Bye Bye semi automatic rifles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FishHog

Apparently not a fan of maid?
In the right circumstances I’m all for it and glad I’ll have the option. Only need to watch one person with an incurable disease suffer for months to be in favour of it

It’s a far cry different than some teenager committing suicide due to some social media harassment

As for the buy back I will be shocked if anyone ever gets a penny. You might get a tax credit at best. So nice of them to pay you back some of your money for giving them your personal property

---

Not when they push it .
Example
1. A man that's been in the hospital for years was being pressured into it as he was a burden on the system. Not ok he wants to live.
2
What about the vet who just wanted a wheel chair ramp lol. She wanted help not a death sentence

3 when it involves mature minors with mental health issues. Without parental rights is wrong.

Yes I would agree with some of it but when they drive it .

A guy was trying to get on the list because he was broke and didn't want to be homeless. Is that a good reason?
Loose your job inflation to high and Wamo make the list because life is ruff. Not acceptable.

Anyway about the banned semi's.
When the government talks to the Indigenous Peoples in court. What talking points will they use. Will they ask if a gun could kill a deer with a gun they propose to keep. If so the rest are gone. Will the defense individual's have a lawyer? Or just the government. ?

Remember removing the guns is just another goal to them.

Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

They will pay out for sure they will.
But I dout they will remove many of the proposed guns from the list.


Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

Just to buy the SKS back at FMV will cost 1/2 billion dollars for all guns if 100% were turned in, a rough guess 4 - 5 billion.
Imagine if the government put that money towards mental illness and smuggling. But in all honesty the Liberal government has zero interest in stopping criminals I would go as far as stating they encourage it.

---

Absolutely right, the cost of a compensation program will be staggering. They've added more rifles to the prohibited lists and their initial estimates appeared to be for compensation only not the program costs. The cost of administration, record keeping, collection personnel costs and subcontractors will be massive particularly now that police agencies have made it clear they are not a pick up service for banned guns.

I believe it will be a fast collection once they figure out the plan it could happen within a few months of a deal.
They will want them collected asap and will be partnered with many groups to make it happen.

Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

I believe it will be a fast collection once they figure out the plan it could happen within a few months of a deal.
They will want them collected asap and will be partnered with many groups to make it happen.

Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

---

Interesting last comment but in reality how many groups will they recruit and will they be willing to actually do the task.

So to me: Firearms Verifiers, Firearms Instructors, Gun Shops, Gun Smiths. Probably the biggest would be auctioneers like Switzers.

The auctioneers would I believe be the best choice as they have storage facilities, alarmed premises.

If you were to look at say retired LEO,s many of them have only been trained on one gun, may would not know how to safety these guns.

So of all the above many of the folks being pro gun might not want to partake, save and except auction houses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Interesting last comment but in reality how many groups will they recruit and will they be willing to actually do the task.

So to me: Firearms Verifiers, Firearms Instructors, Gun Shops, Gun Smiths. Probably the biggest would be auctioneers like Switzers.

The auctioneers would I believe be the best choice as they have storage facilities, alarmed premises.

If you were to look at say retired LEO,s many of them have only been trained on one gun, may would not know how to safety these guns.

So of all the above many of the folks being pro gun might not want to partake, save and except auction houses.

---

Maybe a voluntary drop off center they also mentioned a courier to pick them up. With less people than an election turnout it could be done swiftly over a few weeks with selected dates. Very little officers would be needed at each location for security purposes.

They won't want to visit every household with a gun. So you take and drop and they will visit the rest who did not comply.

After dropping your guns off you will get a receipt and a cheque in the mail.

Just a guess I highly dout they would go to every gun owners home.

We are law abiding citizens we would be happy to deliver them to a local police department or another location. To either sell them or have them rendered usless for a wall piece.

Maybe a fine if you don't comply with the voluntary drop off to encourage people.

Do gun store's keep records of who purchased what and for how long? That would show who has what for the most part.

Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Interesting last comment but in reality how many groups will they recruit and will they be willing to actually do the task.

So to me: Firearms Verifiers, Firearms Instructors, Gun Shops, Gun Smiths. Probably the biggest would be auctioneers like Switzers.

The auctioneers would I believe be the best choice as they have storage facilities, alarmed premises.

If you were to look at say retired LEO,s many of them have only been trained on one gun, may would not know how to safety these guns.

So of all the above many of the folks being pro gun might not want to partake, save and except auction houses.

---

If an auction house were planning never to have another gun auction they might participate. Those who do won't do it for free and because they have the government over a barrel they would charge accordingly. Retired LEOs or even paid duty officers might be recruited to run the program but it's very unlikely they will be going door to door. They too will very expensive.

My expectation is restricted owners will get a notice and instructions where to bring their firearm accompanied by advice that failure to do so would result in the revocation of their PAL and potentially criminal charges.

Non-restricted owners would be given a limited window of opportunity to turn their firearms if they want to participate in the compensation/deactivation program.

After the window closes nothing much will happen. People who don't turn them in will be stuck with a prohibited firearm they can't legally use with the risk of a charge should they be caught with it. Governments have all the time in the world and will get most of the guns in the fullness of time.

I got caught in the second round of prohibitions. I'm taking the money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I got caught in the second round of prohibitions. I'm taking the money.

---

Maybe they won't stick and a few changes will be made.

I also agree with the rest ,you worded it well and it's simple.

Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

I suspect compliance will be less then 50% possibly as low as 10%.

Not trying to change the subject at all, honest, but this is 100% exactly the same problem the government caused when a few people thought they knew better then the majority and mandated lockdowns and forced vaccinations on the word of some "science experts" when said science was political and not medical.
This is another feel good-knee jerk reaction to try to solve a crime problem by directly affecting a law abiding part of society adversely and making no impact on the people causing the problem in the beginning.
How many law abiding hunters rent a gun and a few bullets from "Dave down at the corner" to go hunting for a few days??
If current regs are not solving the problem, how is making the crime more illegal going to solve the problem?
How about regulating maximum spoon sizes sold in Canada to fight obesity? They already have minimized food package sizing while raising the price, just the first baby step.
I'm going to work.
John