Jump to content

A Proposal for Firearms Legislation in Canada


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

.....

no red state would ratify, no swing states would ratify

it wouldn't even get a majority in the senate, let alone a super majority

Democrats don't even want that

what you think has no bearing on what Americans think

why would anyone want to even restrict body armor in public?

....

What do I know?

Your 2nd Amendment specifically restricts the State. No government can pass a law forbidding an individual to "bear arms".  (I'll ignore well-regulated militia.... IMHO, the amendment is an 18th century nonsense. It should be repealed.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, August1991 said:

What do I know?

Your 2nd Amendment specifically restricts the State. No government can pass a law forbidding an individual to "bear arms".  (I'll ignore well-regulated militia.... IMHO, the amendment is an 18th century nonsense. It should be repealed.)

 

it shouldn't be repealed

it being from the 18th century isn't a good reason to repeal

the 1st amendment is from the 18th century

I don't hear you calling to repeal it because it's from the 18th century

newer ideas aren't always better ideas

you pine for the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, so clearly age has nothing to do with your support of something

if you want to repeal the second amendment, you're going to need a better reason

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2022 at 2:14 AM, Yzermandius19 said:

that couldn't pass

you just say you think it could and offer no explanation

no red state would ratify, no swing states would ratify

it wouldn't even get a majority in the senate, let alone a super majority

Democrats don't even want that

what you think has no bearing on what Americans think

why would anyone want to even restrict body armor in public?

that makes no sense

it will never be a constitutional amendment and it's a stupid idea

Not sure why the need to restrict body armor when it is legal to carry an AR-15 well out for a walk with the dog downtown. 

Unless they know already they can't touch or restrict firearms, restricting body armor would make it easier for police to take someone down if need be. Giving advantage to the police. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2007 at 11:16 PM, August1991 said:

In the wake of the events in Virginia, it seems timely to resurrect a proposal I made before here.

I think the following represents a useful compromise that would have for effect to reduce the dangers of firearm use in Canada.

In rural areas, subject to control for storage and purchase of weapons and ammunition, we should allow small-calibre semi-automatic weapons with a maximum of five rounds and single bore long guns in homes. In urban areas, all legal firearms (shooting pistols and so on) should be stored in gun clubs.

We should forbid all other types of firearms and increase penalties for their possession, use or sale.

We should abolish the long gun registry.

I think this is a reasonable compromise between legitimate gun users and people who want gun control. It would also achieve the benefits of gun control at reasonable cost so that more funds could be applied to enforcement.

It also mirrors legislation in Australia.

You do know that some of your proposals are already law. and the rest make no sense at all, not sure what a small caliber, semi-auto weapon means to you. But I live in the country, I've had plenty of wildlife on my property, everything from coyotes wolfs, bears, moose, deer, etc... and have shot bears in my yard twice, one after it killed my dog, the second was charging my wife while she was in her garden at mid-day. The weapon used was a WWII m1- Garand with an 8-round mag capacity. my dog died because i could not access my rifle fast enough, it was triggered locked and then locked in a safe gun locker...the day I shot the bear charging my wife the rifle was hanging above the back door without any locks... that bear fell about 50 feet from my wife...Firearms laws should be common sense, not based on some city folks that think it is scary, and it is scary because they don't know anything about the existing laws.

I'm not sure why people who do not have firearms or use firearms feel the need to impose restrictions on them. criminals don't abide by the laws, it is not so hard to understand. want to commit suicide, you can do that a million ways all just as effective... and trust me, someone with a plan is going to carry it out ( suicide is the leading cause of vets) 

"everyday" ever gun owner gets a background check, which includes your medical records they are search for mental health issues, other red flags once discovered RCMP will swing by and pick up your weapons, and ammo, and it is up to you the owner to jump through the hoops to get them back, fail to do so, you forfeit them forever with our any compensation. break any of the millions of gun laws and you risk confiscation and heavy fines, and possible jail time. what else do you want...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2022 at 1:43 PM, Army Guy said:

You do know that some of your proposals are already law. and the rest make no sense at all, not sure what a small caliber, semi-auto weapon means to you....

 

Army Guy, I'll be honest, it means nothing to me.

(Semi-auto = bullet each time you click? Small calibre = 9mm? No idea.)

I live in urban Montreal.

=====

In the OP, I copied (more or less) the existing Australian gun law.

You say that it is already law in Canada. Why not the rest?

 

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2022 at 1:43 PM, Army Guy said:

...

I'm not sure why people who do not have firearms or use firearms feel the need to impose restrictions on them.

...

Around the world, about 10% of the population is left-handed.

====

As I always say about the US 2nd Amendment, where does the Supreme Court draw the line?

-Does the 2nd Amendment mean that no government can forbid a citizen owning/using a tactical nuclear weapon?

Edited by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"military weapon" is really a meaningless distinction

Canada fought the First & Second World Wars with Lee Enfield bolt action rifles

single aimed shots are the most lethal fires

automatic fire is used for suppression, to keep the enemies heads down while you advance

if you need to shoot a bolt action rifle rapid fire, it can easily be done

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, August1991 said:

As I always say about the US 2nd Amendment, where does the Supreme Court draw the line?

-Does the 2nd Amendment mean that no government can forbid a citizen owning/using a tactical nuclear weapon?

DC v. Heller states  "arms" suitable only for self defense and common use

it cannot be indiscriminate weapons, such a bombs

also, the 2nd Amendment is to constrain the federal government

so long as it doesn't abridge the right to keep & bear, states have broad authority to restrict

seven US states & the District of Columbia have "assault weapon" bans

so long as it is the state regulating its militia and not the feds, that is constitutional

the Well Regulated Militia is state militia's, as opposed to the federal military

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

"military weapon" is really a meaningless distinction

Canada fought the First & Second World Wars with Lee Enfield bolt action rifles

single aimed shots are the most lethal fires

automatic fire is used for suppression, to keep the enemies heads down while you advance

if you need to shoot a bolt action rifle rapid fire, it can easily be done

 

Actually it takes a lot of practice to do with any accuracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

if you're a mass shooter firing into the crowd, you can't miss

it's not like these guys popping off rounds from their AR's are shooting for accuracy

Of course you can miss. AR's have standard 30 round magazines.

Also, the guy in your video is using his third finger to pull the trigger. That takes practice.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Of course you can miss. AR's have standard 30 round magazines.

Also, the guy in your video is using his third finger to pull the trigger. That takes practice.

takes practice to employ an AR accurately

I've trained hundreds of troops to shoot AR's

they are not shooting accurately right out of the gate

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada fought the First & Second World Wars with Lee Enfield bolt action rifles

single aimed shots are the most lethal fires

if you need to shoot a bolt action rifle rapid fire, it can easily be done

Many accurate long rifles available now, and ammunition manufacturers have finally realized that precision/consistent ammo is a must for hunters.  Regularly take moose and elk at 400+yds. using my handloads.  Model 70 Winchester(s) are a personal favorite.

On big bears, short range is the best with a competent shooter.  Have had clients that freeze up in the close-up ranges with dangerous game. That's fine, we just back out of the situation with no shots fired. 

A competent rifleman can shoot, cycle and be on target again with a slick 'kicker' bolt action long gun in seconds. 

Off hand shooting separates the riflemen from the plinkers . . . 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Many accurate long rifles available now, and ammunition manufacturers have finally realized that precision/consistent ammo is a must for hunters.  Regularly take moose and elk at 400+yds. using my handloads.  Model 70 Winchester(s) are a personal favorite.

On big bears, short range is the best with a competent shooter.  Have had clients that freeze up in the close-up ranges with dangerous game. That's fine, we just back out of the situation with no shots fired. 

A competent rifleman can shoot, cycle and be on target again with a slick 'kicker' bolt action long gun in seconds. 

Off hand shooting separates the riflemen from the plinkers . . . 

I was trained by the best small army in the world

to be a world class tactical shooter

both with the FN FAL & AR

to include conserving ammunition, making every shot count

single aimed shots, one shot, one kill

you have way more time than a novice would think

the only purpose of rapid fire is supression

if you have the targets at your mercy, no need for that

slow is smooth, smooth is fast

so if you hand me a Lee Enfield

it really makes no difference

Edited by Dougie93
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in actual fact, the uninitiated don't even really understand the advantage of the AR

it's not rate of fire, it's not magazine capacity, the AK has all that too

the AR advantage is the high velocity flat trajectory precision accuracy

thus why it is the choice of SOF

SOF can exploit the precision of the AR

if you just start spraying rounds everywhere willy nilly, you've negated the advantage of the AR

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

guess which firearm would be best for a non precise shooter to use spraying rounds around ?

that would be the totally legal and unrestricted slide action twelve gauge shotgun loading 00 Buck

the Remington 870 Tactical is the gold standard

870-ExpressTactical.jpg

 

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

takes practice to employ an AR accurately

I've trained hundreds of troops to shoot AR's

they are not shooting accurately right out of the gate

The fact is rapid fire with bolt action requires more co ordinated  actions than with a semi auto. Same as the difference between driving with a manual vs automatic transmission. One requires a lot more practice than the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

The fact is rapid fire with bolt action requires more co ordinated  actions than with a semi auto. Same as the difference between driving with a manual vs automatic transmission. One requires a lot more practice than the other.

not really, the AR is actually quite tricky to handle compared to the bolt action

the AR cocking mechanism is more awkward, then there is the added complexity of the bolt catch/release

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

not really, the AR is actually quite tricky to handle compared to the bolt action

the AR cocking mechanism is more awkward, then there is the added complexity of the bolt catch/release

So what, once that is done all you have to do is pull the trigger each time. These guys go out can buy an AR-15 and two hours later it is rapid fire against a bunch of people. It can't be that difficult.

Nothing they can't learn from a couple of YouTube videos.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So what, once that is done all you have to do is pull the trigger each time.

well, the AR is a direct impingement gas operated rifle

so it quickly heats up and becomes fouled by carbon from the propellant gas

this induces stoppages, sometimes called "jams" by civilians

this is what makes the AR so much more difficult & complex to operate

because in order to clear these common stoppages

you must master five different mechanisms

the bolt catch/release, the magazine release, the magazine, the charging handle, and the forward assist

and this is where novice shooter breaks down on the AR, taking a very long time to clear the stoppages

thus what requires so much more training to be proficient on the AR

the overall complexity of the repetition fire gas operated system

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Sure they can. What’s the point of semi auto weapons then?

the automatic rifle invented by the Germans was called an "Assault Rifle"

because it could provide suppressive fire during an assault

again, the purpose of automatic fire is to keep the enemies heads down while you advance

but once you have the enemy in your sights, you take single aimed shots

you take your time, both to control your breathing for accuracy, and to conserve ammunition

it's a case of the military shooter going for maximum efficiency

the novice shooter will spray a lot of rounds about, but miss with most of those rounds

the military shooter will kill more people by killing one with every single shot

when you get to point blank, close quarters shooting, then you go to the controlled pair

that's two aimed shots to the centre of mass

beyond that is the failure drill

target fails to drop, controlled pair to the centre of mass, followed immediately by a head shot

but that's about as rapid as a military shooter ever has to get

now if a military shooter was issued with a bolt action rifle ?

there he would adapt to the situation with tactics

rather than close to short range, optimize the situation by exploiting the advantages

with a bolt action rifle, you remain concealed at stand off range

picking unsuspecting targets off from hundreds of meters away

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, August1991 said:

Army Guy, I'll be honest, it means nothing to me.

(Semi-auto = bullet each time you click? Small calibre = 9mm? No idea.)

I live in urban Montreal.

=====

In the OP, I copied (more or less) the existing Australian gun law.

You say that it is already law in Canada. Why not the rest?

 

That's a problem, to the majority of Canadians they are eating up the shit that the liberals are putting out, they have convinced Canadians that something needs to be done, like the climate change emergency they declared. why is that a problem well it influences Canadian voters, they look like they are doing something, but in reality, they are taking legal gun owners' weapons. 

The most common response I get is what do you need a weapon for anyways? they don't understand i use my rifles as tools, i hunt, and use it to protect myself and my family from wildlife. But because the majority of Canadians live in the cities they don't care, and quickly agree with the government.

 I get the semi-auto thing I was looking for caliber. 

We already have some of the most restrictive firearms policies in most of the western world. And really don't need anymore. Everyday legal gun owners are checked for breaking any laws, plus have their health records checked for any red flags. And legal gun owners rarely commit violence with their firearms. Illegal's gun owners, on the other hand, like shooting people, and yet the government decides to place more regulation on legal gun owners, and disregard for the most part the illegal owners. because it is cheaper, and it looks good that don't know much about guns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the automatic rifle invented by the Germans was called an "Assault Rifle"

because it could provide suppressive fire during an assault

again, the purpose of automatic fire is to keep the enemies heads down while you advance

but once you have the enemy in your sights, you take single aimed shots

you take your time, both to control your breathing for accuracy, and to conserve ammunition

it's a case of the military shooter going for maximum efficiency

the novice shooter will spray a lot of rounds about, but miss with most of those rounds

the military shooter will kill more people by killing one with every single shot

when you get to point blank, close quarters shooting, then you go to the controlled pair

that's two aimed shots to the centre of mass

beyond that is the failure drill

target fails to drop, controlled pair to the centre of mass, followed immediately by a head shot

but that's about as rapid as a military shooter ever has to get

now if a military shooter was issued with a bolt action rifle ?

there he would adapt to the situation with tactics

rather than close to short range, optimize the situation by exploiting the advantages

with a bolt action rifle, you remain concealed at stand off range

picking unsuspecting targets off from hundreds of meters away

WTF does this have anything to do with the military? What percentage of mass shootings are done with bolt action long guns compared to semi automatic weapons?

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...