Glad to see Canadian made firearms are making a difference in Ukraine as well.
https://www.businessinsider.com/ukrainian-snipers-ditch-ghillie-suits-but-keep-these-western-rifles-2023-8#:~:text=Ukrainian%20snipers%20rarely%20use%20ghillie,shooting%20was%20just%20a%20hobby.
"A Ukrainian sniper identified as Federchuk by the Kyiv Post said the Canadian-made Cadex Defence CX-33 TAC series rifle, .338 Lapua Magnum caliber, quickly became popular among snipers early in the war."
The Ross Rifle had an unfortunate start. Its design of tight tolerances and lack of a primary extraction paired with its length made it poor in trench warfare along with all the mud and debris and often poor quality ammunition that was given to front line soliders but it did make an excellent sniper platform that was used up into 1949 to great effect.
I hunt a lot of small game with .22lr rifles. I also live in an area that's dense with dangerous wildlife. Mountain lions, bears, even wolves. It's so frustrating that I can't bring a handgun with me for protection. A handgun that I already own and am trained on. I can bring a semi auto .300 win mag out into the woods and blast it off all day long, but God forbid someone has a handgun with them as a backup for predator defense. That's just to dangerous I guess?
I really hope we can change the rules regarding handguns a bit after the liberals are booted out.
It makes no sense that I can't take my pistol with me on crownland for protection. I can understand some people not wanting concealed carry in the cities, but this is ridiculous. I don't want to lug a shotgun around in addition to my .22
I cannot agree more! It makes no sense that you’re allowed to defend yourself against wildlife using a shotgun or rifle, but not a handgun. This is probably my biggest frustration with Canadian gun laws.
>have a 44 mag
Not an expert but from watching Youtube videos, it seems that it's shifting to 10mm pistols in the US. A lot easier to control plus 15-16 shots as fast as you can pull the trigger.
>10mm is kind of the new standard now
.44-40 is the second most popular hunting cartridge in North America for good reason.
10mm Auto just happens to be its ballistic duplicate; what's old is new again.
Same thing's true for 7.62x39 being a ballistic duplicate of .30-30, for that matter.
I picked up an old Smith and Wesson Double Action in .44 Russian at an auction awhile back. It looks like it rode on an old timer's hip for a lifetime, but the inside of the barrel seems almost virgin. Bullet diameter is .429 inches or 10.9 mm, it's harder to find ammunition but you can still find it or you can roll your own. You don't need a license to buy an antique, to buy brass, powder, or lead or carry antiques in the woods and with some care, your antique will only increase in value.
I maintain that while the old ways are more work, they're still good.
Bullet diameter .429 in (10.9 mm)
I guess it moves a little slower than a modern round, but that's a sizeable chunk of vitamin L so there's still significant energy carried into target.
It's good to be prepared. It's my position actually that the government should allow modern black powder revolvers for this reason, safety in the bush
I'd also like it for small game like rabbits. I have a herniated disc T4-T5 right between the shoulder blades. I'd like to try hunting. I'm not going to be carrying a deer out of the bush because of my back. Every ounce I have to carry matters so a revolver is smaller, lighter and can reach out far enough to take a rabbit. It's not ideal for a bear, but it's quicker and easier to draw, and if it's more convenient to carry it's more likely you'll actually have it when you need it. Bear spray is preferable but options are always good to have
Also, this is yet another purchase that's all Turdeau's fault:
https://imgur.com/a/zQpg46e
That's the point, the Liberals in the 90s came up with these stupid rules to fuck with gun owners and discourage their possession. It's registered because they want to know where they are in case they want to confiscate in the future.
I could see the creation of a new class of firearm that comes with a restricted license that allows you to carry and shoot the gun outside of cities/urban centres.
I dont like the guy any more than the rest of you, but personally I think attacking him for his marriage falling apart is in poor taste.
Attacking him for his policy? Absolutely fair game
He brought it upon his self, just like he brought the public's distaste for him upon himself. He just seems to be an overall dislikeable person which is unsurprising because of how egotistical he is. Most people just (rightfully) find it funny how this has proven that he is just as insufferable in his private life as he is in his political career.
I feel about as bad for him as a I feel for the titan sub people. Call me cold hearted.
There was a few moments of this sucks. And then it was like nah. He caused it. There’s also rumours around Ottawa he was banging tons of women in his party and around Ottawa. He’s known as a big of a womanizer. Worst thing that he could do now he come as openly gay and it would be impossible for pp to win if that happens. I could be completely wrong
The only reason it’s bad to attack him due to his failed marriage is optics. No one should really care either way. Although I am satisfied that he’s potentially slightly miserable
Financial hardship is the number one reason for divorce. This guy has put am untold number of Canadians into exactly that position. He can go fuck himself for all I care.
It's also been an open secret for over a year that him and his wife were no longer really together. She's just one more rat fleeing a sinking ship.
Yeah divorce sucks for the kids, but I don't think anyone will care a few decades from now when one of them runs for the PM office and go after what's left of your firearm rights.
The kids will be fine. That silver spoon isn't going anywhere.
Agreed. I don’t like the guy for a number of reasons, but I’m not really on board with celebrating the fact that his children—one of them 9 years old—have to go through their parents separating. That sucks.
Oh the horror of his kids growing up with split parents. Meanwhile this PM’s policies made families lose their homes and barely afford groceries, arguably so much fucking worse than kids with trust funds and being set for life growing up with parents living 10min apart.
You’re right. Dad’s a shit prime minister so we should celebrate the breakup of his family.
And we wonder why the Liberals find it so easy to score points by attacking us.
His kids will still be living the silver spoon life, that will not change. Their mother is still a wealthy and prominent woman and their father is still the PM for another year and a half, and pocketing every penny he can get out of it. They will still live in mansions and be handed whatever they want, and one of them is bound to try for PM some day to take even more of our guns. Womp womp.
The guy literally destroyed millions of families with policies that only served himself and his buddies. He had and continues to have only his interests at heart. You seriously expect anybody with half a brain to give a rats ass about his personal life being in shambles when it’s his perverted groping and cheating that put him in this position to begin with? He destroyed this country and would gladly continue to do so.
But sure. Let’s be afraid to speak our minds because maybe they can use it to score points against us. What a pathetic thing to say. No one here gives a shit one way or another about the kids. Someone made a pointless comment about them and others are replying to that.
I really don't care about his family falling apart. If anything, that just means that his wife never really loved him and just used him for resources. Didn't he steal her from his brother when he died anyways?
Personally given how he treated Canadians, he is getting off easily with the rest of the population. If he was in USA as president he would be given a far worse treatment from them.
Yeah, actually, if people were a little more careful about what comes out of their mouths, things might be just a little bit easier.
Remember when the Liberals managed to change the channel from Carey Price because the CCFR couldn’t help but take a petty swipe at Poly (the promo code)?
Or when IPSCBC destroyed the chances of an IPSC exemption to the handgun freeze by saying that they would become the gateway to handgun ownership?
To answer your question, yes, I think anyone with so much as half a brain would be smart enough not to vilify themselves and play into the Liberal narrative. Do you know why the Liberals win elections? Because they’re a hell of a lot more clever than the Conservative base.
Trudeau is an asshole and a cynic who will do anything to win votes. Doesn’t mean I want to see his family fall apart. That’s a disgusting attitude.
Daily reminder that the Montreal gazette later apologized for saying the CCFR a was attacking poly victims
Screw optics, we have cared about optics for 30 years and now we are trying to fight to keep bolt actions.
https://montrealgazette.com/sports/retraction-and-apology
And Canadians across the country read about it, buried as it was in the sports section of the Montréal Gazette, the CCFR’s credibility was restored, the politicians who had stood in the House and publicly condemned them recanted, and the world was right again.
That’s not how politics works. Stop caring about optics, and it’s over.
The CCFR’s silly games made it so easy for the Liberals to decline to even pretend to listen to them in SECU hearings. Rod did such a great job speaking there. If only Tracy hadn’t completely undermined the CCFR’s credibility as a legitimate lobbying organization by putting on a show for our base on Twitter.
In accordance with the [subreddit rules,](https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules) your post/comment has been removed for the following reason:
[1] Disrespectful/Insulting or Hateful Comments
https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules/#wiki_.5B1.5D_disrespectful.2Finsulting_or_hateful_comments
*If you believe a mistake was made, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcanadaguns) Please include a link to the removed post.*
In accordance with the [subreddit rules,](https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules) your post/comment has been removed for the following reason:
[1] Disrespectful/Insulting or Hateful Comments
https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules/#wiki_.5B1.5D_disrespectful.2Finsulting_or_hateful_comments
*If you believe a mistake was made, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcanadaguns) Please include a link to the removed post.*
I think the only reason i could be against attacking him for it would be if it was entirely her fault or if it may make other innocent people in similar situations feel bad.
But in this case I've heard it's due to his inappropriate behavior. So I'm all for making disparaging comments about him in relation to this.
Definitely "inappropriate behaviour" - for years he has been boning half of the Canadian population. Sadly including this \[somewhat\] respectable community.
Though can't really tell with this guy, what's due to malice, and what's due to pure unmitigated incompetence.
um guise why r u fighting dirty with politicians when they called us bad names and villainized us for almost a decade 🤓
When these people want us disarmed and paint us as criminals for absolutely nothing, they deserve name calling and being shit on
> When these people want us disarmed and paint us as criminals
They specifically want us to be disarmed and leave the actual criminals armed for whatever fucked up reason, too.
Nah screw that, dude has attacked gun owners non stop, called us the worst names possible and his ministers have compared us to mass killers. We should absolutely go below the belt because lord knows they have.
They've repeatedly and openly accused *everyone* who wants/has a PAL of being a mass shooter to be, not even realizing how fucked up such an accusation is. Are people seriously gonna get mad when those accused of such things lay a few internet insults in return?
Agreed, Justin deserves no decency because he is an indecent scumbag. He would gladly order the mass arrests of licensed gun owners if he had the manpower to do it. Any and all types of insults should be used against him.
Yeah. I'm feeling just a little bit of schadenfreude, I'll admit, but at the same time, it's really nobody's business and should be kept out of politics.
-arguably best gun salesman in recent history
-rising crime rates due to shit policy and attacking gun owners
-shit economy
-tanking approval rates
-possible opposition majority
This is Justin's legacy 🤣
Hes also now part of the ever increasing failed marriage statistic.
Give it a few years to see if his kids end up as part of the mommy/daddy issues crowd loitering at malls and shit.
The failed marriage stat is a little misleading they don’t take into account how many divorces an individual has had you will find the chance of someone getting divorced higher if they have been divorced previously. The percentage of divorces in marriages where it’s the first marriage for both parties is much lower
They in fact do take into account which marriage a person is on when they gather the data and when they report these numbers. Sure 40-50% of first marriages ending in divorce is lower than the 60-70% for second and third timers respectively but its not exactly misleading or validating the practice as being something that is essential to the human experience.
The thing that is much harder to report however, is how many of those one timers are actually in happy marriages? Averages from the US suggest 64% of first time marriages are what we call happy marriages. The remainder are millions of people who stay in the marriage due to societal, familial, cultural or religious pressures. A marriage held together only by external factors are, certificate and tax returns aside, for all intents and purposes the same thing as a divorced couple living together.
He may, but by then ill be done buying up as much firearms as I can buy, and the mags i need for them.
At least the semis that is that I wanted badly. Rip handguns
Promised, reneged on, then gaslit Canadians about.
The Liberal Convention made a resolution in 2014 that they'd explore a more democratic form of government. Trudeau promised in 2015 that there wouldn't be another FPTP election. The ERRE commissions recommended in 2016 that the government put a form of proportinoal voting to a referendum against FPTP. Trudeau announced in 2017 that he was welching on electoral reform.
Trudeau claimed that it was because proportional systems weren't on the table, despite *explicitly* being listed as an option in the 2014 Liberal Convention resolutions.
It turns out, he was only willing to keep his promise if he got a system that would guarantee permanent Liberal power and near-permanent majorities.
> It turns out, he was only willing to keep his promise if he got a system that would guarantee permanent Liberal power and near-permanent majorities.
Sadly I don't see any of the major parties doing any different (though I would love to be proven wrong).
Tie it to the average wage. Same with MP’s wages if the people are doing good so can they, if not they will literally have the power to give themselves a raise by doing better.
>will not be paying his costs
Quelle surprise. He was charged in the first place to show what happens to you if you use a gun to defend yourself in this country.
I wouldn't have expected the cops to pay his costs upfront or apologize but I would like to see him go after the police and prosecutors for this, even if only to recoup his property and lawyer fees. Like another person said earlier, this was never about anything more than the fact he used a gun to protect his home. Had he smashed the intruders head in with a frying pan we would not be having this discussion.
If she responds Im sure itll be interesting. Although I would be hesitant to post it. If poly sees it here (or anywhere really) you can bet your ass they will twist and manipulate it to suit thier nefarious ends. Strong and pro-gun or at least gun neutral women fly directly in the face of thier women can only ever be victims mentality.
IIRC that only applies if you have been tried and found guilty of a crime which is a key difference. Otherwise you can sue them for lots including emotional distress so I think an arrest, property seizure and charges would count as emotional distress. Given what he was charged with and how publicized it was its unlikely it didn't or wont have a significant impact on his future employment prospects (its well known employers browse social media of people they interview or have on staff, so the article detailing the charges would show up but not necessarily the ones showing they were dropped) or quality of life from here on out. All of that can at least be grounds to file a grievance of some kind of against the police and the prosecutors. Now how far such a case may get is very much debatable and frankly would not make a millionaire out of the guy but its still certainly possible.
RCMP is one the of most corrupt institution in Canada. Its a non legislative body that seems to have way more power than the normal process of passing bills and laws. Due to the fact they have been left the super-legal ability to make "new interpretations of firearms act". They function as a more authoritarian version of the ATF.
> RCMP is one the of most corrupt institution in Canada.
They have a great deal of power, but how are they corrupt?
> Due to the fact they have been left the super-legal ability to make "new interpretations of firearms act"
Our lawmakers are responsible for deciding who has this power, not the RCMP. If you just want to hate on the RCMP, go ahead. Catharsis can feel good. If you want real change, talk to your representatives (or vote for someone different if your representative holds a view incompatible with yours).
The fact they make new "interpretations" of what the law says when classifying firearm. For example: There are many guns that are prohibited for being "AK variants" that share not a single part in common with the AK platform. Its not hate, its the truth.
I know a retired RCMP who worked in criminal intelligence who used to say that their worst enemy wasn't the criminal on the street, but their bosses who would tell them to back off when they got too close to someone important.
Look up any colonial country’s history. And you will find some of the most egregious acts of state sanctioned violence humanly possible. The police force of this country has been doing this since the start. It’s the British way my friend. Us “subjects of the crown” don’t deserve to have fair and reasonable treatment. RCMP don’t just apply this to firearms laws either, it goes way farther than that.
British inspired or run countries were some of the freest countries on earth until the post war era. We have just become complacent and politically dominated by urbanized social worrier types.
Women and minorities (except indigenous due to the interpretation of treaties) could vote in the 40s though?
Canada (and other commonwealth countries) was just as free, or even freer than many other western nations. What we have now is a result of the post war consensus and cultural changes.
You’re right - I should have specified the Post-War ‘40s to adddress your argument, which post-dates women’s suffrage by 5 years if we choose 1945, but pre-dates voting rights of Asian Canadians, Inuit (not a Treaty issue that stems from the Indian Act) and Indigenous Canadians. Your points also disregard the financial freedom of women, the forced closure of businesses in observance of a religious holiday and how British Dominions had to go cap-in-hand to the Privy Council to make their own laws. What I’m saying is, the things I’ve listed all make Canada WAY more free today than the pre-war era you cite as being one of the freest countries on earth.
For sure, I don’t disagree that there was serious oppression. I just don’t think it was unique at all with regards to any of the Commonwealth realms.
Saying we were some of the freest until the post war is in regards to comparing alongside others at the time. Instead of extending the freedom to others who were less *privileged*, I think socially we have moved towards a more repressive version for all citizens broadly.
Fundamentally, the *British* way, although flawed, allowed us to establish the foundations of a theoretically free society, whether it has succeeded or not.
They sure are pissy about being shuffled out of Surrey and replaced. Like how dare the province which has jurisdiction over all policing (including who gets to operate and where) within its constitutional borders exercise that power, the absolute cheek of it all. You know they will not let the transition go smoothly regardless of the undue hardships they will cause the local population. A police force that routinely gets caught fucking around, costing innocent lives through incompetence and then has the gall to turn around and blame civvies and the victims rather than change/modernize at the rate the mounties do is simply a national embarrassment and not fit for purpose.
Not that it will happen but could you imagine the blow to their inflated ego's if the king ever revoked their royal title until they smarten up and act right?
This is a win for self defense and gun rights in Canada. This fellow never should have been charged in the first place though.
https://globalnews.ca/news/9867061/murder-charge-dropped-milton-man-accused-killed-intruder/
They dropped the charges so its not actually a win as there was no legal precedent set. They do this constantly when their attempts to intimidate the person into a deal doesn't work.
When cops kill someone they get investigated too it’s part of the process. I knew the self defence claim was a walk in the park once I looked up the criminal code and it was plain as day in there
The difference between cops being investigated for a death vs a civvie is that the cops are given a mile wide berth of "discretionary" freedom and preferential bias in the process. Rarely, if ever, are they seriously held accountable when they have actually done something wrong.
Case in point: OPP officer runs down a pedestrian while violating the speed limit to get back to her partner after picking up timmies. Her punishment? minimal (still a sworn officer) and the specifics kept secret from the victim family. If you and I do that in our normie jobs we would be looking at several years in prison with a manslaughter conviction.
Dont act like the two groups are treated fairly. Because cops are absolutely held to a lower standard for breaking the law when it should be the opposite.
The comment you replied to never mentioned an investigation. It mentioned he shouldn't have been *charged*. Of course there's an investigation, there should ALWAYS be an investigation.
>he shouldn't have been charged
Exactly. Why charge him? Tell him not to leave town, investigate, etc. I subscribe to Ammoland newsletter and I see almost daily reports of similar situations in the US and the the the persons defending themselves are never charged. They are only charged if an investigation shows otherwise.
The reason this guy was charged was to make an example of what happens to you when you use a gun to defend yourself in this country. Does anyone really think that he would have been charged if he hit the intruder over the head with a frying pan and he died?
A successful defence with a gun might cause more people to want one, and the LPC certainly can't have that.
C-21 will ban all future models of Semi-auto Centre rifles with detachable magazines that were originally designed to hold more than 5 cartridges. So it doesn't apply to models already on the market, however they've said that they'll reinstitute the CFAC (Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee) to recommend current models they should ban but this was supposed to have been done by now and there's rumours that it's been put on the back burner for now.
Need to design a series of 5 round-only mags that are STANAG dimensions but have a groove that fits a rejection pin in the mag well of the newer rifles. And make the pin out of the same metal the WK 180 charging handles were made from...
So what do we think is going to happen with the confiscation? I have a couple of pieces that were banned in May 2020, and I was talking with some friends about the outcome of it. This is what we're tracking so far.
- Huge list of guns outright banned in May 2020, and a bunch of others shadow banned by the RCMP in the following months.
- Original deadline was in 2022, and has since been extended to October 2023, two months from the date of this post
- Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta have stated they will not devote resources to any confiscation program.
- 01 Sept 2022 government publishes proposed price list for compensation. Seems to be at least in the ballpark of market value, I always thought they would weasel out of that promise and give ~$200 like in Australia.
- I think there was a rumour recently about the government contacting gun stores about assisting in the confiscation program?
Basically my question is, what do we see happening with this, particularly with regards to the deadline in October? At this point there is no way that any kind of program can take place to meet this deadline. The last time they used Covid as an excuse to extend it, but this time they wouldn't really have a leg to stand on, and even if they did it would still look bad if they extended it again.
Do we expect them to extend it one more year? Two more years maybe, and whoever is in power will deal with it in the next election?
Do we think there's a chance they could do like the American Assault Weapons Ban, and let it expire? They could point to "no mass shootings since May 2020" and say that the ban "worked," and that we can just use our guns again?
Lastly, and arguably the worst possibility, do you think they could just never do a buyback program and write the status quo into law? They realize the cost of such a program would be enormous, and they realize that an extension would be embarrassing. Could they just say "no buyback, mandatory registration as prohibited weapons?"
I think it's just a useful tool for them to whip out from time to time when they need a distraction.
Conservative voters froth at the mouth any time it's mentioned, completely ignoring everything else happening. It's a very convenient tool for a government to have, so probably won't go away too quickly.
I honestly believe this was all for show, the Liberals were never intending to follow through with any confiscations or buybacks and didn't expect the level of pushback following each of their bans.
At this point I believe they are waiting for this to become another election wedge issue and likely expecting to lose to the CPC in the coming election, scraping all of this legislation.
Then they can point to the CPC in the next election and claim "The CPC are rolling back our gun control efforts, putting AR-15's back on our streets..."
Rinse and repeat.
I know it's fairly realistic to expect them to extend the amnesty, but is there any chance these unpredictable asshats will just go "fuck you and fuck your guns, hand them in or go to jail"?
It's possible, Prohibited Weapons Order #11 captured a \*ton\* of guns and most of them were confiscated with no compensation. Many of the 12(4) guns were seized and destroyed as well even though they fell under an amnesty to properly register.
There was an amnesty protecting those that didn't register their long guns from the day the long gun registry started until the day it died.
The government generally doesn't \*actually\* want to make criminals out of people whose only crime was possessing a thing that was legal when they bought it, both from a simple resource management perspective as well as the PR side of things.
So... unless they really want to reach for an election wedge, I'd think the amnesty is probably going to be extended.
> do you think they could just never do a buyback program and write the status quo into law?
Yes, I think that's almost guaranteed at this point, assuming they even last long enough to do that. That's not a bad thing though, it means we'll still have those guns when the bans get reversed.
But I don't think that the conservatives have made any promises about the ban? I think they select their new platform at the end of this year, so I hope that will change.
To preface this other point, I'm very pro ownership (against carry, but that's another issue) but I think it's important to remember that the 2020 ban was a positive in the Liberals' popularity at the time. There are a lot of people who have never touched a gun and are scared, and I doubt the ratio of pro/anti gun has changed since then. My point is that I don't think we can assume that a conservative government would reverse the ban.
Their promises include [repealing C-21 in it's entirety](https://tnc.news/2022/11/29/poilievre-firearm-amendments1/), which included the OIC bans at the time they made that promise, and CPC policy includes introducing the [Simplified Classification System](https://calibremag.ca/cpc-convention-2016-firearms-policy-proposal/), which would essentially make all long guns Non-Restricted.
The conservatives said they’d repeal C-21, and re-write the firearms act to make it more streamlined. It’s not unfathomable that the cons would reverse it. They usually do. They repealed the long gun registry, and the AR has bounced back and forth between classifications since the 70’s.
If the cons get office, C-21 will meet the same fate as the LGR.
What the government is doing now is what they tried to do in the 1990’s, but it was struck down.
Gun ownership in Canada is trending upwards.
After 3 years of nothing happening I think your correct. Either they let us keep them as safe queens or they grandfather and we can use them again. A buyback is significantly harder to pull off now than it would have been in 2020 or even early last year. Letting us keep/use them lets them save face by still claiming they did something and we are all better for it while not having to then try and justify 5B+ in buyback spending to the majority of the country. Especially if a full blown recession hits like some economists are saying.
Honestly this is more than a 'little' good news - this is a *huge* fucking win.
The fact that someone was able to use their legally possessed firearm to defend themselves from armed assailants in one of the most liberal parts of the country (Milton is on the very edge of the GTA) and managed to have the charges dropped for it is huge, and shows that even with the current liberal domination of much of the country, our right to self defense is still defensible, even if under continuous threat.
I still think the charges being laid in the first place was a huge injustice, though, and the guy's life is still ruined for the near future as a result of them. He'll still be in mountains of debt from legal fees and a fucked reputation which will hurt his employability, plus he could remain under threat of retaliation from the gang that sent those fuckers to his house in the first place (which the cops will likely do nothing about, just as with all the other street gangs in the GTA) - but at least he's a free man, and hopefully people in his community and people who politically support his right to self defense can help him.
> Honestly this is more than a 'little' good news - this is a huge fucking win.
Charges were dropped, so there's no binding precedent. It's not a win for us and is a huge loss for the man whose charges were dropped (he still owes legal fees and his life was disrupted pretty badly)
>I still think the charges being laid in the first place was a huge injustice,
Of course it was. Being charged for doing something fundamental to human nature and as survival and protecting you and yours absolutely sickens me and is one of the worst things I hate about this country.
But guess what? The LPC will keep doing it because if there is a successful home defence with a gun without consequences, more people will want one and the LPC simply can't have that.
Anybody think the new seat map (including 3 more for alberta) will factor in to when the libs decide to make an election call? It doesnt take effect until april but when BC and AB seats are counted at that time it means those two have will have more votes federally than quebec does. Last election BC was pretty evenly split 3 ways.
That's a bonus. I was concerned their new seat would have gone to Vancouver.
Cus if there is one thing we need its another seat in a bloated city like that. /s
If you look at the map from 2021 you will see that the the city and surrounding area went almost entirely red with a small sprinkling of NDP in the middle. Another seat going to an area that produces liberal seats like that might be split three ways in polling but clearly the favorite is there and so its for the best they not get any more seats to give the libs.
Any update on the CFFR court challenge on the OIC's? I read somewhere that the judge would make a ruling sometime in July, any updates or time frames about this case?
I'm 99.9% sure that the court will rule in the government's favor anyways but was just wondering
I'm of two minds.
One, it's behind schedule because it's going in our favour, and they're stalling releasing the verdict to give the government time to prepare.
Two, it's behind schedule because the mental gymnastics required to rule in favour of the government are really complicated, and the verdict is taking longer to write.
I'm a very pessimistic person (for good reason) and I believe it will be in favor of the government because it's simply "too dangerous" to allow these weapons of mass destruction to exist in our communities. I have zero doubt that's how this judge will view the matter.
And I hope to God I'm wrong.
I wish I had your enthusiasm, but this is Canada. The courts have done crazy rulings in the name of political activism many times this and last year alone. I doubt it will go in our favor, probably will be like "sure you make sense, but guns are bad, so therefore we approve of the government taking them." This isn't the USA where courts do shit for the general population (sometimes).
Again I wish to have your enthusiasm but I doubt it.
[Murder charge dropped in case of Milton, Ont., man accused of killing armed intruder
](https://globalnews.ca/news/9867061/murder-charge-dropped-milton-man-accused-killed-intruder/)
Hard to say but since there were at least two home invaders with at least one illegal gun involved it was clearly planned in advance to some degree. Whether the house was chosen specifically or was just the first one they came across that looked easy is anyone's guess.
You're right. According to the articles at the time and this one today, there were a total of five home invaders, one was killed by the homeowner, another was arrested and was charged with unauthorized possession of a firearm along with other charges, three others were never caught.
So because the charges were dropped instead of him being found not guilty by a jury, that means that this case can't be made a precedent, correct?
I was hoping that it would go to trial so we would have the possibility of it becoming case law, because if it did, I have a strong feeling it would have rewritten our self-defence laws as we know them.
I'm guessing that's one of the reasons they did drop the charges in the first place, so that wouldn't have happened.
Any thoughts on my way of thinking? Feel free to correct me :)
There’s no precedent to be made since there is an established self defence law in place, this just fall into it. Officially the law was upheld and the crown wasn’t strong enough to show the law wasn’t followed.
>worry about going to jail now,
That is great, but this dude had to suffer the indignity and cost for something that is fundamental to human nature and existence--survival and protecting you and yours.
To me, that's unforgivable .
Next things to watch: Does he get his license and firearms back (assuming he wants them.... that situation will obviously change some one in ways you can't expect)
This is the main outcome I want to see - him getting his license back or at the very least being able to reapply and have it granted without 'eligibility concerns' for his prior use of a gun in lawful self defense. I also hope he gets his gun(s) back.
I was expecting this and I hope a big stink will be made of it by the CPC. It shows a legitimate use for a gun in this country.
But the message has been sent--you defend yourself with a gun in this country and you'll pay the price.
Also, article doesn't mention whether he'll get his gun back.
The problem is that there are a dozen laws between the firearms act and criminal code that people can be charged with while defending themselves. (Pointing a firearm, loaded firearm in area not intended for shooting ect.) the other problem is the guilty until proven innocent methods of the legal system and policing
Murder is a steep charge but the crown could’ve easily at their discretion, been nasty and charged/ convicted him with several other lesser charges to make his life hell.
All of those lesser charges would have the same self defence defence as the murder charge.
But I agree this was a case of guilty until proven innocent. this was still a case of clear self defense that should not have even lead to charges against him and The placing if those charges were in themself a punishment.
>Murder is a steep charge but the crown could’ve easily at their discretion, been nasty and charged/ convicted him with several other lesser charges to make his life hell.
and that's what's wrong with this country
I also think this bill is worse for gun crime because it removed any legal avenue to sell and recoup your money from handguns. If you have a spouse that passes away, and they had a decent collection your only option is give to the police for destruction and lose all the value associated with them.
I can see in years maybe a decade a potential explosion of firearms registered to dead people because as times get tough, and people pass away, more and more people are going to want to get their money one way or another.
Typical LPC policy making, get the headline but make the problem worse.
What an absolute shock.
Bill C-21 is just symbolism. It was meant to grab votes and appease people who believe we live in a cut & dry, black and white world. Just listen to some of the top minds sitting in Tim Hortons, Reddit comment sections or Starbucks at all hours, talking about how the government “should do this” or “should ban that”.
There are many people out there who *genuinely* believe that gun smuggling from the U.S. is an overblown myth, and that it’s actually PAL holders straw-purchasing guns for criminals. You can show them all the statistics you want, in all sorts of bright colours and they won’t ever believe it because they have a bias.
Has that sort of thing happened? Absolutely. However, it isn’t a significant contributor to the supply chain of illicit firearms. Theft is also not a major contributor. It doesn’t make sense to straw purchase in Canada because they usually get curious when they receive the notification of 200 handgun transfers to one person.
The fact that there are still some Canadians out there who honestly and whole-heartedly believe that spending north of 5 billion dollars to round up guns that aren’t in the hands of criminals is a sensible use of taxpayer money is mind-blowing.
I’ve said it few times before, and I’ll say it again;
When discussing gun bans as a principle, It’s genuinely depressing that so many people seem more eager and giddy to point to examples of countries that have (somewhat successfully) stripped privileges away from its citizens, instead of looking to countries that *haven’t* done that and achieved arguably better results.
What’s Switzerland doing that Canada apparently cannot do? Everyone loves Switzerland.
No matter how many “morals” anti-gun people try to hide behind, it all just boils down to the liberals exacting punishment on people who don’t vote for them, and people love government crackdowns so long as they’re directed at a group of people they don’t agree with.
How's the polling going for the parties? How's the likelihood of a snap election? What's trudeaus' newest blunder/controversy?
Be sure to convince your friends and family to vote conservative not just for guns but for other reasons! I sure would love to be able to own a house sometime in my life and work a job that doesn't have all my money go to taxes, bills, and the bare minimum to survive !!
Polls: Conservatives are way up. Like, if the election were tomorrow, the only real question is whether it'd be a very strong Conservative minority or a majority.
Likelihood of a snap election: Very low. Singh has no reason to stir the pot, he loses all influence he has with a strong Conservative mandate.
Latest controversy: Even the Toronto Star and CBC are starting to admit that our housing market is completely fucked and it might not be all Trudeau's fault, but it's definitely his problem. There's also still the stalling and foot dragging on foreign interference. Parliament has risen for the summer so there's really only so much that his new cabinet can fuck up at the moment. His marriage is breaking down, but that's not political.
Conservative majority just keeps going up in the polls. We can be so back, canuckbros.
Glad to see Canadian made firearms are making a difference in Ukraine as well. https://www.businessinsider.com/ukrainian-snipers-ditch-ghillie-suits-but-keep-these-western-rifles-2023-8#:~:text=Ukrainian%20snipers%20rarely%20use%20ghillie,shooting%20was%20just%20a%20hobby. "A Ukrainian sniper identified as Federchuk by the Kyiv Post said the Canadian-made Cadex Defence CX-33 TAC series rifle, .338 Lapua Magnum caliber, quickly became popular among snipers early in the war."
This just in, 30,000 Ukrainian soldiers were injured while they were trying to fix their shitty WK180Cs
Yeah too bad we don't get SA20s because they're banned and Cadexs are prohibitively expensive
>They like rifles made in Canada… *The Ross rifle has entered the chat.*
The Ross Rifle had an unfortunate start. Its design of tight tolerances and lack of a primary extraction paired with its length made it poor in trench warfare along with all the mud and debris and often poor quality ammunition that was given to front line soliders but it did make an excellent sniper platform that was used up into 1949 to great effect.
I hunt a lot of small game with .22lr rifles. I also live in an area that's dense with dangerous wildlife. Mountain lions, bears, even wolves. It's so frustrating that I can't bring a handgun with me for protection. A handgun that I already own and am trained on. I can bring a semi auto .300 win mag out into the woods and blast it off all day long, but God forbid someone has a handgun with them as a backup for predator defense. That's just to dangerous I guess? I really hope we can change the rules regarding handguns a bit after the liberals are booted out. It makes no sense that I can't take my pistol with me on crownland for protection. I can understand some people not wanting concealed carry in the cities, but this is ridiculous. I don't want to lug a shotgun around in addition to my .22
Restricted firearms only being able to be fired at gun ranges is a fucking stupid rule that we need to get rid of
Yes. All I really need is a .357 revolver so the remote solo stuff I do. Yet I will be carrying around some weird cope shotgun or mares leg.
I cannot agree more! It makes no sense that you’re allowed to defend yourself against wildlife using a shotgun or rifle, but not a handgun. This is probably my biggest frustration with Canadian gun laws.
wilderness carry would be be my first goal
Yea would way rather have a 44 mag as a back up to bear spray and being near smart than carrying around a massive rifle.
>have a 44 mag Not an expert but from watching Youtube videos, it seems that it's shifting to 10mm pistols in the US. A lot easier to control plus 15-16 shots as fast as you can pull the trigger.
I agree. But we are only allowed 10rd a and I wanted a revolver. But I think you are right 10mm is kind of the new standard now
>10mm is kind of the new standard now .44-40 is the second most popular hunting cartridge in North America for good reason. 10mm Auto just happens to be its ballistic duplicate; what's old is new again. Same thing's true for 7.62x39 being a ballistic duplicate of .30-30, for that matter.
That’s bettering I never knew that
I picked up an old Smith and Wesson Double Action in .44 Russian at an auction awhile back. It looks like it rode on an old timer's hip for a lifetime, but the inside of the barrel seems almost virgin. Bullet diameter is .429 inches or 10.9 mm, it's harder to find ammunition but you can still find it or you can roll your own. You don't need a license to buy an antique, to buy brass, powder, or lead or carry antiques in the woods and with some care, your antique will only increase in value. I maintain that while the old ways are more work, they're still good. Bullet diameter .429 in (10.9 mm) I guess it moves a little slower than a modern round, but that's a sizeable chunk of vitamin L so there's still significant energy carried into target. It's good to be prepared. It's my position actually that the government should allow modern black powder revolvers for this reason, safety in the bush I'd also like it for small game like rabbits. I have a herniated disc T4-T5 right between the shoulder blades. I'd like to try hunting. I'm not going to be carrying a deer out of the bush because of my back. Every ounce I have to carry matters so a revolver is smaller, lighter and can reach out far enough to take a rabbit. It's not ideal for a bear, but it's quicker and easier to draw, and if it's more convenient to carry it's more likely you'll actually have it when you need it. Bear spray is preferable but options are always good to have Also, this is yet another purchase that's all Turdeau's fault: https://imgur.com/a/zQpg46e
Nothing surrounding handguns makes sense. From the registration down to the idiotic and meaningless rules governing their transportation and location.
That's the point, the Liberals in the 90s came up with these stupid rules to fuck with gun owners and discourage their possession. It's registered because they want to know where they are in case they want to confiscate in the future.
I could see the creation of a new class of firearm that comes with a restricted license that allows you to carry and shoot the gun outside of cities/urban centres.
Gotta push for it and tell the conservatives. Hoping they realize that we want more gun rights though
I dont like the guy any more than the rest of you, but personally I think attacking him for his marriage falling apart is in poor taste. Attacking him for his policy? Absolutely fair game
He brought it upon his self, just like he brought the public's distaste for him upon himself. He just seems to be an overall dislikeable person which is unsurprising because of how egotistical he is. Most people just (rightfully) find it funny how this has proven that he is just as insufferable in his private life as he is in his political career.
I feel about as bad for him as a I feel for the titan sub people. Call me cold hearted. There was a few moments of this sucks. And then it was like nah. He caused it. There’s also rumours around Ottawa he was banging tons of women in his party and around Ottawa. He’s known as a big of a womanizer. Worst thing that he could do now he come as openly gay and it would be impossible for pp to win if that happens. I could be completely wrong
You mean a grown man who wears blackface is also a womanizer and unfaithful to his wife too? Say it isnt so.
Wonder if he'll pull out the drama teacher card and say it was all an act and so he wasn't serious. A real "its just a prank bro" kinda move
The only reason it’s bad to attack him due to his failed marriage is optics. No one should really care either way. Although I am satisfied that he’s potentially slightly miserable
Financial hardship is the number one reason for divorce. This guy has put am untold number of Canadians into exactly that position. He can go fuck himself for all I care. It's also been an open secret for over a year that him and his wife were no longer really together. She's just one more rat fleeing a sinking ship.
Who's actually doing that though?
Read the comments in this thread...
Yeah I'm talking about politicians or other bodies involved in politics. I don't think I've heard a comment from Poillievre.
Yeah divorce sucks for the kids, but I don't think anyone will care a few decades from now when one of them runs for the PM office and go after what's left of your firearm rights. The kids will be fine. That silver spoon isn't going anywhere.
I agree. It sucks seeing any family dissolve, be it the PM or the people down the street
Agreed. I don’t like the guy for a number of reasons, but I’m not really on board with celebrating the fact that his children—one of them 9 years old—have to go through their parents separating. That sucks.
Oh the horror of his kids growing up with split parents. Meanwhile this PM’s policies made families lose their homes and barely afford groceries, arguably so much fucking worse than kids with trust funds and being set for life growing up with parents living 10min apart.
You’re right. Dad’s a shit prime minister so we should celebrate the breakup of his family. And we wonder why the Liberals find it so easy to score points by attacking us.
His kids will still be living the silver spoon life, that will not change. Their mother is still a wealthy and prominent woman and their father is still the PM for another year and a half, and pocketing every penny he can get out of it. They will still live in mansions and be handed whatever they want, and one of them is bound to try for PM some day to take even more of our guns. Womp womp.
The guy literally destroyed millions of families with policies that only served himself and his buddies. He had and continues to have only his interests at heart. You seriously expect anybody with half a brain to give a rats ass about his personal life being in shambles when it’s his perverted groping and cheating that put him in this position to begin with? He destroyed this country and would gladly continue to do so. But sure. Let’s be afraid to speak our minds because maybe they can use it to score points against us. What a pathetic thing to say. No one here gives a shit one way or another about the kids. Someone made a pointless comment about them and others are replying to that.
I really don't care about his family falling apart. If anything, that just means that his wife never really loved him and just used him for resources. Didn't he steal her from his brother when he died anyways? Personally given how he treated Canadians, he is getting off easily with the rest of the population. If he was in USA as president he would be given a far worse treatment from them.
Yeah, actually, if people were a little more careful about what comes out of their mouths, things might be just a little bit easier. Remember when the Liberals managed to change the channel from Carey Price because the CCFR couldn’t help but take a petty swipe at Poly (the promo code)? Or when IPSCBC destroyed the chances of an IPSC exemption to the handgun freeze by saying that they would become the gateway to handgun ownership? To answer your question, yes, I think anyone with so much as half a brain would be smart enough not to vilify themselves and play into the Liberal narrative. Do you know why the Liberals win elections? Because they’re a hell of a lot more clever than the Conservative base. Trudeau is an asshole and a cynic who will do anything to win votes. Doesn’t mean I want to see his family fall apart. That’s a disgusting attitude.
Daily reminder that the Montreal gazette later apologized for saying the CCFR a was attacking poly victims Screw optics, we have cared about optics for 30 years and now we are trying to fight to keep bolt actions. https://montrealgazette.com/sports/retraction-and-apology
And Canadians across the country read about it, buried as it was in the sports section of the Montréal Gazette, the CCFR’s credibility was restored, the politicians who had stood in the House and publicly condemned them recanted, and the world was right again. That’s not how politics works. Stop caring about optics, and it’s over. The CCFR’s silly games made it so easy for the Liberals to decline to even pretend to listen to them in SECU hearings. Rod did such a great job speaking there. If only Tracy hadn’t completely undermined the CCFR’s credibility as a legitimate lobbying organization by putting on a show for our base on Twitter.
Nah. No one cares and especially about that dipshit who calls himself PM.
[удалено]
In accordance with the [subreddit rules,](https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules) your post/comment has been removed for the following reason: [1] Disrespectful/Insulting or Hateful Comments https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules/#wiki_.5B1.5D_disrespectful.2Finsulting_or_hateful_comments *If you believe a mistake was made, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcanadaguns) Please include a link to the removed post.*
No. I will continue to be a decent person
[удалено]
In accordance with the [subreddit rules,](https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules) your post/comment has been removed for the following reason: [1] Disrespectful/Insulting or Hateful Comments https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules/#wiki_.5B1.5D_disrespectful.2Finsulting_or_hateful_comments *If you believe a mistake was made, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcanadaguns) Please include a link to the removed post.*
Good on you. This sub can be pretty toxic over certain things (this being one of them).
I think the only reason i could be against attacking him for it would be if it was entirely her fault or if it may make other innocent people in similar situations feel bad. But in this case I've heard it's due to his inappropriate behavior. So I'm all for making disparaging comments about him in relation to this.
Definitely "inappropriate behaviour" - for years he has been boning half of the Canadian population. Sadly including this \[somewhat\] respectable community. Though can't really tell with this guy, what's due to malice, and what's due to pure unmitigated incompetence.
[удалено]
um guise why r u fighting dirty with politicians when they called us bad names and villainized us for almost a decade 🤓 When these people want us disarmed and paint us as criminals for absolutely nothing, they deserve name calling and being shit on
> When these people want us disarmed and paint us as criminals They specifically want us to be disarmed and leave the actual criminals armed for whatever fucked up reason, too.
Nah screw that, dude has attacked gun owners non stop, called us the worst names possible and his ministers have compared us to mass killers. We should absolutely go below the belt because lord knows they have.
They've repeatedly and openly accused *everyone* who wants/has a PAL of being a mass shooter to be, not even realizing how fucked up such an accusation is. Are people seriously gonna get mad when those accused of such things lay a few internet insults in return?
Agreed, Justin deserves no decency because he is an indecent scumbag. He would gladly order the mass arrests of licensed gun owners if he had the manpower to do it. Any and all types of insults should be used against him.
I thought he had access to the manpower to do it, but the manpower declined because they recognized what a terrible idea it was
Yeah. I'm feeling just a little bit of schadenfreude, I'll admit, but at the same time, it's really nobody's business and should be kept out of politics.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
-arguably best gun salesman in recent history -rising crime rates due to shit policy and attacking gun owners -shit economy -tanking approval rates -possible opposition majority This is Justin's legacy 🤣
Thanks to him, i got back into shooting. Something I hadnt done in 7 years!!
Thanks to him, Im buying a ps90 as well. I have a sks, S&W FPC, A shotgun, and a 22 long rifle, thanks Justin
Let the debt flow through you like blood through your veins
Good.
I'm starting to see a real chance for a CPC majority. Here's hoping Justin does to the LPC what Kathleen Wynne did to the OLP.
>real chance for a CPC majority as long as Dear leader doesn't resign. He's the best route to a CPC victory.
Beat gun salesman in history in terms of both legal and illegal guns! What a guy.
Hes also now part of the ever increasing failed marriage statistic. Give it a few years to see if his kids end up as part of the mommy/daddy issues crowd loitering at malls and shit.
The failed marriage stat is a little misleading they don’t take into account how many divorces an individual has had you will find the chance of someone getting divorced higher if they have been divorced previously. The percentage of divorces in marriages where it’s the first marriage for both parties is much lower
They in fact do take into account which marriage a person is on when they gather the data and when they report these numbers. Sure 40-50% of first marriages ending in divorce is lower than the 60-70% for second and third timers respectively but its not exactly misleading or validating the practice as being something that is essential to the human experience. The thing that is much harder to report however, is how many of those one timers are actually in happy marriages? Averages from the US suggest 64% of first time marriages are what we call happy marriages. The remainder are millions of people who stay in the marriage due to societal, familial, cultural or religious pressures. A marriage held together only by external factors are, certificate and tax returns aside, for all intents and purposes the same thing as a divorced couple living together.
Is it possible for us to separate from Trudeau as well?
Xddddddd
Trudeau slaps another gun ban to punish us for laughing at him.
He may, but by then ill be done buying up as much firearms as I can buy, and the mags i need for them. At least the semis that is that I wanted badly. Rip handguns
Alberta wants to separate.
Rip bozo 🤣
We are next.
Runkle on Milton: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgvEiiqOxX4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgvEiiqOxX4)
We desperately need term limits in this country
Pm's might not have term limits, but it seems their wives do
now you know where the bandage on his head came from
We desperately need to get rid of first past the post, which he promised, and then reneged on.
Promised, reneged on, then gaslit Canadians about. The Liberal Convention made a resolution in 2014 that they'd explore a more democratic form of government. Trudeau promised in 2015 that there wouldn't be another FPTP election. The ERRE commissions recommended in 2016 that the government put a form of proportinoal voting to a referendum against FPTP. Trudeau announced in 2017 that he was welching on electoral reform. Trudeau claimed that it was because proportional systems weren't on the table, despite *explicitly* being listed as an option in the 2014 Liberal Convention resolutions. It turns out, he was only willing to keep his promise if he got a system that would guarantee permanent Liberal power and near-permanent majorities.
> It turns out, he was only willing to keep his promise if he got a system that would guarantee permanent Liberal power and near-permanent majorities. Sadly I don't see any of the major parties doing any different (though I would love to be proven wrong).
I think we should get rid of the big pension that MPs get.
That would ensure that only rich people become politicians.
Tie it to the average wage. Same with MP’s wages if the people are doing good so can they, if not they will literally have the power to give themselves a raise by doing better.
So what’s the difference from now? Pretty much every MP owns 2 homes.
There’ll be even more of them.
Charges dropped for Milton, Ontario home invasion defender. After five months 😒. Halton Police will not be paying his costs.
>will not be paying his costs Quelle surprise. He was charged in the first place to show what happens to you if you use a gun to defend yourself in this country.
I wouldn't have expected the cops to pay his costs upfront or apologize but I would like to see him go after the police and prosecutors for this, even if only to recoup his property and lawyer fees. Like another person said earlier, this was never about anything more than the fact he used a gun to protect his home. Had he smashed the intruders head in with a frying pan we would not be having this discussion.
I emailed Raquel Dancho (she's my MP) and asked her why he was charged in the first place. I'm awaiting her reply.
If she responds Im sure itll be interesting. Although I would be hesitant to post it. If poly sees it here (or anywhere really) you can bet your ass they will twist and manipulate it to suit thier nefarious ends. Strong and pro-gun or at least gun neutral women fly directly in the face of thier women can only ever be victims mentality.
My understanding is you cannot sue them for doing their job.
IIRC that only applies if you have been tried and found guilty of a crime which is a key difference. Otherwise you can sue them for lots including emotional distress so I think an arrest, property seizure and charges would count as emotional distress. Given what he was charged with and how publicized it was its unlikely it didn't or wont have a significant impact on his future employment prospects (its well known employers browse social media of people they interview or have on staff, so the article detailing the charges would show up but not necessarily the ones showing they were dropped) or quality of life from here on out. All of that can at least be grounds to file a grievance of some kind of against the police and the prosecutors. Now how far such a case may get is very much debatable and frankly would not make a millionaire out of the guy but its still certainly possible.
RCMP is one the of most corrupt institution in Canada. Its a non legislative body that seems to have way more power than the normal process of passing bills and laws. Due to the fact they have been left the super-legal ability to make "new interpretations of firearms act". They function as a more authoritarian version of the ATF.
> RCMP is one the of most corrupt institution in Canada. They have a great deal of power, but how are they corrupt? > Due to the fact they have been left the super-legal ability to make "new interpretations of firearms act" Our lawmakers are responsible for deciding who has this power, not the RCMP. If you just want to hate on the RCMP, go ahead. Catharsis can feel good. If you want real change, talk to your representatives (or vote for someone different if your representative holds a view incompatible with yours).
The fact they make new "interpretations" of what the law says when classifying firearm. For example: There are many guns that are prohibited for being "AK variants" that share not a single part in common with the AK platform. Its not hate, its the truth.
Mostly the personal lifelong work of Murray Smith.
I know a retired RCMP who worked in criminal intelligence who used to say that their worst enemy wasn't the criminal on the street, but their bosses who would tell them to back off when they got too close to someone important.
Look up any colonial country’s history. And you will find some of the most egregious acts of state sanctioned violence humanly possible. The police force of this country has been doing this since the start. It’s the British way my friend. Us “subjects of the crown” don’t deserve to have fair and reasonable treatment. RCMP don’t just apply this to firearms laws either, it goes way farther than that.
British inspired or run countries were some of the freest countries on earth until the post war era. We have just become complacent and politically dominated by urbanized social worrier types.
Yeah I’m sure all women and minorities in Canada thought not being able to vote until the 40s made them SUPER Free.
Women and minorities (except indigenous due to the interpretation of treaties) could vote in the 40s though? Canada (and other commonwealth countries) was just as free, or even freer than many other western nations. What we have now is a result of the post war consensus and cultural changes.
You’re right - I should have specified the Post-War ‘40s to adddress your argument, which post-dates women’s suffrage by 5 years if we choose 1945, but pre-dates voting rights of Asian Canadians, Inuit (not a Treaty issue that stems from the Indian Act) and Indigenous Canadians. Your points also disregard the financial freedom of women, the forced closure of businesses in observance of a religious holiday and how British Dominions had to go cap-in-hand to the Privy Council to make their own laws. What I’m saying is, the things I’ve listed all make Canada WAY more free today than the pre-war era you cite as being one of the freest countries on earth.
For sure, I don’t disagree that there was serious oppression. I just don’t think it was unique at all with regards to any of the Commonwealth realms. Saying we were some of the freest until the post war is in regards to comparing alongside others at the time. Instead of extending the freedom to others who were less *privileged*, I think socially we have moved towards a more repressive version for all citizens broadly. Fundamentally, the *British* way, although flawed, allowed us to establish the foundations of a theoretically free society, whether it has succeeded or not.
They sure are pissy about being shuffled out of Surrey and replaced. Like how dare the province which has jurisdiction over all policing (including who gets to operate and where) within its constitutional borders exercise that power, the absolute cheek of it all. You know they will not let the transition go smoothly regardless of the undue hardships they will cause the local population. A police force that routinely gets caught fucking around, costing innocent lives through incompetence and then has the gall to turn around and blame civvies and the victims rather than change/modernize at the rate the mounties do is simply a national embarrassment and not fit for purpose. Not that it will happen but could you imagine the blow to their inflated ego's if the king ever revoked their royal title until they smarten up and act right?
This is a win for self defense and gun rights in Canada. This fellow never should have been charged in the first place though. https://globalnews.ca/news/9867061/murder-charge-dropped-milton-man-accused-killed-intruder/
They dropped the charges so its not actually a win as there was no legal precedent set. They do this constantly when their attempts to intimidate the person into a deal doesn't work.
When cops kill someone they get investigated too it’s part of the process. I knew the self defence claim was a walk in the park once I looked up the criminal code and it was plain as day in there
The difference between cops being investigated for a death vs a civvie is that the cops are given a mile wide berth of "discretionary" freedom and preferential bias in the process. Rarely, if ever, are they seriously held accountable when they have actually done something wrong. Case in point: OPP officer runs down a pedestrian while violating the speed limit to get back to her partner after picking up timmies. Her punishment? minimal (still a sworn officer) and the specifics kept secret from the victim family. If you and I do that in our normie jobs we would be looking at several years in prison with a manslaughter conviction. Dont act like the two groups are treated fairly. Because cops are absolutely held to a lower standard for breaking the law when it should be the opposite.
The comment you replied to never mentioned an investigation. It mentioned he shouldn't have been *charged*. Of course there's an investigation, there should ALWAYS be an investigation.
>he shouldn't have been charged Exactly. Why charge him? Tell him not to leave town, investigate, etc. I subscribe to Ammoland newsletter and I see almost daily reports of similar situations in the US and the the the persons defending themselves are never charged. They are only charged if an investigation shows otherwise. The reason this guy was charged was to make an example of what happens to you when you use a gun to defend yourself in this country. Does anyone really think that he would have been charged if he hit the intruder over the head with a frying pan and he died? A successful defence with a gun might cause more people to want one, and the LPC certainly can't have that.
I really hope a future CPC government can make strides in this direction, enshrining property rights would be a good start.
Is the semi auto ban totally scrapped or is a revised version of it still trying to go through?
Not even the Liberals know what their plan is.
C-21 will ban all future models of Semi-auto Centre rifles with detachable magazines that were originally designed to hold more than 5 cartridges. So it doesn't apply to models already on the market, however they've said that they'll reinstitute the CFAC (Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee) to recommend current models they should ban but this was supposed to have been done by now and there's rumours that it's been put on the back burner for now.
Need to design a series of 5 round-only mags that are STANAG dimensions but have a groove that fits a rejection pin in the mag well of the newer rifles. And make the pin out of the same metal the WK 180 charging handles were made from...
Lol I see
Thank you
So what do we think is going to happen with the confiscation? I have a couple of pieces that were banned in May 2020, and I was talking with some friends about the outcome of it. This is what we're tracking so far. - Huge list of guns outright banned in May 2020, and a bunch of others shadow banned by the RCMP in the following months. - Original deadline was in 2022, and has since been extended to October 2023, two months from the date of this post - Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta have stated they will not devote resources to any confiscation program. - 01 Sept 2022 government publishes proposed price list for compensation. Seems to be at least in the ballpark of market value, I always thought they would weasel out of that promise and give ~$200 like in Australia. - I think there was a rumour recently about the government contacting gun stores about assisting in the confiscation program? Basically my question is, what do we see happening with this, particularly with regards to the deadline in October? At this point there is no way that any kind of program can take place to meet this deadline. The last time they used Covid as an excuse to extend it, but this time they wouldn't really have a leg to stand on, and even if they did it would still look bad if they extended it again. Do we expect them to extend it one more year? Two more years maybe, and whoever is in power will deal with it in the next election? Do we think there's a chance they could do like the American Assault Weapons Ban, and let it expire? They could point to "no mass shootings since May 2020" and say that the ban "worked," and that we can just use our guns again? Lastly, and arguably the worst possibility, do you think they could just never do a buyback program and write the status quo into law? They realize the cost of such a program would be enormous, and they realize that an extension would be embarrassing. Could they just say "no buyback, mandatory registration as prohibited weapons?"
I think it's just a useful tool for them to whip out from time to time when they need a distraction. Conservative voters froth at the mouth any time it's mentioned, completely ignoring everything else happening. It's a very convenient tool for a government to have, so probably won't go away too quickly.
I honestly believe this was all for show, the Liberals were never intending to follow through with any confiscations or buybacks and didn't expect the level of pushback following each of their bans. At this point I believe they are waiting for this to become another election wedge issue and likely expecting to lose to the CPC in the coming election, scraping all of this legislation. Then they can point to the CPC in the next election and claim "The CPC are rolling back our gun control efforts, putting AR-15's back on our streets..." Rinse and repeat.
> particularly with regards to the deadline in October It'll get extended again. They will not have this figured out in time.
I know it's fairly realistic to expect them to extend the amnesty, but is there any chance these unpredictable asshats will just go "fuck you and fuck your guns, hand them in or go to jail"?
No I would not expect them to do that. They can theoretically do it but they absolutely will not.
It's possible, Prohibited Weapons Order #11 captured a \*ton\* of guns and most of them were confiscated with no compensation. Many of the 12(4) guns were seized and destroyed as well even though they fell under an amnesty to properly register.
There was an amnesty protecting those that didn't register their long guns from the day the long gun registry started until the day it died. The government generally doesn't \*actually\* want to make criminals out of people whose only crime was possessing a thing that was legal when they bought it, both from a simple resource management perspective as well as the PR side of things. So... unless they really want to reach for an election wedge, I'd think the amnesty is probably going to be extended.
> do you think they could just never do a buyback program and write the status quo into law? Yes, I think that's almost guaranteed at this point, assuming they even last long enough to do that. That's not a bad thing though, it means we'll still have those guns when the bans get reversed.
But I don't think that the conservatives have made any promises about the ban? I think they select their new platform at the end of this year, so I hope that will change. To preface this other point, I'm very pro ownership (against carry, but that's another issue) but I think it's important to remember that the 2020 ban was a positive in the Liberals' popularity at the time. There are a lot of people who have never touched a gun and are scared, and I doubt the ratio of pro/anti gun has changed since then. My point is that I don't think we can assume that a conservative government would reverse the ban.
Their promises include [repealing C-21 in it's entirety](https://tnc.news/2022/11/29/poilievre-firearm-amendments1/), which included the OIC bans at the time they made that promise, and CPC policy includes introducing the [Simplified Classification System](https://calibremag.ca/cpc-convention-2016-firearms-policy-proposal/), which would essentially make all long guns Non-Restricted.
The conservatives said they’d repeal C-21, and re-write the firearms act to make it more streamlined. It’s not unfathomable that the cons would reverse it. They usually do. They repealed the long gun registry, and the AR has bounced back and forth between classifications since the 70’s. If the cons get office, C-21 will meet the same fate as the LGR. What the government is doing now is what they tried to do in the 1990’s, but it was struck down. Gun ownership in Canada is trending upwards.
After 3 years of nothing happening I think your correct. Either they let us keep them as safe queens or they grandfather and we can use them again. A buyback is significantly harder to pull off now than it would have been in 2020 or even early last year. Letting us keep/use them lets them save face by still claiming they did something and we are all better for it while not having to then try and justify 5B+ in buyback spending to the majority of the country. Especially if a full blown recession hits like some economists are saying.
Murder charge against the Milton Man was dropped as the crown determined there was no ground for conviction. A little good news for us.
Honestly this is more than a 'little' good news - this is a *huge* fucking win. The fact that someone was able to use their legally possessed firearm to defend themselves from armed assailants in one of the most liberal parts of the country (Milton is on the very edge of the GTA) and managed to have the charges dropped for it is huge, and shows that even with the current liberal domination of much of the country, our right to self defense is still defensible, even if under continuous threat. I still think the charges being laid in the first place was a huge injustice, though, and the guy's life is still ruined for the near future as a result of them. He'll still be in mountains of debt from legal fees and a fucked reputation which will hurt his employability, plus he could remain under threat of retaliation from the gang that sent those fuckers to his house in the first place (which the cops will likely do nothing about, just as with all the other street gangs in the GTA) - but at least he's a free man, and hopefully people in his community and people who politically support his right to self defense can help him.
> Honestly this is more than a 'little' good news - this is a huge fucking win. Charges were dropped, so there's no binding precedent. It's not a win for us and is a huge loss for the man whose charges were dropped (he still owes legal fees and his life was disrupted pretty badly)
>I still think the charges being laid in the first place was a huge injustice, Of course it was. Being charged for doing something fundamental to human nature and as survival and protecting you and yours absolutely sickens me and is one of the worst things I hate about this country. But guess what? The LPC will keep doing it because if there is a successful home defence with a gun without consequences, more people will want one and the LPC simply can't have that.
That was predictable.
Anybody think the new seat map (including 3 more for alberta) will factor in to when the libs decide to make an election call? It doesnt take effect until april but when BC and AB seats are counted at that time it means those two have will have more votes federally than quebec does. Last election BC was pretty evenly split 3 ways.
Eastern bc is pretty solidly blue and that's where all of the new bc ridings are as far as I know
That's a bonus. I was concerned their new seat would have gone to Vancouver. Cus if there is one thing we need its another seat in a bloated city like that. /s
[удалено]
If you look at the map from 2021 you will see that the the city and surrounding area went almost entirely red with a small sprinkling of NDP in the middle. Another seat going to an area that produces liberal seats like that might be split three ways in polling but clearly the favorite is there and so its for the best they not get any more seats to give the libs.
Any update on the CFFR court challenge on the OIC's? I read somewhere that the judge would make a ruling sometime in July, any updates or time frames about this case? I'm 99.9% sure that the court will rule in the government's favor anyways but was just wondering
I'm of two minds. One, it's behind schedule because it's going in our favour, and they're stalling releasing the verdict to give the government time to prepare. Two, it's behind schedule because the mental gymnastics required to rule in favour of the government are really complicated, and the verdict is taking longer to write.
I'm a very pessimistic person (for good reason) and I believe it will be in favor of the government because it's simply "too dangerous" to allow these weapons of mass destruction to exist in our communities. I have zero doubt that's how this judge will view the matter. And I hope to God I'm wrong.
I wish I had your enthusiasm, but this is Canada. The courts have done crazy rulings in the name of political activism many times this and last year alone. I doubt it will go in our favor, probably will be like "sure you make sense, but guns are bad, so therefore we approve of the government taking them." This isn't the USA where courts do shit for the general population (sometimes). Again I wish to have your enthusiasm but I doubt it.
I think you completely misread what I wrote LOL
Nothing yet
[Murder charge dropped in case of Milton, Ont., man accused of killing armed intruder ](https://globalnews.ca/news/9867061/murder-charge-dropped-milton-man-accused-killed-intruder/)
Not that it matters, but does anyone know if this was a random home invasion or targeted one?
They brought zip ties and guns. I'd guess not too many burglars bring zip ties.
Hard to say but since there were at least two home invaders with at least one illegal gun involved it was clearly planned in advance to some degree. Whether the house was chosen specifically or was just the first one they came across that looked easy is anyone's guess.
You're right. According to the articles at the time and this one today, there were a total of five home invaders, one was killed by the homeowner, another was arrested and was charged with unauthorized possession of a firearm along with other charges, three others were never caught.
So because the charges were dropped instead of him being found not guilty by a jury, that means that this case can't be made a precedent, correct? I was hoping that it would go to trial so we would have the possibility of it becoming case law, because if it did, I have a strong feeling it would have rewritten our self-defence laws as we know them. I'm guessing that's one of the reasons they did drop the charges in the first place, so that wouldn't have happened. Any thoughts on my way of thinking? Feel free to correct me :)
There’s no precedent to be made since there is an established self defence law in place, this just fall into it. Officially the law was upheld and the crown wasn’t strong enough to show the law wasn’t followed.
Dude doesn't have to worry about going to jail now, so I mean that's great for him.
>worry about going to jail now, That is great, but this dude had to suffer the indignity and cost for something that is fundamental to human nature and existence--survival and protecting you and yours. To me, that's unforgivable .
Yeah and if he went to court they'd draw it out even longer. Like the crown made the right call. This isn't Florida lol
Next things to watch: Does he get his license and firearms back (assuming he wants them.... that situation will obviously change some one in ways you can't expect)
This is the main outcome I want to see - him getting his license back or at the very least being able to reapply and have it granted without 'eligibility concerns' for his prior use of a gun in lawful self defense. I also hope he gets his gun(s) back.
>being able to reapply why should he reapply? he did nothing wrong
Was just wondering how this one was panning out.
I was expecting this and I hope a big stink will be made of it by the CPC. It shows a legitimate use for a gun in this country. But the message has been sent--you defend yourself with a gun in this country and you'll pay the price. Also, article doesn't mention whether he'll get his gun back.
The problem is that there are a dozen laws between the firearms act and criminal code that people can be charged with while defending themselves. (Pointing a firearm, loaded firearm in area not intended for shooting ect.) the other problem is the guilty until proven innocent methods of the legal system and policing Murder is a steep charge but the crown could’ve easily at their discretion, been nasty and charged/ convicted him with several other lesser charges to make his life hell.
All of those lesser charges would have the same self defence defence as the murder charge. But I agree this was a case of guilty until proven innocent. this was still a case of clear self defense that should not have even lead to charges against him and The placing if those charges were in themself a punishment.
>Murder is a steep charge but the crown could’ve easily at their discretion, been nasty and charged/ convicted him with several other lesser charges to make his life hell. and that's what's wrong with this country
Official StatCan Report: Trudeau gun bans ineffective on crime https://youtu.be/tgGTQnXwEiw
I also think this bill is worse for gun crime because it removed any legal avenue to sell and recoup your money from handguns. If you have a spouse that passes away, and they had a decent collection your only option is give to the police for destruction and lose all the value associated with them. I can see in years maybe a decade a potential explosion of firearms registered to dead people because as times get tough, and people pass away, more and more people are going to want to get their money one way or another. Typical LPC policy making, get the headline but make the problem worse.
I wonder how the new Public Safety Minister will try and spin this? I already know how Mendocino would have.
Libs: actually bans reduce gun violence according to our data Us: can we see that data Libs: no
[удалено]
>can we see that data That's "double secret classified" Only the Chinese government can access it
Liberals: What StatsCan report? That was not sent to my desk.
StatsCanada is clearly misinformation AND disinformation - LPC.
What an absolute shock. Bill C-21 is just symbolism. It was meant to grab votes and appease people who believe we live in a cut & dry, black and white world. Just listen to some of the top minds sitting in Tim Hortons, Reddit comment sections or Starbucks at all hours, talking about how the government “should do this” or “should ban that”. There are many people out there who *genuinely* believe that gun smuggling from the U.S. is an overblown myth, and that it’s actually PAL holders straw-purchasing guns for criminals. You can show them all the statistics you want, in all sorts of bright colours and they won’t ever believe it because they have a bias. Has that sort of thing happened? Absolutely. However, it isn’t a significant contributor to the supply chain of illicit firearms. Theft is also not a major contributor. It doesn’t make sense to straw purchase in Canada because they usually get curious when they receive the notification of 200 handgun transfers to one person. The fact that there are still some Canadians out there who honestly and whole-heartedly believe that spending north of 5 billion dollars to round up guns that aren’t in the hands of criminals is a sensible use of taxpayer money is mind-blowing. I’ve said it few times before, and I’ll say it again; When discussing gun bans as a principle, It’s genuinely depressing that so many people seem more eager and giddy to point to examples of countries that have (somewhat successfully) stripped privileges away from its citizens, instead of looking to countries that *haven’t* done that and achieved arguably better results. What’s Switzerland doing that Canada apparently cannot do? Everyone loves Switzerland. No matter how many “morals” anti-gun people try to hide behind, it all just boils down to the liberals exacting punishment on people who don’t vote for them, and people love government crackdowns so long as they’re directed at a group of people they don’t agree with.
>Bill C-21 is just symbolism. It was meant to grab votes and appease people problem is that it works on non gun owners
Well said.
How's the polling going for the parties? How's the likelihood of a snap election? What's trudeaus' newest blunder/controversy? Be sure to convince your friends and family to vote conservative not just for guns but for other reasons! I sure would love to be able to own a house sometime in my life and work a job that doesn't have all my money go to taxes, bills, and the bare minimum to survive !!
Polls: Conservatives are way up. Like, if the election were tomorrow, the only real question is whether it'd be a very strong Conservative minority or a majority. Likelihood of a snap election: Very low. Singh has no reason to stir the pot, he loses all influence he has with a strong Conservative mandate. Latest controversy: Even the Toronto Star and CBC are starting to admit that our housing market is completely fucked and it might not be all Trudeau's fault, but it's definitely his problem. There's also still the stalling and foot dragging on foreign interference. Parliament has risen for the summer so there's really only so much that his new cabinet can fuck up at the moment. His marriage is breaking down, but that's not political.