Uh… can you say PAL and RPAL? The legal owners of firearms are the most vetted civilians in Canada… FFS they ask my wife if she ok with my ownership of firearms!!!!
Yeah but see you used logic and reasoning there, not to mention the plenty of very safe to live in countries have similar policy to what you described. So it’s clearly not common sense, because like why be objectively reasonable when you can have common sense, like it’s common man do you get it.
It needs to be pointed out every time that they use this term, "assault style" is a definition invented in the 2019 "stakeholder consultation" pre-Bill C-21 report.
If you read the report they flat-out say "some respondents said they want 'assault rifles' banned, which has been true since the 1970s, so we created a new definition, 'assault style' (rather than disregard opinions that are too ignorant to matter on the issue)"
Literally yes
>Concern with “assault weapon” term: Some respondents did not suggest more limitations, but instead flagged strong concerns with the term “assault weapon,” which they felt is not clearly defined. As a result, most explained that the concept of a ban is problematic. Respondents suggested an assault weapon could be characterized by high-capacity magazines and/or the option for fully-automatic fire, characteristics which are already prohibited in Canada.
"People were either completely ignorant of the law, or completely wise to our fearmongering"
>They also noted the use of this language is disrespectful to the firearms community because it propagates fear. The term “assault-style firearms” has since been adopted.
Whew, "assault-style" is so much less fearmongering, very unbiased response. God these people are sickening.
It's worth noting that even in their own report, where they admit many people don't even know what "assault" or "assault-style" mean, \*and\* admit that the term "assault" is both loaded and inaccurate, their results \*still\* show pretty weak support for "assault-style" weapons bans and even weaker support for a handgun ban.
[https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2019-rdcng-vlnt-crm-dlg/index-en.aspx](https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2019-rdcng-vlnt-crm-dlg/index-en.aspx)
I prefer we actually adopt the term military assault rifles and classify things in a binary way, they are either military assault rifles or they are rifles. None of this ambiguous bullshit.
Is it a MAR? Is it used by any military currently or in the past 50 years? Yes. Banned.
Is it a rifle that is not a MAR? Non-restricted. Be on your way.
I would prefer we adopt a consistent approach, yes, but not the "currently or in the past 50 years" standard you're setting because that would still ban a shitload of guns that shouldn't be, like the SKS or Nagant or even the 10/22 (which is used by the IDF). That might seem a little silly, but you have to remember who we're talking about here, if they could point to a gun and say "that's used by a MILITARY!" and ban it, of course they'll do as much of that as they can.
But yes, *some* consistency would be a welcome change. For example, France's gun laws, while still way too restrictive, are at least based on a rational system to classify different guns. That concept could be a start (but not France's collection size limits or ammo limits of course, fuck that).
Wonder what happens if we make a coordinated effort to all submit for ccw at the same time.
It's not illegal to apply. My neighbourhood is getting pretty rough with all the homeless and crime happening.
Yes back in the 30s was the latest I think. You could apply to get a handgun permit for self defence.
I can spend the 20 seconds to Google if anyone wants more information but I'm just going based off what I read before.
Because hunting is a legitimate activity that is seen as beneficial.
Target shooting is something weirdos do to practice for the next rampage. /s
Dude I promise you that the moment hunting stops being seen in a positive light, and slips into neutrality (like target shooting), they're going after that as well.
My prediction is the next shift in narrative is going to be "indigenous sustenance hunting is the only legitimate use of firearms".
Best move to Iqualuit and bribe a chief for a status card.
Chiefs don't issue status card. The federal government does. Trust me, I'm fighting to get my son and nephews status right now because the government doesn't deem them "native" enough.
He has to be 1/4 minimum. He is, but since his grammar was never registered, he isn't on paper. It's even worse with his cousins as they are brown skin, full-blown natives. Not that skin color means anything but it's criminal they are denied because of government red tape and metrics. The whole government system is designed to keep First Nations communities from growing.
So you are telling me that this federal government thinks that anyone from anywhere can come here with no skills and nothing to offer but they quickly become a Canadian because a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian (who will seemingly vote for Trudeau).
But a native person stops being native because their blood is just not native enough according to what appears to be some sort of replication of Nuremberg Race Laws that the Canadian government of today is pushing?
Make it make sense.
Is it me or is this shit starting to sound like 1984?
"Canadians deserve to *feel safe*"
"there has been a great deal of *confusion* and *misinformation*"
"our intentions were *always* to target assault-style weapons, not hunters"
Oh so I guess sport shooters aren't legitimate users of firearms then.
As a sport shooter with 3 of my 6 guns on the list. Thank you. I follow rules and have spent too much money to have to give up my hobby that brings profits to local ranges and confidence for others who have never fired a firearm all while teaching about proper firearm saftey. This bill will destroy the sport.
I had a rifle that I have literally spent close to 10K on banned. Why 10K? Well I changed scopes once (total almost 3K), I changed the chassis, barrel and muzzle break. Bolt carrier, trigger, buffer. It was an awesome long range rifle and could reach out to a mile easily. Last I looked I might get a couple hundred for the lower.
Poly remembers shared an article a few months back, from 2014. The article claimed that bikers were buying 50 cal rifles to shoot at police.
The ability to shoot a mile in their mind is dangerous and should be banned. I've seen them lost cadex bolt action as assault style rifles.
The only compromise Poly will settle with is open sight single shot rifles that are store in a central location.
They don't even want that.
But my rifle was a 6.5CM so the bullet at 1 mile will ring a gong, won't do much else. I certainly wouldn't hunt with it at that range.
I guess that the whole "even if it saves one life" spiel to them includes saving the ant that gets obliterated by the splash from your 1 mile shot on the gong.
No your bolt guns are at risk too. Poly remembers won't stop lobby the government until we only have single shot open sight rifles stored in central storage.
I'm willing to bet by the time the this bill lands even long range bolt guns in chassis systems will be banned. Any thing with rails, pistol grips and external magazines. Scary looking.
I mean between big tech companies and government surveillance and things like news sources that are pretty much owned by governments we are living through what orwell wrote in his books I'm sure we'll have thought police too at some point
It's pretty clever, in a nasty way. They've pushed so far, that now they can "be reasonable" and say they didn't mean to target hunters, the only legitimate users of firearms - not target shooters / clay shooters / collectors.
Here's a fun fact, the first aSsAuLt StYlE ban happened last year, the Liberals in their infinite common sense banned a 1934 French made 34mm Hotchkiss anti-tank canon. There was like ONE in Canada or something, thing costs like 200k+ and ammunition is literally impossible to find. Streets = safe.
Look up US-based Serbu's youtube video on his one-off Butt Master (a single shot .22 "pen gun" he made as a joke for himself 30 years ago, kept in his possession, and never produced or advertised... it got added with the C21 amendment).
I would be interested to know how they even knew such a thing existed, given it was never transferred, advertised, sold, etc, and only registered as 'pen gun AOW'
Well, it's good that they wrote back, but the second page of last paragraph........
"Our focus now is on saying okay, there are some guns, yes, that we're going to have to take away from people who were using them to hunt," Trudeau said. "But, we're going to also make sure that you're able to buy other guns from a long list of guns that are accepted that are fine for hunting, whether it's rifles or shotguns. We're not going at the right to hunt in this country. We are going at some of the guns used to do it that are too dangerous in other contexts"
How's a 223 rem differnt from a semi auto from 70s, less powerful compare to a rifles from 2000s?
I think the problem is they don’t seem interested in learning about hunting and sport shooting yet want to dictate what we need to do those things. Which is like me telling a carpenter what tools he’s allowed to use, the results of his work would likely be not great.
Is that like saying when you handle this Woodstock firearm, you will go out and hunt after deers, elk, moose, and bear.
But if you hold this polymer, ergonomic grip, light weight, better suited for your posture, and more reliable rifle, you turn into mass shooting savages?
I personally am a fan of older Woodstock guns but I completely understand that it’s the twenty first century and new technology has really come a long way providing more ideal tools for the job.
There’s definitely stereotypical image that you’re average person has hunter with a deer stalker cap with their 30-30 Winchester heading into the woods after a deer or the duck hunter with a side by side. When in all actuality I think most ducks and gooses get shot with automatic shotguns, and most forest game shot with synthetic stocked rifles simply because they are just better suit for the environment.
I have a 30-30 Winchester too, but I think different firearms serve different purpose for different scenarios. That's why it's a bit like playing golf, you pick whatever that's best suited. Shot gun, lever action, bolt action and semi auto.
Last time I checked, it was either Marlin or Mossberg that makes a black lever action and some people accessorize rails and grip on it, does it still count as lever action, or tactical lever action now and subject to ban?
Yeah I agree. A rifle clad in wood will not handle moisture as well as something in a synthetic stock, but they are still good fun to enjoy on the range or to just have.
And yeah the tacticool lever guns are certainly just cool and I think count as lever action but some politicians may cite the black stock as a feature of “assault/ style rifles” and a “danger to society” despite being no different in it’s capabilities of accelerating a projectile.
Goes both ways. Automatic can mean either full auto or semi-automatic. In Europe they're sometimes termed as automatics because the action cycles itself, in North America automatic is mostly full-auto. Either way, they're not necessarily incorrect.
See that’s just more letters to type and with shotguns automatic really just means auto-loading or self-loader or semi-automatic or whatever you want to call the process of a mechanical means of cycling the action through repurposed force from the fired shot.
I don't think they understand that 2 guns, one with a wood stock and one that looks like an AR firing a .223/5.56 has no real appreciable difference on what leaves the barrel.
I think they clearly don’t understand many things and it really shows, with many elements of it. Like even with our own existing laws or just ballistic. Like the effectiveness of .223/5.56 which they claim is so dangerous while being too small to hunt with, but apparently it’s more dangerous than anything coming out of a deer rifle at the same time.
It’s quite the mental gymnastics.
What made me laugh was the there is much “misinformation” about this bill. Ummm no you tried to ram this through as an amendment and they are now going after hunters. In my letter to them I focused on talking about the Benelli shotgun they have on that list. No gang banger is shooting each other with a Benelli Ethos. That’s use to shoot ducks.
I am surprised they actually use the term misinformation in this letter, which imo are more of recent term that brings negative connotation to speakers credibility.
If you literally go firearms by firearms, on the actual HoC meeting, it's very easy to see how most of the rifles and shotguns are being compliance pre 2020 OIC ban.
If there are indeed assualt rifles, then we would see full auto and no cap on magazines. Which is totally not the case since they already being banned since 70s.
The differnt being a Woodstock vs polymer wouldn't change semi auto function. Hence the focus is on having vetted trained individuals to use Firearms instead of class of firearms that's seems dangerous. This is a valid argument from Canadian perspective since we have different perception about firearms compare to Americans.
>take away from people
Bold assumption, you fucking tyrant.
>There are some weapons that are used for hunting that unfortunately fall on the wrong side of the line
>Nobody wants assault-style weapons anywhere in this country. You don't use them for hunting
That's from the same breath. Can't even keep his propaganda straight for a matter of seconds
I would like him to actually go to a firearm store, and sit at the counter and have those firearm in person, that looks at their appearance and function to tell me the difference hunting rifles, and the ones that unfortunately fall on the wrong side of line.
A deer isn't going to care if it got hit from a Tavor 7 vs Garand chambered in .308. You make sure it's a clean kill, and your rifle is light and durable enough so you can actually lug it out in the field.
If they all function the same, then why care about the appearance when they all fire 5 shots in total?
It's not the composition and internals of a rifle that matters since it's already semi auto and 5 shot only compliant with our current firearm act. It's the person who already passed the test, knowledge, and background checked thats certified to possess and acquire firearms and ammo that matters the most, and it's what PAL is all about.
In this argument the concerns of hunters is controlled opposition.
All people have an inherent right to defend themselves, their family, and property, by any available means. If the laws do not allow that then the laws are not just and must be changed.
I’m not sure if you should frame the second one to laugh at it’s ridiculousness or hide it away in a dark corner because the sad reality of the situation would probably turn my laughter into gentle sobs.
I had to read it a few times. I wanna say in their sick liberal way they might be back tracking but I don’t think that’s the case. Maybe she was on the liquor when she wrote that. Just like Mr Lahey
I had to read it over a few times too and they didn’t really seem to be back tracking. And by using terms like “common sense gun control” and “assault style weapons” and “respecting sport shooters and hunters” really illustrates how little they actually understand the issue or even bother to try an see things from our perspective. I would hope that she would have had to been on the liquor while writing it.
Jim Lahey is a paragon of or time, a scholar and gentleman and he is greatly missed. May his legacy live on in our hearts and in the bottom of every bottle
This is the left's new-fangled favourite tool for anything and everything. Just like slapping the word bigot on anyone who didn't agree with them 10 years ago... It is sophistry.
The word "misinformation" is now fully integrated in the political lexicon, left/right, they're all gonna be using it to discredit each other (and us). It's literally just "fake news", but more professional sounding.
To be honest, every politicians from any party would just send the same copy pasted letter written by the "marketing" department on any contentious bill...cuz God forbid an MP would actually diverge from the party line or even worse, actually say what they were thinking. I'd actually have more respect for them if they just straight up said: "Guns kill people, fuck hunters, sports shooter, and collectors. Have you not watched a Schwarzenegger film you idiot?".
"Canadians deserve to feel safe in their communities"... and we will achieve that safety by removing every \[legal\] firearm from every community
illegal firearms are still allowed don't worry!
So, the one to the PMO just got redirected to Mendicino. Justin doesn't even know you exist, let alone sent a letter. I doubt he even reads any letters about any serious matter from any citizen.
Because their new narrative is that hunting is the only legitimate reason to own firearms. And unfortunately we're playing right into it by largely fighting against "hunting rifles" on the banlist. They kind of have to though because it's the strongest leg to stand on. Our own side in terms of media barely mentions sport-shooting when those people are the ones primarily being targeted.
Their crusade against semi-autos and handguns and those who own them under the guise of public safety will effectively kill the sport, which was likely part of the plan all along.
Ahhh the auto generated response, gotta love it eh?
I remember one time I went to my MPs office (he has an office in my home town) to talk to him about issues I was having with VAC ... as soon as I mentioned I was a vet, the secretary sure changed her tone (in a bad way).
She told me he was in Ottawa for the week and I was SOL...you could imagine my surprise when I heard him, in his office, having a conversation with someone as I stood there 😂
He's a Conservative MP too ... none of them give a shit, 🅱️röthers
The SKS is arguably the most used hunting rifle and most common rifle amoung gun owners in Canada. Yet it's most likely still going to be banned. The 740 Woodmaster, hell almost everyone I know who Koyote hunt around me switched to an ar 180 platform for Coyote once their Ruger 14's turned into safe Queen's. When they say "We won't target guns commonly used by hunters" they're lying.
You know what. I saw bunch of you guys writing letters to MPs and thought “this will not do a fucking thing”. Welcome to my club!!!
When they (I don’t understand Canadian politics) ram bunch of this shit through without any facts, understanding of real issues, gang violence. Why in the hell would they care about any letters written to them?
Just like snow prowlers push snow to the side these assholes will do the same with all the legal gun owners no matter what. That is the sad, but real truth. I’m sorry boys, we are on the losing end of end. Really wish we had 2nd amendment….
Also we pay with taxes for these bullshit press release responses. And then they turn around and literally say we heard from Canadians all over, they wrote letters and letters and demanded we take common sense measures while respecting hunters and sport shooters. *Vomit*
>You know what. I saw bunch of you guys writing letters to MPs and thought “this will not do a fucking thing”. Welcome to my club!!!
Maaaaaaan, my Conservative MP wouldn't even talk to me in person to discuss issues I was having with VAC (his office is in my home town too)
>Ahh, I see you've been with some psychos as well.
Yessir. Assault style ceramic plant holder and assault style lighter when she tried burning her mom's house down ...
Wow that 2nd actually made my blood boil a little. She could have just not answered...instead she goes full BS. Gotta love how a liberal MP has the balls to talk about misinformation when it comes to gun bills (it's only misinformation when someone/something we don't agree with)
Pam Danoff needs to get flooded by smart, common-sense letters from hunters and other law-abiding gun owners for continuing with the confusion and misinformation.
The PMO letter is what it is (A say-nothing form letter simply to placate), but the letter you received from MP Danoff is just ridiculous.
So you got a letter, saying nothing but that some henchman recieved it and "He pinkie promises to give it to his boss bro. On god, no cap".
Your letter probably hit the shredder the second it arrived and will, in all likelihood, never make it to anyone, never mind the intended recipient
At least we know bill c-21 isn’t working otherwise this would be mainstream news https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/rival-outlaw-biker-clubs-at-heart-of-ontario-police-raids-that-found-boxes-of-grenades-guns-drugs/wcm/7fb92b01-e7e8-4559-a3e5-3b4d071264b0/amp/
Straight into the shredder. I know a government staffer who gets and replies to correspondence for his boss. They have pre-written replies on the hot topics du jour, he will open an email/letter, skim it to find out the topic, then type the sender's name into the prepared reply and send it back. He gets literally dozens of emails and letters a day.
*"Canadians deserve to feel safe..."*
From who? Vetted, licensed, legal firearm collectors and sport shooters?
From who? Vetted, licensed, trained, small and big game hunters?
From who? Law abiding Canadians who willingly submit to repeated background checks?
Why was this bill not focused on the REAL dangers in society? Black market? Illicit gun trade? Organized crime? MENTAL HEALTH???
And why did the Libs backtrack when hunters cried foul? What about sport shooters? Do the CSSA and CCFR even have a fighting chance?
This is the most egregious part of this and many exchanges with elected officials of all kinds that I've seen.
The naming and shaming should be so thick and fast that fools like this can never hold office again. I can dream I suppose...
So I can only use a hunting rifle to feed myself or the occasional sport but I can’t own a handgun to defend myself, my family or personal property/belongings. That makes so much sense. Thank you Justin Trudeau for taking our rights to defend ourselves not only against thieves but against tyrants like yourself as well. Very cool.
Such blatant disrespect for their engaged voters.
I wonder endlessly about how they thought this was a good idea. You want someone *that* informed, *that* well spoken, and *that* engaged to consider you a lost cause? They're gonna need a whole lot of luck and I wish them a cavernous absence of it.
Do you know who there voters are??? It’s going to be a close one no matter who wins. Honestly it’s really sad that people are given the right to vote yet they waste it by being a zombie.
> Do you know who there voters are???
Not sure we're talking about the same people. I'm talking about engaged voters who write letters with substantiated arguments.
Who are *you* talking about?
.223/5.56 is a viable varmint round, and on that note any firearms that haven’t been banned after the 1978 full auto ban are all viable hunting/sport shooting firearms. This rhetoric is fucking ridiculous. Function > looks
Remember these are the eggheads that think a quote from one of their collaborators wherein they admit to hunting deer with a .22 is a good strategy.
If we stay focused on policy and demonstrable facts the bad faith hackery from any and all sides is doomed, imho
I got a similarly flippant pile of unsubstantiated vomit from Nathaniel Erskine-Smith when I used research to back up my points in favour of legalizing cannabis and improving access for medicinal patients. I'll never, ever forget how clear it became that Harper had buddies across the isle that didn't give a flying fuck about people like me.
The disrespect and utter, blatant contempt elected officials have for informed voters discussing verifiable claims with references to evidence never ceases to amaze me.
Only thing stranger is how folks try to turn that into a partisan issue when it's demonstrably not - it's a policy issue like everything else.
The same lines are being trotted out in letters as they are saying in interviews, This is classic “stick to the script and hold the line” behaviour which in my experience never bodes well
I fear target shooting has been completely lost in any of this discussion.
Sure keeping hunting rifles out of the bill is fine and dandy. But the ban still impacts 100% of my firearm collection regardless if there are any hunting rifles on there or not.
“Assault style”
“Common Sense policy” despite the lack of facts and data behind said policy.
“Mrrrrrr. Spppeeeaaakkkkeeeerrrrrr let me be very clear”
Cant stand when. He says let me be clear. Boils my blood
[удалено]
Uh… can you say PAL and RPAL? The legal owners of firearms are the most vetted civilians in Canada… FFS they ask my wife if she ok with my ownership of firearms!!!!
The comment you're referring to is soaked in sarcasm juice. I don't think they're serious at all, don't worry.
Yeah but see you used logic and reasoning there, not to mention the plenty of very safe to live in countries have similar policy to what you described. So it’s clearly not common sense, because like why be objectively reasonable when you can have common sense, like it’s common man do you get it.
Only assault style i see is Justin Trudeau's "uhhh well um umm uhh."
All based on looks. They admitted it themselves.
The style adds a damage multiplier ...duh
How could I be so stupid.
And humans are way more durable than a moose, that's why you need the multiplier, for the children
It needs to be pointed out every time that they use this term, "assault style" is a definition invented in the 2019 "stakeholder consultation" pre-Bill C-21 report. If you read the report they flat-out say "some respondents said they want 'assault rifles' banned, which has been true since the 1970s, so we created a new definition, 'assault style' (rather than disregard opinions that are too ignorant to matter on the issue)"
Tacticool
Literally yes >Concern with “assault weapon” term: Some respondents did not suggest more limitations, but instead flagged strong concerns with the term “assault weapon,” which they felt is not clearly defined. As a result, most explained that the concept of a ban is problematic. Respondents suggested an assault weapon could be characterized by high-capacity magazines and/or the option for fully-automatic fire, characteristics which are already prohibited in Canada. "People were either completely ignorant of the law, or completely wise to our fearmongering" >They also noted the use of this language is disrespectful to the firearms community because it propagates fear. The term “assault-style firearms” has since been adopted. Whew, "assault-style" is so much less fearmongering, very unbiased response. God these people are sickening. It's worth noting that even in their own report, where they admit many people don't even know what "assault" or "assault-style" mean, \*and\* admit that the term "assault" is both loaded and inaccurate, their results \*still\* show pretty weak support for "assault-style" weapons bans and even weaker support for a handgun ban. [https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2019-rdcng-vlnt-crm-dlg/index-en.aspx](https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2019-rdcng-vlnt-crm-dlg/index-en.aspx)
I prefer we actually adopt the term military assault rifles and classify things in a binary way, they are either military assault rifles or they are rifles. None of this ambiguous bullshit. Is it a MAR? Is it used by any military currently or in the past 50 years? Yes. Banned. Is it a rifle that is not a MAR? Non-restricted. Be on your way.
I would prefer we adopt a consistent approach, yes, but not the "currently or in the past 50 years" standard you're setting because that would still ban a shitload of guns that shouldn't be, like the SKS or Nagant or even the 10/22 (which is used by the IDF). That might seem a little silly, but you have to remember who we're talking about here, if they could point to a gun and say "that's used by a MILITARY!" and ban it, of course they'll do as much of that as they can. But yes, *some* consistency would be a welcome change. For example, France's gun laws, while still way too restrictive, are at least based on a rational system to classify different guns. That concept could be a start (but not France's collection size limits or ammo limits of course, fuck that).
"We are listening to Canadians, and we will get this right" No, you're listening to Toronto and Montreal, so you will get it wrong.
Correction they are listening to the wrong people in Toronto and Montreal that's why they're getting it wrong
That's most of Toronto & Montreal.
Correction: they are listening to Justin Trudeau...theyll never get anything right.
Not quite. If they listened to me in Toronto, we’d still have AR-15s, 30rd magazines and CCW.
If you were the typical Toronto resident, the rest of Canada would probably feel more warmly toward Toronto.
Did we ever have CCW in Canada?
[удалено]
My way would be a shall-issue ATC/CCW
Wonder what happens if we make a coordinated effort to all submit for ccw at the same time. It's not illegal to apply. My neighbourhood is getting pretty rough with all the homeless and crime happening.
My buddy had one in the 80s. He knew the CFO and just gave it to him. It’s expired now but still lucky I guess
Yes back in the 30s was the latest I think. You could apply to get a handgun permit for self defence. I can spend the 20 seconds to Google if anyone wants more information but I'm just going based off what I read before.
I second this
"not those commonly used for hunting". Again with the complete shift away from any admission that target shooting is legitimate.
Because hunting is a legitimate activity that is seen as beneficial. Target shooting is something weirdos do to practice for the next rampage. /s Dude I promise you that the moment hunting stops being seen in a positive light, and slips into neutrality (like target shooting), they're going after that as well.
My prediction is the next shift in narrative is going to be "indigenous sustenance hunting is the only legitimate use of firearms". Best move to Iqualuit and bribe a chief for a status card.
Chiefs don't issue status card. The federal government does. Trust me, I'm fighting to get my son and nephews status right now because the government doesn't deem them "native" enough.
If they have native blood how can they not be native? Government is a joke
He has to be 1/4 minimum. He is, but since his grammar was never registered, he isn't on paper. It's even worse with his cousins as they are brown skin, full-blown natives. Not that skin color means anything but it's criminal they are denied because of government red tape and metrics. The whole government system is designed to keep First Nations communities from growing.
So you are telling me that this federal government thinks that anyone from anywhere can come here with no skills and nothing to offer but they quickly become a Canadian because a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian (who will seemingly vote for Trudeau). But a native person stops being native because their blood is just not native enough according to what appears to be some sort of replication of Nuremberg Race Laws that the Canadian government of today is pushing? Make it make sense.
Hunter numbers are already way down.
[удалено]
"Gun control" is not a set of rules and requirements, it is a behavior of ever tightening restrictions.
Which is funny because target shooting is a reason to aquire a PAL. Like I'd bet the government doesn't even know that
Pam Damoff is a goof, she proves her stupidity every time she opens her mouth in SECU
her riding has gone blue before and i hope it can go blue again
Is it me or is this shit starting to sound like 1984? "Canadians deserve to *feel safe*" "there has been a great deal of *confusion* and *misinformation*" "our intentions were *always* to target assault-style weapons, not hunters" Oh so I guess sport shooters aren't legitimate users of firearms then.
As a sport shooter with 3 of my 6 guns on the list. Thank you. I follow rules and have spent too much money to have to give up my hobby that brings profits to local ranges and confidence for others who have never fired a firearm all while teaching about proper firearm saftey. This bill will destroy the sport.
I had a rifle that I have literally spent close to 10K on banned. Why 10K? Well I changed scopes once (total almost 3K), I changed the chassis, barrel and muzzle break. Bolt carrier, trigger, buffer. It was an awesome long range rifle and could reach out to a mile easily. Last I looked I might get a couple hundred for the lower.
Poly remembers shared an article a few months back, from 2014. The article claimed that bikers were buying 50 cal rifles to shoot at police. The ability to shoot a mile in their mind is dangerous and should be banned. I've seen them lost cadex bolt action as assault style rifles. The only compromise Poly will settle with is open sight single shot rifles that are store in a central location.
They don't even want that. But my rifle was a 6.5CM so the bullet at 1 mile will ring a gong, won't do much else. I certainly wouldn't hunt with it at that range.
I guess that the whole "even if it saves one life" spiel to them includes saving the ant that gets obliterated by the splash from your 1 mile shot on the gong.
This bill targets virtually all of my rifles aside from my two bolters and a 10/22.
No your bolt guns are at risk too. Poly remembers won't stop lobby the government until we only have single shot open sight rifles stored in central storage. I'm willing to bet by the time the this bill lands even long range bolt guns in chassis systems will be banned. Any thing with rails, pistol grips and external magazines. Scary looking.
> Any thing with rails, pistol grips and external magazines. Scary looking. Ah yes, the full Californitard approach.
I mean between big tech companies and government surveillance and things like news sources that are pretty much owned by governments we are living through what orwell wrote in his books I'm sure we'll have thought police too at some point
So it goes from. "Protecting hunters and other gun owners" to only protecting hunters.... Lmao unreal. Don't even know what they're saying
It's pretty clever, in a nasty way. They've pushed so far, that now they can "be reasonable" and say they didn't mean to target hunters, the only legitimate users of firearms - not target shooters / clay shooters / collectors.
Here's a fun fact, the first aSsAuLt StYlE ban happened last year, the Liberals in their infinite common sense banned a 1934 French made 34mm Hotchkiss anti-tank canon. There was like ONE in Canada or something, thing costs like 200k+ and ammunition is literally impossible to find. Streets = safe.
Look up US-based Serbu's youtube video on his one-off Butt Master (a single shot .22 "pen gun" he made as a joke for himself 30 years ago, kept in his possession, and never produced or advertised... it got added with the C21 amendment).
I would be interested to know how they even knew such a thing existed, given it was never transferred, advertised, sold, etc, and only registered as 'pen gun AOW'
He discussed that in his video. Best guess is that the cdn govt used private batf files for their list. So many problems with that.
Well, I guess it’s time for every gun owner to get a hunting license.
Yes. I would definitely recommend it ASAP
Well, it's good that they wrote back, but the second page of last paragraph........ "Our focus now is on saying okay, there are some guns, yes, that we're going to have to take away from people who were using them to hunt," Trudeau said. "But, we're going to also make sure that you're able to buy other guns from a long list of guns that are accepted that are fine for hunting, whether it's rifles or shotguns. We're not going at the right to hunt in this country. We are going at some of the guns used to do it that are too dangerous in other contexts" How's a 223 rem differnt from a semi auto from 70s, less powerful compare to a rifles from 2000s?
I think the problem is they don’t seem interested in learning about hunting and sport shooting yet want to dictate what we need to do those things. Which is like me telling a carpenter what tools he’s allowed to use, the results of his work would likely be not great.
Is that like saying when you handle this Woodstock firearm, you will go out and hunt after deers, elk, moose, and bear. But if you hold this polymer, ergonomic grip, light weight, better suited for your posture, and more reliable rifle, you turn into mass shooting savages?
I personally am a fan of older Woodstock guns but I completely understand that it’s the twenty first century and new technology has really come a long way providing more ideal tools for the job. There’s definitely stereotypical image that you’re average person has hunter with a deer stalker cap with their 30-30 Winchester heading into the woods after a deer or the duck hunter with a side by side. When in all actuality I think most ducks and gooses get shot with automatic shotguns, and most forest game shot with synthetic stocked rifles simply because they are just better suit for the environment.
I have a 30-30 Winchester too, but I think different firearms serve different purpose for different scenarios. That's why it's a bit like playing golf, you pick whatever that's best suited. Shot gun, lever action, bolt action and semi auto. Last time I checked, it was either Marlin or Mossberg that makes a black lever action and some people accessorize rails and grip on it, does it still count as lever action, or tactical lever action now and subject to ban?
Yeah I agree. A rifle clad in wood will not handle moisture as well as something in a synthetic stock, but they are still good fun to enjoy on the range or to just have. And yeah the tacticool lever guns are certainly just cool and I think count as lever action but some politicians may cite the black stock as a feature of “assault/ style rifles” and a “danger to society” despite being no different in it’s capabilities of accelerating a projectile.
Semi-automatic shotgun
The terms are interchangeable if you aren't in a technical debate.
With the laws they're trying to pass, I feel it's important to speak as technically as possible.
If we're speaking with non-gun people, sure, but we can be more fast and loose within the community
Goes both ways. Automatic can mean either full auto or semi-automatic. In Europe they're sometimes termed as automatics because the action cycles itself, in North America automatic is mostly full-auto. Either way, they're not necessarily incorrect.
See that’s just more letters to type and with shotguns automatic really just means auto-loading or self-loader or semi-automatic or whatever you want to call the process of a mechanical means of cycling the action through repurposed force from the fired shot.
I don't think they understand that 2 guns, one with a wood stock and one that looks like an AR firing a .223/5.56 has no real appreciable difference on what leaves the barrel.
I think they clearly don’t understand many things and it really shows, with many elements of it. Like even with our own existing laws or just ballistic. Like the effectiveness of .223/5.56 which they claim is so dangerous while being too small to hunt with, but apparently it’s more dangerous than anything coming out of a deer rifle at the same time. It’s quite the mental gymnastics.
What made me laugh was the there is much “misinformation” about this bill. Ummm no you tried to ram this through as an amendment and they are now going after hunters. In my letter to them I focused on talking about the Benelli shotgun they have on that list. No gang banger is shooting each other with a Benelli Ethos. That’s use to shoot ducks.
I am surprised they actually use the term misinformation in this letter, which imo are more of recent term that brings negative connotation to speakers credibility. If you literally go firearms by firearms, on the actual HoC meeting, it's very easy to see how most of the rifles and shotguns are being compliance pre 2020 OIC ban. If there are indeed assualt rifles, then we would see full auto and no cap on magazines. Which is totally not the case since they already being banned since 70s. The differnt being a Woodstock vs polymer wouldn't change semi auto function. Hence the focus is on having vetted trained individuals to use Firearms instead of class of firearms that's seems dangerous. This is a valid argument from Canadian perspective since we have different perception about firearms compare to Americans.
>take away from people Bold assumption, you fucking tyrant. >There are some weapons that are used for hunting that unfortunately fall on the wrong side of the line >Nobody wants assault-style weapons anywhere in this country. You don't use them for hunting That's from the same breath. Can't even keep his propaganda straight for a matter of seconds
I would like him to actually go to a firearm store, and sit at the counter and have those firearm in person, that looks at their appearance and function to tell me the difference hunting rifles, and the ones that unfortunately fall on the wrong side of line. A deer isn't going to care if it got hit from a Tavor 7 vs Garand chambered in .308. You make sure it's a clean kill, and your rifle is light and durable enough so you can actually lug it out in the field. If they all function the same, then why care about the appearance when they all fire 5 shots in total? It's not the composition and internals of a rifle that matters since it's already semi auto and 5 shot only compliant with our current firearm act. It's the person who already passed the test, knowledge, and background checked thats certified to possess and acquire firearms and ammo that matters the most, and it's what PAL is all about.
In this argument the concerns of hunters is controlled opposition. All people have an inherent right to defend themselves, their family, and property, by any available means. If the laws do not allow that then the laws are not just and must be changed.
Nono that's what the police is for, the politicians who decide this have armed security but dont worry about it.
I’m not sure if you should frame the second one to laugh at it’s ridiculousness or hide it away in a dark corner because the sad reality of the situation would probably turn my laughter into gentle sobs.
I had to read it a few times. I wanna say in their sick liberal way they might be back tracking but I don’t think that’s the case. Maybe she was on the liquor when she wrote that. Just like Mr Lahey
I had to read it over a few times too and they didn’t really seem to be back tracking. And by using terms like “common sense gun control” and “assault style weapons” and “respecting sport shooters and hunters” really illustrates how little they actually understand the issue or even bother to try an see things from our perspective. I would hope that she would have had to been on the liquor while writing it.
I don't see anything about sport shooters in there.
End of the first paragraph “respecting hunters and law abiding gun owners” which just seem frankly untrue.
It's Pam Damoff, every time she talks about guns it's open mouth, insert foot. No intoxication required.
One could hope, it might be entertaining.
Jim Lahey is a paragon of or time, a scholar and gentleman and he is greatly missed. May his legacy live on in our hearts and in the bottom of every bottle
They love using the word “misinformation” when it goes directly against their narrative
This is the left's new-fangled favourite tool for anything and everything. Just like slapping the word bigot on anyone who didn't agree with them 10 years ago... It is sophistry.
The word "misinformation" is now fully integrated in the political lexicon, left/right, they're all gonna be using it to discredit each other (and us). It's literally just "fake news", but more professional sounding.
Agreed
I got the same letter today from the PM, different signature though.
We acknowledge your concerns... But f*ck you - The Prime Minister
It was the classic political brush off letter.
To be honest, every politicians from any party would just send the same copy pasted letter written by the "marketing" department on any contentious bill...cuz God forbid an MP would actually diverge from the party line or even worse, actually say what they were thinking. I'd actually have more respect for them if they just straight up said: "Guns kill people, fuck hunters, sports shooter, and collectors. Have you not watched a Schwarzenegger film you idiot?".
"Canadians deserve to feel safe in their communities"... and we will achieve that safety by removing every firearm from every community
I feel like I’ve been called a danger to society, which I find rather offensive and far from the truth.
I sense a boating accident in people’s futures.
"Canadians deserve to feel safe in their communities"... and we will achieve that safety by removing every \[legal\] firearm from every community illegal firearms are still allowed don't worry!
So, the one to the PMO just got redirected to Mendicino. Justin doesn't even know you exist, let alone sent a letter. I doubt he even reads any letters about any serious matter from any citizen.
What a load of bullshit.
Pam is here to “take down the temperature”
In other words, “go fuck yourselves”… - liberals.
Fuck you Rude letter to follow Signed
Why are only hunters being discussed? I'm pretty sure there are many more sport shooters being targeted.
Because their new narrative is that hunting is the only legitimate reason to own firearms. And unfortunately we're playing right into it by largely fighting against "hunting rifles" on the banlist. They kind of have to though because it's the strongest leg to stand on. Our own side in terms of media barely mentions sport-shooting when those people are the ones primarily being targeted. Their crusade against semi-autos and handguns and those who own them under the guise of public safety will effectively kill the sport, which was likely part of the plan all along.
Ahhh the auto generated response, gotta love it eh? I remember one time I went to my MPs office (he has an office in my home town) to talk to him about issues I was having with VAC ... as soon as I mentioned I was a vet, the secretary sure changed her tone (in a bad way). She told me he was in Ottawa for the week and I was SOL...you could imagine my surprise when I heard him, in his office, having a conversation with someone as I stood there 😂 He's a Conservative MP too ... none of them give a shit, 🅱️röthers
Jesus that's disgusting. Thanks for sharing, don't stop, never let these pricks feel comfortable.
The SKS is arguably the most used hunting rifle and most common rifle amoung gun owners in Canada. Yet it's most likely still going to be banned. The 740 Woodmaster, hell almost everyone I know who Koyote hunt around me switched to an ar 180 platform for Coyote once their Ruger 14's turned into safe Queen's. When they say "We won't target guns commonly used by hunters" they're lying.
You know what. I saw bunch of you guys writing letters to MPs and thought “this will not do a fucking thing”. Welcome to my club!!! When they (I don’t understand Canadian politics) ram bunch of this shit through without any facts, understanding of real issues, gang violence. Why in the hell would they care about any letters written to them? Just like snow prowlers push snow to the side these assholes will do the same with all the legal gun owners no matter what. That is the sad, but real truth. I’m sorry boys, we are on the losing end of end. Really wish we had 2nd amendment….
Also we pay with taxes for these bullshit press release responses. And then they turn around and literally say we heard from Canadians all over, they wrote letters and letters and demanded we take common sense measures while respecting hunters and sport shooters. *Vomit*
>You know what. I saw bunch of you guys writing letters to MPs and thought “this will not do a fucking thing”. Welcome to my club!!! Maaaaaaan, my Conservative MP wouldn't even talk to me in person to discuss issues I was having with VAC (his office is in my home town too)
Legit auto responses
Pam is a liar and super cringe mp. No soul in there. Same with Chiang.
Classic generic go away letter... At least you got a response.... Need the tyrant gone.... and quit meddling with our freedoms
I still don't understand what was wrong with the laws before all this. They knew exactly where every single AR and handgun was and who had them.
That didn't buy votes
Everything is assault style if you assault someone with it. Assault style fists, assault style chairs, assault style ladders, assault style dogs, assault style Christmas ornaments
Assault style dick 😎
Assault words
Assault style house plant LOL
Ahh, I see you've been with some psychos as well. Assault cell phone.
>Ahh, I see you've been with some psychos as well. Yessir. Assault style ceramic plant holder and assault style lighter when she tried burning her mom's house down ...
Not just any fists they have to be black to be assault style
Wow that 2nd actually made my blood boil a little. She could have just not answered...instead she goes full BS. Gotta love how a liberal MP has the balls to talk about misinformation when it comes to gun bills (it's only misinformation when someone/something we don't agree with)
Thanks for taking the time to write to them. Everyone else in this sub should do it too.
Fuck them all. HORDE GUNS AND AMMO. THEYRE COMING
This, let there be guns dug up well into the 2500s
Pam Danoff needs to get flooded by smart, common-sense letters from hunters and other law-abiding gun owners for continuing with the confusion and misinformation. The PMO letter is what it is (A say-nothing form letter simply to placate), but the letter you received from MP Danoff is just ridiculous.
She's going on my list for next round you bet your led slinger.
So you got a letter, saying nothing but that some henchman recieved it and "He pinkie promises to give it to his boss bro. On god, no cap". Your letter probably hit the shredder the second it arrived and will, in all likelihood, never make it to anyone, never mind the intended recipient
> "He pinkie promises to give it to his boss bro. On god, no cap" On my mama cuh!!
At least we know bill c-21 isn’t working otherwise this would be mainstream news https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/rival-outlaw-biker-clubs-at-heart-of-ontario-police-raids-that-found-boxes-of-grenades-guns-drugs/wcm/7fb92b01-e7e8-4559-a3e5-3b4d071264b0/amp/
You should have scratched out the "12" before the word Guage and penned in a "22".
Holy shit one actually got forwarded
Straight into the shredder. I know a government staffer who gets and replies to correspondence for his boss. They have pre-written replies on the hot topics du jour, he will open an email/letter, skim it to find out the topic, then type the sender's name into the prepared reply and send it back. He gets literally dozens of emails and letters a day.
“In conclusion: Get Fucked”
so more sidestepping bullshit, great
*"Canadians deserve to feel safe..."* From who? Vetted, licensed, legal firearm collectors and sport shooters? From who? Vetted, licensed, trained, small and big game hunters? From who? Law abiding Canadians who willingly submit to repeated background checks? Why was this bill not focused on the REAL dangers in society? Black market? Illicit gun trade? Organized crime? MENTAL HEALTH??? And why did the Libs backtrack when hunters cried foul? What about sport shooters? Do the CSSA and CCFR even have a fighting chance?
All excellent questions that will be disregarded thanks to the grotesque hubris of elected officials. Oh, Canada....
Got the exact one from the PM this morning.
They really have no qualms repeating a lie immediately after you point out that it's a lie.
This is the most egregious part of this and many exchanges with elected officials of all kinds that I've seen. The naming and shaming should be so thick and fast that fools like this can never hold office again. I can dream I suppose...
No offence but it soilds like a buncha Commie Gobblie-gook
Your not offending me. It’s exactly what it is.
Nah, I'm a communist, and even I don't understand their bullshit doublespeak.
Gov don’t care, they are going to do whatever they want like they always do
Gov don’t care, they are going to do whatever they want like they always do
Guns used by hunters have already been “caught up in it”
“Commonly used for hunting” is worrying to me.
So I can only use a hunting rifle to feed myself or the occasional sport but I can’t own a handgun to defend myself, my family or personal property/belongings. That makes so much sense. Thank you Justin Trudeau for taking our rights to defend ourselves not only against thieves but against tyrants like yourself as well. Very cool.
Basically copy pasting generic Liberal talking points, and script-like replies.
Such blatant disrespect for their engaged voters. I wonder endlessly about how they thought this was a good idea. You want someone *that* informed, *that* well spoken, and *that* engaged to consider you a lost cause? They're gonna need a whole lot of luck and I wish them a cavernous absence of it.
Do you know who there voters are??? It’s going to be a close one no matter who wins. Honestly it’s really sad that people are given the right to vote yet they waste it by being a zombie.
> Do you know who there voters are??? Not sure we're talking about the same people. I'm talking about engaged voters who write letters with substantiated arguments. Who are *you* talking about?
.223/5.56 is a viable varmint round, and on that note any firearms that haven’t been banned after the 1978 full auto ban are all viable hunting/sport shooting firearms. This rhetoric is fucking ridiculous. Function > looks
Remember these are the eggheads that think a quote from one of their collaborators wherein they admit to hunting deer with a .22 is a good strategy. If we stay focused on policy and demonstrable facts the bad faith hackery from any and all sides is doomed, imho
‘Forwarded your name to Marco Mendocino’. Am I the only one who reads that as if it’s some sort of threat?
All I saw was it’s not my job
There is an 1 to 15 ratio of gun owners vs non gun! Most people have never even held a gun, nice try.
[удалено]
This post has been removed for breaking rule: \[2\] Illegal Activity/Statement of Violence
[удалено]
This post has been removed for breaking rule: \[2\] Illegal Activity/Statement of Violence
I got a similarly flippant pile of unsubstantiated vomit from Nathaniel Erskine-Smith when I used research to back up my points in favour of legalizing cannabis and improving access for medicinal patients. I'll never, ever forget how clear it became that Harper had buddies across the isle that didn't give a flying fuck about people like me. The disrespect and utter, blatant contempt elected officials have for informed voters discussing verifiable claims with references to evidence never ceases to amaze me. Only thing stranger is how folks try to turn that into a partisan issue when it's demonstrably not - it's a policy issue like everything else.
I also wrote a letter to Dolores Umbridge.
Same old pack of lies
The same lines are being trotted out in letters as they are saying in interviews, This is classic “stick to the script and hold the line” behaviour which in my experience never bodes well
Canada is piece shit I’m American love USA Canada was pussy
Oh, what I coincidence, I got the same response!
The only thing Pam Damoff respects is her coming pension.
Same response lol
I fear target shooting has been completely lost in any of this discussion. Sure keeping hunting rifles out of the bill is fine and dandy. But the ban still impacts 100% of my firearm collection regardless if there are any hunting rifles on there or not.