Derek 2.0

I did offer comment.......as I said, its an actual question of end user cost for the civilian firearms industry. Would a Trudeau Government, after signing said treaty, offer compensation to pay for said marking measures and retreating said firearms?

Reread your link: Hence firearms classifications and the tossing of the LGR, and the recent changes made under C-42. Yet, much to the ire of groups like the NFA: As I said, I fail to see what said groups would bring to the table? Furthermore, by repealing C-42, so to go measures that require safety training and lifetime bans for violent persons...why would Trudeau be after that? As I said, the Liberals policy is disjointed......I give both the NDP and Greens credit for suggesting actual effective measures.

The United States hasn't implemented it, which would require approval by Congress.......I would expect, after the Second American Civil War, the new United States Government would reject said treaty Joking aside, for sporting arms, much of the aversion here comes down to cost and warranty issues. First, who is going to pay for said country import stamping (Simply a "CA" stamped on firearms for the Canadian market), and second, the effect of said after marking stamping, on said firearm's factory corrosion resistant treatments......IOW, who gets the bill and who is going to pay for my firearm to be retreated after its been stamped and starts to rust? For the Americans themselves, this is less a concern, since much of the import measures are already a condition per the 1968 Gun Control Act......hence why most European gun makers produce their guns intended for the US market in the United States.......there, it will never be passed by Congress due to the simple fact that includes "UN" and firearms in the title..........

That is the purpose of the CFAC, to advise the elected Government on firearms classification policy.....I don't see the gain of said inclusions........ In my opinion, the CFAC should be handed over to Industry Canada and the RCMP.

It won't, the Greens of all parties, have actually suggested increasing measures to prevent smuggling and the black market sale of firearms in Canada.....

I agree, its a wedge that the Liberal's own Wayne Easter warned his own party against at their previous policy convention.......it should noted, the Greens and to a lesser extent, the NDP, have avoided.

For what gain? All the previous conditions of the LTATT are now included in ones license, nothing has changed in regards to conditions, other than going from a required license and permit, to a combined license/permit. The CFAC already includes retired and serving police officers.......I don't understand what women's groups and public health advocates would bring to a forum encompassing technical aspects of new firearms requiring a FRT number. What does that mean? What enhancements over the already existing background checks, as required by the Liberal's Firearms Act, will be required? That is already a requirement, and not only for firearms, but also ammo sales. All Imported guns are already marked with country of production (and even factory stamps) and either year of production or said year can be determined through the serial numbers, be they from the United States, Europe, Russia or China etc. You mean a backdoor registry?

That's not the case, prior to Sept 2 2015, restricted gun owners (such as myself) had to obtain (after getting their license) a separate one-time long term Authorization to Transport, which included the conditions on which said restricted firearms could be transported. Post Sept 2 2015, the exact same conditions of the once separate LTATT are now included into said owners RPAL license.........IOW, we went from a license and a ATT permit, to a combined license/ATT. Nothing else has changed.

Crazy if true.........

I strangely felt that Duceppe won the debate (I always felt him a good debater and an interesting political figure)…..Aside from face coverings, I think he also scored on Harper with the image of his mother having to pick-up the mail, and I felt did make a good point on the placing of the community boxes (absent local consultation)….On Mulcair, when Mulcair spoke to abolishing the Senate, his retort of the Monarchy, then Mulcair’s expression, will I feel resonate in Quebec……..Then on both Mulcair and Trudeau* on not bringing back the long gun registry, which I feel will also resonate in Quebec. *Trudeau’s political grave dancing on “lax Canadian gun control laws” will sink any hoped gains outside of urban centers in Western Canada, rural/suburban Ontario and the Territories (maybe even hurt him in rural areas in the Atlantic). Any prospective goodwill and trust the Liberals were attempting to regain with gun owners, fronted by Liberal MP Wayne Easter namely, were lost in a couple of sentences aimed at pandering to Quebec.

Is there any other polls supporting the Nanos numbers that the Liberals are now in front in BC? I stand to be corrected, but in the last 50 years, the Liberals have only placed 1st in BC once (1968 PET) and only a couple of times even second.....The Federal NDP and Tories would have to be destroyed in the Province to equal a result as Nanos is suggesting.

Have any disproved my statement on the race in British Columbia between the Tories/NDP? (My point from several days ago after all)........You appear to follow polling more than I.

Has the landscape in BC drastically changed in the last several days?

And the promised EKOS poll (Was starting to wonder if they were delaying it's release like the last one) And by Province: Confirming again, that here in BC, the Liberals are not a factor (Justin's pops giving us the finger still stings) and the race in this Province is between the Tories and the NDP.

No surprise with the All Blacks win today.......big game (really big game in our household) in the morning between South Africa and Scotland, could very well decide the first quarter final games between Pool A (currently Wales and Australia) and Pool B (currently Scotland and South Africa)......as it stands now (baring an English rally), its looking like the first match-ups will be: Scotland vs Australia Wales vs South Africa

Like I said, I don't blame him at all....all the power to him.

I was unaware Angus Reid was releasing a poll today, from looking at it, it appears its findings should align (perhaps a degree under) what I'm to believe EKOS (soon to be released) numbers should show, namely: And here in BC: Both confirming my (mocked) assertion from last night, in which I stated the Liberals are not a major factor in BC, and that if the NDP bled support to the Liberals, net result, Tory wins (Perhaps I should have kept my mouth shut ooooops)

Thanks, I've seen both sites, for ease of use, I preferred the old threehundredeight site, but I don't blame the sites creator for getting in bed with CBC.

Nope, the planning horizon is limited to the sunset of Freedoms. which is directly squared to the increase in malleable metal alloy hats.

No idea, historically, Nanos polls the Tories 2-3 points behind the actual numbers.

I disagree, this plan is a false flag, meant to distract from the real plan.......

Canada's Jade Helm......flushes the kooks from the bushes, and with C-51 in place, makes for ease of dispatch of the black choppers.

That women wearing face coverings and not keeping terrorists in Canada could translate into a bigger majority, in part thanks to Quebec, then the party has been expecting.

They are behind......EKOS should be releasing a poll, later today or tomorrow morning, confirming/aligning with today's FORUM poll for the Star, both of which are under representing, to a degree, our internal polling.

The Wizard's own internal polling machine........entrails of birds maybe, whatever works.