PDA

View Full Version : Ottawa to review RCMP decision to prohibit Swiss Arms rifle - fairly positive article



Foxer
02-28-2014, 11:58 PM
The Canadian Press
Published Friday, February 28, 2014 3:24PM EST

OTTAWA -- The Harper government, which has championed the rights of gun owners for years, is reviewing a decision by the RCMP to effectively ban a previously legal rifle.

The National Firearms Association says the Mounties have reclassified the Swiss Arms Classic Green carbine as a prohibited weapon, essentially banning it.

Alberta Tory MP Chris Warkentin raised the issue in question period Friday, saying the rifles had been legally sold for a decade.

He says there have never been any criminal events reported involving the weapon, but it has been banned at the stroke of a pen.

Roxanne James, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of Public Safety, says the government is troubled by the ruling and will review what she calls an unfortunate decision.

She says a number of options are being explored.

The issue is a tricky one for the Harper government, which campaigned for years to eliminate the long-gun registry and even went to court to keep Quebec from holding on to existing records from the registry.

"We are in fact very troubled by the situation that has arisen from the Swiss Arms rifle," James told the House of Commons. "This decision was made by bureaucrats and not by politicians."

The firearms association said in a statement that there are 1,000 to 1,800 of the rifles in Canadian hands.

"The government will not be offering compensation and will be demanding that the firearms, which cost between $3,000-$4,000 be surrendered," the statement said.

"The government is suggesting that all affected firearms owners contact the distributors from which the firearms were purchased for reimbursement."

James said the issue of compensation is being studied.

"I would like to let all Canadians know that all options are on the table to ensure that no firearms owner who acted in good faith suffers any consequences as a result of this terrible situation," she said.

The firearms association said the ban is part of a quiet RCMP effort to prohibit firearms in Canada.

"Access-to-information records show that RCMP have an aggressive firearms reclassification agenda and that prohibitions will not stop with the Swiss Arms series rifles," the association said on its website.

Its Facebook page is even more direct with this posting: "Has RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson declared war on law-abiding firearm owners?"

The association said the weapons have been around for years without incident and some of them were even formally listed in the gun registry before the RCMP decided on prohibition.

The RCMP has not given an explanation of its decision.

The gun association calls it an assault on the rights and private property of law-abiding gun owners.

It's urging people to contact the government and write their MPs to get the decision overturned.

Foxer
03-01-2014, 12:00 AM
Well it's gone mainstream. There's half a dozen different articles out there about it, and the CPC reaction. Some more positive, some slanted the other way. This one was from CTV, which is nice to see. The pic that went with it was very benign and wasn't even of an 'evil assault rifle'.

Foxer
03-01-2014, 12:19 AM
btw - prediction, if the cpc is getting serious about this i suspect their 'solution' will be requirement for gov't oversight of all classifications (or at least reclassification) before any action is taken in the future, essentially taking it out of rcmp hands for any contentious decisions. That's not a perfect solution for us, but I suspect that'll be what happens. There's already a committee but i suspect we'll see that system revamped.

Steveo9mm
03-01-2014, 12:29 AM
Now they can add the cz858 to the list. wonder what the conservatives will say about the ARRRRCMP's agenda now...

Stay tuned. more bannings coming this week

webster
03-01-2014, 12:51 AM
All options, eh? How about repealing the Firearms Act?

Didn't think so.

Foxer
03-01-2014, 01:08 AM
All options, eh? How about repealing the Firearms Act?

Didn't think so. Really? You figure that would be a logical way for them to address the problem of classifications? That won't get a massive blowback from the anti's and the fence sitters?

You're right, they're screwing us and we should all vote liberal. :slap:

Mad Hatter
03-01-2014, 01:16 AM
Now they can add the cz858 to the list. wonder what the conservatives will say about the ARRRRCMP's agenda now...

Stay tuned. more bannings coming this week

Is there a link to this list? This seems to have just come out of the blue.

Camo tung
03-01-2014, 01:22 AM
Is there a link to this list? This seems to have just come out of the blue.

Post #12

http://www.gunownersofcanada.ca/showthread.php?12427-CZ858-manufactured-in-2007-or-later-are-now-prohibited-too/page2

Grizz
03-01-2014, 01:37 AM
Looks like there are FAR more to come before this is over!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

webster
03-01-2014, 07:44 AM
Really? You figure that would be a logical way for them to address the problem of classifications? That won't get a massive blowback from the anti's and the fence sitters?

You're right, they're screwing us and we should all vote liberal. :slap:

I didn't say vote Liberal, though this incident has definitely lost the CPC some (perhaps a lot) of voter support. And if we demand they repeal the FA, maybe we can bargain our way into a deal that we can support. It's like when you're selling a house or a car. You ask for more than you want so you and the buyer can negotiate a price that works for both of you. I don't seriously expect the FA to go anywhere, but we need to incorporate some bargaining room into our demands. If we come to the table with what we actually want, we'll leave with far less.

Claven2
03-01-2014, 09:06 AM
Here's a fun solution, make the RCMP pay for compensation, make it DOULBE the retail price, since there's a cost to convenience and accessorizing, of EVERY firearm that gets seized for ANY reason, and make that come out of a FROZEN RCMP operations budget. Then watch the seizures drop like a stone.

Foxer
03-01-2014, 11:19 AM
I didn't say vote Liberal, though this incident has definitely lost the CPC some (perhaps a lot) of voter support.
I hate to think that very many gun owners can't tell the difference between the RCMP and the CPC. The cops who are in charge of the firearms program are bound and determined to mess with us, and are not under the control of the CPC. THe CPC is coming out with very strongly worded (bordering on insulting to the Firearms cops) language saying this is not acceptable. So... we would not vote for the cpc.. why exactly?

And unfortunately with our system if you're not voting cpc, you're pretty much voting liberal in the next election.


And if we demand they repeal the FA, maybe we can bargain our way into a deal that we can support.

That's just not how it works in politics. If anything, the opposite is true and the write you off as 'unreasonable cranks'. It is not possible for them to repeal the gun laws in their entirety in any practical sense. So - if you ask for something insane then they just dismiss you as ... insane.

Think about it - you walk into your bosses office tomorrow and say "I want a million dollar a year raise or I'm outta here!" He's going to say "you're insane, joking, or fired. You pick." You would have lost all credibility. If you think he might settle for a 1000 dollar a year raise, then maybe you ask for 2000 and see what you can do. But you start off at least somewhere remotely possible.

And just FYI if it comes up, Harper never said he'd scrap the gun laws and leave it at that - he said they need to be 'rewritten from a clean slate', meaning redone from scratch but we'd STILL have firearms laws. And that didn't happen for pretty much the same reason as senate reform didn't - can't do it without a majority, and it takes a long long time and wasn't a priority during the economic challenges we faced.

You want to aim high in your negotiations - but not crazy high.

Foxer
03-01-2014, 11:23 AM
Here's a fun solution, make the RCMP pay for compensation, make it DOULBE the retail price, since there's a cost to convenience and accessorizing, of EVERY firearm that gets seized for ANY reason, and make that come out of a FROZEN RCMP operations budget. Then watch the seizures drop like a stone.

Well first off the cops get their money from us - so WE would be paying for it in the end anyway. Second off - if you do that then the cops will cut services people need or like, and blame the resulting problems on the gov't. Every bit of bad news will be hung around the cpc's neck - "Oh is crime up? Well - we could probably have done something about that if harper hadn't slashed our budget" etc etc. They will spin it till they're dizzy.

I love the concept - it's just not really practical. In the end, gov't will pay for it, and that means we pay for it, and the RCMP will simply sit back and decide what their budget is this year for bans and go for it. They won't care.

conger
03-01-2014, 11:24 AM
I didn't say vote Liberal, though this incident has definitely lost the CPC some (perhaps a lot) of voter support. And if we demand they repeal the FA, maybe we can bargain our way into a deal that we can support. It's like when you're selling a house or a car. You ask for more than you want so you and the buyer can negotiate a price that works for both of you. I don't seriously expect the FA to go anywhere, but we need to incorporate some bargaining room into our demands. If we come to the table with what we actually want, we'll leave with far less.

Lets be realistic. The FA act is not going to be rewritten before the next election or shortly after. The best we will ever get from this are changes and amendments to the act. (hopefully in our favour) To threaten to withdraw CPC support is another vote for Justin. You really want to do that? Lets not forget that Jean Chretien and his minion Alan Rock gave us the long gun registry and C-68. Justin Trudeau, Like his father is as pro gun control as it gets. Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien's liberals gutted the Canadian Forces during their times in power. Liberal legislation has done more to strip Canadians of their property and gun rights each time they have had a majority government. Justin says he is for the middle class. He doesn't even know what the middle class is. He is a rich trust fund kid who never worked a day or ever had to do without something in his life. I'll bet he doesn't even know how much a loaf of bread or a jug of milk costs at the super market. The family has expressed their admiration for communist values all their lives. The son is patterned after his father.
So each time you guys threaten to withdraw conservative support; that is what you are going to replace it with. Issuing threats to withdraw support is a lousy and stupid way to negotiate. If you want a liberal government next, you don't have to vote liberal. All you have to do is not show up to vote in protest against the Conservatives. Hell.... I'd rather see Justin Bieber running the country instead of Justin Trudeau.

Foxer
03-01-2014, 11:41 AM
Lets be realistic. The FA act is not going to be rewritten before the next election or shortly after. The best we will ever get from this are changes and amendments to the act. (hopefully in our favour) To threaten to withdraw CPC support is another vote for Justin. You really want to do that? Lets not forget that Jean Chretien and his minion Alan Rock gave us the long gun registry and C-68. Justin Trudeau, Like his father is as pro gun control as it gets. Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien's liberals gutted the Canadian Forces during their times in power. Liberal legislation has done more to strip Canadians of their property and gun rights each time they have had a majority government. Justin says he is for the middle class. He doesn't even know what the middle class is. He is a rich trust fund kid who never worked a day or ever had to do without something in his life. I'll bet he doesn't even know how much a loaf of bread or a jug of milk costs at the super market. The family has expressed their admiration for communist values all their lives. The son is patterned after his father.
So each time you guys threaten to withdraw conservative support; that is what you are going to replace it with. Issuing threats to withdraw support is a lousy and stupid way to negotiate. If you want a liberal government next, you don't have to vote liberal. All you have to do is not show up to vote in protest against the Conservatives. Hell.... I'd rather see Justin Bieber running the country instead of Justin Trudeau.

Well said. What we need to do right now is put a lot of pressure on the CPC by telling them specifically what our expectatons are with regards to this issue. And that should be "change the legislation so this never happens again", which is something they say they're open to.

It's like a boss - you wouldn't want your boss to continually threaten to fire you. "Get this account back or you're fired. Work harder or your fired. Get me a cup of coffee or your fired." Most people wouldn't stay working their long. Instead what a smart boss does is say "this is what we expect you to achieve in the hours we've given you, and it is achievable. If you fail to achieve it, well we will review that at that time but right now this is what is expected of you and we know that it can be done". That's basically what we're looking for here - This is the problem, it's ongoing and happens a lot, we expect an effective permanent solution and we know you can deliver that. Now go to it. "

conger
03-01-2014, 12:05 PM
Well said. What we need to do right now is put a lot of pressure on the CPC by telling them specifically what our expectatons are with regards to this issue. And that should be "change the legislation so this never happens again", which is something they say they're open to.

It's like a boss - you wouldn't want your boss to continually threaten to fire you. "Get this account back or you're fired. Work harder or your fired. Get me a cup of coffee or your fired." Most people wouldn't stay working their long. Instead what a smart boss does is say "this is what we expect you to achieve in the hours we've given you, and it is achievable. If you fail to achieve it, well we will review that at that time but right now this is what is expected of you and we know that it can be done". That's basically what we're looking for here - This is the problem, it's ongoing and happens a lot, we expect an effective permanent solution and we know you can deliver that. Now go to it. "

You and I think along the same lines. There is a way of dealing with people to achieve a goal. Those in power will quickly dismiss those who utter threats and continue to draw lines in the sand. Look at the situation unfolding in Ukraine. Putin certainly doesn't take Obama's limp ultimatums seriously after he showed how weak his foreign policy was dealing with Syria.
Our politicians and the public need to see calm and smart negotiation, not "kill the firearms act or you won't get my vote" That gets as much attention as the time it takes to hit the "delete" key.

BrotherRockeye
03-01-2014, 03:08 PM
at least a couple of folks get it...

this is office politics on a grand scale.

a way to get back at the boss by turning the "board of directors" against him...

wasn't the CFO's office of bureaucracy in the cross hairs not long ago...think maybe they're trying to get even?

Is this their way of making gun owners toe the line?

We call for their office to be removed and they "oh yeah?" us with banning firearms...

One of the fundamental problems is that regardless of who is in the big chair, the bureaucrats still have their jobs.

Foxer
03-01-2014, 04:09 PM
One of the fundamental problems is that regardless of who is in the big chair, the bureaucrats still have their jobs. If someone ever really wants to understand how this works, watch an old british show called "yes minister" or the later "Yes prime minister". It was considered so accurate that it almost didn't air as it was thought it might be seen as being too 'anti government'.

Here's an example of the kind of thing that's said (Not a precise quote but close enough) Two civil servants are talking and one says "Ministers come and go, but the civil service is eternal. We cannot allow elected MP's to interfere with our running of the country".

or "the minister has a fat salary, a chauffeur, a good pension and fame. What more does he want?" - " I think he wants to run the country." - "Well STOP him, Bernard".

Even tho it's a comedy, it's actually a rather stinging and surprisingly accurate look at how the gov't and civil service see each other.

The fact is - they will never forgive us for what we did. We took away the registry, and it was a MASSIVE blow to them. Then they tried to crack down on people recording gun sales, and we had the CPC pass a regulation prohibiting them from doing that. Gun ownership is up, licenses are up, public sentiment is going our way. So they tried high river - and got slapped for that. This is just their ongoing campaign and they haven't learned that each time they come at us, it winds up with them having less power and we're likely to see that again here.

Remember - this was the plan all along. That's WHY they wanted the registry - so that it would be easier to go after people when they reclassified.

444shooter
03-01-2014, 08:24 PM
^ Exactly!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

blacksmithden
03-01-2014, 11:24 PM
If someone ever really wants to understand how this works, watch an old british show called "yes minister" or the later "Yes prime minister". It was considered so accurate that it almost didn't air as it was thought it might be seen as being too 'anti government'.

Here's an example of the kind of thing that's said (Not a precise quote but close enough) Two civil servants are talking and one says "Ministers come and go, but the civil service is eternal. We cannot allow elected MP's to interfere with our running of the country".

or "the minister has a fat salary, a chauffeur, a good pension and fame. What more does he want?" - " I think he wants to run the country." - "Well STOP him, Bernard".

Even tho it's a comedy, it's actually a rather stinging and surprisingly accurate look at how the gov't and civil service see each other.

The fact is - they will never forgive us for what we did. We took away the registry, and it was a MASSIVE blow to them. Then they tried to crack down on people recording gun sales, and we had the CPC pass a regulation prohibiting them from doing that. Gun ownership is up, licenses are up, public sentiment is going our way. So they tried high river - and got slapped for that. This is just their ongoing campaign and they haven't learned that each time they come at us, it winds up with them having less power and we're likely to see that again here.

Remember - this was the plan all along. That's WHY they wanted the registry - so that it would be easier to go after people when they reclassified.

Sometimes I hate your clarity of thought you know. LOL. The fact of the matter is, what you're pointing out here is just common sense. If the conservatives really want to help us, then they should make a concerted effort to replace outgoing civil service leaders with people who have a proven track record of understanding and a common sense approach to solving problems.

The real problem with the RCMP today is that it's collective mentality has changed. It's gone from one that used to pride itself on fairly policing larger problems and using discretion on the small insignificant things, to one of being a solution looking for a problem....any problem. When no real problem exists, they create one, no matter how far fetched, and then become it's solution. This was never the intended purpose of Canada's national police force.

They have to be forced to understand that if all is well, then they have done their job in any said area...now leave it alone, move on, and focus on something different. As long as there is a dedicated department within the RCMP who's only job is to find fault within the realm of firearms ownership, then they will always do that in order to justify themselves whether in their own minds, their supervisor's, or the public's. The real usefulness of the RCMP lab and the classification system has "jumped the shark" and really needs to be put down before it further embarrasses the government, itself, and the entire RCMP organization with more and more outlandish claims of impending doom at the hands of law abiding firearms owners.

Strewth
03-01-2014, 11:43 PM
^I think it's very challenging to replace civil servants, they basically have tenure. I wouldn't want to be in the position the CPC is in right now; finally after being in power long enough to usher out the Liberal employees, and having them kick up an absolute fit about it. One more term as a majority might allow them to actually put the people they want into middle management.

Canuck
03-01-2014, 11:55 PM
^I think it's very challenging to replace civil servants, they basically have tenure. I wouldn't want to be in the position the CPC is in right now; finally after being in power long enough to usher out the Liberal employees, and having them kick up an absolute fit about it. One more term as a majority might allow them to actually put the people they want into middle management.

And, at the moment, what are the chances of that?

Strewth
03-02-2014, 12:13 AM
I would think that with changes to the Firearms Act, they'll get a solid block of votes from gun owners, and their families? Hopefully also from people that care about Canada as a nation, I do not like how involved the government is with the economy, but having Trudeau at the helm would be....rocky....and the NDP are only the opposition because Quebec used them to vote against the PQ.

dakott
03-02-2014, 12:30 AM
It was the Liberals that started this silliness and now the son wants to do it all over again?!? Yes go ahead and send us all down Shit Creek with out a paddle!!!

Foxer
03-02-2014, 01:27 AM
Sometimes I hate your clarity of thought you know. LOL.

Hah! yeah, well, ... i get that comment fairly often. :)

If the conservatives really want to help us, then they should make a concerted effort to replace outgoing civil service leaders with people who have a proven track record of understanding and a common sense approach to solving problems.


Where possible, sure. WHere have we seen examples? The judiciary would be one place to look, where the cpc has focused on judges of more common sense than just liberal values.

But sometimes that's not possible. Or waiting for the current crop to retire would be too long. So you use other tricks, like segregating and sealing off departments so that minimize their influence, or shifting powers from departments that are out of your control to departments you set up so that the problem department is toothless.

That last one is what they're likely considering here. Pull the whole classification thing away from the cops and then they're not an issue. Much easier than trying to change the cops involved, because they have no direct control over that at all.

But it takes time and must be done carefully. Go too fast and the whole civil service gets up in arms and it takes very little effort for them to massively screw with you. In this case, they have the political justification they need I think.


The real problem with the RCMP today is that it's collective mentality has changed. It's gone from one that used to pride itself on fairly policing larger problems and using discretion on the small insignificant things, to one of being a solution looking for a problem....any problem. When no real problem exists, they create one, no matter how far fetched, and then become it's solution. This was never the intended purpose of Canada's national police force.

True.


The real usefulness of the RCMP lab and the classification system has "jumped the shark" and really needs to be put down before it further embarrasses the government, itself, and the entire RCMP organization with more and more outlandish claims of impending doom at the hands of law abiding firearms owners.

Also true.

Foxer
03-02-2014, 01:42 AM
I would think that with changes to the Firearms Act, they'll get a solid block of votes from gun owners, and their families?

The challenge is will they get a correspondingly negative reaction from the non-gun public. In some cases, yes. For example - make machine guns non-restricted and you'd likely get more people who were pissed about it (rightly or wrongly) than you would win votes. Not that many firearms owners are desperate to own full auto and lots of the public are scared of it.

On the other hand, in this case there's a fair bit of public sympathy. Nobody likes the idea that the gov't could steal their property without compensation. People undersatand how a gun owner might be honked off having spent 4 grand when the cops said it was perfectly ok to do so only to now have that same body say that same gun which has caused no problem is somehow illegal. And it's not just one instance, it's happened a few times now so they can see it being a systemic problem with the police, not just "one little mistake" or the like. And - gun owners DO care about it, and in large numbers.

So in this case - a change would likely gain much good will amongst their core voters and would likely not result in any real bad will with those who are possible supporters, and won't cause those who don't support them to come out and vote against them to put a stop to it. Even those who don't agree with it will likely forget about it in a few months.

The problem is that the CPC has gotten a little out of touch with the regular people, and they like to have 40 polls done and internal focus groups etc before making a decision, but I think there's enough feed back from gun owners in this case (as well as enough history - Harper has to be sick of this popping up every year) that the cpc might just well jump forward.

This may be a little bit of a golden opportunity for the CPC to breathe a little momentum into their efforts heading towards the next election. Hopefully they'll use it wisely.

conger
03-02-2014, 09:28 AM
One more thing to consider is that Harper is only in his first majority term. The previous, was minority where little gets accomplished. Chretien on the other hand had 3 majority terms in a row. So those who are considering withdrawing support if their demands aren't met should perhaps exercise some patience and give the conservatives another majority to get some more work done. Because Justin will definitely undo the things that have been fixed so far.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

webster
03-02-2014, 10:25 AM
You want to aim high in your negotiations - but not crazy high.

Fair enough. Damn Foxer and his logic... :p

zguy
03-02-2014, 05:22 PM
One more thing to consider is that Harper is only in his first majority term. The previous, was minority where little gets accomplished. Chretien on the other hand had 3 majority terms in a row. So those who are considering withdrawing support if their demands aren't met should perhaps exercise some patience and give the conservatives another majority to get some more work done. Because Justin will definitely undo the things that have been fixed so far.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

+1

We can not afford not to have the CPC reelected at this point.

bogie
03-02-2014, 05:55 PM
I think its time we "reclassified" the RCMP. They are no longer a police force but a power unto themselves. Lookout Stephen Harper. You could be reclassified too....

conger
03-02-2014, 05:55 PM
So what then?

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

Edenchef
03-02-2014, 05:56 PM
^^^^^Agreed.

Cheers!

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

conger
03-02-2014, 05:57 PM
+1

We can not afford not to have the CPC reelected at this point.

So who would be better?

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

Foxer
03-02-2014, 06:00 PM
So who would be better?


I think you misread that one conger - i did too at first. He said we can NOT afford NOT to have the cpc reelected. In other words, we must reelect the CPC.

conger
03-02-2014, 06:01 PM
My bad. Apologies.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

exmilitary
03-02-2014, 06:28 PM
Damn double negatives

harbl_the_cat
03-02-2014, 06:38 PM
So who would be better?

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

No one would be better, obviously. But asking that questions insinuates that preserving some element of the status quo is necessary to bring about change or that any such change would be positive

I say what is needed is a clean slate. A fresh new start. A system reset. Canada is less than 150 years old - what is so great about it that is worth preserving at the cost of enduring the kind of totalitarianism that is going on today?

In the past, people came to Canada in the hopes of leaving behind tyrannical governments. Canada today has become one of the very tyrannies people in the past fled from.

It's a disgrace and it is not worth preserving.

Food for thought. For any folks reading this odds are, unless you are native, at most 6 - 10 generations past, your ancestors felt that their country was such a terrible it-hole and that Canada/British North America held more promise for them that it justified moving there/here.

If you told those very same ancestors that the Government in Canada taxes 40-50% of your earnings AND that they could arbitrarily declare you a criminal liable for a prison sentence for a completely victimless crime, what do you think they would say?

I suspect they for many, they would probably say "So were we.... That's why we left where we came from in the first place."

For those who didn't, they would probably tell you "The economy was better in Canada than back home."

conger
03-02-2014, 06:44 PM
My dad and grandfather would be sad to see what has become of the country they fought in two world wars for.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

ReignCzech
03-02-2014, 06:48 PM
No one would be better, obviously. But asking that questions insinuates that preserving some element of the status quo is necessary to bring about change or that any such change would be positive

I say what is needed is a clean slate. A fresh new start. A system reset. Canada is less than 150 years old - what is so great about it that is worth preserving at the cost of enduring the kind of totalitarianism that is going on today?

In the past, people came to Canada in the hopes of leaving behind tyrannical governments. Canada today has become one of the very tyrannies people in the past fled from.

It's a disgrace and it is not worth preserving.

- True to the first 3 size font, but some of those people attempted to instill their own colony within canada (dominion) bringing with them the mindset and such with them, which were shut down pretty hard and assimilated.

- as for a disgrace and not worth preserving.... bullshit, and over my and many others dead body. It's exactly what to preserve and or change to what can be agreed upon as what's best over all currently and for all now and for the future.

harbl_the_cat
03-02-2014, 07:06 PM
.

- as for a disgrace and not worth preserving.... bullshit, and over my and many others dead body. It's exactly what to preserve and or change to what can be agreed upon as what's best over all currently and for all now and for the future.

What many have believed they fought and died for is long dead and gone. What Canada WAS is well worth bringing back:

A country with virtually no standing, regular army and no foreign military adventurism. A country with a pathetically small Federal Government and virtually non-existent bureaucracies responsible for regulating EVERYTHING. A country with NO income tax. A country where police bureaucrats couldn't arbitrarily change a few regulations and incriminate tens of thousands, and potentially MILLIONS of people. A country with few rules and regulations (as just a few are necessary to ensure a safe, prosperous, free nation).

You really can't look at Canada and say it differs very much from Nazi Germany, Maoist China or the Soviet Union - the only critical difference is Canada hasn't destroyed its economy yet the way all three of these did (note: instigating and losing wars destroys your economy re: Naziism).

The Canada of today is a hybrid monstrosity embodying some of the worst elements of ALL of those iconic historical examples, and it deserves to crash the way those failed experiments did. Not coincidentally, all of which were grounded in democracy.

Strewth
03-02-2014, 07:16 PM
harbl, you need to get some fresh air or something. Are you casting bullets inside? China, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union were all based on democracy? Were you homeschooled in History?
On any other forum that would be trolling to sidetrack away from the positive message in the OP.

conger
03-02-2014, 07:21 PM
You really can't look at Canada and say it differs very much from Nazi Germany, Maoist China or the Soviet Union - the only critical difference is Canada hasn't destroyed its economy yet the way all three of these did (note: instigating and losing wars destroys your economy re: Naziism).

The Canada of today is a hybrid monstrosity embodying some of the worst elements of ALL of those iconic historical examples, and it deserves to crash the way those failed experiments did. Not coincidentally, all of which were grounded in democracy.

Oh we're a long way from that kind of world. We've got some problems, but we've got lots of good stuff as well. We just need to keep working hard to defend our way of life so that the lefties can't take it away.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

harbl_the_cat
03-02-2014, 07:36 PM
harbl, you need to get some fresh air or something. Are you casting bullets inside? China, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union were all based on democracy? Were you homeschooled in History?
On any other forum that would be trolling to sidetrack away from the positive message in the OP.

Hitler didn't seize power until AFTER he was elected in what, by Canadian standards, would be 2 amazingly high turnout elections. His career in politics started out shortly after the Weimar hyperinflation - the Nazi party very much was the NDP of its day.

If you read many of his speeches, one of the biggest justifications Hitler used to win over the public, one recurring trend he reiterated was that all his actions were designed to protect Germany's democracy.

You can read all about the democratic process in the Soviet Union in Article 4 of the 1918 USSR Constitution here: http://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/constitution/1918/article4.htm

You can read all about Mao's "New Democracy" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democracy

The problem IS ALWAYS the government. Asking the government to regulate and reform itself (i.e - democracy) is akin to the class nerd asking the class bully not to beat him up and take his lunch money. It never works.

The bully/government holds the monopoly of violence, so there is equally no point in resisting it.

The only solution for the nerd is to simply not involve himself with the bully.

The problem with what most people understand democracy to be, is that it is an enabler of state violence against its citizens, regardless of the intentions. Read the Soviet Constitution - besides abolishing private property (which, at the time meant taking the property of the handful of aristocrats and giving it to the peasantry who already had no property) and outright establishment of a socialist state, it sounds astonishingly similar to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The problems that citizens like you and I are falling victim to are a result of more government.

More government isn't the cure to more government.

Haywire1
03-02-2014, 07:45 PM
And we are off topic. Start a thread on what Canada should or shouldnt do but it has nothing to do with the OPs post. Next off topic post will recieve a warning/infraction

Sent from my SGH-T989D using Tapatalk

Wanna B Free
03-03-2014, 11:20 AM
What do the Russians Putin and the RCMP have in common? They both think they can do whatever they want without consequences . When did the RCMP ever become so out of control ? What is happening about the gun grab in Alberta ? Swiss Arms prohibited, magazines that hold no more than 10 shots prohibited,what is it that the RCMP fear ? Why doesn't the Gov't step in and withdraw some of they're powers ? This great country of ours is quickly becoming a police state and a growing communist way of thinking that the Gov't and police have to keep their citizens in line and disarm them so they cannot defend themselves. I am not suggesting we take up arms to get what we want but maybe way back in time we should have adopted the 2nd amendment from our U.S. neighbours. We really need these organizations that we belong to as gun owners to keep up the good fight for our rights to own firearms. There are a great many of us in the shooting sports that hunt to put food on the table on a regular basis, in spite of the rhetoric from the gun lobbyist as to why we need to hunt. I THINK that RCMP should stand for real communist making policies. They ( those over paid bureaucrats making these b.s. decisions ) should all join Putins red army and go over there and kick butt instead of taking away our rights and freedoms here in Canada. They can take along the gun hating CFO's from Ontario too or as we call them here the gunstapo. North Korea and China may be looking for new recruits !

Member of the NFA, OFAH

Haywire1
03-03-2014, 11:48 AM
and since that has absolutely nothing to do with an article stating that the Govt is reviewing the situation, locked