RCMP seize large gun cache in Prince George

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

The response from Clare (NFA president) makes me question the organization I recently joined.

I agree Oko. I've never joined the NFA simply because of issues such as this one. They do a lot of good but defending something like this leads to a lack of credibility with a lot of responsible firearms owners IMO. It's one thing to be a firearms advocate, it's another to take firearms issues to levels that I am not personally comfortable with.

"The National Firearms Association is Canada's leader in the quest for fair and practical firearm and property rights legislation. While working for practical laws across Canada, your Association provides access to legal assistance for the defense of the rights of Canadians."

The terms "Fair" and "Practical" are relative so does the NFA think that owning firearms like this is fair and practical?

[fish gunner]

Lader hosen some strudles and an Ak what not to love . Jolly bravarian and full auto hmm high fashon say 60 yrs ago.

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

Are you talking Tatla lake? They don't want to scare anyone?

There was a large stash of automatic weapons and explosives found....the story was hushed up pretty quickly. This isn't the first stash of arms, and probably not the only one.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

There was a large stash of automatic weapons and explosives found....the story was hushed up pretty quickly. This isn't the first stash of arms, and probably not the only one.

That would explain alot.

[Matt L.]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

You do when its cyclic rate is 500 rpm ?? How many laws does a gut need to break ? legal law abiding firearms owners are made to appear on side with this guy?? Face palm

Sigh, did I condone his breaking the law? I am saying that his owning of these firearms should not have broken any laws. In other words they should be legal for those as wish to use them at a range.
Is that easier to understand?

[Au revoir, Gopher]

Originally Posted by greylynx

The terms "Fair and Practical" are liberal speak for my way or the highway.

For example, I think all rifles should be banned. Why? Because it is "fair and practical.

So what does it mean when the NFA says it, or are they liberal gun grabbers too?

https://nfa.ca/about-national-firear...un-information

ARG

[greylynx]

Originally Posted by Au revoir, Gopher

So what does it mean when the NFA says it, or are they liberal gun grabbers too?

https://nfa.ca/about-national-firear...un-information

ARG

Become an NFA member and find out.

I hope the NFA has not changed it's position.

[Au revoir, Gopher]

Originally Posted by greylynx

Become an NFA member and find out.

I hope the NFA has not changed it's position.

Who says I'm not?

If you go back and re-read the initial post by HunterDave where, "fair and practical" was quoted from the NFA page that I linked to. Hence my question.

ARG

[greylynx]

Perhaps the NFA can respond.

I continue to this day to believe that the NFA has a planned training program for owning firearms that are prohibited. I am referring to the late David Tomlinson's patch grogram and other ideas from the days of Bill C-68.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by Matt L.

Sigh, did I condone his breaking the law? I am saying that his owning of these firearms should not have broken any laws. In other words they should be legal for those as wish to use them at a range.
Is that easier to understand?

No, not unless you have training to the level of the folks that actually carry them on a day to day basis. Sustained fire rifles ino have no place in hunting heritage. The wish to reduce them to a plinking toy boggels, they have little or no place in civilian hands.
Do we see F1 cars just sitting in garages for a track day ? No, partially because few qualified to drive them use them for fun . Wanna see F1 go to a race .wanna play with fullauto join the big green machine they have tons to hand out and come with free ammo &boots.

[greylynx]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

No, not unless you have training to the level of the folks that actually carry them on a day to day basis. Sustained fire rifles ino have no place in hunting heritage. The wish to reduce them to a plinking toy boggels, they have little or no place in civilian hands.
Do we see F1 cars just sitting in garages for a track day ? No, partially because few qualified to drive them use them for fun . Wanna see F1 go to a race .wanna play with fullauto join the big green machine they have tons to hand out and come with free ammo &boots.

We used to have two or three full auto shoots a year in Alberta.

The civilian owners came, the police came, the military came.

Then the liberal federal government came with Bill C-68.

No more police and military.

It would be nice to see things like the old days

Fishgunner: I guess you were not a resident of Alberta in those good old days just prior to Bill 68.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by greylynx

So why not come clean Dave:

Why do you really want no civilians, just the police and military, to have access to a fully automatic firearm?

Because you haven't earned the right to own one.

[greylynx]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Because you haven't earned the right to own one.

No:, I would never own one. I love to watch how they operate and the history behind them. Cheap entertainment.

You too probably were not a resident of Alberta when the auto shoots used to be held.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by greylynx

We used to have two or three full auto shoots a year in Alberta.

The civilian owners came, the police came, the military came.

Then the liberal federal government came with Bill C-68.

No more police and military.

It would be nice to see things like the old days

We used to do lots of things in the past when respect was a thing we all held in the utmost . Till I was 12 or so most any kid I knew would have been safe carring a fullauto rifle . Today I would have the jitters giving one to most 25 yr old.
Times change, society's acceptances follow that
We live in time where me is more important than us .

[farmerpk]

IMHO, whether it's right or wrong for him to own these items, (I believe it should be legal for legit target shooters, etc).

He broke the law. Maybe it sucks, but he knew what he was doing when get acquired them.

Like someone else said, sometimes good people make poor choices and suffer the consequences.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by greylynx

The only difference between those who own prohibited firearms and those who do not is a piece of paper.

The only thing that makes you from not being charged with ownership of a firearm is a piece of paper.

All paper crimes in the name of public safety.

With the current drive to call rifles like that .270 you own "sniper" weapons, and ban them will put you into the same boat as the prohibited owners.

You sit smuggly spitting at other gun owners, say your an NFA member, and at the same time extoll the virtues of banning firearms.

Again Oki, you are not right.

I agree that the only difference may be a piece of paper, but the law says without it you can't have full auto, and he did it anyways, breaking the law.

If you want to change the law, the best way to do it is not to break the law in the first place. Send letters to the government asking for the laws to be changed. Get organizations like the NFA to support you in this before you break the law, not after.

The guy who is charged with a pile of crimes for wanting to keep legally purchased and registered guns and then ordered to hand them over is the guy we should be defending, not the guy who imports illegal firearms in knowingly. How many people have had their legally purchased type 97 confiscated when they first arrived because the police later deemed them to be prohibited?

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

We used to do lots of things in the past when respect was a thing we all held in the utmost . Till I was 12 or so most any kid I knew would have been safe carring a fullauto rifle . Today I would have the jitters giving one to most 25 yr old.
Times change, society's acceptances follow that
We live in time where me is more important than us .

Yes times and society have changed, and they have changed because too many left minded people say that parents can't discipline your child, the schools have been filled with people who's idea of what is right and wrong have been influenced by those same kind of people who say parents cant raise their own child.

We have let this happen. We let our government change laws, and make new ones, and now we suffer the consequences. The decline is out own making due to inaction.

[greylynx]

This person broke the law yes. It was a paper law. Yes convict him and send him away for life for not having papers.

Meanwhile,there are people in this country that currently own two of these firearms imentioned legally.

They were grandfathered to them in 1977. I suppose that was when the Liberals decided not to trust civilians.

These grandfathered firearms were shot at special shoots in the Province of Alberta until Bill C-68 came along.

What bothers me is every time a case like this comes up, a few retired wanna be army officers, and liberal gun owners chirp up telling how bad prohibited firearms are. In reality Bill C-68 makes them on step away of being like the person charged. No papers.

All Gunowners: Remember this the next time you go to your constituency meeting. Constituency meeting....wutz dat?

[BeeGuy]

Anyone know any upstanding Canadian citizens I could acquire an M-16 and AK-47 from? As well as a few bullet proof vests?

[greylynx]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

Anyone know any upstanding Canadian citizens I could acquire an M-16 and AK-47 from? As well as a few bullet proof vests?

You could not, but there are members of this forum that could.

And just why would you want to purchase such items Beeguy?

Thanks Beeguy, you just proved some points of mine. Your the best.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

Anyone know any upstanding Canadian citizens I could acquire an M-16 and AK-47 from? As well as a few bullet proof vests?

I have a couple bullet proof vests, but I also work in a war zone.

[BeeGuy]

Originally Posted by greylynx

You could not, but there are members of this forum that could.

And just why would you want to purchase such items Beeguy?

Thanks Beeguy, you just proved some points of mine. Your the best.

You missed my point.

I'm fictitiously looking for a reputable source for illegal firearms.

Anyone know any upstanding citizens trafficking M-16's and AK's?

Pew pew pew!

I'm sure the baker was dealing with some real gentlemanly characters in his sourcing of them there firearms.

To be fair to the dough kneeder though, PG is a place you might legitimately need such self defense tools.

Braka!brak!brak!

Don't smoke crack!

[silverdoctor]

Canada seems to be gearing more toward guilty until proven innocent, that's getting worrysome.

Firearms owners, I feel for you - you don't have a right to own guns. Like many other things in this country - it is a privilege that can be taken away at the whim of a CFO. You tend to be under a microscope - basically guilty at the drop of a hat. Unnecessary laws and restrictions are put in place cause government knows the vast majority of the population will follow them - not necessarily agree with them.

So you can't own a fully auto (with exceptions), and you can't own a slew of other firearms... CFO decides to reclassify a firearm, owners of those firearms are basically automatically criminals. There is definitely a problem here, and has been for a long time.

One of the biggest issues I see with stories like these is the villainizing of gun owners in general because of one person - the RCMP are very good at smear campaigns and chest thumping.

Should the firearms community back this guy? I think you should - yes he broke a law - and it's a law that most don't agree with. How many of you would like to have an AK or M16 even as a trophy to have on the wall? Admit it, c'mon, you can do it...

[rwm1273]

The RCMP have been trying to ban many other scarey guns. Several companies won't import the VZ58/CZ858 anymore because the RCMP have classified some of them prohibited. They sent the rifles to their lab, and they then determined they are prohibited, and sent them back, and there is no appeals when they do this. They did the same thing with the Type97, and there are a few other rifles that have been similarly treated recently, and the gun owners who purchased said gun get a letter in the mail demanding to have the gun returned without compensation.

It appears the RCMP are finding new ways to limit what comes in based solely on what they look like, and we gun owners suffer.

Then you have cases like this where a guy just goes out and brings in things that he knows are prohibited anyways.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

The RCMP have been trying to ban many other scarey guns. Several companies won't import the VZ58/CZ858 anymore because the RCMP have classified some of them prohibited. They sent the rifles to their lab, and they then determined they are prohibited, and sent them back, and there is no appeals when they do this. They did the same thing with the Type97, and there are a few other rifles that have been similarly treated recently, and the gun owners who purchased said gun get a letter in the mail demanding to have the gun returned without compensation.

It appears the RCMP are finding new ways to limit what comes in based solely on what they look like, and we gun owners suffer.

Then you have cases like this where a guy just goes out and brings in things that he knows are prohibited anyways.

Excellent points. But why the prohibition?

Because they can get away with it - without so much as a whimper.

[Red Bullets]

Originally Posted by greylynx

We used to have two or three full auto shoots a year in Alberta.
The civilian owners came, the police came, the military came.
Then the liberal federal government came with Bill C-68.
No more police and military.
It would be nice to see things like the old days
Fishgunner: I guess you were not a resident of Alberta in those good old days just prior to Bill 68.

I think this is the problem....
In the good old days people had a grasp on right from wrong. In the good old days of lets say the mid 60's Alberta's population was 1.4 million people. The last census in Alberta (2011) says Alberta's population is 3.6 million. Too many people to manage.
If the general public were allowed fully auto weapons, quite a few twisted minds would push it to the extreme and the deer, elk, and moose would go the way the buffalo did. I know FA weapons wouldn't just stay on the rifle range.

At least...The benefit of hunting with fully auto guns would be that we wouldn't hear about wounded game getting away as much.

__________________________________

Or do you mean the good old days?... before millions of buffalo were almost exterminated in a few short years by the repeating rifle.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Red Bullets

I think this is the problem....
In the good old days people had a grasp on right from wrong. In the good old days of lets say the mid 60's Alberta's population was 1.4 million people. The last census in Alberta (2011) says Alberta's population is 3.6 million. Too many people to manage.
If the general public were allowed fully auto weapons, quite a few twisted minds would push it to the extreme and the deer, elk, and moose would go the way the buffalo did. I know FA weapons wouldn't just stay on the rifle range.

At least...The benefit of hunting with fully auto guns would be that we wouldn't hear about wounded game getting away as much.

__________________________________

Or do you mean the good old days?... before millions of buffalo were almost exterminated in a few short years by the repeating rifle.

Lots of places in the US have much larger populations than us, and also permit full auto firearms and high capacity magazines, and they don't have issues with people decimating the wild game populations, nor shooting up neighborhoods.

In fact the places with high gun crimes are the places with the most restrictive guns laws.

[antlercarver]

It`s not the guns that is the real problem, it`s the MINDSET of parts of society that may get their hands on the full auto. They are playing electronic games where they are dressed in body armor, carrying full auto weapons and are shooting people, where you see blood splattered on the screen. It is kids age starting at 8 or 10 and they play several times per week and sometimes for a few years. Paintball is similar but more interactive. The player feels invincible. They are losing touch with reality. 100`s and 1000`s of people will not be affected, but one with a mental condition or drugs or alcohol and my family is not safe. There are fanatical groups of all kinds , large and small. I don`t understand how some people believe sharia law is the way to live but millions chose to live by that type of mindset.
Any of the school shooting, the nut case did not go in with a single shot weapon.
What I am saying is to protect our way of living or maybe the way we used to live, these full auto weapons have no place here ,even if a few people want to safely play with them

[gutline homestead]

Originally Posted by grizz325

I don't know if I agree with a lot being said in this bust as I know Karl personally, and he kept this pretty discrete as I new he had firearms but not to this extent.
That being said I do understand the actions of the law.

He new the law, he took his chances. ammo drums,fully auto, like nowadays people hear he has that stuff and he`s dead and the guns are gone into the underworld. Like wow.Just the types of stuff screams the guy don`t play by the rules.....years ago in Calgary a city police captain,who lived out by Cochrane had his house broke into, they gun safes were to tough to get into, but the uniforms radio`s and exspecial , the case of handgrenades the idiot had, have been very big bonus for the thieves.no one caught, no media, no scolding for what all that stuff was used for.I know,one of the crooks was from my home town.But he was a police captain this guy has no such protection, he`ll get a large fine, as long as they never followed a trail to him, if it was a trail to him, goodbye to him.

[TomCanuck]

Originally Posted by antlercarver

It`s not the guns that is the real problem, it`s the MINDSET of parts of society that may get their hands on the full auto. They are playing electronic games where they are dressed in body armor, carrying full auto weapons and are shooting people, where you see blood splattered on the screen. It is kids age starting at 8 or 10 and they play several times per week and sometimes for a few years. Paintball is similar but more interactive. The player feels invincible. They are losing touch with reality. 100`s and 1000`s of people will not be affected, but one with a mental condition or drugs or alcohol and my family is not safe. There are fanatical groups of all kinds , large and small. I don`t understand how some people believe sharia law is the way to live but millions chose to live by that type of mindset.
Any of the school shooting, the nut case did not go in with a single shot weapon.
What I am saying is to protect our way of living or maybe the way we used to live, these full auto weapons have no place here ,even if a few people want to safely play with them

What you said, was basically an emotion based rant. From what I can gather, you don't have any serious knowledge of the subject matter. I don't advocate ownership of fully automatic firearms, but I know, that semi-auto well aimed fire is far more lethal than spray and pray. The only time they have much use is in a fire fight with well armed opposition.

The fact is, that unbalanced people shouldn't have any sort of weapon, but no amount of legislation will ever fully prevent them from acquiring them.