Hunters say firearms ban didn't affect hunting season

Well I usually won't try calling for coyotes until Feb March so in terms of timeline I haven't been affected.

However that was the only "small caliber" rifle I owned.

So short of buying another rifle ...

I guess I could shoot the 270wsm. It falls within the areas allowable rifle size. Seems like a little overkill, and my bullets went from cents to dollars. So probably won't use that.

If they actually offered a market value buy back program I would go purchase a new 223. Until then ... I am affected as a hunter.



Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Does the banning of your rifle mean you will never hunt coyotes again? If not then it hasn't affected your hunting season which is the point of the article.

---

I think the point he was making that a gun is a gun. We are not the same no one is the same and some just like them. Is it wrong to like something that is not hurting the public?

What did banning the guns do for the safety of the public?

Nothing so it's just another useless agenda to take more control . Who cares if it was an ak47 if that's what you want then so be it.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

You bet your sweet single malt it ain't happening from Conservatives because nobody anywhere ever said they wanted to put "assault" weapons (fully automatic as defined which have been illegal for 50 years,BTW) into the hands of Canadians. That was a dumb statement.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Of course he won't. When he has a majority win, then he will reverse the liberal b s. Just like Harper did with federal LGR....lol

---

I did not say assault weapons but I did say assault rifles and I think we are know what we are discussing here. Erin O'Toole will steer away from this like the Captain of a ship trying to stay of the rocks. There will be hardly a mention in the election as its not a vote getter for Erin. He would also need a majority which I do not think he will get and certainly not on this issue. I am sure both of you have a sick feeling in your stomach's that this guy is not going to get elected in modern day Canada.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I did not say assault weapons but I did say assault rifles and I think we are know what we are discussing here. Erin O'Toole will
steer away from this like the Captain of a ship trying to stay of the rocks. There will be hardly a mention in the election as its not a vote getter for Erin. He would also need a majority which I do not think he will get and certainly not on this issue.I am sure both of you have a sick feeling in your stomach's that this guy is not going to get elected in modern day Canada.

---

Not if the evidence proves other wise .

Where is the the proof these guns banned saved lives ? So far there is none lol.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

Not if the evidence proves other wise .

Where is the the proof these guns banned saved lives ? So far there is none lol.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

---

If its an election issue it comes down to how many Canadians think feel that citizens should have the privilege of owning an assault type weapon if it could compromise their own safety. High profile cases work towards the Liberals and against the Conservatives. We are simply in the middle of the fray. Hunters have consistently expressed the opinion that these guns are not commonly used by them and are not over concerned with the ban. The vast majority on this forum of hunters I believe fall into this belief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

. Hunters have consistently expressed the opinion that these guns are not commonly used by them and are not over concerned with the ban. The vast majority on this forum of hunters I believe fall into this belief.

---

I agree to a point,but,the folly of "It doesn't concern me at this point,so,I'm not concerned" will eventually come back to bite us as has been seen over and over,again with successive governments. As government becomes more and more leftist all the time,it behoves people to pay attention to the political consequences of simply shrugging it off. It's like the old adage about eating an elephant one bite at a time. We need to take a united stand as lawful,legal firearm owners no matter what our political leanings. Our national freedom and liberty demand it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I am pretty sure 99.9% of hunters would not even have heard about this gun, let alone use one.

---

You're full of it -- used by thousands of turkey hunters across the province, and the list of banned hunting shotguns and rifles doesn't end there.

Just because you're not "in the know" doesn't mean others aren't.

-N.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I did not say assault weapons but I did say assault rifles and I think we are know what we are discussing here.

---

It's very obviously not what we're discussing here. Since when did semi-auto rifles, shotguns and 22 lr's become assault rifles?
Assault rifles have selective fire which you must already know, so all 1500+ guns banned, not one is an actual assault rifle.
What rifles are we discussing here Gilroy?

I feel that the gun ban will quietly go away and that the gov't will grandfather a large percentage of these guns to their existing owners. It is completely conceivable that if the government decides to offer some ridiculous buy back such as $1,500 for each gun (for round numbers) that many people will not comply 100%.

The New Zealand gun ban is only about 40% effective meaning 60% of the guns on their list have not been turned over to the authorities. I figure we will be seeing similar numbers in Canada as well especially in rural areas. I feel that the large percentage of non compliance will be driven by once non-restricted firearms now considered banned. With no gun registry how can authorities collect a firearm when you have no clue who has one or if/when when it has been sold, because individual sales records are not required.

Restricted guns will be easier to collect by authorities but I think 100% compliance is not going to happen - mid 90's at best. There will be acts of civil disobedience (and I would not recommend any of these) but there will be the "someone broke into my house and stole it", and I am sure someone will try the "I never owned an AR and I do not know why you have me on your registry as owning one". Leading to my previous point, if the buyback is not up to the true value of the gun I can see this happening. Here is my AR officer. That is all that I have left (a stripped receiver - that is the only part that is restricted). You see I was right in the middle of a custom build when you put the AR on the banned list. I sold off all the original components months back to fund this build and was just about to order all new custom components (bbl, sights, trigger, stock, upper, bolt carrier) then the ban took effect. You may even see the opposite take effect. People taking off all the custom AR components (barrel, trigger, slide, stock, upper) and putting back on stock components and then hand the gun it in to collect your $1,500. I do not think that the Liberals have taken into account the additional resources (time and money) that will be required to execute this ban.

Liberals know they are opening a can of worms on this issue much like their infamous gun registry that was originally going to cost $2 million but ended up costing $2.7 Billion and had ZERO effect on gun crimes in Canada. Billy states, "the cost for the “buy back” of roughly 250,000 firearms would be between $400 million and $600 million—$375 million for the guns and presumably the rest for overhead." I am very curious if Justin & Billy are ready, and have an appetite for, another epic government failure that will make the ill fated gun registry look like a tea party. If I extrapolate the numbers from the previous gun registry cost oversight, I highly doubt that Canadian taxpayers have an appetite to pay more for buying back legally acquired property from Canadian citizens than what they are on the hook for the COVID buyouts of $343 Billion.

But we will see.......

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blog...ion-boondoggle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

It's very obviously not what we're discussing here. Since when did semi-auto rifles, shotguns and 22 lr's become assault rifles?
Assault rifles have selective fire which you must already know, so all 1500+ guns banned, not one is an actual assault rifle.
What rifles are we discussing here Gilroy?

---

“Assault weapon” is not a legally defined term in Canada’s firearms legislation."

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/c...lnt-crm-en.pdf

Page #2......but apparently most politicians and all media outlets have not read this.