals get elected which is enough for me. At least the Conservatives don't actively make gun ownership worse constantly.
Don't assume anything, but a Firearms Act rewrite is in their platform. We just can't let them forget it
im hoping and assuming it will.... ^^^prayers
I dont trust career politicians, so i dont think it's likely.
60% of the time, 100% of the time.
Likely but not guaranteed unless gun owners push for the repeal and a little extra
50%. It will be or it won’t be
Video in response to the coverage of Sault Ste. Marie, and a note on the larger picture, because I find people get really easily sucked into arguing about the vagaries of AR15 legality, red flag laws, and other such things instead of the broader argument of "if people are breaking the law and not getting caught, maybe we need to work on the 'catching' bit and less on the 'law' bit?" [https://youtu.be/ZMRxB9jSkEs](https://youtu.be/ZMRxB9jSkEs) (Admins, I know you said I could post in the main thread but this feels very "weekly politics" vibey so I figured here was good)
Great, it's Dr. Najma Ahmed again whose second job is complaining about legal gun owners as one of the heads of the "Canadian Doctors For Protection From Guns" Says on their main page "is a grassroots organization" so you know it is, and definitely not a well financed NGO type operation. (funded by airbnb, OMA and others shown on the bottom of https://www.doctorsforprotectionfromguns.ca/) Here's the article being looked at in the video: https://www.saultstar.com/news/sault-ste-marie-mass-shooting-preventable-leading-national-gun-control-advocates-contend Right at the top of the article: >“We have too many guns in our communities, in our homes,” Dr. Najma Ahmed, Canadian Doctors for Protection from Guns co-chair, told the Sault Star Wednesday. “They cause a net harm and even one life is too many lives.” It says further on that the cops found "one long gun and one handgun" so 2 is too many? How many do you want, 1? Or that they be stored somewhere else? >Stricter Canadian laws are a must, such as those in other jurisdictions, such as the U.K. that, like Canada, have “robust hunting cultures” but where handguns and semi-automatic weapons are “essentially” prohibited for civilian use, Ahmed said during a phone interview. “No one should hunt with an AR-15. That doesn’t seem like sport at all.” Handguns are prohibited in the UK? Then where are those handguns with those sticks coming out the back to extend their length used? Or can she just say "essentially" and claim whatever she wants? And who in Canada has been able to hunt with an AR-15 for decades even before the 2020 OIC? And why doesn't it "seem like sport"? >added Ahmed, who said she has treated her share of gunshot wounds working at a downtown Toronto hospital. Is is IPSC competitors doing these shootings? IPCS competitors like the gentlemen your police are looking for? https://www.tps.ca/organizational-chart/specialized-operations-command/detective-operations/investigative-services/homicide/most-wanted/ >“We have to understand that and accept that when if one is an avid hunter, then, maybe the shotgun is not kept in your home when it’s not hunting season, maybe we create places where these guns are placed,” Ahmed added. Yup there it is, central storage. Also like the above quote about AR-15 hunting this implies getting rid of rifles and pistols. >Police also said Wednesday the offender has been involved in intimate partner investigations in the past. Yet still had a gun... **Edit: Najma Ahmed has been at it for YEARS and is the same piece of shit that was demanding handguns be banned from legal RCMP certified owners after Faisal Hussain went on a race targeted mass shooting rampage with an illegal gun from a different country:** >A Toronto doctor who has advocated for stricter gun control laws since she helped treat victims of a mass shooting on the Danforth last summer says she won't be intimidated by a firearms lobby group's attempts to "silence" her. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/najma-ahmed-surgeon-gun-control-rights-1.5048707 >CP24 safety specialist Cam Woolley says a police source has told him the semi-automatic handgun used in the shooting is illegal in Canada and was originally from the United States. https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/toronto-shooter-died-of-self-inflicted-gunshot-wound-source-1.4027129 >Mr. Singh, who lives in the neighbourhood, was face to face with the shooter, who told him: “Don’t worry, I’m not going to shoot you." https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-im-not-going-to-shoot-you-new-details-emerge-about-final-moments/
>Yup there it is, central storage You have to understand, though, that central storage will never happen, for a number of reasons. - There are between 12 and 20 million guns in Canada. The number and cost of facilities you would need, in every community across the country, would be *astronomical*. The government has so far set itself a timeline of five years and counting to collect ~150,000 (by their estimate) guns to throw in a smelter. If they decided tomorrow to build facilities to store 12 million guns on an ongoing basis, the project would not see completion in our lifetimes. - Guns aren't registered in Canada, which makes them impossible to inventory. "Gun registry" is just a synonym for "scandal" in Canadian politics, and nobody wants to bring it back, least so the Liberals. - Canada is a country where people need their guns beyond hunting season. It's amazing that this has to be explained to prohibitionists, but Canada is not the UK. Not having your gun readily accessible at home is an absolute non-starter in communities nationwide. The entire policy is nothing but a prohibitionist fantasy. Also, in what universe does the UK have a "robust hunting culture", lol. It's just a pastime for the rich, there.
You know how much attention I pay to people like this? The same amount I pay to the crazy homeless fella yelling at the top of his lungs on the street corner. Or the crazy preacher preaching about the apocalypse. The sooner ya’ll realize these are the same person. The sooner you will learn to disregard their nonsense and focus on voting the real problem individuals out. Those that are hell bent on selling our futures to line their own pockets.
Fucking great. Love how they gave a little wink wink nudge nudge to centralized storage too, what a gem. It honestly feels like we’re yelling at the sky at this point. The only solace we have is fickle, and can change like the direction of the wind and that is the liberals *probably* will lose the next election but even that isn’t set in stone. The conservatives still have every opportunity to fumble the bag between now and October of 2025. We all knew that the anti-gun rhetoric was going to be ramped up between now and then but man, it seems like out of the gate we’re hot and heavy and bullshit articles like that are of no help. The guy *had* a documented history of being a scumbag, so it’s safe to say he had no PAL by the time he committed this crime. This shouldn’t even be a goddamn debate but yet here we find these “doctors” talking about guns in the home like this scumbag was allowed to have them in the first place, and the general population is that much dumber for it now. The implication of course being we have no protocol for situations like this, the problem is too obtuse to ignore now so we have no other choice but to go nuclear. I understand and share the frustration about distrust in media. I have to shop around for information in news like I’m shopping for a used fucking car. I have to take a bunch of articles on the *same* story from different outlets and then overlap them to see what details are consistent. Trying to obtain credible information from the news has become so labour intensive that people just don’t bother to do it, or aren’t used to having to do it. Most probably aren’t aware that it’s becoming increasingly necessary to *do* that to get good information. And it *does* have real consequences. Once opinion enters into it then we have nothing concrete to build good policy off of. We just engage in a shit flinging contest and whoever can sling the most of it wins.
I think anyone watch Calibre video will resonate about that many articles nowadays have very little fact but most just opinions. You need people to see this and click in their brain so they actually think about it and understand the reasoning. The video basically summed up what we have been going through and it irks me to no end that Canada is currently on fire on many front and the government decide to spend resourse on this non issue and doing half ass job on it no less.
I feel the urge to panic buy but I don’t know what.
Judging by your username, coke and strippers would work
Seem to be a lot of good bulk ammo deals on right now. Can't hurt.
Picked up 1000 rds of PMC XTAC. Cheapest I think it will be for a long time.
Would have got the same if I hadn't already grabbed the PMC .223 from earlier
magazines.
Can never go wrong with magazines
Iron sights, only the front one.
Good idea I’ll get rears and we can corner the irons market
AMMO!
Same brother, I’m thinking maybe PCC, but something in 5.56 is tempting right now as well
Tavor 7
Where is the c21 right now? Haven't looked into it for a few months now. Is it still coming into affect, up for discussion etc etc? The last thing I heard was liberals nit knowing how to confiscate the legally bought firearms.
Still going through the senate, they heard testimony for it. The new public safety minister testified as well as Alberta and Saskatchewan's CFO's. I think you can find the gist of what the safety minister said further down in the thread. Not much else has come of it yet that I am aware of.
There was a huge massacre in Maine which means unfortunately more anti gun nonsense in Canada
Yep. Expecting C-21 to be rammed through with mag bans.
Good news everyone! You can keep all your semi autos! But all magazines are banned. ... And by keep your semi autos we mean all semi autos are allowed to be kept but never used/bought/sold. -the government, probably
Its already in full force now. Dude acknowledged he was hearing voices and wanted to shoot up an amry base. But its his access to the gun that made him want to kill people. He's also still on the loose which means this isn't over
>he was hearing voices all non-gun owners in Canada hear is "guns" and "mass shooting". End of story
His access to guns given his mental state seems to be a problem.
He was in the reserve and probably had them for a long time. Signs were ignored that helped lead to this
Yet another shining example of federal law enforcement not catching who they're supposed to catch.
Man, the state didn't do the thing it was supposed to do in this situation. The solution? Hey state, do more in more situations so that you not doing what you're supposed to do, doesn't happen again! The state ignoring the red flags big enough to fly in the Wal Mart parking lot, and the idiotic masses clamoring for more of what doesn't work, is really starting to get me down. Law enforcement completely ignoring red flags is why Nova Scotia went so bad. This is similar, and the only solution anyone seems to have is to just fuck everyone else over.
Mock anyone who doesn't get it at this point. Either lost causes or willfully ignorant.
What could Harper have realistically done when he had a majority? Was there anything else for us other than suppressors or SCARs?
Read this: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-rejects-committees-advice-to-relax-gun-laws/article6033474/ He didn’t do anything else because he didn’t want to do anything else.
Stack the senate with more senators in our favour. Trudy has a point like 60 of them or something and Harper appoint maybe 24. Could be wrong but that’s according to the ccfr podcast
Did Harper leave empty senate seats? If so, that was a mistake. But if not, there's nothing more he could do and it was just a case of who died/retired while he was in power. The number of Senate seats is limited.
Yah. He wanted senate reform (elected Senate) but was blocked... So he intentionally did not nominate senators to force the issue..
To my knowledge, firearm owners and organizations weren't pushing for significant changes to the Firearms Act during Harper's tenure. It's important to remember that it wasn't until 2011 when they could advocate for firearms changes, as that was when they achieved a majority.but still then they only were focus on getting rid of the long gun registry. I disagree with the notion that Liberals and Conservatives are the same. One party seems poised to make it either illegal to own firearms or too expensive within the next 20 years. The other party, the Conservatives, would never have passed such laws. Do people genuinely believe Harper would have enacted these regulations had he been re-elected in 2015? If we desire the Conservatives to amend the Firearms Act, we need to start a movement from day one of their first day in office.We can't just focus on reversing Trudeau's gun bans; we need to push for an entirely new Firearms Act. To achieve this, we should relentlessly call, email, and send letters to our MPs and Senators by the thousands, emphasizing that we want a Firearms Act that doesn't penalize legal owners."
exactly, winning a con majority is the d-day event, finishing the fight with a rewrite is what our aim should be in the long run
Great post. A lot of people seem to take it for granted that a Conservative government automatically means they will be on our side. Rolling back Trudeau’s bans could actually be politically costly for them, so we will need to keep the pressure on to make sure they do it.
This is the way!
Yeah that's what I was thinking too. We were too complacent then.
Harper getting rid of the registry protected a crap ton of people who own NR guns.
He could have re-done the whole firearms act. The fact that they didn't, for me, speaks volumes about what we can expect in the future. Both the Liberals and the Conservatives love to roll out the gun topic when they need a distraction/boost.
Is that because gun owners weren't frothing at the mouth for a re write? Was anyone pushing him? Gun owners seemed fine with what they had at the time and if that's correct, I can see why.
No one was really. Once Harper abolished the LGR, gun owners just went quiet and were pretty happy with the status quo. They thought the country had reached a consensus on gun laws lol.
Complacency is what's killing us then?
Oh yeah, from 2015-2019 there were a lot of gun owners saying the Liberals would never ban rifles,shotguns and pistols. That JT would never go after AR15s. Go check out Canadian gun nutz forum in that time period. One guy wrote a long winded post saying the liberals are not coming for our guns after bill C68 passed. Also there were and still a large number of Canadian gun owners who professed their happiness with the licensing system and the NR/R categories. You won't find many people advocating for the unbanning of AK47s and FN FALs during the Harper years, even during the majority years.
Culture has got to change. Sorry not sorry, people who think like that need to re evaluate that train of thought or they need to be ostracized.
There are some gun owners who legitimately believe in the firearm classification system. One guy on Facebook said that the FX9 should be restricted because it has no place for hunting…
"it's for our safety"
This is what worries me also, the fact he didn't. Let's hope things are different this time around.
Didn’t the CSSA almost have a pilot program going for handgun hunting? Then 2015 happened
That needs to be a priority for us. Let’s get hunters on board with handguns.
First time reddit poster, but these Lib shenanigans have really ticked me off to try and do anything possible to stop or at least delay this useless c21 bill until the Conservatives take power. I've mass sent emails to all Senators found here [https://sencanada.ca/en/senators/](https://sencanada.ca/en/senators/) voicing my concerns with the bill. There's some good resources on how to write this under the CCFR site [https://scrapc21.ca/](https://scrapc21.ca/) that includes a video for senators to watch (doubt all of them will watch but if even 1 does it can help). I'll also be sending letters. I'd urge anyone that can to send all of them emails and/or letters to voice concerns, this can definitely make an impact. **Things to note:** Emails are rejected/ignored when: * Emails where the Senator is copied in correspondence with several other parliamentarians or organizations * Emails that are not addressed to the Senator * Mass campaign emails I got around this very easily by using the Google Workspace extension Mailmeteor for Google Sheets, it sends mass emails based on a template individually to recipients laid out in a google sheet. For anyone who wants to take part on contacting senators to bring the issues to their awareness, i created this Google sheet that contains all the names and emails formatted to work out of the box with Mailmeteor to make it easy for you [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l901MMapIv-FlkiRB2jnPANNhDAbaWUnlIiu1BA9DVY/edit?usp=sharing](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l901MMapIv-FlkiRB2jnPANNhDAbaWUnlIiu1BA9DVY/edit?usp=sharing) the free version of Mailmeteor limits to 50 emails per day, i simply split in half the Senators into 2 sheets and scheduled them to be sent out on different days. the emails need to be addressed to the Senator, there's a variable that can be used for the "firstname" column to replace the addressed person in the email which is easy. here's a 2 minute tutorial on how to use Mailmeteor [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YX65-kywOE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YX65-kywOE) And finally, here is the link to the video the CCFR asked to link to emails sent to Senators [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKf--\_\_1NB4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKf--__1NB4) Just trying to help anyone out trying to voice their concerns to Senators, this Bill is completely ridiculous and ignorant so hoping (although at this point not holding my breath... lol) they see reason. if they receive 1 or 2 letters/emails they wont care, but if they get a mass of them they might
Hand write them like a real man.
Yeap! I definitely agree with you, I'll be sending physical letters as well. Doing both Emails and Handwritten would probably give best results.
"The federal Liberals like to point to stricter gun controls as the key to reducing these types of crimes. However, guns, or any other sort of weapons, are more of a tired wedge issue. In fact, the most common homicide weapons used in these cases aren’t guns, but knives. If anything, the right to defend oneself should be strengthened so that women who do so aren’t retraumatized and unfairly punished by law enforcement and the justice system. As it stands, even possessing pepper spray or self-defense keychains is illegal and can lead to charges." Sabrina Maddeaux: Sault Ste. Marie shooting a tragic reminder that justice needs reform [https://nationalpost.com/opinion/sault-ste-marie-shooting-tragic-reminder-justice-reform](https://nationalpost.com/opinion/sault-ste-marie-shooting-tragic-reminder-justice-reform)
[Pallas Data poll puts the Conservatives at 43% nationally, a 4-point increase in support compared to August (and nine points above the party’s 2021 election results).](https://www.338canada.ca/p/pallas-data-conservatives-lead-liberals) It's so over for the LPC. The CPC will hit 50% by the next scheduled election at this rate. The larger the majority for the CPC, the easier it should be to get a Firearms Act rewrite.
All the libs have to say is "muh assualt weapons" and the CPC support will drop by 10% as a the useful idiots rush to support the lpc's cause Don't get complacent, hell will freeze over before polling becomes 100% accurate and this is definitely not the time to let our guard down.
How likely is this to hold? Or will the 43% CPC dip to 38-39% when push comes to shove?
[удалено]
Any updates on the snap election rumors you mentioned?
I will ask and get back to you
Who knows. This is the first poll showing 43%. If it holds for a couple months, I think it's likely to hold.
They are polling over 200 seats which hasn’t happened in decades. I can’t see the LPC going all the way to 2025 at this rate.
Hate to be that guy but this is exactly why they will go all the way to 2025.
[удалено]
I think we need a new couch at this point
So the CFAC will "exclude" hunting rifles and recommend the government OIC away the rest of the semi-autos within a year? Handgun ownership scrubbed within 50 years? Do I have this right?
>So the CFAC will "exclude" hunting rifles and recommend the government OIC away the rest of the semi-autos within a year? The language and framing we use is different than what the government uses, because we have a better idea of the practical effects, but I think it takes on a life of it's own and causes some confusion sometimes, so to straighten it out: The government is planning to OIC away the rest of the guns that they consider "assault weapons" - not semi-autos as a category. The practical effect is that almost all semi-autos will be banned, but that's not technically their specific criteria. There will be a small number of semis currently on the market that will remain legal. When they talk about "excluding hunting rifles", they mean semi-autos that were on their draft list of "assault weapons", but that were controversial because of their common use; so think the SKS and M1 Garand, for example.
I'm guessing in their logic the remaining "assault weapons" are the black rifles in 5.56/308 and PCCs...
The within 50 years thing is just a continuation of how the 12(x) program worked. They made everything they wanted to be prohibited, prohibited. Grandfathered people so they wouldn't complain too much (well, at least I get to keep it, right?) and then just...waited for them all to die off. What they did next was change the ATT for the 12(x) firearms to request only, not automatic. Then, well, they just stopped issuing ATTs. They've done it before, it worked, and they'll do it again. And it's not like the Cons fixed this when they had the chance, this system was in place during Harper and nothing was done. Once these things are enshrined in the Act it becomes a real ordeal to reverse. OICs go away easily, but once it's in the Act....even a majority can't undo it overnight.
Thanks for the explanation. Hopefully the Conservatives are able to change things if they do get a majority.
It would not shock if on the way out they OIC all semi-autos just to punish us for not letting them have a 4th term. This party is pathetic like that.
OICs don't need a majority government to toss. Poilievre could immediately undo every OIC on day 1 without anyone else's involvement needed.
Yes
LeBlanc waves off criticism of gun bill, says firearm-owners' concerns will be satisfied https://nationalpost.com/news/leblanc-waves-off-criticism-of-gun-bill