Liberal Party of Canada's misinformation on Bill C-42

[On Guard for Thee]

Not unless the person received a lifetime ban, C-42 ensures any violent convictions prevent obtaining a firearms license.

No it doesn't........the transport restrictions stay exactly the same, the difference, the RPAL and ATT are now combined as one.

The rules for transporting restricted weapons is eased in the bill. The good news is it seems to have pissed off both the left and the right for various reasons. I always like it when a sleazy attempt at vote getting goes south.

[Derek 2.0]

The rules for transporting restricted weapons is eased in the bill.

No it doesn't.....again, that is false. The Authorization to Transport (ATT) is currently a stand-alone permit, obtained after purchasing a restricted firearm, that allows the holder to transport said firearm to and from ranges, gun clubs, gun shows, gunsmiths and Ports of entry.....With C-42, the ATT will be combined with the holders restricted licence. All of the rules and restrictions within a ATT currently, will be maintained within a holders RPAL.......Nothing changes other than the licence and transport permit being made as one.

[On Guard for Thee]

No it doesn't.....again, that is false. The Authorization to Transport (ATT) is currently a stand-alone permit, obtained after purchasing a restricted firearm, that allows the holder to transport said firearm to and from ranges, gun clubs, gun shows, gunsmiths and Ports of entry.....With C-42, the ATT will be combined with the holders restricted licence. All of the rules and restrictions within a ATT currently, will be maintained within a holders RPAL.......Nothing changes other than the licence and transport permit being made as one.

Perhaps you're not understanding what you're reading in the bill but as I say, it's a nowhere bill transparently trying to garner a few votes heading into the election cycle. Harper is panicking over JT breathing down his neck.

[Derek 2.0]

Perhaps you're not understanding what you're reading in the bill but as I say, it's a nowhere bill transparently trying to garner a few votes heading into the election cycle. Harper is panicking over JT breathing down his neck.

No, I very much understand both the Bill, current rules and regulations encompassing Canadian Firearms law and what will and won't change.....

[On Guard for Thee]

No, I very much understand both the Bill, current rules and regulations encompassing Canadian Firearms law and what will and won't change.....

so then you understand why the bill is being slammed from both sides .

[Derek 2.0]

so then you understand why the bill is being slammed from both sides .

I understand why the NFA is slamming C-42, in their view, it does little to nothing for the pro-gun crowd and they won't be happy until the entire Firearms Act is repealed.......I've no idea why the Liberals (or NDP) oppose it, nor what they hope to gain by lying about its intent.

[On Guard for Thee]

I understand why the NFA is slamming C-42, in their view, it does little to nothing for the pro-gun crowd and they won't be happy until the entire Firearms Act is repealed.......I've no idea why the Liberals (or NDP) oppose it, nor what they hope to gain by lying about its intent.

AS I've said before, Canadian's look south of the border and see the carnage there. They/we don't want that here. Harper is hoping for a few votes from norther constituents, while hoping those in cities don't care. And it's not working.

[Derek 2.0]

AS I've said before, Canadian's look south of the border and see the carnage there. They/we don't want that here. Harper is hoping for a few votes from norther constituents, while hoping those in cities don't care. And it's not working.

What are you talking about? How does, in your mind, combining a license (RPAL) and a permit (ATT) into one, lifetime license bans for people with violent pasts and requiring applicants to undergo a safety course equate to carnage?

As to vote share, why would both the Liberals and now the NDP come out against a revamped gun registry? Didn't the LGR prevent "carnage"?

[On Guard for Thee]

What are you talking about? How does, in your mind, combining a license (RPAL) and a permit (ATT) into one, lifetime license bans for people with violent pasts and requiring applicants to undergo a safety course equate to carnage?

As to vote share, why would both the Liberals and now the NDP come out against a revamped gun registry? Didn't the LGR prevent "carnage"?

The carnage exists as I quite clearly pointed out south of the border (please read more intently so as not to waste time) and Canadians don't want that carnage here. The LGR may well have prevented a recurrence of the massacre in Montreal, but the Harper gov. did away with it. C-42 is not a revamped LGR.

[Derek 2.0]

The carnage exists as I quite clearly pointed out south of the border (please read more intently so as not to waste time) and Canadians don't want that carnage here.

Yes, I do understand you equating carnage here and there..........what you've failed to mention, is how (in your view) Bill C-42 will introduce "carnage" here...

The LGR may well have prevented a recurrence of the massacre in Montreal, but the Harper gov. did away with it.

How would a registry have prevented Lepine's rampage?

C-42 is not a revamped LGR.

I never suggested that it was.......C-42 will enhance firearms safety (by requiring the RCMP firearms safety course) and prevent those with violent criminal records from obtaining a Firearms License.....The Liberals oppose C-42, likewise, they oppose bringing back a revamped registry for long guns.....Do you agree with the Liberals's disjointed policy with regards to firearms?

[On Guard for Thee]

Yes, I do understand you equating carnage here and there..........what you've failed to mention, is how (in your view) Bill C-42 will introduce "carnage" here...

How would a registry have prevented Lepine's rampage?

I never suggested that it was.......C-42 will enhance firearms safety (by requiring the RCMP firearms safety course) and prevent those with violent criminal records from obtaining a Firearms License.....The Liberals oppose C-42, likewise, they oppose bringing back a revamped registry for long guns.....Do you agree with the Liberals's disjointed policy with regards to firearms?

Slack gun laws in the US led to the carnage there. And we don't want it here. Maybe the LGR prevented another Lepin because there hasn't been one since the LGR was enacted to help prevent just that.

[Derek 2.0]

Slack gun laws in the US led to the carnage there. And we don't want it here.

How is C-42 a "slack gun law"? It further prevents violent people from obtaining legal firearms.

Maybe the LGR prevented another Lepin because there hasn't been one since the LGR was enacted to help prevent just that.

Nice deflection, but you didn't answer the question, how would a registry of guns prevent Lepine's rampage? Also, if a long gun registry is an effective tool against "carnage like in the United States", why do both the Liberals and NDP oppose bringing back a revamped registry?

[On Guard for Thee]

How is C-42 a "slack gun law"? It further prevents violent people from obtaining legal firearms.

Nice deflection, but you didn't answer the question, how would a registry of guns prevent Lepine's rampage? Also, if a long gun registry is an effective tool against "carnage like in the United States", why do both the Liberals and NDP oppose bringing back a revamped registry?

It may have kept the restricted weapon out of his hands. Fairly simple isn't it. We haven't had a "Lepine" since we've had the LGR.

[Derek 2.0]

It may have kept the restricted weapon out of his hands. Fairly simple isn't it. We haven't had a "Lepine" since we've had the LGR.

Actually you're wrong on all counts......the LGR didn't prevent the mentally ill or criminals from obtaining firearms. Also Lepine's rifle (Ruger Mini-14) is not a restricted firearm........The Dawson collage "rampage" took place at the height of the LGR....

So why do the Liberals and NDP, like the Tories, oppose a registry of long guns?

[On Guard for Thee]

Actually you're wrong on all counts......the LGR didn't prevent the mentally ill or criminals from obtaining firearms. Also Lepine's rifle (Ruger Mini-14) is not a restricted firearm........The Dawson collage "rampage" took place at the height of the LGR....

So why do the Liberals and NDP, like the Tories, oppose a registry of long guns?

As per usual,and not unlike the NRA commentary, you spout a bunch of suggestions or questions that are of course unanswerable or have little bearing, such as the like of "I wonder why I didn't have a car accident on my way home today" etc. and then try to suggest that the cometary supports something substantial. The LGR did in fact prevent criminals from obtaining firearms. You, seem to support them being even more available. As I say, the bill is basically BS and I suspect Canadians see throug it xclearly.

[Derek 2.0]

As per usual,and not unlike the NRA commentary, you spout a bunch of suggestions or questions that are of course unanswerable or have little bearing, such as the like of "I wonder why I didn't have a car accident on my way home today" etc. and then try to suggest that the cometary supports something substantial.

Actually, that is exactly what you're doing by suggesting the LGR would have prevented Lepine's "rampage"......

The LGR did in fact prevent criminals from obtaining firearms.

No it didn't.....but by all means, explain why it is you feel it did.

You, seem to support them being even more available.

How so?

As I say, the bill is basically BS and I suspect Canadians see throug it xclearly.

How is Bill C-42 "BS"?

[On Guard for Thee]

Actually, that is exactly what you're doing by suggesting the LGR would have prevented Lepine's "rampage"......

No it didn't.....but by all means, explain why it is you feel it did.

How so?

How is Bill C-42 "BS"?

Once again, you can't prove a negative. C 42 is BS because it doesn't really do anything but hoodwink some into voting for the cons.

[Derek 2.0]

Once again, you can't prove a negative. C 42 is BS because it doesn't really do anything but hoodwink some into voting for the cons.

I've outlined several times what the intent of C-42 is and what changes will be brought about with its passage.........How has a Bill drafted and tabled within a mater of months "hoodwinked" anyone into voting for the Conservatives? Are you now suggesting the Tories retained their two seats in the recent bye-elections because of C-42? If so, I thought you also suggested gun laws were a non-issue.........

Now, why do the NDP and Liberals oppose bringing back a revamped LGR, likewise, why do they oppose C-42, so much so that the LPC has engaged in a series of obvious lies over the content of C-42?

As suggested by another member, the Liberals are creating "fear" and playing wedge politics with the issue (poorly I might add based on recent polling), but I recall Trudeau stated he didn't want to pit Canadians against other Canadians, nor campaign on "fear"......yet based on these recent adds, the Liberal Party of Canada is attempting exactly that......

[On Guard for Thee]

I've outlined several times what the intent of C-42 is and what changes will be brought about with its passage.........How has a Bill drafted and tabled within a mater of months "hoodwinked" anyone into voting for the Conservatives? Are you now suggesting the Tories retained their two seats in the recent bye-elections because of C-42? If so, I thought you also suggested gun laws were a non-issue.........

Now, why do the NDP and Liberals oppose bringing back a revamped LGR, likewise, why do they oppose C-42, so much so that the LPC has engaged in a series of obvious lies over the content of C-42?

As suggested by another member, the Liberals are creating "fear" and playing wedge politics with the issue (poorly I might add based on recent polling), but I recall Trudeau stated he didn't want to pit Canadians against other Canadians, nor campaign on "fear"......yet based on these recent adds, the Liberal Party of Canada is attempting exactly that......

Most things Harper does involve grappling for votes. Such as the so called "tough on crime " bill, when crime has been dropping constantly for the past 20 years or so. He damn near lost the seat in Ontario. He couldn't have lost the one in Alta. obviously. And don't fall into the trap of discussing the ad campaign. Harper's attack ads are about as smarmy as we have ever seen.

[Derek 2.0]

Most things Harper does involve grappling for votes.

Is Trudeau "grappling for votes" by lying about Bill C-42 and opposing bringing back another long gun registry?

[On Guard for Thee]

Is Trudeau "grappling for votes" by lying about Bill C-42 and opposing bringing back another long gun registry?

Trudeau is a politician so of course he is looking for votes. If you think he is lying then you can press him to explain his comments. At least he's not drubbing a video of the type Haper tried to use of JT taking his shirt off at a fundraiser and completely misrepresenting it in a smarmy way that is equivalent to the schoolyard bully.

[Derek 2.0]

Trudeau is a politician so of course he is looking for votes. If you think he is lying then you can press him to explain his comments. At least he's not drubbing a video of the type Haper tried to use of JT taking his shirt off at a fundraiser and completely misrepresenting it in a smarmy way that is equivalent to the schoolyard bully.

I don't think Trudeau/LPC is lying, I know they are by the very LPC resources I posted in the OP......in no way, shape or form does C-42 change the current rules and regulations encompassing legal and safe transport of firearms.

[On Guard for Thee]

I don't think Trudeau/LPC is lying, I know they are by the very LPC resources I posted in the OP......in no way, shape or form does C-42 change the current rules and regulations encompassing legal and safe transport of firearms.

Well it does actually, but I'm not going to argue it with you. Transport of restricted weapons is eased. Not a big deal, but a change that may compromise safety. The worrying part is it the slippery slope toward more NRA style of wild west ahoot 'em up crap that as I say, we don't want here. The US example is as much of a lesson as even the dumbest of dummies could not fail to comprehend at least in some small way.

[Derek 2.0]

Well it does actually, but I'm not going to argue it with you. Transport of restricted weapons is eased.

Again, that is not true.......the current standalone ATT permit will be combined with a gun owners RPAL, all current rules and regulations will remain.......if you feel what I say is not true, by all means, explain what rules and regulations encompassing transport will be done away with.

I won't hold my breath, as you clearly don't have a clue as to what you're talking about.........prove me wrong though.......just name a single transport rule or regulation that will be removed by C-42.......just one......I dare you

[The_Squid]

Actually, the bill does loosen the requirements on transporting restricted firearms.