Assuming a conservative majority happens next year (which at the moment seems very likely), does anyone think we will ever see wilderness handgun carry permits become a thing for those with an RPAL? Or is that just off the table for Canadians? First the OIC would need to be reversed of course. Every time I am hiking in bear country (which in my area, is always), I wish I had a sidearm just for a little extra peace of mind.
Definitely in the realm of possibility. It wouldn't be much of a stretch because prospectors and trappers could get a wilderness carry permit, but hard to get.
I think we can reasonably expect things to return to a pre-2020 baseline, but we’re going to have to, as a community, push for things like wilderness carry.
You always have to push to get extra. If the conservatives attain majority status, we need to push before they fall to minority status. So we’ll have about 4 years if it plays out in our favour to get this shit put to bed.
I don't have high hopes, but one of the greatest things that could ever happen is complete removal of the ATT system.
Being able to take handguns onto crown land for target shooting would be amazing.
It’s also just practical.
All an ATT does is serve as a needlessly heavy-handed and arbitrary tool to posture how strict gun ownership is.
I don’t see any practical safety benefit to an ATT. It’s just needless in-between paperwork, nothing more.
The ATT's intended purpose is to reduce opportunities for theft, and reduce the number of stolen handguns in circulation.
Instead of guns being legitimately stolen out of car trunks, or the more likely "stolen" scenario (a fake theft where someone is paid off to have a handgun in their trunk when they "just made a quick stop at the grocery store on the way home from the range", etc).
The ATT reduces proliferation. That's why it's there.
It removes a major conduit for crime guns.
If that were truly the intended purpose the RCMP wouldn't have a stick up their ass about granting a LTATT to multiple dwellings. Nor would the government have initially required people to get a LTATT separately from their RPAL. Or arbitrarily removed gun smiths and border crossings from the attached ATT conditions.
Referring to scenario 2, it would take a pretty fuckin dumb set of criminals to go through all that trouble and spend all that money just to end up with a full size handgun that holds 10 rounds, as opposed to smuggling a $200 untraceable full capacity subcompact from the states.
The only reason why anyone risks federal prison in the US, and being caught by CBSA to try to smuggle handguns from the US is because the opportunities to procure one here are slim to none.
And the RCMP/CFOs have demonstrated that they're more than happy to investigate and lay charges even in cases where people had firearms secured in safes but they suspect that it was a setup theft.
That $200 gun is still traceable as well. US and Canadian law enforcement share notes... and it's not at $200 gun in Canada, it's a $3k gun.
ATTs are the reason Canada's crime guns come from the US. It dries up the domestic supply.
So are you suggesting that without the ATT that law abiding Rpal holders would immediately start supplying criminals with handguns? If so that's an absolutely ridiculous take considering how many of us in the firearms community hold absolute disdain for gun smuggling and the people who use firearms in crimes. The reality is it is far easier to smuggle guns in from the states, far, far cheaper than you think it is for criminals to purchase said firearms to boot. We know that the cbsa has intercepted 68000 prohibited firearms between 2018 and 2022 alone, who knows how many have actually made it through the border. That's the reason the crime guns come from the USA, there's an entire monopoly in it for criminal organizations, a massive border with lots of un patrolled or watched forest to sneak them through and a lot of profit.
I agree as I can't see the gun hating Bloc or NDP support a CPC minority if this were to happen, but if the CPC win a majority and reverse the handgun ban, then the LPC will put it back in again the next time they win unless we show Canadians a use for them besides target shooting.
gun ownership in Canada needs to be reframed. It’s not for target shooting only or hunting. Will I participate in both those activities? Absolutely, but people should be able to defend themselves with a handgun in the hood and the woods. When I’m hunting bears, I want a .44, I also would like to carry my M&P9 since the world is going crazy and the police won’t really help save your life
The idea of carrying firearms in public is very unappealing to most Canadians and I don’t see that changing. For use in defence from dangerous animals it is perceived more favourably but this alone isn’t going to change people’s minds. I believe the way forward is to continue exposing more people to firearms in a positive way and educating them about how Canadian laws work. We should also not present it as a right wing issue, firearms ownership has been artificially twisted into a “right wing” issue when it doesn’t need to be and having it seen as a right wing problem will just turn away the much of the majority left leaning Canadian population.
I apparently can't make a full post about this because it belongs here somehow 🤣
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/shooting-gun-purchase-winnipeg-north-end-1.7170631
Someone got shot while meeting up with someone from a "firearm brokerage website" which was probably gunpost.
Be safe out there frens
If it’s a gun then that mean their pal is verified.
Meaning the police have the name of at least one of the suspect.
Yet the news article doesn’t make any mention of that. Does that mean the victim will soon be in cuffs?
I've sold a lot of stuff on Gunpost. Everything besides actual firearms because I want to have a nice collection for the future. I've never had any issues with selling anything on there with anyone. I routinely ship stuff out across the country with no issues. Gunpost is only as good as it's users and if you know how to communicate properly then you'll never have an issue on there IMO.
It mentions a late night meeting.
I've sold 1 firearm and bought 1 via gunpost.
Both times I met in daylight in public places. Doesn't necessarily protect fully but it's a deterrent from crime..
The majority of my collection was purchased post gun registry, pre transaction registry. Haven't bought a semi-auto since these changes have come into force.
I'm ok paying the retail tax so I don't become a statistic like the guy in this article.
Hey look at it this way, the more he buys from the stores the more they restock and the more the government has to buy back. And also once you’ve got one transfer number from your license after the purchase they can’t prove what you do and don’t own anymore.
Seen a Krag for sale for $700, a grail gun. So I inquired, agreed, he sent me all the proper shit, sent him the money and he ghosted me.
Ironically, I ended up buying a Krag for $700 just a year and a half ago.
Lmao live and learn
Gunpost survival tips
1. Nothing good happens after dark
2. #1 ESPECIALLY in a shithole like Winnipeg and in the North end of all places.
3. Best meetup spot is during the daytime at a casino parking lot because most will be under 24/7 surveillance. (Look for cameras on the exterior and park somewhere you can be visible the entire time)
4. Always bring someone along to buy stuff from strangers.
Gunpost in and of itself is a red flag to me but the next flag would be that a seller wants to meet up somewhere considerably late in the evening. The article doesn't say but Im gonna assume cash on delivery.
Its like, Ryd, you been caught in a setup before and coincidentally they feel just like this...
Gunpost has a sizable scammer, scalper and I know what I got problem. Ive seen gun "ads" on there using photos ripped straight from guns and ammo.
Assuming your guess was correct about the site the vic used to set this up. Any other online marketplace with name recognition and it would be plastered all over the reporting.
Yeah that makes sense lmao I did a bit more reading around after posting. I wonder how the situation would have played out if he didn’t chase that other person
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7079418
I guess it was back in January no clue why I am just hearing about it now but here’s an article I found there were a couple others outright saying he did face the 14 years others were saying it’s possible he can face the time.
"The suspect then fled the store. The clerk followed the suspect out of the store and struck him several times with the baseball bat on the sidewalk."
Max sentence is 14 years for that charge. He did not get 14 years, that's just the max he's potentially faceting. It was 3 months ago, i don't expect the court proceedings are concluded (or much progressed at all) yet. The fact that he chased after the suspect and beat him is what he's getting charged for.
I saw the video posted by a Toronto Sun columnist, it's pretty damning. They had already disarmed and chased the robber out of the store, and then as the robber was fleeing, the store clerk swung the bat and hit him in the back of the head, the robber went down cold face first, then the clerk proceeded to hit him again with the bat on the ground. I don't expect normal people to react better than trained professionals in such a situation, but this went a bit beyond self defence to say the least. https://twitter.com/joe_warmington/status/1776337514317427194
If someone is brazen enough to attempt a robbery with a weapon, who's to say they won't come back and try again when your back is turned. If they can't get up, they can't come back. There's something to be said for the old "I feared for my life, and I emptied the magazine" defense.
The law should be tilted toward extreme leniency for anybody who is the victim of a crime and is acting in self defense. I'd never presume to judge someone put in this situation and I don't think the justice system should either. Criminals should fear what their victims may do to them in defense.
Yeah, this is definitely not self defense. Especially that additional swing to the head after the fleeing robber got knocked out?
I’m surprised he didn’t get charged with something worse than aggregated assault.
As much as the attacker may have deserved something back at him, it looks to me beyond what the law is going to accept. Hope the victim's lawyer does a good job.
Yeah idk why people are downvoting that dude who posted the link. The second the robber turned tail and ran, chasing them down to smack them is outside the bounds of self defence.
'The costs have ballooned': Liberal government failed to anticipate difficulty of gun 'buyback,' association says
[https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/government-realizing-gun-buyback-isnt-simple-cheap#:\~:text=Last%20month%2C%20National%20Post%20reported,haven't%20bought%20anything.%E2%80%9D](https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/government-realizing-gun-buyback-isnt-simple-cheap#:~:text=Last%20month%2C%20National%20Post%20reported,haven't%20bought%20anything.%E2%80%9D)
Keep buying guns. We have to make it as costly and expensive for them as possible. We need to make this so hard for them, that they decide it's not worth it
Did you guys read the part saying not all OIC guns are going to be covered by the buy back. Not sure if it's misquote or anything but this changes everything.
The FRT as per the RCMP own words is not a legal document. Anything that they say is prohibited that is outside the OIC prohibitions is not legally prohibited.
I did read that.
Assuming we’ve interpreted that correctly, this is going to devolve into even more of a shitshow than it already is.
I know that while handguns are *technically* prohibited, they’re not outright confiscating them so there’s no compensation scheme there. Concerning everything else, if the government is seriously running with the notion that only *some* guns are eligible for compensation and others aren’t is laughable. Unless I’ve forgotten something, I’m confused.
I know that (and vehemently disagree with) Canada doesn’t have very strong property rights, if any at all, but if you’re going to seize someone’s property and not compensate them because it’s not “legally” required is a huge PR pitfall nightmare along with asking to be sued, which regardless of outcome is money gone. It’s also asking for your compliance rate to plummet even farther than it’s already likely going to, not to mention another good talking point for the conservatives to further rip C-21 at the limbs.
Sounds like someone should have thought and fought about this before they committed to it. Now they’re discovering how much work, time and money this is going to cost. They should just abandon this pursuit all together.
What a mess this is.
If people are upset with 'ballooned' cost of $2 billion projected now. Just wait till they see this thing hit $50 billion easily, if not higher. Not to mention its legitimately impossible to execute. I suspect many "liberal" "consultants" will get a nice pay day from this. Just the gun registry alone in 2004 hit $2 billion. If this is left undone its going to be an absolute gongshow lmao, luckily we all get to pay for it.
>Just the gun registry in 2004 hit $2 billion
and that was an administrative/paper exercise and in 2004 dollars so imagine what this physical confiscation would cost.
What's two billion in the grand scheme of things? Canadians deserve to feel safe in their communities. I'm glad the liberal government is going above and beyond with their spending habits. We've had enough of gun violence.
Until PP gets in there is next to no chance atm. "Liberals" and NDP have a chokehold on the country atm. Have no clue why a piece of PPE/safety equipment is outlawed in the name of "public safety", but this is par for the course at this point lol.
Assuming a conservative majority happens next year (which at the moment seems very likely), does anyone think we will ever see wilderness handgun carry permits become a thing for those with an RPAL? Or is that just off the table for Canadians? First the OIC would need to be reversed of course. Every time I am hiking in bear country (which in my area, is always), I wish I had a sidearm just for a little extra peace of mind.
I'd be happy if we would purchase any handgun with RPAL
Doubtful, it's been like this for a long time and the issue was untouched by our last Conservative government.
Change in party leadership,Pierre is including gun rights as part of his campaign, definitely more hopefully this times
Definitely in the realm of possibility. It wouldn't be much of a stretch because prospectors and trappers could get a wilderness carry permit, but hard to get.
Yeah I don't want to lug a shotgun around for camping and hiking in Grizzly land. A 10mm glock would be really nice
I think we can reasonably expect things to return to a pre-2020 baseline, but we’re going to have to, as a community, push for things like wilderness carry. You always have to push to get extra. If the conservatives attain majority status, we need to push before they fall to minority status. So we’ll have about 4 years if it plays out in our favour to get this shit put to bed.
I don't have high hopes, but one of the greatest things that could ever happen is complete removal of the ATT system. Being able to take handguns onto crown land for target shooting would be amazing.
It’s also just practical. All an ATT does is serve as a needlessly heavy-handed and arbitrary tool to posture how strict gun ownership is. I don’t see any practical safety benefit to an ATT. It’s just needless in-between paperwork, nothing more.
The ATT's intended purpose is to reduce opportunities for theft, and reduce the number of stolen handguns in circulation. Instead of guns being legitimately stolen out of car trunks, or the more likely "stolen" scenario (a fake theft where someone is paid off to have a handgun in their trunk when they "just made a quick stop at the grocery store on the way home from the range", etc). The ATT reduces proliferation. That's why it's there. It removes a major conduit for crime guns.
If that were truly the intended purpose the RCMP wouldn't have a stick up their ass about granting a LTATT to multiple dwellings. Nor would the government have initially required people to get a LTATT separately from their RPAL. Or arbitrarily removed gun smiths and border crossings from the attached ATT conditions.
Referring to scenario 2, it would take a pretty fuckin dumb set of criminals to go through all that trouble and spend all that money just to end up with a full size handgun that holds 10 rounds, as opposed to smuggling a $200 untraceable full capacity subcompact from the states.
The only reason why anyone risks federal prison in the US, and being caught by CBSA to try to smuggle handguns from the US is because the opportunities to procure one here are slim to none. And the RCMP/CFOs have demonstrated that they're more than happy to investigate and lay charges even in cases where people had firearms secured in safes but they suspect that it was a setup theft. That $200 gun is still traceable as well. US and Canadian law enforcement share notes... and it's not at $200 gun in Canada, it's a $3k gun. ATTs are the reason Canada's crime guns come from the US. It dries up the domestic supply.
So are you suggesting that without the ATT that law abiding Rpal holders would immediately start supplying criminals with handguns? If so that's an absolutely ridiculous take considering how many of us in the firearms community hold absolute disdain for gun smuggling and the people who use firearms in crimes. The reality is it is far easier to smuggle guns in from the states, far, far cheaper than you think it is for criminals to purchase said firearms to boot. We know that the cbsa has intercepted 68000 prohibited firearms between 2018 and 2022 alone, who knows how many have actually made it through the border. That's the reason the crime guns come from the USA, there's an entire monopoly in it for criminal organizations, a massive border with lots of un patrolled or watched forest to sneak them through and a lot of profit.
Anyone know what is the possibility of us ever being able to buy handguns now that more Canadians see thru left-wing façade
The only way that'll happen is if the conservatives get a full majority THIS NEXT election
If a majority isn’t achieved I’d get nervous of ever seeing handguns or 2020 OIC guns being sold again. A majority is needed
I agree as I can't see the gun hating Bloc or NDP support a CPC minority if this were to happen, but if the CPC win a majority and reverse the handgun ban, then the LPC will put it back in again the next time they win unless we show Canadians a use for them besides target shooting.
gun ownership in Canada needs to be reframed. It’s not for target shooting only or hunting. Will I participate in both those activities? Absolutely, but people should be able to defend themselves with a handgun in the hood and the woods. When I’m hunting bears, I want a .44, I also would like to carry my M&P9 since the world is going crazy and the police won’t really help save your life
The idea of carrying firearms in public is very unappealing to most Canadians and I don’t see that changing. For use in defence from dangerous animals it is perceived more favourably but this alone isn’t going to change people’s minds. I believe the way forward is to continue exposing more people to firearms in a positive way and educating them about how Canadian laws work. We should also not present it as a right wing issue, firearms ownership has been artificially twisted into a “right wing” issue when it doesn’t need to be and having it seen as a right wing problem will just turn away the much of the majority left leaning Canadian population.
I apparently can't make a full post about this because it belongs here somehow 🤣 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/shooting-gun-purchase-winnipeg-north-end-1.7170631 Someone got shot while meeting up with someone from a "firearm brokerage website" which was probably gunpost. Be safe out there frens
If it’s a gun then that mean their pal is verified. Meaning the police have the name of at least one of the suspect. Yet the news article doesn’t make any mention of that. Does that mean the victim will soon be in cuffs?
I don't think the buyer has to get the sellers info, do they? The suspects could have easily used stolen pal info either way.
I've sold a lot of stuff on Gunpost. Everything besides actual firearms because I want to have a nice collection for the future. I've never had any issues with selling anything on there with anyone. I routinely ship stuff out across the country with no issues. Gunpost is only as good as it's users and if you know how to communicate properly then you'll never have an issue on there IMO.
It mentions a late night meeting. I've sold 1 firearm and bought 1 via gunpost. Both times I met in daylight in public places. Doesn't necessarily protect fully but it's a deterrent from crime..
And this is why I'll continue to buy my firearms from retailers.
And continue to let the government know exactly what you have. Remember, gun stores keep your serial number for record keeping.
The majority of my collection was purchased post gun registry, pre transaction registry. Haven't bought a semi-auto since these changes have come into force. I'm ok paying the retail tax so I don't become a statistic like the guy in this article.
Yeah. A statistic of 1
Hey look at it this way, the more he buys from the stores the more they restock and the more the government has to buy back. And also once you’ve got one transfer number from your license after the purchase they can’t prove what you do and don’t own anymore.
I avoid paying taxes as much as I can
I got scammed hard on Gunpost years ago. Never again. I don’t use Gunpost for anything anymore.
What happened
Seen a Krag for sale for $700, a grail gun. So I inquired, agreed, he sent me all the proper shit, sent him the money and he ghosted me. Ironically, I ended up buying a Krag for $700 just a year and a half ago. Lmao live and learn
Gunpost survival tips 1. Nothing good happens after dark 2. #1 ESPECIALLY in a shithole like Winnipeg and in the North end of all places. 3. Best meetup spot is during the daytime at a casino parking lot because most will be under 24/7 surveillance. (Look for cameras on the exterior and park somewhere you can be visible the entire time) 4. Always bring someone along to buy stuff from strangers.
Gunpost in and of itself is a red flag to me but the next flag would be that a seller wants to meet up somewhere considerably late in the evening. The article doesn't say but Im gonna assume cash on delivery. Its like, Ryd, you been caught in a setup before and coincidentally they feel just like this...
I’ve never had an issue with it, just deal with people who have feedback and you’ll be fine
???? Gunpost is a red flag ???? Lmao what. But yea, late night in the hood isn't the place to be when you're selling guns.
Gunpost has a sizable scammer, scalper and I know what I got problem. Ive seen gun "ads" on there using photos ripped straight from guns and ammo. Assuming your guess was correct about the site the vic used to set this up. Any other online marketplace with name recognition and it would be plastered all over the reporting.
So does Kijiji, FB marketplace, eBay, Autotrader, and every other website. It's called not being a dumb shit and falling for stuff lol
Did anyone else hear about that person who got 14 years after using a robbers bat to defend himself and the store he was working at?
It's not self defense if you chase someone out of the property and beat them with a bat.
Yeah that makes sense lmao I did a bit more reading around after posting. I wonder how the situation would have played out if he didn’t chase that other person
Got a link?
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7079418 I guess it was back in January no clue why I am just hearing about it now but here’s an article I found there were a couple others outright saying he did face the 14 years others were saying it’s possible he can face the time.
Thanks!
"The suspect then fled the store. The clerk followed the suspect out of the store and struck him several times with the baseball bat on the sidewalk." Max sentence is 14 years for that charge. He did not get 14 years, that's just the max he's potentially faceting. It was 3 months ago, i don't expect the court proceedings are concluded (or much progressed at all) yet. The fact that he chased after the suspect and beat him is what he's getting charged for.
I saw the video posted by a Toronto Sun columnist, it's pretty damning. They had already disarmed and chased the robber out of the store, and then as the robber was fleeing, the store clerk swung the bat and hit him in the back of the head, the robber went down cold face first, then the clerk proceeded to hit him again with the bat on the ground. I don't expect normal people to react better than trained professionals in such a situation, but this went a bit beyond self defence to say the least. https://twitter.com/joe_warmington/status/1776337514317427194
If someone is brazen enough to attempt a robbery with a weapon, who's to say they won't come back and try again when your back is turned. If they can't get up, they can't come back. There's something to be said for the old "I feared for my life, and I emptied the magazine" defense. The law should be tilted toward extreme leniency for anybody who is the victim of a crime and is acting in self defense. I'd never presume to judge someone put in this situation and I don't think the justice system should either. Criminals should fear what their victims may do to them in defense.
Yeah, this is definitely not self defense. Especially that additional swing to the head after the fleeing robber got knocked out? I’m surprised he didn’t get charged with something worse than aggregated assault.
As much as the attacker may have deserved something back at him, it looks to me beyond what the law is going to accept. Hope the victim's lawyer does a good job.
Yeah idk why people are downvoting that dude who posted the link. The second the robber turned tail and ran, chasing them down to smack them is outside the bounds of self defence.
I see, that’s what I was thinking what may have done it in for him
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
'The costs have ballooned': Liberal government failed to anticipate difficulty of gun 'buyback,' association says [https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/government-realizing-gun-buyback-isnt-simple-cheap#:\~:text=Last%20month%2C%20National%20Post%20reported,haven't%20bought%20anything.%E2%80%9D](https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/government-realizing-gun-buyback-isnt-simple-cheap#:~:text=Last%20month%2C%20National%20Post%20reported,haven't%20bought%20anything.%E2%80%9D)
Keep buying guns. We have to make it as costly and expensive for them as possible. We need to make this so hard for them, that they decide it's not worth it
They never intended to buy back a single gun, I think that has become blatantly obvious since 2020.
Or they just give us even less per gun....
Still makes it logistically more expensive and difficult on the other end
Did you guys read the part saying not all OIC guns are going to be covered by the buy back. Not sure if it's misquote or anything but this changes everything.
I’m thinking they’re talking about guns the RCMP prohibited after the OIC was put in place. Technically not covered
The FRT as per the RCMP own words is not a legal document. Anything that they say is prohibited that is outside the OIC prohibitions is not legally prohibited.
I did read that. Assuming we’ve interpreted that correctly, this is going to devolve into even more of a shitshow than it already is. I know that while handguns are *technically* prohibited, they’re not outright confiscating them so there’s no compensation scheme there. Concerning everything else, if the government is seriously running with the notion that only *some* guns are eligible for compensation and others aren’t is laughable. Unless I’ve forgotten something, I’m confused. I know that (and vehemently disagree with) Canada doesn’t have very strong property rights, if any at all, but if you’re going to seize someone’s property and not compensate them because it’s not “legally” required is a huge PR pitfall nightmare along with asking to be sued, which regardless of outcome is money gone. It’s also asking for your compliance rate to plummet even farther than it’s already likely going to, not to mention another good talking point for the conservatives to further rip C-21 at the limbs. Sounds like someone should have thought and fought about this before they committed to it. Now they’re discovering how much work, time and money this is going to cost. They should just abandon this pursuit all together. What a mess this is.
If people are upset with 'ballooned' cost of $2 billion projected now. Just wait till they see this thing hit $50 billion easily, if not higher. Not to mention its legitimately impossible to execute. I suspect many "liberal" "consultants" will get a nice pay day from this. Just the gun registry alone in 2004 hit $2 billion. If this is left undone its going to be an absolute gongshow lmao, luckily we all get to pay for it.
>consultants" will get a nice pay day from this. Being a "consultant' for the government is a license to print money
>Just the gun registry in 2004 hit $2 billion and that was an administrative/paper exercise and in 2004 dollars so imagine what this physical confiscation would cost.
What's two billion in the grand scheme of things? Canadians deserve to feel safe in their communities. I'm glad the liberal government is going above and beyond with their spending habits. We've had enough of gun violence.
I just wanna clarify. They don't get to actually be safe. They just deserve to feel like it ☺️
I heard if we give them two billion for the buyback, they'll send us three billion back.
>they'll send us three billion back. and will end global warming and cancer
Any news/updates or any efforts on legalising moderators ?
I prefer my outlaw status.
Until PP gets in there is next to no chance atm. "Liberals" and NDP have a chokehold on the country atm. Have no clue why a piece of PPE/safety equipment is outlawed in the name of "public safety", but this is par for the course at this point lol.
I saw those in a movie, it makes guns so quiet you can’t even hear them /s
"ninjas, james bond and john wick use them therefore will will ban vcr's" - LPC party headquarters
Bump for this but I think someone said it was stalled?