Pack a handgun in wilderness areas poll

[Mountain Adventurer]

I feel that I should be able to pack a handgun in wilderness areas if I choose to. So I thought I'd start a poll to see who else feels the same way. I recently wrote the liberal party of Canada looking for some information on there opinions on gun control seeing as how I will be voting liberal. I feel the liberal party with guidance from Justin Trudeau has a chance to really make a positive change for all Canadians,you always have to take the good and bad with any party you should decide to vote for, anyways here's basically what I said.

These are based on my opinions,I respect others opinions but this is what I had to say.

I feel that I should be able to pack a handgun in wilderness areas if I choose to, I'd also like to say that I'm for the gun registry and I would like to own a handgun but won't purchase one until the laws change somewhat. I don't think people should be able to carry a concealed handgun as i cant see the purpose,but I do feel that handguns should be in a similar category as non restricted firearms. Responsible people should be able to take one out in the bush so long as it is properly stored in a locked container during transportation with the magazines and ammo kept separately in locked containers on all roads and highways in any type of transportation. And those who do not follow such rules shouldn't have the right to own any firearms period! And I also feel that five round magazine capacity for certain semi auto guns is only a burden for those who follow the laws like myself. Anyone who feels the need to break the law could easily pull a pin or modify such magazines in minutes and it is unfair to the rest of us following such laws.

This is what they told me,

Dear Sir,

Thank you for sharing your concerns with the Liberal Party of Canada regarding gun control. I apologize for the delay in responding.

Liberals are committed to creating fewer victims of gun violence and we believe in balanced gun control that prioritizes public safety while ensuring that law-abiding firearms owners do not face undue treatment under the law. We will spend the time leading up to the federal election developing evidence-based firearms policy that is based on this approach.

Regarding Bill C-42, Liberals cannot support a new gun bill that puts Canadians’ safety at risk. First, Bill C-42 would take the power to classify firearms out of the hands of the police – the experts in keeping Canadians safe – and put it in the hands of politicians like Stephen Harper. Second, it eliminates the need for owners of prohibited and restricted firearms to have transportation authorization to carry those guns in their vehicles. This means they could freely transport handguns or automatic weapons anywhere within their province, whether to a grocery store or a soccer field.

We will not bring back a gun registry, but we do need smart and well-crafted gun control legislation. In its current form, Bill C-42 is neither; instead, it makes Canadians less safe. We cannot and will not support it.

Liberals support several elements in Bill C-42, such as the provisions streamlining licencing paperwork, tightening safety training requirements, and making it harder for people convicted of domestic offences to obtain a gun. We are calling on the government to split Bill C-42 in order to help expedite these acceptable measures through Parliament.

Thank you again for sharing your perspective on this issue. It is through consultation with Canadians like you that the Liberal Party of Canada can continue to develop policies that reflect the priorities of Canadians.

Kind regards,


Liberal Party of Canada

Tell us about what issues you care about | Dites-nous quels enjeux vous tiennent à


Once again this is my opinion, and I will respect your opinion. Would you like to bring your handgun out to the bush camping or fishing? Let the polls begin!

[45/70/500]

give the libs a few more hours and they will have a different opinion stand by for more BS

[Twisted Canuck]

Regarding Bill C-42, Liberals cannot support a new gun bill that puts Canadians’ safety at risk. First, Bill C-42 would take the power to classify firearms out of the hands of the police – the experts in keeping Canadians safe – and put it in the hands of politicians like Stephen Harper. Second, it eliminates the need for owners of prohibited and restricted firearms to have transportation authorization to carry those guns in their vehicles. This means they could freely transport handguns or automatic weapons anywhere within their province, whether to a grocery store or a soccer field.

Liberal Party of Canada




Once again confirming what a bunch of ignorant uneducated ignorant useless Turds (because it won't let me say ****s) those stupid ****ing Liberals are. Ok. It's been a rough couple of days. Thanks for sharing that. And you said you are going to vote for them? Jesus wept, and wept and wept.....

Automatic weapons to a grocery store or a soccer field. What a bunch of fear mongering knee jerk stupidity from a pack of stupid ignorant morons. Arseholes. Did you say you were going to vote for them?? I so want to meet you and help you. 'Make a positive change for Canadians....' Jesus wept.

[Mountain Adventurer]

oh this should be a good one! I'm sure you are all aware the liberals don't support organized crime either..:scared0018:

[Zuludog]

I'm not voting for more gun control, the Liberals and especially Trudeau. Let me say it again especially JT.
I would love to carry hand gun while bow hunting to answer the OP's original question.

[dale7637]

How in gods green earth can you support the idea of packing a handgun in one sentence, and then admit in the next that you are going to vote liberal?

One of these things isn't like the other.

[Got Juice?]

Do they REALLY think a piece of paper would stop someone from taking firearms anywhere?

Failed gun control indeed.



Restraining orders are another good example of a piece of paper that does.... NOTHING!

[HyperMOA]

Regarding Bill C-42, Liberals cannot support a new gun bill that puts Canadians’ safety at risk. First, Bill C-42 would take the power to classify firearms out of the hands of the police – the experts in keeping Canadians safe – and put it in the hands of politicians like Stephen Harper. Second, it eliminates the need for owners of prohibited and restricted firearms to have transportation authorization to carry those guns in their vehicles. This means they could freely transport handguns or automatic weapons anywhere within their province, whether to a grocery store or a soccer field.

Once again this is my opinion, and I will respect your opinion. Would you like to bring your handgun out to the bush camping or fishing? Let the polls begin!

We have learned that the RCMP should not be classifying firearms themselves. Second I am quite sure that C-42 does not eliminate the need for an ATT. IT is just going to make it easier to get a permanent ATT. You still will not be able to take a handgun to the grocery store. I am certain you won't be able to take automatic weapons there either. You think that they would research what they are opposed to a little more.

Lastly, they never even answered your questions about your concerns they just deflected to bill C-42. You really think this is who should lead our country? You must be after legal dope or something. :)

[Mountain Adventurer]

How in gods green earth can you support the idea of packing a handgun in one sentence, and then admit in the next that you are going to vote liberal?

One of these things isn't like the other.

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

[Hydro1]

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

LOL :sHa_sarcasticlol:
Good grief....

[Mountain Adventurer]

We have learned that the RCMP should not be classifying firearms themselves. Second I am quite sure that C-42 does not eliminate the need for an ATT. IT is just going to make it easier to get a permanent ATT. You still will not be able to take a handgun to the grocery store. I am certain you won't be able to take automatic weapons there either. You think that they would research what they are opposed to a little more.

Lastly, they never even answered your questions about your concerns they just deflected to bill C-42. You really think this is who should lead our country? You must be after legal dope or something. :)

I do not do drugs, let me make that clear! Am I voting for who I think will do the best job of keeping drugs out of our children's hands,absolutely. But this is a small attribute for my vote.

[Twisted Canuck]

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

As Winston Churchill said, 'A young man who is not a Liberal has no heart. An old man who is not a Conservative has no brain.'.....

Is that you in the Avatar?I really want to be your new BFF, maybe we could get together and share ideas sometime. You need help in the worst kind of way.

[HyperMOA]

I do not do drugs, let me make that clear! Am I voting for who I think will do the best job of keeping drugs out of our children's hands,absolutely. But this is a small attribute for my vote.

The smiley face meant that I was joking about my comment of legal dope. I do however find it funny that you say that they would be the best choice to keep drugs out of children's hands though. If they legalize pot, in my estimation, it will make it easier for children to aquire it.

[Got Juice?]

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

I disagree. If guns kill people, mine are all DEFECTIVE.....

Why should I be FORCED to give up what is lawfully acquired?

Justin Trudeau can kiss my @ss, with his tongue out. Watching him flip flop in the house of commons is enough to make a person sick.

Harper is not perfect, but he is respected, and he is a statesman. Something the young JT is NOT CAPABLE of being.

[Redfrog]

That's some funny stuff right there:snapoutofit:

So far out there that there is really no serious argument to that kind of thinking.

[dale7637]

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

I have no argument to this.. I feel sorry for you. Anybody that will willing give up legally aquired guns is bat poop crazy in my book.

Have a great life.. Enjoy the decline.

[ESOXangler]

Trolling is a very common winter past time!

[HyperMOA]

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

If I lose guns has it really made Canada better? Also, I am curious as to what changes you feel the Liberals and only the Liberals could make? I am not being sarcastic, I am honestly curious.

[Twisted Canuck]

This seems like a good thread to post my latest good feeling poster.....I'm pretty sure Justine and his Ilk could get behind the RCMP and the Crown Prosecutors when they charge a senior citizen for defending himself from three young men who kicked his door in, weapons in hand, to rob him, and he defended himself with a firearm. This isn't hypothetical, it happened recently, in our lovely country where you are expected to be a victim. God forbid you would defend yourself.

http://i377.photobucket.com/albums/oo213/twistedcanuck/Welcome_zpsgbk2xqi1.jpg

[Acesneights]

Really Trudeau..... He is such a douche. It's funny that you brought up a great idea to the government like carrying handguns in the mountains then just wrecked all your credibility with such a silly idea like your for the gun registry. Please tell me that it's the handgun registry your referring to not the long gun registry. Everyone knows the long gun registry was the biggest political mistake in history when it comes to public money. However aside from the registry comment... I agree

[Got Juice?]

This seems like a good thread to post my latest good feeling poster.....I'm pretty sure Justine and his Ilk could get behind the RCMP and the Crown Prosecutors when they charge a senior citizen for defending himself from three young men who kicked his door in, weapons in hand, to rob him, and he defended himself with a firearm. This isn't hypothetical, it happened recently, in our lovely country where you are expected to be a victim. God forbid you would defend yourself.

http://i377.photobucket.com/albums/oo213/twistedcanuck/Welcome_zpsgbk2xqi1.jpg

I am going to make copies of this picture, laminate them , and post them at my house....:sHa_shakeshout:

[coreya3212]

Op is a troll. Look at the join date....

[Talking moose]

Would love a handgun on my hip while bush camping. But if J.T gets the helm, might drive people to third person ramblings!!! Lord help us all!

[45/70/500]

the best part of young trudeau dripped down his mothers leg

[Twisted Canuck]

I am going to make copies of this picture, laminate them , and post them at my house....:sHa_shakeshout:

I'm only disappointed that it isn't a Sig P220 in the picture.

[Got Juice?]

the best part of young trudeau dripped down his mothers leg

Lol Trudeau.. infinite proof that the 'purple starfish' is NOT a safe alternative....

Then again it does explain a lot...

[Twisted Canuck]

Op is a troll. Look at the join date....

We saw that. But us old timers look for occasions to get our blood pressure up and rant. It's either here, or yelling at the neighbor's kids 'Get off of my lawn!!'.:)

[Got Juice?]

I'm only disappointed that it isn't a Sig P220 in the picture.

STI in 357 SIG for me....

Or a Steyr AUG!!!!:sHa_shakeshout:

[Got Juice?]

Op is a troll. Look at the join date....

Strange, I was hoping it was Justin himself posting that crap. Then we could really have fun.

[rugatika]

haha. The op was hilarious. Thanks. You should get a job for this hour has 22 minutes. You would be head and shoulders above any of their writers.

[coreya3212]

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad... I met one a few days ago and they make you want to dig out your own eyes with your fingers....

[Twisted Canuck]

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad... I met one a few days ago and they make you want to dig out your own eyes with your fingers....

They make me want to do something quite different from that, but I understand your sentiment. The Gene Pool needs more chlorine.

[silverdoctor]

Can't see why not...

[Acesneights]

the best part of young trudeau dripped down his mothers leg

Well said.... Well said

[Klondike]

Anyone that listens to stupid pony speak and then says to themselves " yep, that's the guy I want running this country" has some serious mental issues

[rugatika]

When I hear people talking about voting Liberal I am reminded of the movie Idiocracy for some reason.

[Mountain Adventurer]

I feel that loosing our gun registry makes it easy for criminals to obtain guns for criminal purposes and has created an underground market that is somewhat untraceable. I wouldn't be happy at all if I had some of my guns taken away that's why a sensible approach needs to be taken. My first gun was a ksg and my first thoughts when I got it was,I can't believe the cops let people have these things. As I stated I'm a responsible level minded owner but I could see really easily how some nut bar with a couple loose screws could ruin a responsible persons rights. I'm just using the KSG as an example of many that are questionable and I guess I did contradict my self on magazine capacity,it is a pain in the butt though. I for one know I wouldn't feel very good if someone used a certain model I own to go on some shooting spree. Trudeau to me as he stated is trying to fight for mid class citizens such as my self. I also wrote him about other topics such as child care and how expensive it is, I for one pay $925 a month for one child and if the government took child care into there own hands they would make more money and create more jobs by doing so. The list of positive things the liberals are trying to do out ways the negative to me. Back on the topic of legalization, I was young once and remember how easy it was to find a bag of grass as a kid, rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled, I want to try and guide my children to make good choices in life as my parents did with me,but it did not stop me at all because it was so simple to acquire I'm sure there will be people selling the crap to our kids but there would be a much larger price to pay for doing so. Don't you people want to try and keep this crap out of your kids minds ? I don't think I sound crazy here people.

[Talking moose]

"Sheltered"

[Mountain Adventurer]

I'm not sure what a troll is but I'm just speaking my mind on important issues that effect us all good or bad.

[Hydro1]

I'm not sure what a troll is but I'm just speaking my mind on important issues that effect us all good or bad.

Here is copy and paste for the defintion.

1a. Noun
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.

1b. Noun
A person who, on a message forum of some type, attacks and flames other members of the forum for any of a number of reasons such as rank, previous disagreements, sex, status, ect.
A troll usually flames threads without staying on topic, unlike a "Flamer" who flames a thread because he/she disagrees with the content of the thread.

1c. Noun
A member of an internet forum who continually harangues and harasses others. Someone with nothing worthwhile to add to a certain conversation, but rather continually threadjacks or changes the subject, as well as thinks every member of the forum is talking about them and only them. Trolls often go by multiple names to circumvent getting banned.

[vcmm]

You get internet under the bridge?

[grouse_hunter]

When I hear people talking about voting Liberal I am reminded of the movie Idiocracy for some reason.

Best post of the thread...

[HyperMOA]

I feel that loosing our gun registry makes it easy for criminals to obtain guns for criminal purposes and has created an underground market that is somewhat untraceable. I wouldn't be happy at all if I had some of my guns taken away that's why a sensible approach needs to be taken. My first gun was a ksg and my first thoughts when I got it was,I can't believe the cops let people have these things. As I stated I'm a responsible level minded owner but I could see really easily how some nut bar with a couple loose screws could ruin a responsible persons rights. I'm just using the KSG as an example of many that are questionable and I guess I did contradict my self on magazine capacity,it is a pain in the butt though. I for one know I wouldn't feel very good if someone used a certain model I own to go on some shooting spree. Trudeau to me as he stated is trying to fight for mid class citizens such as my self. I also wrote him about other topics such as child care and how expensive it is, I for one pay $925 a month for one child and if the government took child care into there own hands they would make more money and create more jobs by doing so. The list of positive things the liberals are trying to do out ways the negative to me. Back on the topic of legalization, I was young once and remember how easy it was to find a bag of grass as a kid, rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled, I want to try and guide my children to make good choices in life as my parents did with me,but it did not stop me at all because it was so simple to acquire I'm sure there will be people selling the crap to our kids but there would be a much larger price to pay for doing so. Don't you people want to try and keep this crap out of your kids minds ? I don't think I sound crazy here people.

You are amazed that the government allows you to own a pump shotgun?!?!?!???? OK I Can see we are fundamentally different people.

Aren't you happy that the Conservatives just increased your childcare tax benefit this year? You do know that you can claim your children's daycare against your taxes right? I can stand behind a tax credit, but why should every Canadian have to subsidize your childrens entire care?

You must have grown up somewhere very different from where I grew up. "Rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled." Ummm, Marijuana is/was controlled more than alcohol. I mean, alcohol was in all of our parents liquor cabinets. Our older friends/brothers could legally buy it at any liquor store. I don't recall any of my friends parents having a dope cabinet however. To find a bag of dope would've been a lot more daunting than finding a case of beer.

[Got Juice?]

I feel that loosing our gun registry makes it easy for criminals to obtain guns for criminal purposes and has created an underground market that is somewhat untraceable. I wouldn't be happy at all if I had some of my guns taken away that's why a sensible approach needs to be taken. My first gun was a ksg and my first thoughts when I got it was,I can't believe the cops let people have these things. As I stated I'm a responsible level minded owner but I could see really easily how some nut bar with a couple loose screws could ruin a responsible persons rights. I'm just using the KSG as an example of many that are questionable and I guess I did contradict my self on magazine capacity,it is a pain in the butt though. I for one know I wouldn't feel very good if someone used a certain model I own to go on some shooting spree. Trudeau to me as he stated is trying to fight for mid class citizens such as my self. I also wrote him about other topics such as child care and how expensive it is, I for one pay $925 a month for one child and if the government took child care into there own hands they would make more money and create more jobs by doing so. The list of positive things the liberals are trying to do out ways the negative to me. Back on the topic of legalization, I was young once and remember how easy it was to find a bag of grass as a kid, rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled, I want to try and guide my children to make good choices in life as my parents did with me,but it did not stop me at all because it was so simple to acquire I'm sure there will be people selling the crap to our kids but there would be a much larger price to pay for doing so. Don't you people want to try and keep this crap out of your kids minds ? I don't think I sound crazy here people.


If Trudeau is MID CLASS, I am poor white trash. He is the MODEL of self entitlement!!

Criminals do not obey laws. So when the REGISTRY WAS LAW, how did that help?

IT DID NOT HELP!!!! So what was the point? Nothing other than Liberals slapping themselves on the back for 'taking a bite out of crime' At the cost of mere BILLIONS to you and I .

2 billion would cover a lot of child care. Wouldn't you say that would have been a better expenditure than on a law that criminals would never follow?

[Mountain Adventurer]

Sorry all I'd didn't realize what a troll was and try and keep my crazy thoughts at bay. If you are wondering I haven't been on this forum before. And no I don't have internet under a bridge,my home is paid for and I'm proud of it. Once again sorry. I didn't mean to cause havoc and mayhem it wasn't my intension.

[Got Juice?]

Sorry all I'd didn't realize what a troll was and try and keep my crazy thoughts at bay. If you are wondering I haven't been on this forum before. And no I don't have internet under a bridge,my home is paid for and I'm proud of it. Once again sorry. I didn't mean to cause havoc and mayhem it wasn't my intension.

No apologies needed. WE all have differing opinions. You might want to re-examine a few priorities though..just sayin'

[Hydro1]

Sorry all I'd didn't realize what a troll was and try and keep my crazy thoughts at bay. If you are wondering I haven't been on this forum before. And no I don't have internet under a bridge,my home is paid for and I'm proud of it. Once again sorry. I didn't mean to cause havoc and mayhem it wasn't my intension.

No worries, one thing that will forever cause some sort of debate is politics.

[Twisted Canuck]

Personally, I think it should be obvious to any intelligent person that Thomas Mulchair and the NDP are the only way to vote, if you want a kinder gentler better Canada.

:scared0018:

[TripleTTT]

Just more proof that Margaret smoked dope while pregnant...:(

[Got Juice?]

Just more proof that Margaret smoked dope while pregnant...:(

Is Justin really Pierre's son? He looks a little like Mick Jagger to me....

And we do need some more B@STARDS in Ottawa after all:bad_boys_20:

[sikwhiskey]

Is Justin really Pierre's son? He looks a little like Mick Jagger to me....

And we do need some more B@STARDS in Ottawa after all:bad_boys_20:

Too funny.................thanks. Still laughing ........

[coreya3212]

Personally, I think it should be obvious to any intelligent person that Thomas Mulchair and the NDP are the only way to vote, if you want a kinder gentler better Canada.

:scared0018:

I see what you did here...the old " if you can't beat em, fish with em"

And in case we were wondering, he hasn't been on here before....like when you walk in the room and your kid sees you and says, " I wasn't doing anything". You always believe them...

[Mountain Adventurer]

You are amazed that the government allows you to own a pump shotgun?!?!?!???? OK I Can see we are fundamentally different people.

Aren't you happy that the Conservatives just increased your childcare tax benefit this year? You do know that you can claim your children's daycare against your taxes right? I can stand behind a tax credit, but why should every Canadian have to subsidize your childrens entire care?

You must have grown up somewhere very different from where I grew up. "Rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled." Ummm, Marijuana is/was controlled more than alcohol. I mean, alcohol was in all of our parents liquor cabinets. Our older friends/brothers could legally buy it at any liquor store. I don't recall any of my friends parents having a dope cabinet however. To find a bag of dope would've been a lot more daunting than finding a case of beer.
I did get that tax credit this year! First time ever I got something back! Until last week I didn't even know there was a new child credit, Not bad.I grew up in lower fairview,red deer a place we used to call the hood. Drugs were very easy to find and I felt obligated to fit in and people didn't care who they sold them to as long as they got there money. I don't recall that much alcohol being available.my parents never drank or smoked and were rather strict. I got kicked out at 15 with a good luck trying to survive. Weeks later I had my own place with a couple guys and my girlfriend and I had a car to boot 1976 ford pinto I made a deal on for $50 bucks , no licence I drove it around red deer for months till it died,so I just left it there. Soon after they got me back home and straightened me out.I used to smoke with my girlfriends parents all the time at 13 years of age.its what I knew, my childhood taught me how to be street smart and although my parents were good, I still chose my own path in the end and still finished high school. I'd like to keep my kids away from drugs but there needs to be more done to deter our youth.Sorry to get off topic ,just thought I'd tell you where I came from as you kind of asked.You can't really say much with out being scrutinized,I owned it I guess. Please don't bash my parents they really were good, I was uncontrollable .

[Mountain Adventurer]

I see what you did here...the old " if you can't beat em, fish with em"

And in case we were wondering, he hasn't been on here before....like when you walk in the room and your kid sees you and says, " I wasn't doing anything". You always believe them...

There's nothing I can do to prove that I haven't been here before, but by the sounds of it some people or a lot of people are trolls. I think I said already that I've never been on any forums before as I guess I kind of think like old Phil Robertson, but far from being religious .I'm just bored and yes need to get out of the house so will do just that. Wow! I've met some really nice people here and those of you have my contact. I am pretty thick skinned but the scabs still hurt Im one of those people that would drag you out of the building before it explodes while everyone else is running with there tail between there legs. I'm that kind of friend and I will probably miss out on many like minded friends. I'm not digging this hole any deeper. People think what they think.Mountain Adventurer sighting out, wish you the best people. The smile is pretty hard to wipe of my face if anyone here sees a guy out hunting with an ear to ear grin, Thad be this cowboy!:) no hard feelings time to get off the couch I'm bored now.

[rccam1]

Mountain Adventurer
I did get that tax credit this year! First time ever I got something back! Until last week I didn't even know there was a new child credit, Not bad:mad0100:

Maybe, just maybe you should take the time to check out and understand what the present people in power have been doing. You actually may rethink who you plan to vote for.

[airbornedeerhunter]

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

:snapoutofit:

You can crap in one hand and wish in the other and see which one fills up first. You're alright with loosing some of your firearms are you? I'm not, and I'm pretty sure nobody else on here is either.

Enjoy your time here.

[airbornedeerhunter]

I do not do drugs, let me make that clear! Am I voting for who I think will do the best job of keeping drugs out of our children's hands,absolutely. But this is a small attribute for my vote.

:snapoutofit:

Turdeau want to LEGALIZE weed! How is that making it harder for kids to get it?

[dalesilvertip]

I think mountain adventurer was sitting on his couch, bored, and wanted some attention. Surely no gun owner would vote liberal, no one could be that stupid and pass a background check for a PAL

[airbornedeerhunter]

I feel that loosing our gun registry makes it easy for criminals to obtain guns for criminal purposes and has created an underground market that is somewhat untraceable. I wouldn't be happy at all if I had some of my guns taken away that's why a sensible approach needs to be taken. My first gun was a ksg and my first thoughts when I got it was,I can't believe the cops let people have these things. As I stated I'm a responsible level minded owner but I could see really easily how some nut bar with a couple loose screws could ruin a responsible persons rights. I'm just using the KSG as an example of many that are questionable and I guess I did contradict my self on magazine capacity,it is a pain in the butt though. I for one know I wouldn't feel very good if someone used a certain model I own to go on some shooting spree. Trudeau to me as he stated is trying to fight for mid class citizens such as my self. I also wrote him about other topics such as child care and how expensive it is, I for one pay $925 a month for one child and if the government took child care into there own hands they would make more money and create more jobs by doing so. The list of positive things the liberals are trying to do out ways the negative to me. Back on the topic of legalization, I was young once and remember how easy it was to find a bag of grass as a kid, rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled, I want to try and guide my children to make good choices in life as my parents did with me,but it did not stop me at all because it was so simple to acquire I'm sure there will be people selling the crap to our kids but there would be a much larger price to pay for doing so. Don't you people want to try and keep this crap out of your kids minds ? I don't think I sound crazy here people.

Please explain HOW the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier for criminal to obtain firearms? Personally I think you are a ****disturber looking for a fight. You are aware right that you still need a PAL to obtain a firearm? Do you truly believe that the abolishment of the LGR has created an underground gun trade?? Man you are so full of it! You're first gun was a KSG? You are shocked the cops allow people to own SHOTGUNS????? What a crock, TROLL TROLL TROLL. What the hell does Turdeau know about the middle class? He's a silver spoon trust fund kid who was born a millionaire and has never, nor will ever, have a financial worry in his life. He couldn't even define middle class when asked. You pay for child care because it is not government subsidized, why the hell should it be?? So people with no children or grown children should have be pay more tax so you can put your kid in daycare???

Lastly, you haven't got to worry about keeping "crap out your kids minds" my friend, Your mind is full of all the crap it or anyone around you could handle.

Please leave our forum, you are not welcome troll!

[PartTimeHunter]

Please explain HOW the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier for criminal to obtain firearms? Personally I think you are a ****disturber looking for a fight. You are aware right that you still need a PAL to obtain a firearm? Do you truly believe that the abolishment of the LGR has created an underground gun trade?? Man you are so full of it! You're first gun was a KSG? You are shocked the cops allow people to own SHOTGUNS????? What a crock, TROLL TROLL TROLL. What the hell does Turdeau know about the middle class? He's a silver spoon trust fund kid who was born a millionaire and has never, nor will ever, have a financial worry in his life. He couldn't even define middle class when asked. You pay for child care because it is not government subsidized, why the hell should it be?? So people with no children or grown children should have be pay more tax so you can put your kid in daycare???

Lastly, you haven't got to worry about keeping "crap out your kids minds" my friend, Your mind is full of all the crap it or anyone around you could handle.

Please leave our forum, you are not welcome troll!

x2

[58thecat]

Gun control is just another government way of shutting up a bunch of squeaky wheels, people will carry what they want when it comes to personal perfection.

[edmhunter]

Said it before and will say it again. If Trudeau get elected, we are doomed, what an idiot. As for the Liberal Party what a complete joke!

The only reason why Trudeau is the Liberal candidate is because they have no real alternative and instead of putting up a legitimate candidate they are relying on Brand Name recognition of glory days gone by. Do we really want another French politician running Canada? NOT! Remember Chretien, “Daaaa People of Daaaa Countreeee!” I cringe when I remember it.

I would love to carry a 357 Python Magnum in the bush while bow hunting in Grizzly country. My father owned one when we lived in Quebec, he called it his “Lily Pad Hopper Stopper” lol. If the liberals get in, say goodbye to even carrying shotguns in the bush for self-defence.

If Trudeau gets elected I am moving to the USA, which I am sure will make lots of AO members very happy! :)

[kevinhits]

These kinds of threads have mountain giant written all over it:sHa_sarcasticlol:

[chauncy]

There's nothing I can do to prove that I haven't been here before, but by the sounds of it some people or a lot of people are trolls. I think I said already that I've never been on any forums before as I guess I kind of think like old Phil Robertson, but far from being religious .I'm just bored and yes need to get out of the house so will do just that. Wow! I've met some really nice people here and those of you have my contact. I am pretty thick skinned but the scabs still hurt Im one of those people that would drag you out of the building before it explodes while everyone else is running with there tail between there legs. I'm that kind of friend and I will probably miss out on many like minded friends. I'm not digging this hole any deeper. People think what they think.Mountain Adventurer sighting out, wish you the best people. The smile is pretty hard to wipe of my face if anyone here sees a guy out hunting with an ear to ear grin, Thad be this cowboy!:) no hard feelings time to get off the couch I'm bored now.

You have 93 post count?

[VanIsleGuy]

I just had a dream that I was walking in my backyard with a 223 and came face to face with a grizzly. Shot it in the face and it got mad. Couldnt chamber another round. Ran back to the house. My buddy on the porch grabs a 45 and shot it 10 times.

Sending in my rpal application today, I would definitely carry a handgun in the bush while bow hunting.

[Cowtown guy]

There's nothing I can do to prove that I haven't been here before, but by the sounds of it some people or a lot of people are trolls. I think I said already that I've never been on any forums before as I guess I kind of think like old Phil Robertson, but far from being religious .I'm just bored and yes need to get out of the house so will do just that. Wow! I've met some really nice people here and those of you have my contact. I am pretty thick skinned but the scabs still hurt Im one of those people that would drag you out of the building before it explodes while everyone else is running with there tail between there legs. I'm that kind of friend and I will probably miss out on many like minded friends. I'm not digging this hole any deeper. People think what they think.Mountain Adventurer sighting out, wish you the best people. The smile is pretty hard to wipe of my face if anyone here sees a guy out hunting with an ear to ear grin, Thad be this cowboy!:) no hard feelings time to get off the couch I'm bored now.

Phil Robertson a Liberal?

Here's the deal.

It's a fact that legalizing dope makes it easier to obtain. That's kind of why all the potheads want it legalized. No more sneaking around and trying to hide.

It's a fact that the LGR did next to nothing. It did not stop one armed assault. It did not stop one murder. It did not stop one crazy nutjob from holding a gun on someone. It did however backstab the public by barring certain firearms from being owned. It turned previously legal fireams into scary death machines with the stroke of a pen. It also robbed Canadians of those firearms and the money they cost, that were legally obtained.

It is a fact that it has been proven to put good people in jail that were defending themselves and their homes from attack.

It's a fact that if the Libs get into power they will move immediately to stronger and stronger gun control. You don't mind if you "loose" (it's lose by the way) a few guns. Think about that for a second. It's a few now. Then another one seems scary to some idiotic lefty and now that one is banned. Then another... If you want to own guns, any gun, the only person to vote for is your Conservative candidate. If you don't want to own guns, move to the UK and leave us in Canada alone.

It is a fact that no matter how hard you try to portray that polished up turd JT as the saviour of Canada and the middle class, you will always come across as wilfully uneducated. He is a spoiled brat that has no political background or history. The very basis that he is even party leader shows just how desperate the Libs are. Almost every single other party member has far more experience then he does. Yet he parachutes in as the leader of that party? He can't speak as he is continually trying to pull both feet out of his mouth at the same time, he knows nothing of the west half of the country and quite frankly could care less about us and he has lived an entitled life since birth.

You want that guy holding the cards? Maybe you smoked a little too much when you were younger.

[Mountain Adventurer]

Please explain HOW the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier for criminal to obtain firearms? Personally I think you are a ****disturber looking for a fight. You are aware right that you still need a PAL to obtain a firearm? Do you truly believe that the abolishment of the LGR has created an underground gun trade?? Man you are so full of it! You're first gun was a KSG? You are shocked the cops allow people to own SHOTGUNS????? What a crock, TROLL TROLL TROLL. What the hell does Turdeau know about the middle class? He's a silver spoon trust fund kid who was born a millionaire and has never, nor will ever, have a financial worry in his life. He couldn't even define middle class when asked. You pay for child care because it is not government subsidized, why the hell should it be?? So people with no children or grown children should have be pay more tax so you can put your kid in daycare???

Lastly, you haven't got to worry about keeping "crap out your kids minds" my friend, Your mind is full of all the crap it or anyone around you could handle.

Please leave our forum, you are not welcome troll!

Well I got a better sleep and I'm refreshed,it looks like the very nice gentleman in third row with turrets Syndrome has convinced me to stay. Look man I've already apologized and won't apologize again. I didn't realize That politics were such a hot topic here. I've always looked at politics with a grain of salt with the thought that it doesn't matter who you vote for they are all scum in some way.Hell I've never even voted before and usually just go with the flow on what everyone else decides. This was the only time that a politician has made me tune in and listen. I see some people wish bad things for others and I don't ever think that way. I see there is even a bit of pre judgement on the user name I've chose, I can assure you I'm not this mountain giant guy and have never been here before. Nor have a ever really lashed out at anyone for there beliefs or opinions,guess I don't really take that to seriously either.anyways I guess I half to finish what hell I've started here, I've read what not to do to be considered a troll and will try and follow those guide lines. Have a glorious day all, I know I will.

[bat119]

I'm allowed to carry a high powered rifle but not allowed to carry a .22 pistol for grouse why? I would very much like to able to carry a revolver in a hip holster for close shots gopher hunting or grouse.
Another use would be for a finishing shot on wounded animals did you ever have to shoot a deer in the head from 5 feet with a high power rifle?

[Mountain Adventurer]

I'm not trying to ster the pot here with no pun intended and most certainly don't know a heck of a lot about politics. But it also appears that a lot of people's eyes are closed to the way that organized crime works and how the ripple effects of there business trickle down to some of societies bigger issues. Do you think that guy is breaking into your home because he needs food money? There are greater issues here than why someone feels the need to own a gun to keep there family protected in there own homes. I may be quick to respond on issues that I don't fully understand but it looks the same for a lot of others here aswell. If there are any politicians chiming in here you may want to have a good look at this now claimed debate. And what people are saying.

[HyperMOA]

I don't own a single firearm for the purpose of protecting my family. However, if some crackhead came into my house at night and put my family in danger it would not take me a second thought to defend myself and my family. Organized crime exists strictly for the money. Plain and simple. There are no other social problems creating it. Tax free money plain and simple.

[edmhunter]

I am thinking that YOU'RE POLL is indicating:

1. Yes to handguns and 2. No to Frogs lol

[Cowtown guy]

There are greater issues here than why someone feels the need to own a gun to keep there family protected in there own homes. I may be quick to respond on issues that I don't fully understand.
If you think for one second that there is any greater issue than having the RIGHT to defend yourself then you are a fool.

There is no bigger right. If someone takes that right from me then I may as well give up. My life isn't mine anymore.

Why should I be punished if someone breaks into my home with the intent of doing me of my family harm and I end up defending myself?

Come on. Go ahead. You cannot justify that ludicrous statement you made.

Yet every year in Canada it happens. People go to jail and have their firearms confiscated because some dirtbag chooses to B&E instead of going to work and ends up getting a beat down in the process. The "victim" who was about to be robbed gets an assault charge and loses his gun license. Ya that's how I want to live.

[airbornedeerhunter]

I'm not trying to ster the pot here with no pun intended and most certainly don't know a heck of a lot about politics. But it also appears that a lot of people's eyes are closed to the way that organized crime works and how the ripple effects of there business trickle down to some of societies bigger issues. Do you think that guy is breaking into your home because he needs food money? There are greater issues here than why someone feels the need to own a gun to keep there family protected in there own homes. I may be quick to respond on issues that I don't fully understand but it looks the same for a lot of others here aswell. If there are any politicians chiming in here you may want to have a good look at this now claimed debate. And what people are saying.

You're right, when the LGR was still in effect there was no gun related crime in Canada and criminals found it impossible to obtain handguns and other restricted and prohibited firearms. There were just none to be had! Now that the LGR is gone these criminals have free reign to obtain whatever they want!
:snapoutofit:

You could fill volumes with your ignorance on this subject. For your own sake, please stop posting until you've educated yourself. It is one thing to advocate for wilderness carry which i think most fully support, but then shoot yourself in the foot and exclaim that you are OK with yourself and many others losing their firearms in the interest of public safety if the shiny pony of turd mountain becomes PM. You make a point and then in the next sentence contradict that point!

[Sooner]

Something is Fishy here with all this talk of Guns. Er am I wrong lol.

One one hand you want the right to carry a pistol but will vote for the party that will take away most of your guns if they had the chance for the greater good of the county? Please win again Steven, please win the next election.

[rugatika]

The problem with democracy is everyone gets to vote.

Millions of gunowners in Canada with a statistically negligible detrimental effect on Canada resulting from their guns....yet they have to be licenced, registered, tested tracked etc.

Millions of people vote Liberal or Ndp though, causing irreparable harm to this country and they don't have to go through any of the hoops gun owners do.

Crazy!! :)

[Mountain Adventurer]

[QUOTE=airbornedeerhunter;2748907]You're right, when the LGR was still in effect there was no gun related crime in Canada and criminals found it impossible to obtain handguns and other restricted and prohibited firearms. There were just none to be had! Now that the LGR is gone these criminals have free reign to obtain whatever they want!
:snapoutofit:

You could fill volumes with your ignorance on this subject. For your own sake, please stop posting until you've educated yourself. It is one thing to advocate for wilderness carry which i think most fully support, but then shoot yourself in the foot and exclaim that you are OK with yourself and many others losing their firearms in the interest of public safety if the shiny pony of turd mountain becomes PM. You make a point and then in the next sentence contradict that point![/

It is a catch 22 isn't it, and yes there were plenty of restricted and non restricted and prohibited firearms to be had at any given time. It's just way easier to get them now. My statement did make some what of a contradiction, but I didn't say all firearms I said some firearms. Anyways this old cow can be beat to a bloody pulp for ever with people's beliefs and I won't say anymore on the subject because your mind is obviously closed to the real world sir.And I'm smarter to what topics I should be discussing. I'm sure you have a pencil to be pushed so I'll let you get back at that.

[airbornedeerhunter]

Personally I don't think you own any guns or are licensed to own one. Anyone who would make the statement that the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to get restricted or prohibited firearms is out to lunch. Explain if you would how the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to obtain firearms, non-restricted or otherwise???? You still need a PAL!!!! All restricted weapons still need to be registered! You simply don't know what you are talking about!

[WillyOneStyle]

I also grew up in lower fairview, through conservative and liberal governments. The hood was always still the hood. Lawless.

To the O.P. : I can't vote Liberal for a few different personal principals and, personally, don't need to carry a pistol in the woods.

To the opposition to the O.P. : please stop rhyming words with vulgarity so that you can post without being banned.... Any impact you'd hoped the harsh words might convey is lost in the hilarity of imagining someone actually talking like that.

[airbornedeerhunter]

The problem with democracy is everyone gets to vote.

Millions of gunowners in Canada with a statistically negligible detrimental effect on Canada resulting from their guns....yet they have to be licenced, registered, tested tracked etc.

Millions of people vote Liberal or Ndp though, causing irreparable harm to this country and they don't have to go through any of the hoops gun owners do.

Crazy!! :)

Sir Winston said it best:

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter"

I think he had folks like the OP in mind

[WillyOneStyle]

I think he everyone involved in this conversation in mind. (Myself included)

[Mountain Adventurer]

[QUOTE=Mountain Adventurer;2748976]

Personally I don't think you own any guns or are licensed to own one. Anyone who would make the statement that the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to get restricted or prohibited firearms is out to lunch. Explain if you would how the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to obtain firearms, non-restricted or otherwise???? You still need a PAL!!!! All restricted weapons still need to be registered! You simply don't know what you are talking about!

Okay just one more I guess. Yes I have both restricted and non restricted licences. Theoretically speaking let's say I with my licence purchased a box of 100 Russian SKS rifles and then turned around and sold them to people who are not able to obtain such weapons for triple the profit I spent. It looks pretty gald darn feasible to me. Where as if the LGR were still in effect there may be some way to trace back where these firearms came from one way or another. A scary thought really but it is reality my friend!

[CNP]

I feel that loosing our gun registry makes it easy for criminals to obtain guns for criminal purposes and has created an underground market that is somewhat untraceable. I wouldn't be happy at all if I had some of my guns taken away that's why a sensible approach needs to be taken. My first gun was a ksg and my first thoughts when I got it was,I can't believe the cops let people have these things. As I stated I'm a responsible level minded owner but I could see really easily how some nut bar with a couple loose screws could ruin a responsible persons rights. I'm just using the KSG as an example of many that are questionable and I guess I did contradict my self on magazine capacity,it is a pain in the butt though. I for one know I wouldn't feel very good if someone used a certain model I own to go on some shooting spree. Trudeau to me as he stated is trying to fight for mid class citizens such as my self. I also wrote him about other topics such as child care and how expensive it is, I for one pay $925 a month for one child and if the government took child care into there own hands they would make more money and create more jobs by doing so. The list of positive things the liberals are trying to do out ways the negative to me. Back on the topic of legalization, I was young once and remember how easy it was to find a bag of grass as a kid, rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled, I want to try and guide my children to make good choices in life as my parents did with me,but it did not stop me at all because it was so simple to acquire I'm sure there will be people selling the crap to our kids but there would be a much larger price to pay for doing so. Don't you people want to try and keep this crap out of your kids minds ? I don't think I sound crazy here people.

The Federal Government has no business spending our money on a child day care system. The government is going to make money and employ people in day care? That's air fairy tale stuff. How is Quebec making out with their subsidized "National" day care system? You spend your money please and I'll spend mine. Quit the idea that the Federal Government has to come to "YOUR" rescue. The Federal Governement is there for other more lofty matters than providing child care spaces for you. Think along the lines of nation building, not social assistance programmes.........we have enough of those.

Your OP is even missing the mark. The Federal Government does not prohibit you from taking your handgun into AB wilderness areas. The Province of AB Chief Firearms Officer controls that by issuing ATT permits that restrict you from transporting/using your firearms at anywhere other than an approved range, gunsmith, etc. The province could issue you a permit to take your handgun into wilderness area if they chose to. The province could also allow you to hunt with a handgun if they chose to. Lobby the provincial CFO not the federal government and certainly not the Liberal Party of Canada. The RCMP website attempts to control the issue of wilderness permits by allowing persons of specific occupations to obtain a wilderness permit. However, I see no mention of restricting permits to specific occupations in the Firearms Act (http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11.6/page-30.html#docCont)itself. A excerpt from the Act:

19. (1) An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess prohibited firearms or restricted firearms may be authorized to transport a particular prohibited firearm or restricted firearm between two or more specified places for any good and sufficient reason...

Now I would like anyone to correct me on this point that I believe any province could allow it's citizens to carry a handgun in the wilderness..................a province could do this under the current law, if they chose to do this. We need to argue that a good and sufficient reason includes wilderness protection for (insert text here):

[dmcbride]

[QUOTE=]

Okay just one more I guess. Yes I have both restricted and non restricted licences. Theoretically speaking let's say I with my licence purchased a box of 100 Russian SKS rifles and then turned around and sold them to people who are not able to obtain such weapons for triple the profit I spent. It looks pretty gald darn feasible to me. Where as if the LGR were still in effect there may be some way to trace back where these firearms came from one way or another. A scary thought really but it is reality my friend!

Well first of all LGR or no LGR it would be illegal to sell the guns to someone who doesn't have a PAL. Second of all, Even if the guns were registered there is nothing stopping someone from removing the serial #'s. The LGR does nothing to keep guns out of criminal hands, they will just steal them, get them on the black market and criminals don't register there guns.

[diamonddave]

If someone were going to break the law, as in your example, do you really think they would be stupid enough to use their own valid PAL?
Bottom line it their are honest people in this here world, and there are crooks.
A registry doesn't all of a sudden make crooks into honest people, does it?

What were the crime stats with rifles, before the LGR, during the LGR, and after? If you don't know this info, you should, BEFORE you make an opinion and post it all over the web.... Its kinda crucial to your argument.

[Okotokian]

I'm not sure how to answer... How I feel about me being able to take a handgun into the wilderness might be different than how I feel about others being able to a handgun into the wilderness. ;)

Given I don't have an RPAL now, I guess being able to have a handgun isn't that important to me.

[airbornedeerhunter]

Uh, i never said that. Don't know why it has my handle for that quote!

[dmcbride]

Uh, i never said that. Don't know why it has my handle for that quote!

Sorry, Don't know why it put your name there. Fixed it.:)

[Okotokian]

Uh, i never said that. Don't know why it has my handle for that quote!

He just missed the closing quote notation from the guy he did quote, who had quoted you. Technical foul-up.

[Skybuster]

[QUOTE=Mountain Adventurer;2748990]

Well first of all LGR or no LGR it would be illegal to sell the guns to someone who doesn't have a PAL. Second of all, Even if the guns were registered there is nothing stopping someone from removing the serial #'s. The LGR does nothing to keep guns out of criminal hands, they will just steal them, get them on the black market and criminals don't register there guns.

First let me say I am against the LGR. I feel it is a waste of money and does not achieve what they claim it will.

However I am going to support the OP in that not having the LGR makes it easier for criminals to get guns. This is true. Yes they have ways whether there is a registry or not. But without a registry acquiring privately owned guns for criminal intent just got easier. Yes we private owners will do our best to ensure a buyer has a PAL, and they probably will have, but with no registry that gun can now flow into criminal hands with no one the wiser. Whereas if we had to register our guns, when we sold one we will ensure the recipient registers it because we want to make sure the gun is not still linked to us.

And yes there are ways to defeat this, but not having the registry does make it easier.

Having the registry, however, does not prevent the criminals from getting and using guns.

[Cowtown guy]

I'm not sure how to answer... How I feel about me being able to take a handgun into the wilderness might be different than how I feel about others being able to a handgun into the wilderness. ;)

Given I don't have an RPAL now, I guess being able to have a handgun isn't that important to me.

That's the only reason I don't have handguns or an RPAL. I don't see the point of going to just bang rounds off. If I could use it for hunting and such I'd be all over it. I think gophers with a revolver would be a blast.

[brendan's dad]

Personally I don't think you own any guns or are licensed to own one. Anyone who would make the statement that the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to get restricted or prohibited firearms is out to lunch. Explain if you would how the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to obtain firearms, non-restricted or otherwise???? You still need a PAL!!!! All restricted weapons still need to be registered! You simply don't know what you are talking about!

Not that I am agreeing with the OP.... but he could be referring to the fact that a person with a PAL, who has buddies involved in Criminal activity could be supplying firearms to his criminal friends without fear of being linked to the firearm.

Example:

PAL owner goes to CT and buys a non-restricted shotgun and there is no record of the sale. He then sells or gives it to his friend involved in drug trafficking. Warrant is done at druggie's house and the shotgun is found. Without the LGR there is no way to link the shotgun to the PAL holder that bought it originally. So the likelihood of being caught and charged with firearms trafficking has been reduced. Police are finding more of the "tacticool" non-restricted firearms (sks, XCR, tavor21, tactical shotguns) during warrants and this might be an explaination why.

[Dacotensis]

I feel that loosing our gun registry makes it easy for criminals to obtain guns for criminal purposes and has created an underground market that is somewhat untraceable. I wouldn't be happy at all if I had some of my guns taken away that's why a sensible approach needs to be taken. My first gun was a ksg and my first thoughts when I got it was,I can't believe the cops let people have these things. As I stated I'm a responsible level minded owner but I could see really easily how some nut bar with a couple loose screws could ruin a responsible persons rights. I'm just using the KSG as an example of many that are questionable and I guess I did contradict my self on magazine capacity,it is a pain in the butt though. I for one know I wouldn't feel very good if someone used a certain model I own to go on some shooting spree. Trudeau to me as he stated is trying to fight for mid class citizens such as my self. I also wrote him about other topics such as child care and how expensive it is, I for one pay $925 a month for one child and if the government took child care into there own hands they would make more money and create more jobs by doing so. The list of positive things the liberals are trying to do out ways the negative to me. Back on the topic of legalization, I was young once and remember how easy it was to find a bag of grass as a kid, rarely ever was there any alcohol available because it was controlled, I want to try and guide my children to make good choices in life as my parents did with me,but it did not stop me at all because it was so simple to acquire I'm sure there will be people selling the crap to our kids but there would be a much larger price to pay for doing so. Don't you people want to try and keep this crap out of your kids minds ? I don't think I sound crazy here people.


All of your post would be credible if you learndeded the proper use of there, their and they're.
Good grief. You want Ottawa libs to take you seriously?

We Have a registry for handguns. It's been in place since about 32'.
And yet people get killed by handguns still.
Go back and read your first sentence of your quote.

What would be a sensible approach to a person who steals a firearm?
Now what if they use if for another criminal offence?
What should their punishment be? Lay it out here.

I can't believe I actually posted on this thread.
You're (you are) trolling without a doubt.

But since you started it, you get to answer some questions now.

Btw, I'm pretty sure it's illegal to be in possession of a firearm if the SN has been removed. :126fs2277341::1041:


I would not lose sleep if some one goes on a killing spree with a 300 mag.
It doesn't make my particular rifle a bad weapon.

Do you feel bad when some depressed person drives their same make and model of vehicle as you own, head on into a Mack?

Unreal.

[edmhunter]

Not that I am agreeing with the OP.... but he could be referring to the fact that a person with a PAL, who has buddies involved in Criminal activity could be supplying firearms to his criminal friends without fear of being linked to the firearm.

Example:

PAL owner goes to CT and buys a non-restricted shotgun and there is no record of the sale. He then sells or gives it to his friend involved in drug trafficking. Warrant is done at druggie's house and the shotgun is found. Without the LGR there is no way to link the shotgun to the PAL holder that bought it originally. So the likelihood of being caught and charged with firearms trafficking has been reduced. Police are finding more of the "tacticool" non-restricted firearms (sks, XCR, tavor21, tactical shotguns) during warrants and this might be an explaination why.

The reason why police are finding firearms during warrants is because CRIMINALS will always have access to all types of black market firearms and there is nothing that any useless firearms legislations/regulations will do to eliminate or prevent it.

The way I see it; The only people that are effected by these regulations are LAW ABIDING CITIZENS and people that hunt. Want 100 examples?

[Dacotensis]

Not that I am agreeing with the OP.... but he could be referring to the fact that a person with a PAL, who has buddies involved in Criminal activity could be supplying firearms to his criminal friends without fear of being linked to the firearm.

Example:

PAL owner goes to CT and buys a non-restricted shotgun and there is no record of the sale. He then sells or gives it to his friend involved in drug trafficking. Warrant is done at druggie's house and the shotgun is found. Without the LGR there is no way to link the shotgun to the PAL holder that bought it originally. So the likelihood of being caught and charged with firearms trafficking has been reduced. Police are finding more of the "tacticool" non-restricted firearms (sks, XCR, tavor21, tactical shotguns) during warrants and this might be an explaination why.

The time in prison that these criminals are serving is no deterent to being in possession of them.
Put them in a work camp near wood Buffalo.
Make them cut firewood for provincial camp sites or some other job.
Make them live in a wood heated tent. Melt the snow so they have water.
You know, discipline... Cause they never got it at home when they were younger.

[brendan's dad]

Completely agree, but other than smuggled firearms at some point these "black market" firearm were legally in the system.

Airborne asked how the death of the LGR made it easier to obtain a firearm. What I am suggesting is that without fear of prosecution, a criminal can now more easily convince a PAL holder to buy a non-restricted firearm for him. Maybe during the LGR the PAL holder was too fearful he would caught and refused, but now maybe he could be convinced with no record of the sale.

Remember this a discussion board, not a 1 point of view board. A question was ask and I answered it. Now if you completely disagree and believe that the scenario I described could never happen, well that is your take on the discussion.

[brendan's dad]

The time in prison that these criminals are serving is no deterent to being in possession of them.
Put them in a work camp near wood Buffalo.
Make them cut firewood for provincial camp sites or some other job.
Make them live in a wood heated tent. Melt the snow so they have water.
You know, discipline... Cause they never got it at home when they were younger.


X2, and we as gun owner should be pushing for tougher penalties so that the fear of the penalty for trafficking a firearm will be an effective deterent. Because if enough of the scenario I describe occur, we will see stricker gun laws which will effect all of us and our enjoyment of hunting and shooting sports

[CritterCommander]

That argument only holds water if you can say with confidence that 100% of ALL guns required to be registered or surrendered were duly registered in full compliance upon implementation of the LGR. The guys that buried their weapons in burlap bags in the back 40 weren't concerned with being caught or refused anything and also weren't likely the criminals you refer too.

I doubt if any criminal would have bothered digging a hole or worried about the LGR in any respect.

[edmhunter]

That argument only holds water if you can say with confidence that 100% of ALL guns required to be registered or surrendered were duly registered in full compliance upon implementation of the LGR. The guys that buried their weapons in burlap bags in the back 40 weren't concerned with being caught or refused anything and also weren't likely the criminals you refer too.

I doubt if any criminal would have bothered digging a hole or worried about the LGR in any respect.

The only holes that criminals dig, are the holes they dig to bury their victims! lol

[airbornedeerhunter]

Not that I am agreeing with the OP.... but he could be referring to the fact that a person with a PAL, who has buddies involved in Criminal activity could be supplying firearms to his criminal friends without fear of being linked to the firearm.

Example:

PAL owner goes to CT and buys a non-restricted shotgun and there is no record of the sale. He then sells or gives it to his friend involved in drug trafficking. Warrant is done at druggie's house and the shotgun is found. Without the LGR there is no way to link the shotgun to the PAL holder that bought it originally. So the likelihood of being caught and charged with firearms trafficking has been reduced. Police are finding more of the "tacticool" non-restricted firearms (sks, XCR, tavor21, tactical shotguns) during warrants and this might be an explaination why.

Yes, but his argument basically says that all gun owners should be treated with suspicion and be unduly encumbered with bureaucratic red tape on the off chance that someone with a valid PAL might buy a shotgun and give it to their degenerate friend. I think most legitimate gun owners would not risk the potential fallout and prosecution that could occur by carrying on in such a way.

Would be no different than someone with a valid drivers license handing over the keys to someone they know is not allowed to drive, way too risky. I don't believe in group punishment.

[brendan's dad]

But we can all agree Criminals are lazy. If the easiest and cheapiest way to get a firearm is to send a buddy with a PAL to CT, than that is what they are gonna do. They don't have to do some secret meet out in boonies with another criminal with fear of being cheated or shot or maybe it being an undercover cop looking to bust him. Send buddy and he will even come back with a receipt so you can return it if you don't like the color!

If they weren't lazy they would have a job like you and me.

[airbornedeerhunter]

But we can all agree Criminals are lazy. If the easiest and cheapiest way to get a firearm is to send a buddy with a PAL to CT, than that is what they are gonna do. They don't have to do some secret meet out in boonies with another criminal with fear of being cheated or shot or maybe it being an undercover cop looking to bust him. Send buddy and he will even come back with a receipt so you can return it if you don't like the color!

If they weren't lazy they would have a job like you and me.

I don't think laws and legislations should be based on "what if's". If the RCMP could provide 100% definitive proof that thousands of non-restricted firearms were being purchased by PAL holders and then given to criminals then that argument would hold water. Otherwise it's just speculation and I don't think the rule of law in a democracy should be based on speculation and fear mongering. And please, no Harper haters chime in here about the new anti-terror legislation, that threat is a clear and present danger to this country and ISIS is very real- Canadian Tire gun runners- not so much!

[brendan's dad]

Yes, but his argument basically says that all gun owners should be treated with suspicion and be unduly encumbered with bureaucratic red tape on the off chance that someone with a valid PAL might buy a shotgun and give it to their degenerate friend. I think most legitimate gun owners would not risk the potential fallout and prosecution that could occur by carrying on in such a way.

Would be no different than someone with a valid drivers license handing over the keys to someone they know is not allowed to drive, way too risky. I don't believe in group punishment.

Definitely agree, but can we also agree that fear of consequences is the only thing that keeps some people in line.

I only gave a possible answered to the question

Personally I don't think you own any guns or are licensed to own one. Anyone who would make the statement that the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to get restricted or prohibited firearms is out to lunch. Explain if you would how the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier to obtain firearms, non-restricted or otherwise???? You still need a PAL!!!! All restricted weapons still need to be registered! You simply don't know what you are talking about!

I support laws and punishment that holds persons seriously acccountable. It is their crimes that make gun ownership tougher for you and me.

[James Henry]

Arizona has crazy gun law ideas. People with certain criminal convictions can't have or carry guns. People before the courts on certain charges can't have or carry guns. People with mental illness can't have or carry guns. People convicted of criminal acts where a firearm was used in the offence...actually go to jail:scared0015:.
Normal law abiding citizens can have and carry guns without registration or crazy restrictions. See if Trudeau would commit to this...I think not.
I carry a concealed Ruger 9mm when I am there:sHa_shakeshout:.

[edmhunter]

Arizona has crazy gun law ideas. People with certain criminal convictions can't have or carry guns. People before the courts on certain charges can't have or carry guns. People with mental illness can't have or carry guns. People convicted of criminal acts where a firearm was used in the offence...actually go to jail:scared0015:.
Normal law abiding citizens can have and carry guns without registration or crazy restrictions. See if Trudeau would commit to this...I think not.
I carry a concealed Ruger 9mm when I am there:sHa_shakeshout:.

Don't forget about the warden in Arizona that makes all his prisoners wear pink clothing! Pink is fashionable for inmates especially when it comes to courting their cell mates. Not so cool for us normal men that court women in the free world, unless the women are wearing pink of course.

[BlackHeart]

We are going to get nowhere with those that think(believe) gun control is a good thing......their thoughts are corrupted with fear and what-if senarios.
The reality of what really happens is not a factor in their conclusions.....its all based on feeling safe.

Your statement (OP) saying Justin Trudeau would make a good leader of Canada......

Is that based on and because......
a) his belief and statement that only PMs from Quebec are any good.
b) his statement that its is Quebec's right to rule Canada and not anybody from the west
c) his extensive economic training as it relates to drama classes
d) his extensive experience in govt policy, management, governance, finance, taxation, economic developement as it related to his trust fund.
e) its his birthright.....all because his last name is trudeau
f) he has nice hair
g) he has smartened up and now knows better when public speaking to only say what his handlers tell him to say versus the idiotic thoughts that bump around in the vacuous space under his hair.
h) he thinks all we need to do is feed the ISIS terrorist and share a coke with them and that will work
i) his experience as a stateman is to bow like royalty to the parents after a kids drama presentation
j) he can ski better than his brother.

[edmhunter]

Hey you forgot;

k. his experience as a white water rafter!!!

[Leeper]

Legalizing pot: I don't care
Gay Marriage: I don't care
Long gun registry: I'm opposed
Carrying of handguns in wilderness areas: Who would know? I may or may not carry them now and believe in the "don't ask, don't tell" doctrine in this regard. In support of this, I believe in the preservation of wilderness areas.
Voting liberal/mental deficiencies: I'm in favour of making treatment available.

[BlackHeart]

Hey you forgot;

k. his experience as a white water rafter!!!

And l) smoked dope so that makes a clears thought on marijuana policy for Canada

We have people that hoist this clown on their shoulders as leader of the liberal party and try to foist him on all of us as the future PM of this county.....in charge of $280 billion in taxation(which he will increase) and program spending.

Shouldn't you have to prove you have an IQ over 100 to be in charge of spending 280BILLION????

[HyperMOA]

I don't think laws and legislations should be based on "what if's". If the RCMP could provide 100% definitive proof that thousands of non-restricted firearms were being purchased by PAL holders and then given to criminals then that argument would hold water. Otherwise it's just speculation and I don't think the rule of law in a democracy should be based on speculation and fear mongering. And please, no Harper haters chime in here about the new anti-terror legislation, that threat is a clear and present danger to this country and ISIS is very real- Canadian Tire gun runners- not so much!

Come on, if you don't see that as his only valid point you are being intentionally daft. Ignoring his point does not bolster your position. He is in fact right that it would be easier to acquire firearms illegally. I guarantee that there has been many firearms gone through this process already. I mean, do you honestly believe that this hasn't happened? I hate to give the guy any traction, but that was his one valid point. However it kinda contradicts his position that legalizing marijuana will make it harder for kids to get a hold of it.

I am not in favour of a LGR but I will guarantee that events like that happened very quickly after the LGR was abolished. DOes it mean that there are or were anymore illegal firearms out there? I firmly doubt it; but is it easier to get non-restricted firearms illegally? Yes it is.

[cranky]

Whats really scary? Shiny Pony is a couple of points ahead of Harpers PC's in the polls according to the last evening news.

Whats wrong with people? Frankly im scared to death he's gonna be the next PM.
The people that vote for him scare me to death.

[edmhunter]

And l) smoked dope so that makes a clears thought on marijuana policy for Canada

We have people that hoist this clown on their shoulders as leader of the liberal party and try to foist him on all of us as the future PM of this county.....in charge of $280 billion in taxation(which he will increase) and program spending.

Shouldn't you have to prove you have an IQ over 100 to be in charge of spending 280BILLION????

Apparently Not!

[airbornedeerhunter]

Come on, if you don't see that as his only valid point you are being intentionally daft. Ignoring his point does not bolster your position. He is in fact right that it would be easier to acquire firearms illegally. I guarantee that there has been many firearms gone through this process already. I mean, do you honestly believe that this hasn't happened? I hate to give the guy any traction, but that was his one valid point. However it kinda contradicts his position that legalizing marijuana will make it harder for kids to get a hold of it.

I am not in favour of a LGR but I will guarantee that events like that happened very quickly after the LGR was abolished. DOes it mean that there are or were anymore illegal firearms out there? I firmly doubt it; but is it easier to get non-restricted firearms illegally? Yes it is.

I never said it has NEVER happened, perhaps it has. But to propose a re-institution of the LGR and to use that as an example I think you need to provide proof that it is happening and that the instances where it has happened could in any reasonable way warrant even a discussion about bringing it back, let alone actually doing it. I would argue that the criminal element can get their hands on illegal firearms for far cheaper than the cost of a legally purchased one being nefariously handed over to them.

As for the CT argument, I bought two rifles in there at Christmas for my twins and while they did not record the #'s of the guns when I bought them it does show up on the receipt that 2 x Savage Rascals were bought on that date. If I then handed those over to a crook and they were then seized, the RCMP could enter the serial #'s into their system and determine that those guns were shipped from the manufacturer to that CT store and they would then pull the sales records for how many were purchased within the last year or two and then track down the purchasers, question them and through process of elimination and association, figure out who bought the gun legally that then wound up in the hands on the bad guy, unless you paid cash and managed to avoid facial exposure to the security cameras, they'd find you.

You can argue this 6 ways from Sunday, the fact is it's gone and even though I wouldn't trust anything that comes out of shiny pony's mouth, he did say that he would not bring it back. That out of his entitled yap means very little I know, especially to me as I hold him is almost even greater disdain than I held Taliban Jack. Fact is that even under the most draconian of gun laws- crooks will find a way, I don't think I or any other gun owner who plays by the rules should be run through the bureaucratic ringer simply because of a "what if"!

[Got Juice?]

That's the only reason I don't have handguns or an RPAL. I don't see the point of going to just bang rounds off. If I could use it for hunting and such I'd be all over it. I think gophers with a revolver would be a blast.

Join IPSC or IPDA, or IMHSA.. owning a handgun and shooting it skillfully is a lot more difficult than with a Rifle or Shotgun.

Very humbling when first starting out.

And the very reason you need an RPAL.

Actually, the best reason to have an RPAL, is what happens if one day the gov't in all its infinite wisdom decides to not issue them any more????

Now you cannot get one... just like 12.3/12.4/12.6

[HyperMOA]

I never said it has NEVER happened, perhaps it has. But to propose a re-institution of the LGR and to use that as an example I think you need to provide proof that it is happening and that the instances where it has happened could in any reasonable way warrant even a discussion about bringing it back, let alone actually doing it. I would argue that the criminal element can get their hands on illegal firearms for far cheaper than the cost of a legally purchased one being nefariously handed over to them.

Your arguement with MA was never to bring back the LGR. You asked Mountain Adventurer to explain to you how it is easier to acquire illegal weapons since the LGR was abolished. He did.

As for the CT argument, I bought two rifles in there at Christmas for my twins and while they did not record the #'s of the guns when I bought them it does show up on the receipt that 2 x Savage Rascals were bought on that date. If I then handed those over to a crook and they were then seized, the RCMP could enter the serial #'s into their system and determine that those guns were shipped from the manufacturer to that CT store and they would then pull the sales records for how many were purchased within the last year or two and then track down the purchasers, question them and through process of elimination and association, figure out who bought the gun legally that then wound up in the hands on the bad guy, unless you paid cash and managed to avoid facial exposure to the security cameras, they'd find you.

Yes and you happened to walk into the parking lot of the same CT and sold them to another guy that had a valid PAL. You aren't required to record that info, so you don't know who has them. You then witnessed him sell them to another individual who had a valid PAL. . . . do you see where this is going? They may out of a fluke be able to trace them to you as the purchaser but once you walked outside, who knows who owns them. Didn't you sell and buy all new rifles the day the LGR was abolished? I know I did. Funny thing is, none of them ever left my safe.

You can argue this 6 ways from Sunday, the fact is it's gone and even though I wouldn't trust anything that comes out of shiny pony's mouth, he did say that he would not bring it back. That out of his entitled yap means very little I know, especially to me as I hold him is almost even greater disdain than I held Taliban Jack. Fact is that even under the most draconian of gun laws- crooks will find a way, I don't think I or any other gun owner who plays by the rules should be run through the bureaucratic ringer simply because of a "what if"!

Yep I am in 100% agreement here. Not supporting JT or the LGR. Just pointing out that MA made a valid point. Just ignoring it doesn't help anything. Its the same reaction we expect out of any "anti" that will never let reason enter a conversation.


.

[Chernobyl Ant]

Why is this thread even open. OP is obviously a troll

[CritterCommander]

The LGR, PAL, RPAL system simply doesn't make sense when you realize that the major gangs / crime organizations can print themselves and their cohorts counterfeit documents in a heartbeat and go to CT themselves. The only thing the current system does is frustrate the average Joe Blow honest citizen who wants to pursue hunting / shooting sports.

[Ozzzzz]

At the risk of sounding like a "troll", I can't believe all of the personal shots taken at the original poster.

Just because a person just recently joined the forum, and expresses his opinion, he's labelled a troll?? The number of responders who used the terms "stupid" and "ignorant" is staggering...

I am still fairly new to this forum, and I do not have thousands of posts under my belt... I wonder if any of you "veterans" remember being the new guy, trying to get a few posts under your belt so people might take you seriously.

It has been said so many times that everyone's entitled to their own opinion...at the risk of being belittled and ridiculed, obviously.

Pretty attractive to new members (NOT!!)

I'm done here.

Ozz

[edmhunter]

At the risk of sounding like a "troll", I can't believe all of the personal shots taken at the original poster.

Just because a person just recently joined the forum, and expresses his opinion, he's labelled a troll?? The number of responders who used the terms "stupid" and "ignorant" is staggering...

I am still fairly new to this forum, and I do not have thousands of posts under my belt... I wonder if any of you "veterans" remember being the new guy, trying to get a few posts under your belt so people might take you seriously.

It has been said so many times that everyone's entitled to their own opinion...at the risk of being belittled and ridiculed, obviously.

Pretty attractive to new members (NOT!!)

I'm done here.

Ozz

I joined in September 2014, having never been part of a forum before, IT WAS BRUTAL!

But now after being a member for a while, I'm enjoying it, plus I have met some really great, like minded people. Even the people that do not agree with me, I appreciate.

Just got learn the ropes and have a thick skin in the beginning is all lol :)

[brendan's dad]

So do the majority poster here think we should get rid of any form of gun control, PAL/RPAL system, or licencing based on the fact that Criminal won't follow the laws. What other laws should we axe becasue Criminal don't adhere to them. Break and Enter? Lots of Criminal committ Break and Enter and don't adhere to law. Theft? Criminals steal all the time, lets get rid of that one. Murder?????

Now look at others laws that involve licencing and registration. Criminals drive cars without driver's licence, maybe we should get rid of those. Vehicle registration, what the purpose other than to burden me as a law abiding citizen does it serve?

The good old USA is always brought up when someone wants to show how unreasonable our Canadian Laws are.

But, 2 years ago the G8 discussed a firearms initiative which included "point of sale registry" for all G8 Members. Only country to refuse, you guess it.... oh wait...Canada???? Harper believed it smelled too much like a gun registry and it was just after the CFO ledger scandal. In the USA for every fireram regardless of class, it's initial sale after being received at the store from the manufacturer or importer is recorded in a national registry which includes the purchaser info. So everytime you say you wish we had the USA gun laws, would you be willing to go back to providing your info and being registered for a non-restricted firearm sale. If you could open/conceal carry, would you agree to point of sale registry.

Tough to have your cake and eat it too.

But

To suggest we should abolish a law because Criminals don't listen to them is ridiculus as stating Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister would be good for gun owners.

[Dacotensis]

The only holes that criminals dig, are the holes they dig to bury their victims! lol


So that's what's going on in Toronto. :thinking-006:
Must be a lot of criminals with victims there. Lol

[edmhunter]

Ya and they are trying to put JT in power so they can take their turn at the trough. It's called white collar crime! No guns necessary hahaha :bad_boys_20:

[airbornedeerhunter]

I take it you're referring to me. And no I don't think that we should get rid of licensing. I think that it is an acceptable balance but no one will ever convince me that the LGR was effective in any way, shape or form. Billions wasted and for what? To make the non-gun owning public feel safer?

I went after the guy with both barrels because he contradicted himself with nearly every post, wanting restricted laws loosened but non-restricted laws tightened. I don't buy the CT gun runner argument for a second and hardly think that organized crime elements are sending a stooge with a PAL to Canadian Tire to buy them a pump gun or a bolt action 30-06.

[Got Juice?]

Yes, but his argument basically says that all gun owners should be treated with suspicion and be unduly encumbered with bureaucratic red tape on the off chance that someone with a valid PAL might buy a shotgun and give it to their degenerate friend. I think most legitimate gun owners would not risk the potential fallout and prosecution that could occur by carrying on in such a way.

Would be no different than someone with a valid drivers license handing over the keys to someone they know is not allowed to drive, way too risky. I don't believe in group punishment.

Agreed. Punishing/Negating a single individual's rights ""For the collective good"" has always been the hallmark of a dictatorial governing police state in the making.

That a police state mentality is being encouraged by people like BD only shows how easily it can happen if we are not watchful. And sold to the weaker minds as 'a necessary evil'

[Bushmaster]

You lost me when you said you were going to vote Liberal !!

[kennedy]

I'm willing to take the good with the bad, if I should loose a gun or two in the process I'm alright with that as long as change is made for the better of Canadians,which I feel only the liberals and Justin Trudeau is capable of.

this is the funniest joke i ever heard...hahahahahahahahaha:sHa_shakeshout::sHa_sha keshout::sHa_shakeshout:

[edmhunter]

this is the funniest joke i ever heard...hahahahahahahahaha:sHa_shakeshout::sHa_sha keshout::sHa_shakeshout:

x's infinity!

[expmler]

So do the majority poster here think we should get rid of any form of gun control, PAL/RPAL system, or licencing based on the fact that Criminal won't follow the laws. What other laws should we axe becasue Criminal don't adhere to them. Break and Enter? Lots of Criminal committ Break and Enter and don't adhere to law. Theft? Criminals steal all the time, lets get rid of that one. Murder?????

Now look at others laws that involve licencing and registration. Criminals drive cars without driver's licence, maybe we should get rid of those. Vehicle registration, what the purpose other than to burden me as a law abiding citizen does it serve?

The good old USA is always brought up when someone wants to show how unreasonable our Canadian Laws are.

But, 2 years ago the G8 discussed a firearms initiative which included "point of sale registry" for all G8 Members. Only country to refuse, you guess it.... oh wait...Canada???? Harper believed it smelled too much like a gun registry and it was just after the CFO ledger scandal. In the USA for every fireram regardless of class, it's initial sale after being received at the store from the manufacturer or importer is recorded in a national registry which includes the purchaser info. So everytime you say you wish we had the USA gun laws, would you be willing to go back to providing your info and being registered for a non-restricted firearm sale. If you could open/conceal carry, would you agree to point of sale registry.

Tough to have your cake and eat it too.

But

To suggest we should abolish a law because Criminals don't listen to them is ridiculus as stating Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister would be good for gun owners.

Make gun ownership and defending ones life and property a "right not to be impinged upon by government" like they have in the U.S. and I will agree with point of sale registry.

[Got Juice?]

Make gun ownership and defending ones life and property a "right not to be impinged upon by government" like they have in the U.S. and I will agree with point of sale registry.

Interesting idea.

But.


The concept of self defence as a matter of life and death is an inalienable human right.

Of course, one does have to go to court to defend that right, because the mighty Crown, RCMP, and our very laws abrogate that right with legal roadblocks that must be tried in court.

That's the reality.

[Redfrog]

The time in prison that these criminals are serving is no deterent to being in possession of them.
Put them in a work camp near wood Buffalo.
Make them cut firewood for provincial camp sites or some other job.
Make them live in a wood heated tent. Melt the snow so they have water.
You know, discipline... Cause they never got it at home when they were younger.

Hey I see a light, a small light . It's way down at the other end of the tunnel. :thinking-006: There is hope.

Genius my friend pure genius.:sHa_shakeshout:

[Dacotensis]

Hey I see a light, a small light . It's way down at the other end of the tunnel. :thinking-006: There is hope.

Genius my friend pure genius.:sHa_shakeshout:

And I'm just a young feller.
Relatively speaking;) old man.

[Redfrog]

X2, and we as gun owner should be pushing for tougher penalties so that the fear of the penalty for trafficking a firearm will be an effective deterent. Because if enough of the scenario I describe occur, we will see stricker gun laws which will effect all of us and our enjoyment of hunting and shooting sports

Stricter laws? The penalties now for criminals are either plea bargained away, or run concurrent. Big Deal.

A 2 billion dollar cluster stopped some guys with PALS from buying long guns for their criminal buddies? I guess the PAl holder was a criminal all along. The cops just didn't catch him.

Drugs are illegal..........criminals still have them. Regardless of how many laws are on the books, the criminals will not obey them anyway. How many times has the tool from Newell that was arrested for a traffic stop run in prior for firearms offences? Damn the gunlaws and pass the ammunition.

Gun registry will make us all safer when my unicorn ranch turns a profit.:thinking-006:

[Redfrog]

And I'm just a young feller.
Relatively speaking;) old man.

Brighter things on the horizon. I'd suggest you run for office, but you're too honest to ever get elected.:sHa_shakeshout:

[expmler]

Interesting idea.

But.


The concept of self defence as a matter of life and death is an inalienable human right.

Of course, one does have to go to court to defend that right, because the mighty Crown, RCMP, and our very laws abrogate that right with legal roadblocks that must be tried in court.

That's the reality.

Exactly, but our gun laws are part and parcel to the denial of that basic human right.

The trouble is too many of these people who support these ridiculous restrictions don't realize it.

[Got Juice?]

X2, and we as gun owner should be pushing for tougher penalties so that the fear of the penalty for trafficking a firearm will be an effective deterent. Because if enough of the scenario I describe occur, we will see stricker gun laws which will effect all of us and our enjoyment of hunting and shooting sports

Citizens need to push harder as firearms owners when the RCMP overstep their bounds, violate a citizens rights, and try to 'make a case' by extralegal means.
We should push for them to be made accountable instead of hiding behind Queens Writ in execution of their duties.... especially when they break the law in said execution of their sworn duties. 'Exigent Circumstances' is a broad legal term with specific boundaries....

[Wild&Free]

At the risk of sounding like a "troll", I can't believe all of the personal shots taken at the original poster.

Just because a person just recently joined the forum, and expresses his opinion, he's labelled a troll?? The number of responders who used the terms "stupid" and "ignorant" is staggering...

I am still fairly new to this forum, and I do not have thousands of posts under my belt... I wonder if any of you "veterans" remember being the new guy, trying to get a few posts under your belt so people might take you seriously.

It has been said so many times that everyone's entitled to their own opinion...at the risk of being belittled and ridiculed, obviously.

Pretty attractive to new members (NOT!!)

I'm done here.

Ozz

Do what I did, my ffirst 8-900 posts were in the fishing section. then I ventured into general. I'm surprised I still have hair atm.

[Okotokian]

Please explain HOW the abolishment of the LGR makes it easier for criminal to obtain firearms? Personally I think you are a ****disturber looking for a fight. You are aware right that you still need a PAL to obtain a firearm? Do you truly believe that the abolishment of the LGR has created an underground gun trade?? Man you are so full of it! You're first gun was a KSG? You are shocked the cops allow people to own SHOTGUNS????? What a crock, TROLL TROLL TROLL. What the hell does Turdeau know about the middle class? He's a silver spoon trust fund kid who was born a millionaire and has never, nor will ever, have a financial worry in his life. He couldn't even define middle class when asked. You pay for child care because it is not government subsidized, why the hell should it be?? So people with no children or grown children should have be pay more tax so you can put your kid in daycare???

Lastly, you haven't got to worry about keeping "crap out your kids minds" my friend, Your mind is full of all the crap it or anyone around you could handle.

Please leave our forum, you are not welcome troll!

Careful. I got a 14 day time out for a post about 1/100th as insulting as this.

[brendan's dad]

Agreed. Punishing/Negating a single individual's rights ""For the collective good"" has always been the hallmark of a dictatorial governing police state in the making.

That a police state mentality is being encouraged by people like BD only shows how easily it can happen if we are not watchful. And sold to the weaker minds as 'a necessary evil'

Ouch, maybe you should re-read my post. If a "police state" is wanting stiffer laws and penalties for those that would use firearms in their criminal activities, than I guess you have me painted correctly.

And I am not the OP and do not agree with his initial statements. What I added to the converstion that with the LGR gone, when purchasing a non restricted firerarm the need to latter account for that firearm has been somewhat removed. And in this there may be a greater likelihood that it could benefit Criminals.

Does it mean I want the LGR back, No. But around here with the slightest mention of the LGR providing any benefit is viewed as blasphemy and the person is labelled a Troll. We see the LGR like the Americans see their legal system, "if any fruit of the tree is rotten, the entire tree is rotten." Yes the LGR had many flaws and needed to go, but I will not agree that it provided 0 benefit or the theory of it was completely bad.

[Pudelpointer]

The entire tree WAS rotten BD; from the seed that germinated, to great the great trunk of bureaucracy that was cut to the ground.

Wish they would rip the stump from the ground.

[Got Juice?]

Typical Conservatives think for themselves. It is an awesome burden that requires one to be responsible for their own actions, challenge the status quo and strive for a better world.

Being LIBERAL allows one the freedom of actions while being divorced from the consequences of those actions, and without the burden of thinking for themselves. The almighty government will craft a world to keep us safe, secure, and happy... if not emasculated and powerless.

[norwestalta]

Bd what benefit did it provide?
I can understand having a registry but only registering owners not what they own. I really dont see how the lgr was a benefit to anybody but the ones collecting a pay cheque from it.

[brendan's dad]

The entire tree WAS rotten BD; from the seed that germinated, to great the great trunk of bureaucracy that was cut to the ground.

Wish they would rip the stump from the ground.

Come on,

It created jobs in New Brunswich that weren't part of Irving Oil.

Just saw your post NW.

[CritterCommander]

I wish buying and registering any gun was as easy as buying and registering a car. I guess BD must like all the red %^*&# tape that goes with being a law abiding gun owner.

I won't take the argument to extremes like some are wont to do.

OP: Give your head a shake, JT is a disaster!

[brendan's dad]

Boy oh boy. 2 points I made which 1 already said 3 times

1. Fact, without the LGR there is no record of the initial purchase of non-restricted firearms and criminals may use this to their advantage.

2. Here in Canada concerning the sale of non restricted firearm we have the least red tape of any G8 country including the U.S. They have point of sale registry and we have PAL's. Take your pick, just pointed out the grass isn't always greener on the other side.


Like I said, mention of the LGR on this site and your the devil.

FYI not all gun owners supported the abolishment and there may be some on this site. Labeling them or the OP as a Troll for being pro LGR or a Liberal goes against the forum rules and show little tolerence for the opinions of other.

[brendan's dad]

Bd what benefit did it provide?
I can understand having a registry but only registering owners not what they own. I really dont see how the lgr was a benefit to anybody but the ones collecting a pay cheque from it.

The LGR did little or nothing to address criminals that obtain firearms in the black market. I completely agree with everyone's view on this.

But

There are those that would use their PAL/RPAL status to acquire firearms for criminal purposes. Criminals get their guns from a bunch of different sources. Thefts, smuggling, home made firearms and unfortunately legal firearms owner gone bad. So maybe the LGR held these PAL holder gone bad a little more accountable. Did it stop all the criminal activity, of course not, but hard to say it didn't help some.

Like I said I believe the LGR needed to go, but maybe the U.S. program of point of sale registry is something to look at. If we remain so far right that there is no room comprimise, we are just seen as the other end of a spectrum which has the extremist anti's on the other end. Not sure if we want to be categorized as extremist gun owners. The politicians will go with the majority and believe me when I say it is not us and it is not the extreme anti's. It is the average Canadian that want to be safe in the homes, communities and school and they want it for the cheapest amount of tax payer dollars possible.

[edmhunter]

If I may, I would like to direct everyone's attention to the poll that the OP was nice enough to start.

Do we or do we not live in a democratic society? The poll numbers are self-explanatory.

I am sure JT would throw up if he saw this poll then back track when it comes to the Western Canadian vote.

[Talking moose]

If I may, I would like to direct everyone's attention to the poll that the OP was nice enough to start.

Do we or do we not live in a democratic society? The poll numbers are self-explanatory.

I am sure JT would throw up if he saw this poll then back track when it comes to the Western Canadian vote.

Sadly. This forum does not represent western Canada, lol, it's a hunting site

[bat119]

Bd what benefit did it provide?
I can understand having a registry but only registering owners not what they own. I really dont see how the lgr was a benefit to anybody but the ones collecting a pay cheque from it.

The RCMP knew who's door to kick in in High river

Why is it important to know where the gun came from after a crime? Like closing the gate after the cows got out

[brendan's dad]

Maybe to try and prevent another Criminal getting a firearm from the same source.

I don't buy the attitude, "the criminals will get the gun anyway, so what good does it do." Personally I want the Police making it as hard, if not impossible, for a criminal to obtain a firearm or at least trying damn hard to achieve this. Because every time a firearm is used in crime we as gun owners suffer. That cause and effect will never change; a firearm is used in a murder, in media equals "guns kill people."

So maybe what the OP meant was that if us jumping through a few hoops, assists in any little way, stopping a firearm getting into the hands of a Criminal then maybe it is worth it.

But I still don't understand the Trudeau thing.

[edmhunter]

Sadly. This forum does not represent western Canada, lol, it's a hunting site

Unfortunately you are correct! :scared0015:

[Tactical Lever]

When I hear people talking about voting Liberal I am reminded of the movie Idiocracy for some reason.

"Do you even know what electrolytes are?"

"They're what plants crave!"

Something is Fishy here with all this talk of Guns. Er am I wrong lol.

One one hand you want the right to carry a pistol but will vote for the party that will take away most of your guns if they had the chance for the greater good of the county? Please win again Steven, please win the next election.

Maybe? I think we have a returning visitor. Big logic fail for the OP.


It is a catch 22 isn't it, and yes there were plenty of restricted and non restricted and prohibited firearms to be had at any given time. It's just way easier to get them now. My statement did make some what of a contradiction, but I didn't say all firearms I said some firearms. Anyways this old cow can be beat to a bloody pulp for ever with people's beliefs and I won't say anymore on the subject because your mind is obviously closed to the real world sir.And I'm smarter to what topics I should be discussing. I'm sure you have a pencil to be pushed so I'll let you get back at that.

As a gun owner, it is not "way easier" to get them now. Just now I don't have to wait 3 days for some genius to decipher cyrillic script and then screw it up, just so I can bring my gun home.

I think if you read some Canadian and American history, you might learn a little on how effective the gun laws are.

So do the majority poster here think we should get rid of any form of gun control, PAL/RPAL system, or licencing based on the fact that Criminal won't follow the laws. What other laws should we axe becasue Criminal don't adhere to them. Break and Enter? Lots of Criminal committ Break and Enter and don't adhere to law. Theft? Criminals steal all the time, lets get rid of that one. Murder?????

Now look at others laws that involve licencing and registration. Criminals drive cars without driver's licence, maybe we should get rid of those. Vehicle registration, what the purpose other than to burden me as a law abiding citizen does it serve?

The good old USA is always brought up when someone wants to show how unreasonable our Canadian Laws are.

But, 2 years ago the G8 discussed a firearms initiative which included "point of sale registry" for all G8 Members. Only country to refuse, you guess it.... oh wait...Canada???? Harper believed it smelled too much like a gun registry and it was just after the CFO ledger scandal. In the USA for every fireram regardless of class, it's initial sale after being received at the store from the manufacturer or importer is recorded in a national registry which includes the purchaser info. So everytime you say you wish we had the USA gun laws, would you be willing to go back to providing your info and being registered for a non-restricted firearm sale. If you could open/conceal carry, would you agree to point of sale registry.

Tough to have your cake and eat it too.

But

To suggest we should abolish a law because Criminals don't listen to them is ridiculus as stating Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister would be good for gun owners.

I don't think the U.S. is quite as free as it once was, there are a couple states that make our laws look a little better.

I'm not in favour of any kind of gun registry; particularly because it's been used against us a few times. As Dacotensis has pointed out, we've had a centralized handgun registry for about 80 years, and a non centralized one for about 100 years. Yet pistols keep on being the favoured tool of choice, among criminals who have guns. Not too sure if anyone else has noticed, but it's seldom SA Colt revolvers or flintlocks either.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad View Post
X2, and we as gun owner should be pushing for tougher penalties so that the fear of the penalty for trafficking a firearm will be an effective deterent. Because if enough of the scenario I describe occur, we will see stricker gun laws which will effect all of us and our enjoyment of hunting and shooting sports

I agree that penalties should be much tougher for any person that sells, gives, or takes possession of any firearm in any illegal manner. Now that the inquiry has determined that the firearms seizures at High River were not legal, start by charging each RCMP officer that took possession of a firearm in any manner that wasn't 100% legal.

[dmcbride]

Maybe to try and prevent another Criminal getting a firearm from the same source.

I don't buy the attitude, "the criminals will get the gun anyway, so what good does it do." Personally I want the Police making it as hard, if not impossible, for a criminal to obtain a firearm or at least trying damn hard to achieve this. Because every time a firearm is used in crime we as gun owners suffer. That cause and effect will never change; a firearm is used in a murder, in media equals "guns kill people."

So maybe what the OP meant was that if us jumping through a few hoops, assists in any little way, stopping a firearm getting into the hands of a Criminal then maybe it is worth it.

But I still don't understand the Trudeau thing.

I agree police should be making it hard for criminals to get guns, But it should not effect law abiding gun owners by making them jump through unnecessary hoops.

I do not agree that the criminals are not going to have access to a gun because there criminal buddy with a pal won't buy them one because they are registered. These are criminals and they always find a way around the law. If a criminal wants a gun, a registry is not going to stop them. To think that making law abiding gun owners jump through more hoops on the hope that it might deter a criminal from getting access to a gun is plain silly.

[qballs]

I guess another question to ask,

If said criminal is bent on breaking our current laws on robbery, murder etc, why would a gun registry stop him?
Last I checked murder is illegal...

[brendan's dad]

I agree police should be making it hard for criminals to get guns, But it should not effect law abiding gun owners by making them jump through unnecessary hoops.

I do not agree that the criminals are not going to have access to a gun because there criminal buddy with a pal won't buy them one because they are registered. These are criminals and they always find a way around the law. If a criminal wants a gun, a registry is not going to stop them. To think that making law abiding gun owners jump through more hoops on the hope that it might deter a criminal from getting access to a gun is plain silly.


Alright I'll play the silly bugger.

So remove the hoops and licencing for persons to own firearms. Run it like Montana, you have a drivers licence, you can buy a gun. Licenced shops and dealers must check if you have a felony back ground before a sale is complete.

But for private sales and at gun shows, the seller only must have no reason to suspect you can not possess a firearm. So not very many hoops to jump through in Montana for owning a gun and should be very attractive to you.

So heres the simple question, can Criminal buy a gun easier at a gun show in Montana or Canada?

I fully aware that a Criminal can probably buy a gun at either if determined, but question is, which would be easier?

So if any kind of registry if useless, what other proactive enforcement ideas would you suggest for us silly buggers?

Or should the police wait until the crimes happens before enforecement is initiated?

[brendan's dad]

I guess another question to ask,

If said criminal is bent on breaking our current laws on robbery, murder etc, why would a gun registry stop him?
Last I checked murder is illegal...


That is exactly my point, the arguement that "Criminal don't listen to gun laws anyways, so there is no use in have them, as they only burden law abiding citizens?" is disturbing. We have laws with associated penalties in the event that if someone breaks that law they are held accountable. And the fact that you follow those laws also is what seperates you from the Criminals and scum of the earth.

Lets stay just on the guns laws, lets say we get rid of them all.

Think back to some of the guys you went to High School with. Would you feel safe sending your kids to school with that guy, knowing he was carrying concealed. Would it make you feel much safer if your kid was carrying concealed. Knowing you brought your kid up right, would it be your son that stepped up with his firearm to defend the others against the S*&^head if things went south. Lots of 18 year olds in High school.

So the US has point of sale registry and most all states require checks be completed by licenced dealers prior to a sale. But after the initial sale, a criminal can obtain a gun in the same manner as a law abiding citizen. Go to a gun show in a particular state or private sales and here you go. Do we want it that easy for criminals up here?

A few hoops? The hoops I needed to jump through is that I have lead a clean life, I don't do drugs, no criminal activity, I don't beat my wife, I am not violent towards others, and I have to fill 2 pages and take a picture every 5 years. If the government has to complete checks on me to determine that I am not like a person listed above, no problem. It is nice to know they are doing something to help prevent a person like that from buying gun.

[coastalhunter]

The whole point of the firearms act is to dissuade firearm ownership.

[expmler]

That is exactly my point, the arguement that "Criminal don't listen to gun laws anyways, so there is no use in have them, as they only burden law abiding citizens?" is disturbing. We have laws with associated penalties in the event that if someone breaks that law they are held accountable. And the fact that you follow those laws also is what seperates you from the Criminals and scum of the earth.

Lets stay just on the guns laws, lets say we get rid of them all.

Think back to some of the guys you went to High School with. Would you feel safe sending your kids to school with that guy, knowing he was carrying concealed. Would it make you feel much safer if your kid was carrying concealed. Knowing you brought your kid up right, would it be your son that stepped up with his firearm to defend the others against the S*&^head if things went south. Lots of 18 year olds in High school.

So the US has point of sale registry and most all states require checks be completed by licenced dealers prior to a sale. But after the initial sale, a criminal can obtain a gun in the same manner as a law abiding citizen. Go to a gun show in a particular state or private sales and here you go. Do we want it that easy for criminals up here?

A few hoops? The hoops I needed to jump through is that I have lead a clean life, I don't do drugs, no criminal activity, I don't beat my wife, I am not violent towards others, and I have to fill 2 pages and take a picture every 5 years. If the government has to complete checks on me to determine that I am not like a person listed above, no problem. It is nice to know they are doing something to help prevent a person like that from buying gun.

Not sure how old you are, but when I was in high school we used to take our guns to school all of the time in the fall. School lets out and we were off hunting until dark. I even hunted with a couple of my teachers and they thought nothing of looking at each others guns in the parking lot.

No PAL nonsense in those days and blood didn't run in the streets.

[dmcbride]

Alright I'll play the silly bugger.

So remove the hoops and licencing for persons to own firearms. Run it like Montana, you have a drivers licence, you can buy a gun. Licenced shops and dealers must check if you have a felony back ground before a sale is complete.

But for private sales and at gun shows, the seller only must have no reason to suspect you can not possess a firearm. So not very many hoops to jump through in Montana for owning a gun and should be very attractive to you.

So heres the simple question, can Criminal buy a gun easier at a gun show in Montana or Canada?

I fully aware that a Criminal can probably buy a gun at either if determined, but question is, which would be easier?

So if any kind of registry if useless, what other proactive enforcement ideas would you suggest for us silly buggers?

Or should the police wait until the crimes happens before enforecement is initiated?

Wasn't trying to say that your silly.:)

I just find the idea silly.

So heres the simple question, can Criminal buy a gun easier at a gun show in Montana or Canada?

Well that would depend.

First, who the criminals associate with would determine how easy it would be to acquire. It could be as simple as making a phone call and getting a gun delivered right to ones door step.

Second, guns that are sold by criminals that aren't restricted will cost less than a gun at a gun show. (every body knows guns are over priced at gun shows:)) There just isn't the demand for non restricted guns in the criminal world.

Third, Criminals can just go and steal their own guns for free.

Fourth, Even if a criminal did get a gun from the gun show as you are suggesting and we did put hoops in place so this would not happen, what is to stop him from using routes 1, 2 and 3 that I just suggested?

[brendan's dad]

The whole point of the firearms act is to dissuade firearm ownership.

Not sure if the point is to discourage ownership but I sure some people get frustrated with the process and decide it is not worht it.

I have mentioned Criminals a few times but the system also trys to identify and restrict persons with Mental Health issues from buying or possessing firearms.

Ask yourself, Is there a person you know that you believe should not own a gun and if they did they could be a danger to themselves or others? If you answer yes, (most will if honest) How would you purpose to prevent them from buying one without licencing or some form of a PAL?

[edmhunter]

Not sure how old you are, but when I was in high school we used to take our guns to school all of the time in the fall. School lets out and we were off hunting until dark. I even hunted with a couple of my teachers and they thought nothing of looking at each others guns in the parking lot.

No PAL nonsense in those days and blood didn't run in the streets.

Man I so miss the days of common sense and logic! Those day are gone forever only because politicians need to fear monger to get a few votes so they can ride the gravy train and get unbelievable retirement packages and live the good life at our, the law abiding, common people's expense!

[brendan's dad]

Wasn't trying to say that your silly.:)

I just find the idea silly.

So heres the simple question, can Criminal buy a gun easier at a gun show in Montana or Canada?

Well that would depend.

First, who the criminals associate with would determine how easy it would be to acquire. It could be as simple as making a phone call and getting a gun delivered right to ones door step.

Second, guns that are sold by criminals that aren't restricted will cost less than a gun at a gun show. (every body knows guns are over priced at gun shows:)) There just isn't the demand for non restricted guns in the criminal world.

Third, Criminals can just go and steal their own guns for free.

Fourth, Even if a criminal did get a gun from the gun show as you are suggesting and we did put hoops in place so this would not happen, what is to stop him from using routes 1, 2 and 3 that I just suggested?


Yep, definitely could use route 1,2 or 3.

1. Street gun, rarely will know condition or history prior to sale. You might have just bought something used in a murder last week.

2. Very Wrong. Non-Restricted on the street 2x MRSP. Restrcited 4X MRSP. $500 glock will be 2 grand cash or equilavent of drugs.

3. Chance of getting caught and mandatory jail time for Break and enter for theft of Firearms.

or

4. Walk into a gun show like everyone else. Walk up to a table and no info recorded. Buy a gun a little below MRSP and then go home.


I am not a Criminal but I would take option 4.

[expmler]

The whole point of the firearms act is to dissuade firearm ownership.

Exactly, they imposed it on people and many turned in their guns rather than put up with meeting all of the requirements of that ridiculous act. They convinced the non gun owners that gun owners were a danger to the public and needed to be regulated to ensure public safety.

Unfortunately many gun owners bought into this ruse also, and now they undermine the efforts of law abiding gun owners to have this burden upon them lifted. They continue to capitulate thinking that as long as we go along with these regulations no more will be imposed.

History tells us otherwise.

[bat119]

I have never heard a rational explanation how the LGR could prevent crime, after the fact it could be used to find the source of where it came from, too little too late. The spree killers use what's available can't get a gun use a knife. machete, a car or gasoline and a match. Organized criminals use handguns that have been registered for almost a 100 years, has registration helped ?
If the LGR is the answer to gun crime why are crimes still being committed with handguns?
During the LGR's existence I jumped through the hoops, it was a mess
I received somebody else's certificates
Guns I sold were still in my name a year later
I was on a road trip and decided to buy a rifle, because we couldn't get the paper work completed I had to pay for shipping, Canada post dropped it off on my front step while I was at work.
2B$ wasted with no results the LGR never prevented one crime all the money was spent for nothing.

[dmcbride]

Yep, definitely could use route 1,2 or 3.

1. Street gun, rarely will know condition or history prior to sale. You might have just bought something used in a murder last week.

2. Very Wrong. Non-Restricted on the street 2x MRSP. Restrcited 4X MRSP. $500 glock will be 2 grand cash or equilavent of drugs.

3. Chance of getting caught and mandatory jail time for Break and enter for theft of Firearms.

or

4. Walk into a gun show like everyone else. Walk up to a table and no info recorded. Buy a gun a little below MRSP and then go home.


I am not a Criminal but I would take option 4.

1. Criminals don't care if the gun was used in a murder if they are going to be murdering them selves.

2. The stats you are posting are just like when cops make a drug bust a claim 100 pot plants have a street value of 1 million. Long guns sell cheap in Canada, I have been offered a few to buy dirt cheap.

3. If a criminal is going to murder someone they are not going to care about break and enter and theft of firearms.

4. Criminals will take the route that costs the least.

[brendan's dad]

It definitely had a lot of issues and needed to go, but the argument that it did "0" is questionable. The point I made earlier is that the registry "MAY" have dissuaded a person who otherwise would have sold a firearm to Criminal because that gun was in his name and could trace back to him. Unfortunately it is hard to investigative thoughts in someone head or provide stats on something like that.

The negative certainly outweight the positive in regards to the registry and I believe right decision was made to get rid of it.

[edmhunter]

For: 267
Against: 31

Won't make any difference, which SUCKS!

[dmcbride]

Not sure if the point is to discourage ownership but I sure some people get frustrated with the process and decide it is not worht it.

I have mentioned Criminals a few times but the system also trys to identify and restrict persons with Mental Health issues from buying or possessing firearms.

Ask yourself, Is there a person you know that you believe should not own a gun and if they did they could be a danger to themselves or others? If you answer yes, (most will if honest) How would you purpose to prevent them from buying one without licencing or some form of a PAL?

Why does everybody think that guns are the only way for people to kill others?
How do we stop these people with mental issues from using a knife, pointed stick, poison, using a car to run down someone? Ect.Ectt. Maybe we should be dealing with the mental health issues, not putting restrictions on law abiding gun owners.

[airbornedeerhunter]

I have never heard a rational explanation how the LGR could prevent crime, after the fact it could be used to find the source of where it came from, too little too late. The spree killers use what's available can't get a gun use a knife. machete, a car or gasoline and a match. Organized criminals use handguns that have been registered for almost a 100 years, has registration helped ?
If the LGR is the answer to gun crime why are crimes still being committed with handguns?
During the LGR's existence I jumped through the hoops, it was a mess
I received somebody else's certificates
Guns I sold were still in my name a year later
I was on a road trip and decided to buy a rifle, because we couldn't get the paper work completed I had to pay for shipping, Canada post dropped it off on my front step while I was at work.
2B$ wasted with no results the LGR never prevented one crime all the money was spent for nothing.

Testify brother! In 2003 I received a registration cert in the mail for a Winchester 30-30 that I didn't own nor did I ever own. When I contacted the CFC in welfare land and explained the situation they refused to believe that I didn't own the gun. It went on for months with them even going as far to accuse me in writing of either A) having used the rifle in criminal activity and disposed of it, B) Having either lost it or had it stolen due to improper storage or transportation C) having sold or given it to someone illegally and trying to cover up one of those 3 scenarios. Emails, letters, phone calls etc all were ignored. I even received a letter from them saying that the matter was now being investigated as a criminal matter. One day I got another correspondence that said in about 3 lines that there was a computing error and they now knew it was never in my possession, no mention of the months of crap I had to deal with or the veiled threats of having it turned into a police matter.

Gun owners in Canada have two major nemesis:

1- Left, and far left political party's
2- Fellow gun owners who in any way advocate for further restrictions/bureaucratic red tape for gun owners.

I'm all for licensing, I think only the extreme zealots are opposed to that but the registration piece for LG was nonsense and thankfully is as dead as Julius Caesar.

[expmler]

It definitely had a lot of issues and needed to go, but the argument that it did "0" is questionable. The point I made earlier is that the registry "MAY" have dissuaded a person who otherwise would have sold a firearm to Criminal because that gun was in his name and could trace back to him. Unfortunately it is hard to investigative thoughts in someone head or provide stats on something like that.

The negative certainly outweight the positive in regards to the registry and I believe right decision was made to get rid of it.

So without the registry how does the PAL discourage legal gun owners from selling guns to criminals?

If you think that the PAL is good because it keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, how can you support abolishing the LGR which you claim discouraged gun owners from selling guns to criminals?

[honda450]

It definitely had a lot of issues and needed to go, but the argument that it did "0" is questionable. The point I made earlier is that the registry "MAY" have dissuaded a person who otherwise would have sold a firearm to Criminal because that gun was in his name and could trace back to him. Unfortunately it is hard to investigative thoughts in someone head or provide stats on something like that.

The negative certainly outweight the positive in regards to the registry and I believe right decision was made to get rid of it.

Man your all over the board on this this one. To me you don't make sense ya talk bout Montana........ then gun shows........... then something else. ........then something else beyond that. Lost focus I guess.

Sorry dude you make absolutely no sense to me.

[Got Juice?]

The Gun Registry. We were sold a bad bill of goods under the justification "if it saves one life it will be worth it"

LGR active: 1993-2012

Total Cost: 2 Billion plus and annual operating budget in excess of 60 million dollars

Lives Saved "0"

If human life is priceless, perhaps we should have spent 5 BILLION more... just to prove that registration does not work for any gun.


Licensing, a separate issue, is important. And should stay.

[bat119]

This guy has had over 100 charges spent 8 years of a 10 year sentence and is out committing crimes just a matter of time before he kills someone

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/albert-foulston-convicted-of-killing-edmonton-police-officer-arrested-again-1.2974266

Leave the gun owners alone and keep the criminals in jail

[brendan's dad]

So without the registry how does the PAL discourage legal gun owners from selling guns to criminals?

If you think that the PAL is good because it keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, how can you support abolishing the LGR which you claim discouraged gun owners from selling guns to criminals?

Because like many, and all my post reflect this, I believe it is much more more effective and important to regulate "who" is buying as opposed to "what" they are buying. PAL regulates the indivdual and the registry regulates the item, 2 very different things

Just because I say that I don't agree that the LGR had "0' positive effect doesn't mean I am a LGR supporter.

What would you rather?

1. The CFP lower the bar for successful PAL application and incease the risk that more violent or mentally disturbed persons fall through the cracks and get PALs

or

2. Do you want stricter application guidelines that will shows responsible gun owners in a positive light trying desparately to keep thesse people from owning firearms

Too many gun owners on here have the "I don't give a crap what other Canadians think" attitude. We all have to share this country and in the end there are more non gun owner voters than us. Do you think we could use this thread and other like it to convince the non owners to support our issues in the next election? If we stay to the extreme right than we look as crazy as the anti's to the extreme left.

[brendan's dad]

Man your all over the board on this this one. To me you don't make sense ya talk bout Montana........ then gun shows........... then something else. ........then something else beyond that. Lost focus I guess.

Sorry dude you make absolutely no sense to me.


See above post and sorry you are confused.

[expmler]

Because like many, and all my post reflect this, I believe it is much more more effective and important to regulate "who" is buying as opposed to "what" they are buying. PAL regulates the indivdual and the registry regulates the item, 2 very different things

Just because I say that I don't agree that the LGR had "0' positive effect doesn't mean I am a LGR supporter.

What would you rather?

1. The CFP lower the bar for successful PAL application and incease the risk that more violent or mentally disturbed persons fall through the cracks and get PALs

or

2. Do you want stricter application guidelines that will shows responsible gun owners in a positive light trying desparately to keep thesse people from owning firearms

Too many gun owners on here have the "I don't give a crap what other Canadians think" attitude. We all have to share this country and in the end there are more non gun owner voters than us. Do you think we could use this thread and other like it to convince the non owners to support our issues in the next election? If we stay to the extreme right than we look as crazy as the anti's to the extreme left.

So under the current system there is no point of sale registration and I would be free to sell the rifle to anyone I please. Actually a weaker system than the U.S. if your concern is guns falling into the wrong hands.

[brendan's dad]

So under the current system there is no point of sale registration and I would be free to sell the rifle to anyone I please. Actually a weaker system than the U.S. if your concern is guns falling into the wrong hands.

No, I am in support of the "person" being licenced to buy a firearm by way of a PAL or similar system. If you were selling any type of firearm you would still need to ensure your buyer also had a PAL, regardless of whether the sale is recorded or not in a registry style system.

[brendan's dad]

Here is my stance so I don't get 50 more questions.

I believe there should a strict criteria outlining who has the right to own firearms and who doesn't, and it should be based on the persons action and mental capacity.

I feel that classifying and regulating the items (firearms, mags etc) is futile for 2 reasons:

1. They do not cause the problem, the possessor is the issue
2. Technology evolves and manufactures are continually looking for ways to circumvent the laws which causes fustration and confusion for gun owners and law enforcement alike.

I know full well that Criminals will obtain firearms through illegal activity regardless of how strict the guidelines are. But I don't believe in scraping laws and throwing caution to the wind because Criminals don't listen to the law.

The LRG will never come back in it's prior form and that is a good thing. It would be political suicide even for Trudeau to bring it back given the history and prior associated cost. I believe we MAY see a system similar to the US and G8 plan with a point of sale registry but I doubt we will see it with Harper after HR, Swiss Arms/CZ and the CFO Ledger scandals. If it goes the Trudeau way than we may go beyond the US and adopt the Austrailia and UK models, lets hope that doesn't happen.

Have a great evening and further discussion, I am going to watch "Fury"

[expmler]

No, I am in support of the "person" being licenced to buy a firearm by way of a PAL or similar system. If you were selling any type of firearm you would still need to ensure your buyer also had a PAL, regardless of whether the sale is recorded or not in a registry style system.

What you miss is the fact that having a PAL is no guarantee that said person will follow the law. He can choose to check if the potential buyer has a valid PAL, but if he doesn't there is no way of tracing that rifle back to him so no real chance of him being charged with a crime.

So in the end it comes down to the actions of a responsible gun owner and one does not need a piece of paper or pay a fee to be responsible.

[expmler]

Here is my stance so I don't get 50 more questions.

I believe there should a strict criteria outlining who has the right to own firearms and who doesn't, and it should be based on the persons action and mental capacity.

I feel that classifying and regulating the items (firearms, mags etc) is futile for 2 reasons:

1. They do not cause the problem, the possessor is the issue
2. Technology evolves and manufactures are continually looking for ways to circumvent the laws which causes fustration and confusion for gun owners and law enforcement alike.

I know full well that Criminals will obtain firearms through illegal activity regardless of how strict the guidelines are. But I don't believe in scraping laws and throwing caution to the wind because Criminals don't listen to the law.

The LRG will never come back in it's prior form and that is a good thing. It would be political suicide even for Trudeau to bring it back given the history and prior associated cost. I believe we MAY see a system similar to the US and G8 plan with a point of sale registry but I doubt we will see it with Harper after HR, Swiss Arms/CZ and the CFO Ledgerthe private citizen scandals. If it goes the Trudeau way than we may go beyond the US and adopt the Austrailia and UK models, lets hope that doesn't happen.

Have a great evening and further discussion, I am going to watch "Fury"

While you are watching keep in mind that Hitler regulated gun ownership of the private citizen and ultimately disarmed the population. But hey, at least criminals didn't have guns.

[waterninja]

Once again confirming what a bunch of ignorant uneducated ignorant useless Turds (because it won't let me say ****s) those stupid ****ing Liberals are. Ok. It's been a rough couple of days. Thanks for sharing that. And you said you are going to vote for them? Jesus wept, and wept and wept.....

Automatic weapons to a grocery store or a soccer field. What a bunch of fear mongering knee jerk stupidity from a pack of stupid ignorant morons. Arseholes. Did you say you were going to vote for them?? I so want to meet you and help you. 'Make a positive change for Canadians....' Jesus wept.
Just a couple posts in and I'm laughing already. Why don't you tell us how you really feel about the liberals?
By the way. I agree with you.

[shep dog]

Hasn't this kind of thing been done before...

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=202919
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/open-carry-alberta-canada.html

In over two years, the petition received under 1,750 signatures.

It'll never happen.