You can get two shots off faster from a double barrel than a semi. Obviously designed for war and should be banned.
|
|
|
We Know you Ride, But do you Shoot?
- Thread starter Triple
- Start date
Benelli M4 has a trigger grip and a barrel length that means it’s not such a good wildlife/clays gun. Pretty sure that’s why it’s on there. Can you hunt with it? Sure.
there are many other short-trigger grip shotguns available for purchase, but aren't as prominent in video games or movies. that's the only reason it's on there (maybe also because its called M4).
I can guarantee there are more crimes & shootings committed with basic 870/500 pumps in Canada and US than benelli m4s.
you wouldn't be allowed on a lot of clay ranges with that barrel length but there's more to shooting sports than just hunting and clays.
another dumb note, weatherby mark v is on the ban list. I don't even have a clue why for this.
As sad as it sounds, has anyone compared the banned list to guns that are available in any video game? That level of stupidity would fit. It doesn't matter that the Weatherby was in Deer Hunter 2003, it glorifies shooting so it's banned.
woobie
Well-known member
From what I understand the Weatherby is available in .460 Weatherby Magnum and that is above 10,000 joules so they Banned the ENTIRE line as variant of the one chambered in that caliber . There's a few other rifle lines that currently sound like they will be banned by the same logic.
If they are actually goofy enough to blacklist manuf based on available large caliber rifles , there are a half dozen off the top of my head that will be gone .
Where are all the guys that need to trot out Norway and Denmark as a benchmark for life now ? ( deer and bear rifles are like umbrellas up there )
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Where are all the guys that need to trot out Norway and Denmark as a benchmark for life now ? ( deer and bear rifles are like umbrellas up there )
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
The sniveling moron stepped in it this time. Opposition to his ban most guns bill is rapidly rising. Hunters, first nations, every other political party and many more are piling on. Libs have no choice but to revise (again). Not sure who wrote the amendment and who reviewed it that had ever seen a gun before. Complete morons. They should be fired from a minimum wage job for failure to perform at a level commensurate with the compensation provided.
DownUnder
Well-known member
If he wants guns banned he will ban them, doesn't matter what the rest of the country says or wants. He knows what's best for Canada.
Yes and no. When he sees that his voters start pushing back he will decide whether it's worth it or not.
Plus...he's all about being 'inclusive' and 'listening to all parties', so if enough of the minorities that he loves and panders to push back...we may see a change.
DownUnder
Well-known member
Nah he's taking them no matter what and he will get reelected either way.
From what I understand there is a couple million gun owners in canada but they are in groups that don't like eachother.
Reminds me of that quote from the German priest in ww2. *edited to fit the situation*
First they came for the AR15s and I I'd not speak out, because I did not own one.
Then they came for the handguns and I did not speak out because I did not own one.
Then they came for the hunting rifles and I did not speak out because I did not own one.
Then they came for us... and there was noone left to speak out for us.
So on that topic...is it even worth it to get a hunting license now if guns are going to be banned?
I don't know well enough, but my buddy just told me 10min ago he got it and is worried he won't be able to buy a gun before the ban.
Neither of us is well versed on this topic.
I don't know well enough, but my buddy just told me 10min ago he got it and is worried he won't be able to buy a gun before the ban.
Neither of us is well versed on this topic.
They aren't banning everything right now. Just "assault-style" for which there was no definition enshrined in law. Wanker in chief went for "centre fire gun capable of accepting an external magazine that can hold more than five rounds" as part of the definition. An assault rifle has a clear definition (one trigger pull, multiple bullets). Assault-style is the work of a scared child.
So it's still worth doing. My 'Wellness Spending Account' covers hunting license.
DownUnder
Well-known member
Do you want to hunt or a gun? you need a PAL to get a gun no point in a RPAL anymore. The new proposed ban is any gun that is semi auto, centerfire and had a magazine. As any gun that has a magazine can hold a magazine that takes more than 5 bullets.
So as not to inconvenience hunters , we will see a plugged magazine that holds 3 rounds , and then a shooter will build his own mag that holds whatever . Since it’s a metal box with a spring in the bottom.
As an experiment I took my tube feed plincker .22 , that holds 10 .22LR shells . I can fire 10 rounds in 20 seconds . It’s a short throw bolt action.
Squirrels around here should be nervous.
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
As an experiment I took my tube feed plincker .22 , that holds 10 .22LR shells . I can fire 10 rounds in 20 seconds . It’s a short throw bolt action.
Squirrels around here should be nervous.
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Except stupid wrote the definition as "can accept". It has nothing to do with what is used (nor even what is available). It is pretty hard to argue that any external magazine centrefire rifle cannot accept a longer magazine. It might be possible to put a guard to limit mag length but any guard that you can get a magazine past can probably also be bypassed by a specially designed magazine.
Lucky right now all I have is bolt action and lever action rifles. Was going to get a semi auto center fire but will hold off until the dust settles. Might get a semi auto 22 just for fun.
Sent from the future
Sent from the future
Did semi-auto magazine fed shotguns get caught up in this mess?
|
|
|
|
|