Registration leads to confiscation.

Forum Sponsor
bigguy1 said:
This is something that could actually become a reality.
Click to expand...

I'll reserve my optimism until I hear something more concrete.. Until this mess happened, the latest I got from him was "there are gonna be no major reclassifications and definitely not a rewrite".. However, there is big pressure and major public awareness happening.
 
SONIC said:
I hear you on some of your points, but if they are as simple as you say, why make them look big and bad if they really aren't. It just supports the idea that some people want to look and feel like they're Rambo by buying a gun that looks like it'll tear someone to shreds. It's the mentality that breeds gun totting gun nuts, like the ones that run around shooting up innocent people, which is likely a reason why they are trying to ban guns that look like this.
Click to expand...
rifles_have_changed.jpg


Styles change. Appearance change. Function is the same, a projectile comes out the end.
 
Styles change. Appearance change. Function is the same, a projectile comes out the end.
Click to expand...

Much like the Mini 30 and the CZ858:

mini30.jpg


Product_165_1.jpg


Both use the same ammunition, have the same legal capacity, and shoot at the same rate. There is virtually no difference what-so-ever on the impact these two rifles make. However, one was just prohibited based on looks alone and then the government grants a 5 year amnesty -- which just serves to prove that this is not about safety but is just about banning something they don't like. Completely irrational and nonsensical.
 
Here's a police interaction video of a bunch of Texans getting together, carrying their rifles in downtown. Most of them are restricted (can only take them to the range, can't hunt with them) or prohibited (can't have them) in Canada. No animals or humans got hurt in this video :cool: The interaction starts about 2min in, you can skip through the intro.
[video=youtube;vdJ8pjKmIQU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdJ8pjKmIQU[/video]
 
Snobike Mike said:
This times one billion.
Click to expand...

Exactly.. In a free and democratic society where the police services don't act as tools of oppression, an armed law-abiding citizen is much more likely to prevent crime than to commit a crime. It's no wonder that states that allow concealed carry have much lower violent crime rates than states with strict gun control laws.
 
SONIC said:
I hear you on some of your points, but if they are as simple as you say, why make them look big and bad if they really aren't. It just supports the idea that some people want to look and feel like they're Rambo by buying a gun that looks like it'll tear someone to shreds. It's the mentality that breeds gun totting gun nuts, like the ones that run around shooting up innocent people, which is likely a reason why they are trying to ban guns that look like this.
Click to expand...

My coyote gun looks like a sniper rifle... Because essentially that is what it is.

Flat Black: easier to hide in the shadows with it.
Plastic: light weight, easy to clean, durable.
Big scope: You try hitting a moving target the size of a tea plate (aiming for the heart/centre of lungs) at 300m.

Sure, some people want to look like rambo. I'm eventually buying an SKS for a whole bunch of reasons (mostly cheap fun shooting) but plan on modernizing the look of it... Sure, it will look "scary" but the basic function of it is all the same... So what if I want to spend my money and make something I think is cool?
My Tikka rifle I mentioned is way more deadly at range than the SKS ever would be, and my shotgun would be way more effective at something very close quarters (like in my home). Not that I live in fear of that ever happening, and it's not like I haven't already been in the situation where I've had my finger on the trigger and pointed in someone's chest, and honestly I don't have the urge to go and "tear someone up" because I have guns or think they are cool... I like fast cars, I like fast bikes, I like cool guns. It's all the same.
You may see a large group of guys (and gals) together like me and my friends on the weekends out at the pit shooting... Dozens of guns, thousands of rounds of ammo and think we're a bunch of crazed gun people, but really we're out enjoying eachother, shooting some stuff and heading back to a buddie's for some drinks. We have some pretty serious guns in the group, and there is likely $40,000 worth of equipment out there when the whole group is out there.

Those people out there shooting innocent people are not typical gun nuts. Those are the people that have a MENTAL issue, and that is the issue that should be in the spot light, not the millions of sane, legal gun owners in this country who are being punished, made in to criminals and are losing OUR freedoms.

It's not that a specific gun was banned in this manner. It's the fact that ANY gun can be banned for NO reason other than someone decides they don't like it for the look of it.
 
The other thing to consider about these 'scary' guns, that of course non-gun owners wouldn't understand, is that we have a very limited selection of rifles in this country, and those that are legal to own here are sometimes very rare.

Consider the two rifles I posted above, the mini 30 and the cz858.

Both shoot the 7.62 x 39 ammo which is the cheapest option to shoot for center fire. So lets say you want a non-restricted rifle in this caliber so you can plink on your own land, on crown land, take it hunting, etc, what are your choices? Not many. You've got the SKS, the mini 30, the CZ858, and a few higher end much more expensive models.

Out of these choices, I would prefer the mini 30, but have never seen one for sale anywhere. They are rare. So my next best choice, even though I don't care much for the look is the CZ858. I didn't buy one though as I decided an SKS with iron sights would be good enough.

So that is something else to consider SONIC... if I decide if I want something semi-auto in .223 that is unrestricted, my choices aren't that much more... ruger, benelli, keltec, norinco, and a few more that I can't name because they are well out of my price range. My first choice would be a AR platform, but because it is restricted it is useless to me. People don't always buy the 'scary' choices because they like them, in many cases they might be the only available option available that suits their wants.

In this reclassification cluster **** I am very lucky that I am not one of the owners of a CZ858. I was very close to buying one because they are not too pricey. I wonder what the values of these guns will be like now considering the uncertainty of their future classification?
 
Diesel said:
In this reclassification cluster **** I am very lucky that I am not one of the owners of a CZ858. I was very close to buying one because they are not too pricey. I wonder what the values of these guns will be like now considering the uncertainty of their future classification?
Click to expand...

Don't think they aren't coming for whatever you're dreaming about adding to your collection.

This issue is far bigger than whether or not you own either a Swiss or CZ858. This is about abuse of power by an unelected police agency and even more importantly is about Canadian property rights.

Gun owners and non-gun owners alike don't understand that a government that doesn't fear the people is a world in which we don't want to live (even though it's fast becoming one), you'd better get off ones rear and fight back.
 
FiReSTaRT said:
Exactly.. In a free and democratic society where the police services don't act as tools of oppression, an armed law-abiding citizen is much more likely to prevent crime than to commit a crime. It's no wonder that states that allow concealed carry have much lower violent crime rates than states with strict gun control laws.
Click to expand...
Not true states do not have a lower crime rate that have concealed carry laws http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...80a5d7e-47c9-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_blog.html and the crime rates are all still higher than Canada that doesn't allow carrying.
 
Scuba Steve said:
Not true states do not have a lower crime rate that have concealed carry laws http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...80a5d7e-47c9-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_blog.html and the crime rates are all still higher than Canada that doesn't allow carrying.
Click to expand...

That's why my main argument focused on violent crimes as opposed to the general crime rate which can involve property crime and even just your run of the mill drug possession. Even that Washington Post (lol) blog post doesn't dispute that. I think it has more to do with the psychology of the law-abiding gun owner than any fear created in the criminal - law-abiding gun owners make up a larger proportion of the population of areas where gun laws are generally permissive and they are less likely to commit violent acts.
 
Scuba Steve said:
Not true states do not have a lower crime rate that have concealed carry laws http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...80a5d7e-47c9-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_blog.html and the crime rates are all still higher than Canada that doesn't allow carrying.
Click to expand...

Attempting to justify Canadian gun laws through US crime stats is nothing but a lame stretch.

You might be to interested to know that over the past 20 years in the US gun crimes have fallen by 49%. So while they may still have more gun crimes than up here, even with "loose" by Canadian standards gun laws, if it's falling it can't be the scary guns as the root cause of the problem.

The logical conclusion is that it's people (and their associated problems), not the tool, that commit the crimes but of course that flies in the face of the Left for a concept they just can't seem to grasp = personal accountability. For the left, it HAS to be something other than the poor criminal who was just trying to turn their life around and the big bad scary looking gun made them do it......
 
Scuba Steve said:
Not true states do not have a lower crime rate that have concealed carry laws http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...80a5d7e-47c9-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_blog.html and the crime rates are all still higher than Canada that doesn't allow carrying.
Click to expand...

As firestart noted, you have to look at gun crimes, not overall crime rate. the UK has a violent crime rate that is more than 4x higher than the US and yet their gun laws are more draconian than Canada's.

Here's a study showing concealed carry vs murders (oh the inconvenient problem of truth for the anti-gunners)

A recent study undertaken by a Quinnipiac University Economics professor shows that states with stricter gun control laws had higher incidences of gun related murders.

The study is called, "An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates," and you can find it published in the journal Applied Economics Letters.

Here’s the Abstract:

The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state-level murder rates. Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level. These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level. The results of this study are consistent with some prior research in this area, most notably Lott and Mustard (1997).
Click to expand...

http://eaglerising.com/3958/proof-concealed-carry-means-fewer-murders/#kJp213DwfpCsx7Lf.99
 
Scuba Steve said:
Not true states do not have a lower crime rate that have concealed carry laws http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...80a5d7e-47c9-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_blog.html and the crime rates are all still higher than Canada that doesn't allow carrying.
Click to expand...

States have varying crime rates whether there is CCW or not. Some states that allow CCW have lower crime rates than Canada. Check out Vermont & New Hampshire. Check out District of Columbia which doesn't allow CCW & has strict gun control like Canada. Problem is, anti-gun advocates like to conflate gun crime with gun suicide, which is an entirely different problem.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/interactive/2013/sep/17/us-gun-crime-map
 
FiReSTaRT said:
Here's a police interaction video of a bunch of Texans getting together, carrying their rifles in downtown. Most of them are restricted (can only take them to the range, can't hunt with them) or prohibited (can't have them) in Canada. No animals or humans got hurt in this video :cool: The interaction starts about 2min in, you can skip through the intro.
[video=youtube;vdJ8pjKmIQU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdJ8pjKmIQU[/video]
Click to expand...

Oh ny gawd, I nearly got a heart attack. No shots were fired?

Sent from my tablet using my paws
 
Snobike Mike said:
Here's a study showing concealed carry vs murders (oh the inconvenient problem of truth for the anti-gunners)
Click to expand...

Figures don't lie, but liars can figure.

Now I'm no Professor but here's some figures I dug up on my own. Toronto is the 4th largest city in North America at 2.7 million, behind only Mexico City, New York and LA yet it has an unfathomably low murder rates when compared to US cities less then a third its size. But let's compare it to Chicago. Both have a population of approx 2.7 million, and are in a similar geographic location/climate

Toronto had 57 homicides in 2013, 22 by shooting, which works out to be around 38%.

Chicago had 448 homicides in 2013, 372 by shooting. That's 83%

A Homicide in Chicago is also Nearly 8x more likely by those numbers. I would image the right to own and carry firearms has something to do with that.

To me it is far more relevant to compare a country with anti-gun laws to a country without, as the guns must cross through an international boarders to get to a city such as Toronto for example. The guns are everywhere in the states, so it stands to reason unarmed civilians will be more at risk than those who are armed. Making state to state comparison relatively pointless since anyone can still buy the guns..... unless of course you're on the NRA Christmas list
 
Last edited:
whether State by State or Country as a whole it makes no sense to compare Can with US on any gun laws. The NRA is extremely powerful and influential , the 2nd amendment gets thrown on the table constantly. We don't have a lobby group with anywhere near the influence and elected leaders that see the views of legitimate sportsman as important enough to get consideration.
The idea the RCMP can create rules and policy and then be supported by our lawmakers is wrong, very wrong. The whole serve and protect cannot be construed to protect us from something that is not happening. Send letters to your MP's, your PM's office and yes your MPP. I'm pretty convinced no elected officials will ever see this thread, but they need to know what they are allowing is very wrong.
 
inreb said:
I thought Neil V's last paragraph covered that, no?
Click to expand...

If you think it's difficult for a criminal to get a gun on the cheap in Toronto, you're sadly mistaken. Getting an illegal gun is a lot easier and cheaper than going through the licensing process. It's our overall non-violent culture that is keeping our violent crime rates down. We just have fewer violent criminals. Our homicide rate is lower than most countries with similar gun ownership rates.

On the other hand, the US culture is very individualistic and confrontational. That leads to a greater likelihood of using violence to resolve disputes and their murder rates reflect that. If they didn't have access to factory guns, they could always develop a cottage industry like the Philippines or Pakistan.
[video=youtube;HujjuvPiUj4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HujjuvPiUj4[/video]
If these people can get together and develop a cottage industry in such primitive conditions, imagine what could be (and has been) done in an industrialized nation. And even if you waved your magic wand and made all the guns disappear, they'd use knives...rocks...IED's...teeth...Human race is very creative when it comes to killing

Note on the NRA. There are 2 reasons why they exist:
1) There is a powerful attack on gun rights by well-funded (mostly by rich oligarchs) special interest groups, buying up any politicians they can get their hands on. Populous states like New York and California already have stricter gun laws than Canada. US gun owners felt the need to defend their rights
2) Enough US gun owners care enough about the erosion of their gun rights that they decided to pull together and buy some of their own politicians in order to stem the tide.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom