The new gun bill

[myata]

There are so many things that majority governments in this country can do (and very little they cannot by the way - as can be attested by the most recent invocation of war measures for an entirely trivial reason like a peaceful citizens action that happens in some democratic countries routinely). For example, they could look at the outdated to the point of archaic, inspired and constructed by blueprints of somewhere in the 17th century and never changed since why fix political system. And at some point, believe it or not, it even said it was going to. But that's another story, long forgotten now.

Then, there are virtual majority governments and we should be getting used to those. That was inspired by a different, and very effective marketing practice. See, in the store you can buy a top-quality, good value but higher price product; or you can get a cheaper no-frills one next on the shelf. You may be thinking that you're exercising your independent judgement, being conscious of where your money going to. But wrong: all are going to the same pocket, happily receiving quality-minded, value-minded, independent-minded and many other streams of revenue, for a full-flow healthy river, heading to the bottomless ocean. Of cash, or political power you choose. Hi, NDP! Yes now we know what (and how) you're standing up for. Like who couldn't see?

Anyways, no not in the portfolio. In portfolio, yet again, are the two things archaic, opaque and ineffective governments can still do: mandate; and throw public money at it. Strong mandates, higher penalties and a lot of public money, accompanied by (see above, 17th century) minimal accountability for the results. Red face or the blue one pick one of the two allowed is no accountability in this century, only a stuid surrogate but it'll do, for us. By how much gun violence (the end) will be reduced as a direct outcome of the act in a year, three and so on and how much it will cost to us, in place of other needed actions and programs that we can no longer accomplish because they cannot be done with either of the two or both? Please surprise with a direct and meaningful answer. Just please, some time in maybe not so distant future don't tell me it was a complete surprise.

[WestCanMan]

Quote

The legislation revives some federal measures that didn't pass before last year's general election and implements some new proposals made during the campaign.

They include taking away firearms licences from those involved in domestic violence or criminal harassment, increasing criminal penalties for smuggling and trafficking of firearms, and a "red flag" law which would require people deemed a threat to themselves or others to turn in their firearms to law enforcement.

So, the guy who froze the bank accounts of people who just donated small amounts of money to the truckers now wants the power to red flag people who are "deemed a threat"..... Not much chance for government overreach there. 

Here's how that's gonna go down:

-cops will show up at your door and say "give up your guns, you've been deemed a threat"

-you'll say "But why? I've never done anything wrong."

-Cops say "Your name came up on the computer. You can fight this in court. Here's some official-looking paper."

-You think about saying "...to wipe my ass with", but you bite your tongue.

-You try to navigate their idiotic new website, come to a bunch of dead ends (like on the Svc Canada website), give up, try to call in, be put on hold for 2 hours, navigate some more, give up to try another day when you have time during the week, a couple weeks later

-try the site again, then send in a letter. Wait 4 weeks

-You finally get a letter in the mail, a login for their site, you'll pay for an application for an online hearing, but they don't have a time yet. You'll wait a few more weeks for that.

-after the weeks have passed, they will ask you a bunch of personal questions and about your financial history, exactly why and where and how often you use your guns, your financial status, your family and any history of depression there, etc. 

-If anyone on FB ever called you a name, you might not qualify to get your guns back. If you have too many FB posts which are critical of our dear leader, you might not qualify to get your guns back. 

-after a few months you have a 50% chance to get your guns back, but you'll never find out why they were taken in the first place.

 

I've been on this earth 54 years now, I know how this shithole country works. 

Edited May 31, 2022 by WestCanMan

[myata]

Sure and why not? Like what is there, is there anything at all that we can know and see as able to check and stop if necessary, absolute and arbitrary government control? Was there, in the 17th century?

[myata]

Canada cannot be considered a modern democracy: this conclusion has to be drawn based on the recent events. Political system, elections is a thin facade of an archaic entrenched system not interested in any meaningful change. Independence and impartiality of media is seriously compromised to the extent that it can no longer in confidence fulfill one if its key functions: checks on the governments. Judicial system is not interested being in real and functional check on the government. Checks do not exist in reality if they cannot be shown to execute and fulfill their function as and when necessary. This is no democracy, in the sense we understand it. Putin can have this kind of democracy too.

Founding fathers of American democracy and their constituents put serious, deliberate thought into designing and implementing a functional democratic system. It has not been perfect by any notion but it held and holds so far. We have been coasting on an imitation, a thinly decorated colonial management system without any effective checks, controls and accountability. That has been our choice for decades if not centuries and we have to understand: it will not last for ever because it cannot, it has no desire, will and mechanisms to change and adapt to the needs of time and society. The reckoning will happen, sooner or later.

[Queenmandy85]

So, they take our guns. Yah, that sucks, but is it really the end of the world? What do we really need guns for? I used to do a lot of target shooting but that can't match skiing as the purpose of life.  And I'm not going to kill anyone skiing.( maybe driving to Kimberley or Jasper, but not skiing.)

Hunting? We have grocery stores.

We talk about law abiding citizens vs criminals, but the regs will have an impact on murders commited by law abiding citizens who are just pissed off at someone like me who is a lousy driver, or someone stealing your bike. Killing someone is the most terrible thing a human can do.

[myata]

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So, they take our guns.

You sooooh missing the point it's not even funny. It's not about what they are taking away now or next time. One can live with two lead balls attached to feet and mandated standing on one foot for two hours daily. It's about them being able to take away whatever they like, anything. And do we have anything to stop it?

[Queenmandy85]

2 minutes ago, myata said:

Founding fathers of American democracy and their constituents put serious, deliberate thought into designing and implementing a functional democratic system. It has not been perfect by any notion but it held and holds so far.

That is a bad example in the gun debate. First, the uS is not a democracy. It is a Republic. I have been thus informed very forcefully by Americans. 

Those founders in the US shot their political opponents who were American Conservatives, when the "patriots" couldnt beat them in elections. It sparked the first American civil war. When American veterans returned home from the war, if they were conservatives, they were driven out at gunpoint, or just murdered by their Whig neighbours. The reason for their 2nd amendment was to permit them to shoot political opponents. That is not a good argument for gun rights.

[Queenmandy85]

6 minutes ago, myata said:

You sooooh missing the point it's not even funny. It's not about what they are taking away now or next time. One can live with two lead balls attached to feet and mandated standing on one foot for two hours daily. It's about them being able to take away whatever they like, anything. And do we have anything to stop it?

The point is, the government mandates these things because it is what many voters have been asking for. It was a campaign promise in two back-to-back elections. Are you now advocating they break their promise? Usually, on this forum, we are complaining about politicians breaking their promises. This is a clear example of why it is so hard to get good people to enter politics. They are damned if the do and damned if they don't.

Yes, this proposed legislation is an great inconvenience to me personally, but it is not life changing. If the prohibited skiing, that would be life altering.

[Nefarious Banana]

11 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So, they take our guns. Yah, that sucks, but is it really the end of the world? What do we really need guns for? 

Hunting? We have grocery stores.

Many folks hunt. Many folks take an active role in their food sources . . . hunt/vegetable gardens.

It's great that you can be a lousy driver and get to the grocery store.  Urban utopia?  

Bag of Cheezies and head to the ski hill . . . . nice!

[myata]

29 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

It was a campaign promise

Election reform also was a promise on which a majority government was elected. Stop confusing, it has very little to do with "voters" but what majority governments can do, and will not do. So as said, a thin facade with no effective checks and accountability.

[eyeball]

54 minutes ago, myata said:

media is seriously compromised to the extent that it can no longer in confidence fulfill one if its key functions: checks on the governments.

Has it ever been able to though? Recall the old wag 'there's a reason Question Period in Parliament isn't called Answer Period'.   The evasive opacity on display in Parliament carries on into media scrums and the media has so little to work with that it has to make up much of its product just to get by.  Garbage in garbage out and that's all that we the public have to work with.  

It's clear to me where the headwaters for the great mighty river of fake news that's jumped its banks and flooded the world are located.  It's also clear to me that the responsibility for ensuring there are checks on the government is ours and that putting a stop to in-camera lobbying is the first step.

You figure guns are a better option? 

Edited June 1, 2022 by eyeball

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, myata said:

Election reform also was a promise on which a majority government was elected. Stop confusing, it has very little to do with "voters" but what majority governments can do, and will not do. So as said, a thin facade with no effective checks and accountability.

They tried to get election reform through but it was blocked by the NDP. Something like that requires all party buy in. The NDP refused to accept any viable reform. Unless the Liberals were willing to use their majority like a dictatorship to impose reform on another major party, there was no way. If they had done that, they would be dictators.

The gun regualations have a signifigant public support but not all party support. Time will tell if this legislation will actually pass. There is now provincial opposition from Saskatchewan. We may see more from other provinces. There are more checks and balances than are written in your plays, dear Horatio.

In 2025, the grits will go into the election able to say they tried and all the people who were going to vote Liberal anyway, will vote Liberal, and all the people who were going to vote Conservative anyway, will vote Conservative. If Pierre Poilievre is the Conservative leader, Justin Trudeau will be Prime Minister forever.

Edited June 1, 2022 by Queenmandy85

[Dougie93]

the existing handgun law in Canada makes legal handguns of little utility anyways

handguns are Restricted

which means Restricted to the range

hence you couldn't use a handgun for anything other than target practice in Canada anyways

for a handgun to be worth the hassle, you need to move to a free state in America

shall issue licence to open or conceal carry, no duty to retreat

[myata]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

There are more checks and balances than are written in your plays, dear Horatio.

What checks on war measures powers for citizens protest? Any number of countries had occupy movements, even if they were the same thing as they are not - and how many of them needed war measures to deal with them? The checks are non-existent the the rule is one: because he can. If they are, they exist in this reality, you've got to be able to show them, Aristotle. Talking and reading isn't enough. When you talk and read about it instead of seeing and touching it, that is what is called a facade democracy. Not real, in other words.

Edited June 1, 2022 by myata

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

no duty to retreat

Retreat, when possible should be the universal choice. When I was issued with my vest, I told them, if anyone points a gun at me, I wonn't need a vest, I'll need Depends.

[Queenmandy85]

2 minutes ago, myata said:

What checks on war measures powers for citizens protest? Any number of countries had occupy movements, even if they were the same thing as they are not - and how many of them needed war measures to deal with them? The checks are non-existent the the rule is one: because he can. If they are, they exist in this reality, you've got to be able to show them, Aristotle.

We no longer have the war measures act as far as I know. During the October Crisis, the War Measures act removed our civil rights. It was replaced with the Emergencies Act that does not remove your charter rights.

[myata]

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We no longer have the war measures act as far as I know. During the October Crisis, the War Measures act removed our civil rights. It was replaced with the Emergencies Act that does not remove your charter rights.

Great talking, as always. In place of real, effective and functional checks. And it will only take one serious authoritarian to figure it out when the time and conditions are right. Never say never. May not even be that far away.

Edited June 1, 2022 by myata

[myata]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

It's also clear to me that the responsibility for ensuring there are checks on the government is ours

Up to this point I have no argument. We get only what we pay for and order. Bread and parliamentary circuses, so be it, Master.

[Queenmandy85]

When you get an authoritarian person in there, they learn pretty quickly that politics is based on winning support. If a Prime Minister tries to throw his weight around in the Cabinet room, they tend to find out it doesn't work. Clark walked into the cabinet and told the ministers how he wanted things done. These were experienced Parliamentarians like George Hees and Flora MacDonald. Clark quickly discovered the reality of check and balances. 

Edited June 1, 2022 by Queenmandy85

[myata]

8 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Clark walking into the cabinet and told the ministers how he wanted things done.

Rome was a republic once (and with much better checks and balances, 2 millennia back). Why are you telling some old fairy tales? You can check what happens now: SNC-Lavalin scandal, war measures aka emergency act. Party committee recruits wordless employees they dance to make a curtain of democracy, silent. Two spoke about SNC. None, about mandates and war measures. Lesson well learned. What "checks", where? In which alternate reality? Once again: we have to see it for it to be real, not talk about it.

Edited June 1, 2022 by myata

[Queenmandy85]

Trudeau lost the SNC Lavalin maneuver. The emergencies act gave the people of Ottawa some relief after occupation was allowed to express themselves for three weeks. If you don't like it do something about it. That is what I am doing about the 5 round magazine capacity regulation.

Edited June 1, 2022 by Queenmandy85

[cougar]

22 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

I've been on this earth 54 years now, I know how this shithole country works. 

Yep.  This is exactly how it works.  All government departments work about the same way.

You want to contact CRA to appeal a decision  - same story ; you want to appeal a speeding ticket - same story ; you want to talk to an investment agent at your bank - same story;  you want to book a dental appointment or visit your family doctor (if you are lucky to have one) - same story.   Wanna get a haircut? - same story - you have to wait for a few days.  You go into a grocery store - you wait in line, and sometimes you have to wait in line even at the self check out.

We don't matter in this country.  Our time and  lives are devalued to almost nothing !!

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Retreat, when possible should be the universal choice.

in the event of contact

I am overcome with an incandescent fury

a compulsion to close with the enemy and destroy them

to run to the sound of the guns, to seek resolution in battle

I can't help it, I was indoctrinated by the Government of Canada

to be an explosively violent mass murderer, at a very young age

[Dougie93]

I have actually been shot at in Canada, twice

both times in Regent Park in Toronto, as a teenager

the first time I was buying marijuana from the gangsters on the stoop

and the opposing gang showed up to do a  drive by

all the black kids scattered, but I just stood there gawking

I saw the handgun shooting at me from the car window

I could feel the pressure of the bullets going either side of me

the second time I was on the streetcar on Gerrard

and some guy started shooting a rifle at the streetcar from his apartment window

I was listening to my Walkman in the back of the streetcar, and suddenly the windows started exploding

I wasn't afraid in either case, there was no time to be afraid, I was more fascinated by the surreal nature of it

Edited June 1, 2022 by Dougie93

[myata]

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Trudeau lost the SNC Lavalin maneuver.

Wow, really? How can we tell that, objectively? So war measures was the only way to help poor people? .. notice that Putin likes to say that too? Getting there.