Discussions

Time to speak up, if you are a sport shooter, hunter, collector or just or dont agree with banning of firearms let your voice be heard.  
-Townhall on Liberal Firearm Legislation C-71 (Monday) RSVP at  
https://www.larrymaguire.ca/townhall_on_liberal_firearm_legislation_c_71  
 
-Or become a member of the CCFR (Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights)no group will work harder for you.  
 
https://firearmrights.ca/en/membership-info/

Here's an article I found that seems to explain the proposed Bill C-71.  
 
https://globalnews.ca/news/4094224/reality-check-gun-laws-changes/

The proposed bill sounds quite reasonable to me.

Abbysmum said "The proposed bill sounds quite reasonable to me. "

Go figure.

The bill targets lawful gun owners with additional red tape and regulation that do not address the issues of gun violence and gang crime.Somehow we need to ensure the RCMP and other authorities are provided the funding and ability to target the criminals. We support more effective ways of fighting criminals who use guns completely outside of any legal framework.

The inherent flaws in any gun legislation is that they will never stop CRIMINALS who by their nature, don't obey laws. The media continually saturates us with reports of "assault weapons" being used in mass shootings. For starters, a true "assault weapon" is a firearm capable of fully automatic or burst mode operation, and is a restricted weapon not available to the general public. What the public are PROBABLY hearing about are semiautomatic weapons which RESEMBLE their military counterparts (as an aside, the RCMP currently have the power to ban any weapon which appears intimidating, whether it's restricted or not) Long story short, the current process to acquire firearms is certainly extensive and comprehensive, but no amount of paperwork will ever stop weapons from falling into the hands of criminals.

 
 
Most people are afraid of what they don't understand. If more Canadians had to take the PAL/RPAL/Hunter Safety course's I feel like a good percentage of people would shift there opinion about legal firearms owners, however most people aren't bothered to educate themselves.

Absolutely. Introducing more red tape to legally acquire a gun will do nothing to prevent the illegal use of guns.  
 
I encourage everyone to visit CCFR.CA as well as NFA.CA and make yourself heard.

The proposed bill IS reasonable and probably doesn't go far enough. I have a PAL with restricted privileges (what you need to own handguns). The process to own restricted firearms in this country is actually very easy (even easier for non-restricted), despite what most firearms owners will tell you. From 0 firearms experience and knowledge, you just need to complete two courses that can be combined into as little as 2 days. Those courses will teach you firearms safety (not how to shoot), and at the end of those courses you only need to pass a safety test. At that point you can apply for the license - and yes, there's a background check, that looks back a whole 5 years.  
 
Obtaining a firearm is not difficult in this country. Moving and transporting a restricted firearm is also not difficult. Although some find it annoying, all you need to do is call a toll-free number and obtain an authorization to transport. That ATT is typically e-mailed to you within minutes (may vary by province). Moving? Well you can get an ATT that allows you to mail your guns to your new address.  
 
I agree that this law is not going to solve the issue of gun crime in Canada. However, 75% of all gun-related deaths in Canada between 2000 and 2016 were self-inflicted (suicide). There are lots of people who should not own guns, and the current process is doing little to stop those with mental health issues from legally owning (or having access to legally owned) guns. Extended background checks might help in some cases.  
 
Every time gun regulation comes up it's a polarizing issue. Most Canadians probably don't realize that you can (easily) legally own handguns in this country. They have no idea what additional regulation will mean, and applaud whenever they hear it will be more difficult to legally own any guns. Meanwhile, legal gun owners who very often improperly store and secure and handle their firearms don't want an ounce of additional regulation that might prevent the theft of their firearms and the later use of those firearms in the commission of crimes, or access to those firearms by those with mental health issues.  
 
While I do think requiring a lifetime background check is a great idea, the current state of regulation in Canada is a confusing patchwork of often nonsensical rules that frankly nobody on either side of the issue fully understands. What would help is a clearly articulated vision of what we're actually trying to achieve in this country with respect to legal and illegal gun ownership. Until that happens, we'll continue to have blatant misinformation on all sides, and everyone fighting for more or less, instead of better regulation.

Via CTV, just for a wider sense of opinion on the topic. Re support of “A total ban on handgun ownership in Canada, exempting only police and security professionals”....  
 
48% of Canadians would support a total ban  
19% would somewhat support  
21% oppose  
10% somewhat oppose  
 
Support in the prairies is lower than national average at 55%  
 
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/national/canada/2018/9/2/1_4077763.html

I have no issues with back ground checks being extended for gun owners . However, back ground checks on politicians would have eliminated a lot of issues. Giving the rcmp any say in classification of firearms, was the first mistake. Law abiding citizens put your hand over your bottom.

semi-automatic=fully automatic=Gun that can mow down a room in under 30 seconds  
 
Not sure if more is required, acquiring a PAL card is pretty stringent as it is. They probe and check quite a bit already.

"Acquiring a PAL card is pretty stringent"....I disagree. I really know nothing about guns, have only ever handled one in my entire life. I took a two-day course, along with my teenaged nieces, did the paperwork, and now have a PAL! I could, at any time in the future, purchase and own a gun and ammunition. I never have to pass any kind of knowledge or safety test ever again.

You may not have to pass any safety tests in the future, but know that your license is monitored daily against firearms prohibitions. There are a number of crimes that will get you a ban, and not all of them have any violence involved.  
 
There are close to 3 million licensed firearms owners in the country, and you can count on one hand the numbers of them that cause the kinds of problems the public wants to prevent in a year. They are already vetted before they get a license, and as mentioned, are constantly vetted repeatedly for bans.  
 
A lot more good can be done by enforcing the laws we already have. There is a law in the criminal code that if someone breaks in for the purpose of stealing a firearm, or steals a firearm during a break-in (including vehicles), they have committed an indictable offense and are eligible for up to life in prison. Perhaps add a mandatory minimum to this section of the criminal code, and leave the law abiding firearms owners alone.  
 
I think the liberals wrote this bill expecting that it would satisfy their promise do be doing something, and they did not expect the backlash that it caused. It completely targets the wrong people. As a firearms owner myself, I would far far sooner have seen much harsher penalties for those who steal guns, or use them in crimes. No gun owner likes to see the criminal use of firearms, and we are tired of being the scapegoats who get blamed for them.

curlysister said ""Acquiring a PAL card is pretty stringent"....I disagree. I really know nothing about guns, have only ever handled one in my entire life. I took a two-day course, along with my teenaged nieces, did the paperwork, and now have a PAL! I could, at any time in the future, purchase and own a gun and ammunition. I never have to pass any kind of knowledge or safety test ever again. "

When I got my PAL, I had a lengthy interview and they thoroughly checked my references.  
 
I also kept my course books, and reviewed them before I purchased a firearm. I continue to learn safe shooting at the range.  
 
Don't make gun ownership out to be some sort of joke, just because you think of it as one.  
 
If the program is such a farce, why not lead the safety crusade by turning in your card. I'll certainly feel better.

Adam said "Via CTV, just for a wider sense of opinion on the topic. Re support of “A total ban on handgun ownership in Canada, exempting only police and security professionals”....     48% of Canadians would support a total ban   19% would somewhat support   21% oppose   10% somewhat oppose     Support in the prairies is lower than national average at 55%     https://www.google.ca/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/national/canada/2018/9/2/1_4077763.html "

There is an old saying that the river of support for gun control is a mile wide, but not that deep. I can guarantee you that the 20 or 30% who oppose a ban are willing to put their money and time towards their cause.  
 
Gun control is also one of those things that, when it fails (and it always does), those proposing it will say it is because we need more gun control.  
 
When the registration of non-restricted firearms was dropped some 6 years back, and despite the wailing of the gun control advocates, the use of non-restricted firearms in crimes did not go up. Millions on millions saved, but this government somehow feels that putting in half of the registry (asking permission to sell a rifle, and recording the permission) will somehow make things better.  
 
Edited by cmp, 2018-09-09 20:47:38

It was two years ago. My references were checked, and I did have to submit some additional information when asked. There were no course books provided. The instructor made it clear that women know how to kill themselves more effectively than men, that as long as people don't get caught they aren't really doing anything wrong, and that the police are not to be trusted. It seemed like he thought that gun ownership was a joke - much more than those of us taking the course. I do not think it's a joke. I don't own a gun, nor do I feel at all qualified to do so. That was the point of my post - MORE is needed rather than less. Why don't I have to take the course again after a certain amount of time? Why don't I have to take more courses? Why am I basically good for life, as long as I don't have any charges that would negate it?

curlysister said "It was two years ago. My references were checked, and I did have to submit some additional information when asked. There were no course books provided. The instructor made it clear that women know how to kill themselves more effectively than men, that as long as people don't get caught they aren't really doing anything wrong, and that the police are not to be trusted. It seemed like he thought that gun ownership was a joke - much more than those of us taking the course. I do not think it's a joke. I don't own a gun, nor do I feel at all qualified to do so. That was the point of my post - MORE is needed rather than less. Why don't I have to take the course again after a certain amount of time? Why don't I have to take more courses? Why am I basically good for life, as long as I don't have any charges that would negate it? "

Kinda works similar to a drivers licence, you dont have to be tested on it all the time and if you dont obey the laws its pulled.

I’m all for it. It doesn’t matter if there are responsible owners out there or not. The fact is that if there aren’t these types of guns to obtain in Canada then they won’t be obtained. Easy. Sure they will still be around until the ammo runs out but even for sport, there is no good reason to have these types of guns around. Find a different hobby.

For all you people that are for this ban, I would like you to answer a question for me.  
If someone is killed by a drunk driver it is the drunk drivers fault.  
If some one is killed by a suicide bomber it is the bomber fault.  
But if someone is killed by a shooter IT’S THE GUNS FAULT.  
Why is it the guns fault?  
If this is your thinking, maybe we should ban all vehicles so drunk drivers can’t use them to injure people, or have vehicles stolen by other people and have them used in crimes.  
Just wondering

curlysister said ""Acquiring a PAL card is pretty stringent"....I disagree. I really know nothing about guns, have only ever handled one in my entire life. I took a two-day course, along with my teenaged nieces, did the paperwork, and now have a PAL! I could, at any time in the future, purchase and own a gun and ammunition. I never have to pass any kind of knowledge or safety test ever again. "

would be the same, would it not? I passed the test forty years ago, that took about fifteen minutes to pass and have never taken that again. Depends on your learning ability. If you learned nothing on a two day PAL course, I can understand your frustration.

Another gun law that seems based on the premise that the people who miss use guns are not the problem, but instead, the gun is the problem. So, like so many other laws that have been passed, it makes life more difficult for the people who are trying to use and enjoy their guns properly. I could list all of the items that we are not allowed to buy anymore because someone may use them the wrong way and hurt themselves or someone else. I personally am sick of having to be inconvenienced by not being able to buy a product that I intend to use the right way because of that type of thinking by lawmakers. If they had that mentality with drunk driving they would have banned both cars and alcohol. They actually did try to ban alcohol once and everyone who really wanted it still somehow managed to get it.  
 
In England, they basically did ban guns, for all intents and purposes. Now, in London they've had to bring in "knife control" because of all of the stabbings. On 911, four airlineers were brought down by terrorists armed with nothing more than little utility knives known as boxcutters.  
 
I would vote against this legislation. Also to those who are not sure, my thoughts are always that if you're not sure which way to vote, always vote in favor of freedom. Once we lose a right we will never get it back again.

It is an impossible task to to disarm criminals or stop them from buying/using stolen and or smuggled guns. Law abiding citizens ( especially in large urban areas where violence is high) are rightfully demanding that the government do some thing. The easy way out is to disseminate a lot of wrong information and make a big show writing a bunch of useless paper. Putting people on the ground to apply our existing laws would be too expense and offend some special interest group.  
 
Writing a bunch of new laws may satisfy the uninformed who haven't taken the time to think this through, but stop and do the math!!! Do you really thing that the gang banger who shot up the night club parking lot had a valid PAL and a receipt from Cabellos for that pistol?? And that it was registered?? Have you ever heard the announcer say " The suicide bomber had a valid licence and his car insurance was paid. His permit to buy explosives has been revoked for life, though."  
 
Most people would be SHOCKED at how easy it is for these people to acquire handguns and such. Like the earlier post about pot being readily available even though it is illegal. Not even go there about the meth that may contribute to their actions.  
 
Paper doesn't stop bullets. A lack of bullets only drives up knife sales. Taking criminals off the streets stops crime. Let's put our resources where they actually accomplish the mission.

I have never ever heard of an accidental bombing where someone had a bomb in a house and it accidentally went off. Or an accidental drunk driving accident... I’ve never heard of someone who accidentally got drunk and then accidentally drove and then accidentally hit and hurt/killed someone. I think that’s the difference here and answers your question.

scandal said "I have never ever heard of an accidental bombing where someone had a bomb in a house and it accidentally went off. Or an accidental drunk driving accident... I’ve never heard of someone who accidentally got drunk and then accidentally drove and then accidentally hit and hurt/killed someone. I think that’s the difference here and answers your question. "

Not quite sure what your trying to justify

scandal said "I’m all for it. It doesn’t matter if there are responsible owners out there or not. The fact is that if there aren’t these types of guns to obtain in Canada then they won’t be obtained. Easy. Sure they will still be around until the ammo runs out but even for sport, there is no good reason to have these types of guns around. Find a different hobby. "

kill people. Anything can be used as a weapon, if you look hard enough.

curlysister said ""Acquiring a PAL card is pretty stringent"....I disagree. I really know nothing about guns, have only ever handled one in my entire life. I took a two-day course, along with my teenaged nieces, did the paperwork, and now have a PAL! I could, at any time in the future, purchase and own a gun and ammunition. I never have to pass any kind of knowledge or safety test ever again. "

you have to do a test constantly to drive and own a car , something that is used on a public road way and not at a range or field ? No ! same firearms test.  
Also as an fyi , the holders of RPALs ( restricted licences , are checked daily through CPIC for any crimes commited or mental health issues. So I say our system is pretty good as is.

London beat New York city in homicides this year, all due to knife violence (no guns allowed in the UK pretty much). So now Mayor Khan is proposing a knife ban, you cant carry a knife longer than 4 inches. So watch out going home with you new steak or kitchen knifes in London! Some of toughest gun laws on the books are in Chicago. Hows that working for them?  
 
Banning firearms from law abiding citizens because of criminal active by criminals is like the government taking away your car because your neighbor drives drunk.

voiceofthepeople said "London beat New York city in homicides this year, all due to knife violence (no guns allowed in the UK pretty much). So now Mayor Khan is proposing a knife ban, you cant carry a knife longer than 4 inches. So watch out going home with you new steak or kitchen knifes in London! Some of toughest gun laws on the books are in Chicago. Hows that working for them?     Banning firearms from law abiding citizens because of criminal active by criminals is like the government taking away your car because your neighbor drives drunk. "

Exactly

I don't think that by making it harder for Canadians to own guns is the way to go. Rather, the Government has to make it harder for illegal guns to make it into Canada. I really don't think that typical gun violence is being perpetrated by legal gun owners, but rather by violent people who obtain the weapons through illegal means, such as gun smugglers. Just my opinion.