PDA

View Full Version : C-42 Vote



mojo88
04-09-2015, 10:45 AM
It looks like the vote on C-42 will be coming up when the politicians head back to Ottawa on April 20 after their long Easter break.

We should take the time to remind those MPs who flip-flopped on the gun registry legislation, and those who have a significant firearms community in their riding that we won't be taken for granted. I put together a quick list of email addresses and phone numbers.

If these folks are going to vote against C-42, they should know that we aren't happy about it.

Green Party

Bruce Hyer - broke ranks with the NDP and voted to abolish the gun registry. But his new leader, Elizabeth May seems opposed to this Bill
bruce.hyer.p9@parl.gc.ca
bruce@brucehyer.ca
807-345-1818

NDP

John Rafferty - broke ranks with his party on the gun registry, but has said that streamlining the ATT is "a safety risk"
john.rafferty.p9@parl.gc.ca
807-623-6000

Niki Ashton - voted with the Conservatives on C-391, but opposed C-19. She seems to have been silent on C-42
niki.ashton@parl.gc.ca
204-677-1333

Dennis Bevington - supported C-391, but flip flopped on C-19. Also quiet on C-42
dennis.bevington.c1@parl.gc.ca
867-873-6995

Nathan Cullen - supported C-391, but flip flopped on C-19. Also quiet on C-42
nathan.cullen.p9@parl.gc.ca
cullen@parl.gc.ca
(250) 622-2413

Mathieu Ravignat - has been totally silent on firearms since being elected in 2011. Represents a rural western Quebec seat with a big firearms community
mathieu.ravignat.p9@parl.gc.ca
819 648-2003

Foxer
04-09-2015, 10:58 AM
Good point. It'll win anyway - but the more they catch flack for opposing it, the more they'll be reluctant to go against gun owners in the future and they will spread that message in their party.

Zinilin
04-09-2015, 11:14 AM
How many of them won their seats by more than 13.5%?

Assuming firearms owners vote...in the last federal election about 13.5% of the participation electorate were firearms license holders.

(Note 13.5% = "at least 60 seats" according to Wayne Easter)

Kobs
04-10-2015, 08:56 AM
You can safely conclude that the silent ones are pro, the cons will speak their minds about it and as usual try to rally others in their camp.
As someone else said it will go trough any way the conservative government has the most seats, plus those silent ones.

mojo88
04-20-2015, 05:06 PM
Bill passed 148-121. Conservatives all in favour. NDP, Libs, Greens and other miscellaneous leftists voted against.

Folks I posted above all voted against, let's let them know how we feel.

Zinilin
04-20-2015, 05:37 PM
Bill passed 148-121. Conservatives all in favour.
Please verify your details below:
Donation
Amount: $148.42 / One Time Donation
Tax Credit (Up To): $111.31

CaperJim
04-20-2015, 06:14 PM
So does this mean POLs are now PALs?

Canada_Phil
04-20-2015, 06:19 PM
Bill passed 148-121. Conservatives all in favour. NDP, Libs, Greens and other miscellaneous leftists voted against.

Folks I posted above all voted against, let's let them know how we feel.

?????
Whah?... The vote happened? When?

The PM and all the opposition leaders were not even in Parliament today!

Foxer
04-20-2015, 06:39 PM
?????
Whah?... The vote happened? When?

The PM and all the opposition leaders were not even in Parliament today!

Guys - they just voted to refer it to committee. Which is great, but it still has to get voted on in committee and sent back with the recommendations if any, and then get voted on at third reading. Then it goes to the upper house (senate).

it WILL pass, it's moving along, the CPC controlls the committee - but it's not passed yet by a long shot.

Swampdonkey
04-20-2015, 06:47 PM
?????
Whah?... The vote happened? When?

The PM and all the opposition leaders were not even in Parliament today!

They were getting high for Adolf Coors birthday.

lone-wolf
04-20-2015, 07:19 PM
but it still has to get voted on in committee and sent back with the recommendations if any

Any chance some extra goodies will be thrown on at that stage? Or is everything pretty much set in stone now.



4/20, every year that the only thing that happens is a bunch of people smoke some extra weed, I am happy.
I'm inclined to believe another group or person will do something bad on that day again.

Foxer
04-20-2015, 07:23 PM
Any chance some extra goodies will be thrown on at that stage? Or is everything pretty much set in stone now.

Well not much in the way of goodies - they can make changes but nothing that represents a 'substantial' change to the bill. THey couldn't kill mag caps for example, that would be a 'substantial' change. They could stretch the time for the amnesty after the license ends tho a little, because that's just a minor modification of something that's already in the bill, or perhaps clarify that you can take your restricted to and from the post office as part of your regular att which is sort of implied by the bill. The committee stage allows for tuning, but not re-writes.

CaperJim
04-20-2015, 07:32 PM
Guys - they just voted to refer it to committee. Which is great, but it still has to get voted on in committee and sent back with the recommendations if any, and then get voted on at third reading. Then it goes to the upper house (senate).

it WILL pass, it's moving along, the CPC controlls the committee - but it's not passed yet by a long shot.

Ahh, I was wondering why I wasn't hearing gun play in the streets - not actually passed yet

lone-wolf
04-20-2015, 07:33 PM
Ahh, I was wondering why I wasn't hearing gun play in the streets - not actually passed yet

No celebratory gun fire yet

Foxer
04-20-2015, 07:39 PM
No celebratory gun fire yet

No. But - it's moved on to the next stage, and we're that much closer. Getting there, getting there. :)

CaperJim
04-20-2015, 08:35 PM
To build anticipation I just let loose a high capacity mag (holds over 5).. oz's of water. Supersoaker tonight, slingshot tomorrow?

CLW .45
04-20-2015, 10:24 PM
Well not much in the way of goodies - they can make changes but nothing that represents a 'substantial' change to the bill. THey couldn't kill mag caps for example, that would be a 'substantial' change. They could stretch the time for the amnesty after the license ends tho a little, because that's just a minor modification of something that's already in the bill, or perhaps clarify that you can take your restricted to and from the post office as part of your regular att which is sort of implied by the bill. The committee stage allows for tuning, but not re-writes.

They could - and should - make authorization to transport valid throughout Canada.

After all, that is what the firearms act calls for.

Foxer
04-20-2015, 11:22 PM
They could - and should - make authorization to transport valid throughout Canada.

After all, that is what the firearms act calls for.

While you're right in concept, they probably couldn't do that in committee. That would certainly be ruled a substantial change to the legislation. MINOR tweaks are one thing, but you can't re-write the legislation in committee after second reading's debates. It wouldn't give the opposition any chance to address the change.

Doug_M
04-21-2015, 05:27 AM
They could - and should - make authorization to transport valid throughout Canada.

After all, that is what the firearms act calls for.

After the whole "why did the NFA pull out of the C-51 hearings" news cycle Sheldon Clare as much as stated (in a FaceBook comment) it was for some concessions when C-42 hits committee. He mentioned a couple of specifics and this was one of them. Guess we'll have to wait and see.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

DOOK
04-22-2015, 12:55 AM
Gee, it's only how the law is written now. It's just not applied in this way.
It would great though.

Swampdonkey
04-22-2015, 07:17 AM
After the whole "why did the NFA pull out of the C-51 hearings" news cycle Sheldon Clare as much as stated (in a FaceBook comment) it was for some concessions when C-42 hits committee. He mentioned a couple of specifics and this was one of them. Guess we'll have to wait and see.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That doesn't sound very "No Compromise" to me. I bet they pulled out because the NFA is about to collapse.

wolver
04-22-2015, 08:49 AM
That doesn't sound very "No Compromise" to me. I bet they pulled out because the NFA is about to collapse.

That's news to me!

Foxer
04-22-2015, 09:09 AM
That's news to me!

Collapse may not happen just yet, but there's no doubt they're seriously damaged. Their credibility has taken a massive hit both with gun owners in general and their members specifically, and honestly the gov't doesn't think that much of them or give them much credibility either. That damage is very very hard to repair. I can certainly see why they would 'compromise' a little to gain a win or two that would win them back a little good will, and being able to claim that they managed to 'negotiate' the att's being nation-wide would certainly be a decent win.

However - i doubt very much that anything of the sort happened. It seems more likely to me that the NFA is 'fishing' and was putting out some things they believe MIGHT happen as things they negotiated so that they can claim credit if they do happen. I guess we'll see if their list actually comes to pass, but I rather suspect that it won't. I would be very very surprised if the CPC was able to get changing the ATT to a nationwide put forward without it being ruled a substantial change - it pretty clearly is.

One thing we learned about the NFA thru the whole swiss arms thing is that the current leadership does not understand the political process nearly as well as ole dave did. In fact - they don't seem to understand very much of it. This is not real huge surprise, nor is it a big condemnation of them. This stuff is very complex and if you don't study it pretty hard you won't understand even a quarter of it, and even if you DO study it pretty hard you'll be lucky to get much more than half -3/4 of it. That's why they have full time 'parliamentarians' who's only job is to be knowledgeable in this stuff like a very highly specialized lawyer. So I'm not slagging them for it - but if they did understand this stuff I doubt they'd have claimed to have negotiated changing the ATT to 'Canada wide'. That is a substantial change to the existing bill and I would be very surprised if they managed to get that past the parliamentarians in committee.

It is more likely that the NFA is just trying to salvage their reputation after it's recent hit.

RangeBob
05-25-2015, 10:18 PM
If anyone's curious about what was said at 3rd reading debate on Bill C42, I typed a lot of it while it was happening into this thread:

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1242146-C-42-Third-Reading-Live-Stream

Foxer
05-25-2015, 11:24 PM
Wow - way to go RB - that was quite a bit of work.

Man - the libs sure tried to distance themselves from the registry - and the ndp did too, and got called on it rightfully.

Well it's done, now all that's left is the vote. It'll blow thru the senate plenty fast. Hopefully they'll get the vote done this week and it'll be on it's way. Once the vote is done, it's donation time.

Swampdonkey
05-25-2015, 11:42 PM
If C-42 passes, my wife and I may get restricteds.

Canada_Phil
05-26-2015, 07:12 AM
If anyone's curious about what was said at 3rd reading debate on Bill C42, I typed a lot of it while it was happening into this thread:

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1242146-C-42-Third-Reading-Live-Stream

Thanks!

But man, much of that is Soooooo painful to listen to.

I was born and raised in Toronto, but now live well outside the GTA. I vividly recall that I loathed Colin Vaughn. I see that his idiot son is a chip right off the old block.

ruger18
05-26-2015, 09:22 AM
Hi Foxer,
Encourging words.
Any ideas on how they're going to "merge" the POL/PAL? I've been unable to find any info.

Foxer
05-26-2015, 09:39 AM
Hi Foxer,
Encourging words.
Any ideas on how they're going to "merge" the POL/PAL? I've been unable to find any info.Well nothing 'official' but my understanding is they'll simply issue pol holders with pals. Probably require a new picture or the like. And that is in keeping with tradition with this sort of thing, for example when manditory hunting training came in back in the 60's/70's most provinces just said 'If you've held a hunting license before - you get 'passed' without the test'.

So basically i would expect that they will treat holding a pol as being equivilant to having passed a firearms course and issue a new license.

mojo88
05-26-2015, 10:14 AM
My understanding is that on the day of Royal Assent, a bulletin will go out from the RCMP to advise that POL holders now have acquisition rights. Once your POL card expires, it'll be replaced with a shiny new PAL card.

kennymo
05-26-2015, 10:17 AM
Well nothing 'official' but my understanding is they'll simply issue pol holders with pals. Probably require a new picture or the like. And that is in keeping with tradition with this sort of thing, for example when manditory hunting training came in back in the 60's/70's most provinces just said 'If you've held a hunting license before - you get 'passed' without the test'.

So basically i would expect that they will treat holding a pol as being equivilant to having passed a firearms course and issue a new license.

It had been mentioned before that they may be issuing PAL's when the POL comes up for renewal, which makes sense to me from a simplicity standpoint. Just simply stop issuing them, change one letter when the card expires and done.
There was some debate whether or not one would be able to renew their POL early to get the PAL IIRC. I guess we'll see when this all comes out in the near future...

mojo88
05-28-2015, 03:25 PM
Looks like C-42 is back up for debate in the House of Commons tomorrow. Hopefully this will finish it off.

CaperJim
05-29-2015, 03:18 PM
http://oi57.tinypic.com/t0hheq.jpg

Zinilin
05-29-2015, 03:37 PM
Donation
Amount: $420.42 / One Time Donation
Tax Credit (Up To): $310.21
---
Thank you for supporting our Prime Minister, our Party, and our country.
...
Thank you for joining the fight.

Sincerely,

Jaime Girard
Director, Fundraising and Membership Services, Conservative Party of Canada

kennymo
05-29-2015, 08:24 PM
Well, time to check the old Visa balance. Some denomination of 42 headed their way....

Gerald
05-29-2015, 09:48 PM
Big deal what about the AR rifle and mag restrictions.

kennymo
05-29-2015, 10:00 PM
Big deal what about the AR rifle. All this does let the dummies buy pass the test I had to take twenty years ago.

What are you talking about? Bypass what test?

Foxer
05-29-2015, 10:22 PM
What are you talking about? Bypass what test?

Yeah, he's got me there....

Gerald
05-29-2015, 10:31 PM
I guess I forgot we all had to write a exam after the course we took to get our POL or PAL. Hopefully the Conservatives don't screw up on the election. If the NDP gets in power handguns will probably be banned

Foxer
05-29-2015, 10:33 PM
I guess I forgot we all had to write a exam after the course we took to get our POL or PAL. We;; - you still do, you just HAVE to take the course now. In days gone by you could challenge the course and take the test. That's changed, and it's the only change in the bill I don't approve of. But we'll deal with that later.


Hopefully the Conservatives don't screw up on the election. If the NDP gets in power handguns will probably be bannedYeah - unlike the libs who got their asses handed to them by gun owners and are now a LITTLE more leery about angering us, the NDP is unabashedly anti-gun. And Mulcair is the worst of them for it.

Doug_M
05-30-2015, 06:07 AM
Big deal what about the AR rifle and mag restrictions.
It is. C-42 gives the gov the power to change classifications downwards for the first time ever (going upwards was already there). So after C-42 passes the AR could be declared non-restricted.

Mag restrictions are a regulation I believe, which means they could be easily changed. I wouldn't expect the CPC to touch that one with a ten foot pole until after the election. Just imagine the negative attack ads that would be created.

Curly1
05-30-2015, 07:06 AM
It is. C-42 gives the gov the power to change classifications downwards for the first time ever (going upwards was already there). So after C-42 passes the AR could be declared non-restricted.

Mag restrictions are a regulation I believe, which means they could be easily changed. I wouldn't expect the CPC to touch that one with a ten foot pole until after the election. Just imagine the negative attack ads that would be created.

Making the AR non-restricted will not happen as long as short barrel uppers exist. Just my opinion, but, that will be the major hurdle. Mag limits maybe revisited, but, I think 10 is the best we can hope for and that will, most likely, be applied to all platforms, including rim fire IMHO.

TheCenturion
05-30-2015, 07:08 AM
Wait, 'passed' as in 'passed third reading, now it goes to the senate, then royal assent?' or 'passed' as in 'this bill is now in force?' http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Bill=C42&Parl=41&Ses=2 seems to indicate the former.

Doug_M
05-30-2015, 07:13 AM
Wait, 'passed' as in 'passed third reading, now it goes to the senate, then royal assent?' or 'passed' as in 'this bill is now in force?' http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Bill=C42&Parl=41&Ses=2 seems to indicate the former.

Former


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Doug_M
05-30-2015, 07:19 AM
Making the AR non-restricted will not happen as long as short barrel uppers exist. Just my opinion, but, that will be the major hurdle. Mag limits maybe revisited, but, I think 10 is the best we can hope for and that will, most likely, be applied to all platforms, including rim fire IMHO.

There are several platforms that are both restricted and non-restricted based solely on the barrel length (ACR, XCR and vz58/cz858 come to mind). No reason why the AR can't be either.

I think your mag restrictions prediction is realistic. It would be easy for the CPC to sell it (to the general public). The .22 enthusiasts would lose out of course. On the other hand it may be beneficial in the long run on the road to normalizing standard capacity magazines.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Foxer
05-30-2015, 10:21 AM
There are several platforms that are both restricted and non-restricted based solely on the barrel length (ACR, XCR and vz58/cz858 come to mind). No reason why the AR can't be either.

I think your mag restrictions prediction is realistic. It would be easy for the CPC to sell it (to the general public). The .22 enthusiasts would lose out of course. On the other hand it may be beneficial in the long run on the road to normalizing standard capacity magazines.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It's not that easy a sell for the public - the anti's will want to project images of belt fed auto's turning schools into swiss cheese, but it's manageable. With the right timing and such, if it's a regulation you can get it in under the radar a little and it's done and over before the public gets a chance to get worked up or the anti's get organized.

But we're going to have to give them a reason to do it - which is why it's important for us to be thanking them now and showing that good gun law changes will be rewarded. I'm sending in 100.42 to say thanks.

Curly1
05-30-2015, 11:13 AM
There are several platforms that are both restricted and non-restricted based solely on the barrel length (ACR, XCR and vz58/cz858 come to mind). No reason why the AR can't be either.

I think your mag restrictions prediction is realistic. It would be easy for the CPC to sell it (to the general public). The .22 enthusiasts would lose out of course. On the other hand it may be beneficial in the long run on the road to normalizing standard capacity magazines.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I am unfamiliar with the platforms you mentioned, do they have an upper that can be changed out as easily as an AR upper? That is the reasoning behind my thinking, the ease at which the upper can be changed from a non-restricted barrel length to a restricted barrel length. Given no serial number on the upper, which can go on any lower, how do you classify the lower if it can be also used with a restricted length barrel upper?

Foxer
05-30-2015, 11:18 AM
I am unfamiliar with the platforms you mentioned, do they have an upper that can be changed out as easily as an AR upper? That is the reasoning behind my thinking, the ease at which the upper can be changed from a non-restricted barrel length to a restricted barrel length. Given no serial number on the upper, which can go on any lower, how do you classify the lower if it can be also used with a restricted length barrel upper?

Well there's already that issue with other guns where it's not that hard to swap out a few parts. If you change the barrel length, you change the classification. That simple. Get caught with it in a 'restricted' configuration when it's not registered as such and you're in a world of trouble. The reason the AR was deemed to be 'restricted' was not for any other reason than political.

kennymo
05-30-2015, 11:29 AM
I am unfamiliar with the platforms you mentioned, do they have an upper that can be changed out as easily as an AR upper? That is the reasoning behind my thinking, the ease at which the upper can be changed from a non-restricted barrel length to a restricted barrel length. Given no serial number on the upper, which can go on any lower, how do you classify the lower if it can be also used with a restricted length barrel upper?

Takes about five seconds with a pistol grip 870 or Mossberg 500. Short factory barrels are readily available for both. And hacksaws are plentiful and have no serial number to boot....

Canada_Phil
05-30-2015, 01:33 PM
I think your mag restrictions prediction is realistic. It would be easy for the CPC to sell it (to the general public). The .22 enthusiasts would lose out of course. On the other hand it may be beneficial in the long run on the road to normalizing standard capacity magazines.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes... I have said in several other topics that I agree the incremental approach of just making '10' the standard across the board is sensible and realistic.

The mostly non-confrontational approach has worked well with this Government.

I would gladly give up drum mags in a 22 for a common, impossible to confuse standard across the board.

kennymo
05-30-2015, 01:44 PM
Yes... I have said in several other topics that I agree the incremental approach of just making '10' the standard across the board is sensible and realistic.

The mostly non-confrontational approach has worked well with this Government.

I would gladly give up drum mags in a 22 for a common, impossible to confuse standard across the board.

I'd prefer to leave the rimfire regs alone for now, but I do agree that changing the semi auto/handgun restriction to a universal 10 rounds would be a good starting point.
I feel kinda like giving up the unlimited .22 magazines we're tossing a group of gun owners under the bus to make gains elsewhere. Plenty of guys who just own a 10/22 for backyard plinking, take away their fun and they're going to lose interest in trying to help anyone else out.

Canada_Phil
05-30-2015, 02:20 PM
Yeah, I here you.

I'm not saying there "should" be anything given up, but if the idea of "Drum" Mags become a sticky point, then I would rather at least get '10' across the board to level the playing field.

I for one would just luv being able to make proper use of 10 rd. stripper clips. Its a convenient way to carry ammo in a bandolier, and any SKS or VZ58 can appreciate the idea of full 10rd 7.62x39 stripper clip use.

Oh!... Also M14/M1A!... For those not mounting Scopes directly above an open bolt, one can charge an attached mag with 10rd 308 clips right from the rifle... Just like an SKS.

Foxer
05-30-2015, 02:29 PM
I would gladly give up drum mags in a 22 for a common, impossible to confuse standard across the board.


I feel kinda like giving up the unlimited .22 magazines we're tossing a group of gun owners under the bus to make gains elsewhere.

We absolutely would. Phil - never trade another gun owner's rights for yours. That's how the anti's win, not us. It's one thing to negotiate something a little lower than we wanted if it means we get it today, but NOT at the expense of someone else. For example - it's one thing to ask for 15 round centerfire capacity and 'settle' for 10 round today. That still gives us more than we had but no less than we had. It's another to accept that AND accept a REDUCTION in what we had somehwere else.

That was the original spirit of the 'no compromise' concept - we're not turning in some of our guns to keep other guns - and that was something valid and that everyone supported. We may not get everything today, but we shouldn't be giving up our rights to get different ones.

Canada_Phil
05-30-2015, 02:40 PM
Foxer... Is it a "right" for anyone to run around right now with 100 rd C-Mags in an AR?... Or 75 rd Drums of 7.62x39 in an SKS or VZ?... Or 60rd X-Rail (or whatever that X name is) Drums in a 308 Battle rifle?

Those aren't anyone's "rights" now... But those are the things that genuinely terrify average people and continue to act as fodder for Wendy's army of antis.

If removing "Drums" from the equation is what it takes to move ahead a little, I'm not going to be crying over it.

Any Future Liberal or NDP government will virtually criminalize us all anyway. And we ALL know it will happen. The CPC cannot govern forever. Public apathy takes hold after awhile. Especially after 10plus years.

kennymo
05-30-2015, 03:08 PM
^^ The trouble with that view is when the NDP or Libs do get back in (and eventually they will), they can slap the centre fire limit down to five (or one for that matter) and we won't see the rimfire limits come back up. And drum magazines may not be a 'right', but we sure as hell didn't have any problems when they were legal....
Best to avoid all backward steps, ask for more and take less instead of losing ground to make minor gains elsewhere...

Canada_Phil
05-30-2015, 03:31 PM
Yeah... I know.

But it is what it is... My frustration comes from what is it? 20 plus years of these restrictions now?... None of us are getting any younger. I would just like to see a good 5 years of something "reasonable" again... At least before I die hopefully... Lol

I just feel that we are never going to see a day where we have HIGH capacity mags. By that I mean over 30... Hell, 20 is probably even a pipe dream given the public climate.

And, I do feel there will be a day where a future Gov. actually will attempt to prohibit MOST firearms. I don't think that is beyond a possibility. Anything can simply be undone via an OIC by ANY government.... Even a coalition one!

Foxer
05-30-2015, 04:12 PM
Foxer... Is it a "right" for anyone to run around right now with 100 rd C-Mags in an AR?... Or 75 rd Drums of 7.62x39 in an SKS or VZ?... Or 60rd X-Rail (or whatever that X name is) Drums in a 308 Battle rifle?


It's your right to do anything you want provided that your activities don't infringe on the rights of others in my books - but we were specifically talking about 22 lr mag caps being given up for a 'standard' magazine size weren't we? You are willing to "give up" something you don't use to get something you would find more useful.

Understandable and all - but unacceptable.


If removing "Drums" from the equation is what it takes to move ahead a little, I'm not going to be crying over it. All my stuff is 22, shotgun, bolt or lever. Mag limits really aren't affecting me. So - i guess I "shoulnd't cry" over YOUR restrictions? Is that how we're playing this?

How about this - how about you DO cry over other gun owner's rights and freedoms, and so do I. Along with everybody else. And together we get better rights for ALL of us. I think that's a better way to do things. Give that a little thought.

Edit - actually i do have one semi auto centerfire now that I think about it - but it's already allowed 10 rounds so neener neener! :)

Edenchef
05-30-2015, 04:24 PM
And, I do feel there will be a day where a future Gov. actually will attempt to prohibit MOST firearms. I don't think that is beyond a possibility. Anything can simply be undone via an OIC by ANY government.... Even a coalition one!

Oh yes! I can feel the love from the politicians too. If it ever becomes in their best interests, for any reason, to disarm us, we will be outlaws faster than ...........(add your own personal politician comment here). I just hope that Mike from Canmore has enough room in his canoe.


https://youtu.be/Kl8ajhu_e5Y
This says it all!

Cheers!

Curt
05-30-2015, 04:48 PM
my guns ain't ever leaving i am either a legal gun owner or an outlaw never give up someone else right to gain some for yourself i'm a free man, ill die a free man.

kennymo
05-30-2015, 04:57 PM
Just a reminder to make .42 related donations over the next couple days. The Cons still stand a great chance at another majority, money now can make next term really worth it for us.

Canada_Phil
05-30-2015, 04:58 PM
All my stuff is 22, shotgun, bolt or lever. Mag limits really aren't affecting me. So - i guess I "shoulnd't cry" over YOUR restrictions? Is that how we're playing this?

How about this - how about you DO cry over other gun owner's rights and freedoms, and so do I. Along with everybody else. And together we get better rights for ALL of us. I think that's a better way to do things. Give that a little thought.



Hah!

Pot calling Kettle... Pot calling Kettle... Over!!

I guess you answered your own point.. You CARE about YOUR point of view to the exclusion of all else it appears. Who the Hell said I don't own 22LR??.... I was refering to high capacity DRUMS in general...Which are nobody's "right".. Were in Canada you know. :)

If it came down to it... Yeah, I WOULD settle for 10 rd mags for 22 if if MEANT I could have 10 rds. in an SKS, VZ, M1A, and on and on and on! It would be NICE to simply pull that "pin" out of my SKS's using $4.99 pliers INSTEAD of paying $499 in materials, time and effort in order to rig up frankenstein magwell adapters in order to skirt a regulation "loop hole" to do the same thing... More unreliably!.. Just sayin.

So maybe we ARE playing at that?

Canada_Phil
05-30-2015, 05:03 PM
Oh yes! I can feel the love from the politicians too. If it ever becomes in their best interests, for any reason, to disarm us, we will be outlaws faster than ...........(add your own personal politician comment here). I just hope that Mike from Canmore has enough room in his canoe.


Cheers!

Oh yeah... That day will definitely come! And I suspect all the hardware stores will have a run on shovels, large diameter pvc tubes, vacuum seal bags, and packing grease.

Foxer
05-30-2015, 05:13 PM
Hah!

Pot calling Kettle... Pot calling Kettle... Over!!

I guess you answered your own point.. You CARE about YOUR point of view to the exclusion of all else it appears. Who the Hell said I don't own 22LR??.... I was refering to high capacity DRUMS in general...Which are nobody's "right".. Were in Canada you know. :)

Ahhh... No.

First off - nobody at all said you don't own a 22. So.. red herring alert.

Second off - my entire point was I DON"T just care about 'my point of view' - even tho i don't have a 'reason' to care about yours because i don't have those kinds of guns. I care about all points of view including the ones that don't affect me directly - and point out we should ALL care about EACH OTHER'S points just as much.

It was in fact you who said you'd be happy to trade away 22lr mags (drums included) if it meant you got what YOU wanted. I'm saying that's a dead end road for us - If I don't care what you DO care about - then all we do is spend our time throwing other gun owners under the bus so that "we" get what "we" want and the anti's will eat us alive. It's better if everyone cares about everyone's point of view.

So that's not calling the kettle black - that's calling out someone who'd throw his fellow gun owners under the bus for his own interests. And that's not ok.


If it came down to it... Yeah, I WOULD settle for 10 rd mags for 22 if if MEANT I could have 10 rds

Yeah, I get that. That's the point. You'd sell out someone else to get what you'd want.

Don't. That's just not a good way to think. If we think that way they will divide us and conquor. It's the old 'First of all, they came to take the gypsies' thing.

United we stand, divided we fall. Don't trade someone else's rights just to get ones you like better.

So maybe we ARE playing at that?

No, so far it's just you. And the anti's who love that stuff.

We will lose playing that game. Don't do it. Because I guarantee someone somewhere is willing to trade something YOU like for something They'd like - we can't think like that. I don't have restricted guns - but I fight hard for restricted rights. You don't have a particular use for 22lr drum mags or whatever - but others do and you need to keep their rights and such in mind.

And we'll never win 'trading away' one right for another anyway. It's only a win if we get something without losing something.

Foxer
05-30-2015, 05:14 PM
Oh yeah... That day will definitely come! And I suspect all the hardware stores will have a run on shovels, large diameter pvc tubes, vacuum seal bags, and packing grease.

Not if we stand together and fight against it. And not throw each other under the bus. I'm frequently disappointed by how easy our side is to concede defeat.

There's a lot of us - if we do the right thing we keep our rights. Period.

wolver
05-30-2015, 05:36 PM
Not if we stand together and fight against it. And not throw each other under the bus. I'm frequently disappointed by how easy our side is to concede defeat.

There's a lot of us - if we do the right thing we keep our rights. Period.

Agreed. And also, burying our guns or having them confiscated by the feds, amounts to the same thing, no one has easy access to them.

IJ22
05-30-2015, 05:38 PM
Those aren't anyone's "rights" now... But those are the things that genuinely terrify average people and continue to act as fodder for Wendy's army of antis.


One need go back only as far as the C-42 debates to see a graphic demonstration of how futile it is to worry about creating fodder for the anti's. If it's not there, they'll make it up, and sell it to the gullible public as learned understanding of the issues.

Foxer
05-30-2015, 06:47 PM
One need go back only as far as the C-42 debates to see a graphic demonstration of how futile it is to worry about creating fodder for the anti's. If it's not there, they'll make it up, and sell it to the gullible public as learned understanding of the issues.

The anti's don't matter. It's the general public that does - and that's about 70 percent or so of the population. The ones who don't really care about guns and aren't really against us but really aren't for us. The anti's are looking for anything that will 'stick' with the public. And we DO have to worry about that. THe antis fail to get traction with their nonsense crap, but there IS crap they CAN get traction with and we DO have to be careful about that.

Don't kid yourself - we've seen it before. If something sticks, the public can turn on us very very fast. Right now they're kind of 'sleeping' and it's best to keep it that way.

Curt
05-30-2015, 08:55 PM
i have a .22lr 30 round mags some shotguns, bolt actions and lever guns. i don't own an ar or any center fire semi auto rifles. (yet) so right now 5 round pins don't effect me but i sure as hell stand up for every Canadian who has an AR or semi auto center fire to have high capacity mags and i would never say ban AR's so i can keep my high capacity mags for my rim fire rifles. that would be a big betrayal to the guys who are fighting for your very rights.

Swampdonkey
05-30-2015, 11:41 PM
I know a few owners of CZ 858s and one Swiss Arms and feel terrible for them. I hate to think of my SKS or Garand being outlawed. I support repealing any gun restrictions possible.

Foxer
05-31-2015, 12:16 AM
I know a few owners of CZ 858s and one Swiss Arms and feel terrible for them. I hate to think of my SKS or Garand being outlawed. I support repealing any gun restrictions possible.

Yeap. We've got to take an 'all for one and one for all' attitude or else there's no chance. It's literally stand together or fall apart. (which, not to derail the thread, is why the nfa situation is so painful right now.)

Gaidheal
05-31-2015, 06:03 AM
I know a few owners of CZ 858s and one Swiss Arms and feel terrible for them. I hate to think of my SKS or Garand being outlawed. I support repealing any gun restrictions possible.

I lost the ability to use my FN and Galils *decades* ago so I know all about their pain. It well and truly sucks to own things you are not allowed to use.

IJ22
05-31-2015, 07:49 AM
THe antis fail to get traction with their nonsense crap, but there IS crap they CAN get traction with and we DO have to be careful about that.


I'm sorry, what? They have the leader of the official opposition, one who according to polls is a serious threat to be the next PM, spewing their crap. I would call that traction.

They spew their crap regardless of how "careful" we are. Being careful won't do squat. We need to educate the general public, be in the anti's faces. Truth is on our side.

Canada_Phil
05-31-2015, 09:03 AM
^^^
That!

And as per Doug's post today... Re: CSSA meeting and the revelation that the RCMP IS in fact gunning to take away '10' round LAR mags, you now have REAL issue to think about this election... And its NOT about Beowulfs, or 100 rd drums for your Ruger or removing AR this and that...

It is coming down to simply being able to have '10' !

That is your FIGHT now.

Foxer
05-31-2015, 11:30 AM
I'm sorry, what? They have the leader of the official opposition, one who according to polls is a serious threat to be the next PM, spewing their crap. I would call that traction.


It isn't. Traction is not when someone says it, but when the public starts to believe it and demand action as a result of it. If anything - the indications are that mulcair's statements have actually HURT his party and many of his MP's are out there screaming that what he said isn't true, they won't consider a new gun registry, backpedal backpedal backpedal.

They also tried the line that the new laws will allow people to carry pistols around shopping malls, and people didn't buy that either. No traction - nobodys' interested in it and they don't buy it.

Anti's can say stuff night and day but if the public doesn't buy it then it's completely meaningless. What we have to concern ourselves with is those things the public might very well decide is important and concerning - if that happens it can be a very bad thing for us.


They spew their crap regardless of how "careful" we are. Being careful won't do squat. We need to educate the general public, be in the anti's faces. Truth is on our side. Yes, and truth has served us well over the long run, and in the long run I still believe that is our greatest advantage.

But - it's not a magic shield. We've done well because the public has SEEN how useless the gun registry is, and they don't buy it when the opposition says c42 will mean people can open carry in shopping malls. And in generally there's a lack of interest in 'gun control' given how badly the registry failed to stop any gun violence. However - i guarantee you if there is a circumstance where the public genuinely DOES see a problem, they can get whipped up just as fast as they did in 89 in a heartbeat. We work very hard to prevent that and we've been succesful but that doesn't mean we can get lazy.

lone-wolf
05-31-2015, 11:33 AM
We've done well because the public has SEEN how useless the gun registry is, and they don't buy it when the opposition says c42 will mean people can open carry in shopping malls.

PEI's CFO said that.
Sorry, that's all I have to add. I just find it absurd she said it.

Foxer
05-31-2015, 12:01 PM
PEI's CFO said that.
Sorry, that's all I have to add. I just find it absurd she said it.

LOL - i know :) Bad enough for a politician to not understand the law and say something stupid but there's no excuse for a CFO :)

Curt
05-31-2015, 12:24 PM
we need to get rid of cfo's that will help us with everything else.

lone-wolf
05-31-2015, 12:28 PM
we need to get rid of cfo's that will help us with everything else.

She is helpful from everything else I hear. People need to learn they can tell the media "I haven't researched the topic so I cannot comment"

Curt
05-31-2015, 12:34 PM
yes i have dealt with her in the past i never had a hard time, and as much as i would hate to see so many people loose there job reality is there job is pointless.

RangeBob
05-31-2015, 12:58 PM
We've done well because the public has SEEN how useless the gun registry is, and they don't buy it when the opposition says c42 will mean people can open carry in shopping malls. PEI's CFO said that.
Sorry, that's all I have to add. I just find it absurd she said it.

I didn't remember PEI CFO Vivian Hayward saying that.
I remembered this


“(It’s) just basically one step away from the U.S.-style having the gun on their hip authorization to carry, which people in this country don’t have,” Hayward said.
-- http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2014-07-27/article-3813813/Restricted,-prohibited-guns-could-be-carried-on-P.E.I.,-warns-official/1


Probably because that was the line commented on on CGN, and by Wayne Easter (Liberal) in the House Of Commons
( http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parliamentarians/en/publicationsearch?SearchText=&RPP=15&MaxRowReturn=10000&fttarget=0&PublicationTypeId=37&ParlSes=41-2&Topic=39887&Person=&Witness= )


But you're right, she did say shopping malls:

“You would never be able to convict somebody and say, ‘What are you doing at this shopping mall with a restricted firearm in your vehicle?’ It would no longer be an unauthorized place because they would no longer have an ATT. I see huge implications for the police.”
-- http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2014-07-27/article-3813813/Restricted,-prohibited-guns-could-be-carried-on-P.E.I.,-warns-official/1

RangeBob
05-31-2015, 01:02 PM
People need to learn they can tell the media "I haven't researched the topic so I cannot comment"

She's half way there:

"Vivian Hayward says she knows very little about the changes"
-- http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2014-07-27/article-3813813/Restricted,-prohibited-guns-could-be-carried-on-P.E.I.,-warns-official/1

and then she effectively had only a few comments...

Curly1
05-31-2015, 01:02 PM
yes i have dealt with her in the past i never had a hard time, and as much as i would hate to see so many people loose there job reality is there job is pointless.

The cfo's are not pointless. They are functioning as they are supposed to, the cfo's give the provincial governments/police the means to harass legal gun owners, when they cannot reign in crime guns. At least, that is what they seem to do best.

Gunexpert007
05-31-2015, 01:08 PM
Hopefully they can get C-42 through before the election this fall as I suspect that there may be a minority govt. after the election with the CPC in power , but heavily neutered....

TheCenturion
06-03-2015, 06:44 AM
Went through first reading by the Senate yesterday. Not sure when the second reading is.

kennymo
06-03-2015, 07:07 AM
The cfo's are not pointless. They are functioning as they are supposed to, the cfo's give the provincial governments/police the means to harass legal gun owners, when they cannot reign in crime guns. At least, that is what they seem to do best.

Well Allan Rock did openly admit that C-68 was designed to harass us into giving up shooting, and had nothing to do with 'public safety'.....

Foxer
06-03-2015, 08:23 AM
Hopefully they can get C-42 through before the election this fall as I suspect that there may be a minority govt. after the election with the CPC in power , but heavily neutered....

well there's really no good reason why they won't - at this point i'd expect it to clear the senate pretty toute suite. Swiss arms and CZ boys will almost certainly be burning powder again by summer.

Kane63
06-03-2015, 08:42 AM
well there's really no good reason why they won't - at this point i'd expect it to clear the senate pretty toute suite. Swiss arms and CZ boys will almost certainly be burning powder again by summer.

Let's pass this sucker already. I'm currently ATT-less and C42 would be a nice "gesture" to the CFO.

Foxer
06-03-2015, 09:04 AM
Let's pass this sucker already. I'm currently ATT-less and C42 would be a nice "gesture" to the CFO.

hehehe - well the senate won't take very long. it's not the parliament. There'll probably be a day of discussion or so, the usual people on both sides will want to grandstand a little, but this will happen pretty quickly.

TheCenturion
06-03-2015, 02:12 PM
Oop, second reading in the Senate scheduled for Tomorrow, June 4.

DanN
06-03-2015, 02:18 PM
Do you know if we can watch it on cpac or...?

RangeBob
06-03-2015, 02:43 PM
Went through first reading by the Senate yesterday. Not sure when the second reading is.

Here .


http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Chamber/412/OrderPaper/ord-e.htm

Senate

For Thursday, June 4, 2015

No. 1.

June 2, 2015—Second reading of Bill C-42, An Act to amend the Firearms Act and the Criminal Code and to make a related amendment and a consequential amendment to other Acts.

Pizzed
06-03-2015, 03:10 PM
well there's really no good reason why they won't - at this point i'd expect it to clear the senate pretty toute suite. Swiss arms and CZ boys will almost certainly be burning powder again by summer. Those phuckers in the Senate have been holding up Bill C-290 (single game betting) for almost 3 years. Nothing is guaranteed!

TheCenturion
06-05-2015, 06:12 AM
Second reading done. Next, the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs looks at it on June 9th and 10th.



The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs has the mandate to examine legislation and to study matters relating to legal and constitutional matters generally, including the criminal justice system and the Criminal Code, constitutional issues, electoral matters, linguistic and legal duality, federal-provincial relations, law reform, the judiciary and most private bills.

The committee has historically been, and continues to be, one of the Senate’s busiest committees. The vast majority of the committee’s work entails the consideration of legislation, although from time to time the committee has undertaken more in-depth special studies on areas related to its mandate. Over the past few years, the committee has conducted statutory reviews, studied pilot projects, reviewed statutory regulations and has made recommendations relating to user fee increases.

Or, in other words,

"But, my Lord, is it...legal?"
"I will MAKE it legal."

no2fembots
06-06-2015, 06:21 PM
my guns ain't ever leaving i am either a legal gun owner or an outlaw never give up someone else right to gain some for yourself i'm a free man, ill die a free man.

Amen to that!!!