CBC talks about firearms - fear mongering 101

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

How about just "Shot by a rifle" or "Shot from a distance", or I can think of many more adjectives/discriptors that don't sensationalize it in the way the word

"Sniper" or Sniper rifle does. Conjure up certain gut feelings/automatic reaction doesn't it.

Next thing you know everyone going to be thinking every black gun is an "Assault Rifle"...(Oops sorry, that is reality today ) or every pressure cooker a bomb.

or every burka wearing Islamist....

Funny Gord. Don't you hate Harper for "fear mongering"...So when its the "left" screaming about it....Or the Media admonishing people...but when its the right or gun owners saying the same things.

You call those gun owners paranoid nut bars
:)

---

The media has repeatedly shown an open hostility to firearm ownership and CBC I have seen lie several times on air including one where they talked about the NFA and saying they wanted to legalize semi-automatic weapons ..... I had three thoughts on that, first I thought semi-auto was legal and second why is a firearm a weapon and who knew better. I talked to several people and most left voters were surprised semi's weren't illegal and thought they should be. The media for the most part are like the neighbours dog that bites you 8 out of 10 times you walk past their house, you begin to watch them closer and can see their intent pretty soon.... sadly some seem to be ideologues that have no interest in learning. I would say the Liberal/NDP are the 9 out of 10 biters too, it would be rare for them to take the honest firearm owners side.

The media and police now seem to like the newest buzz word sniper and to equate the BLR as one (I'm now jealous of a few people...:p) is technically correct, any rifle a sniper uses could be called one.

When we see bills like S-223 being introduced, articles like the first CBC show post where they talk about killing every person on earth twice etc. their view that every bullet and every firearm is dangerous to public safety and health is and should be gov't controlled and monitored is clearly shown. The only surprise I see in S-223 is that pump and lever actions are not included but that can be an interesting play two when you look at what a summary of the bill said

"3. To qualify as a “hunting firearm”, government approval will be required by way of Order in Council for any specific model."

Whether this intent is there or inaccurate I didn't see in my quick read but it would be interesting to see what would get approvals if it passes???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

T

"3. To qualify as a “hunting firearm”, government approval will be required by way of Order in Council for any specific model."

Whether this intent is there or inaccurate I didn't see in my quick read but it would be interesting to see what would get approvals if it passes???

---

That is the scary part. Whenever a judgement call is left to the RCMP ( remember the High River gun confiscations) to make re: firearms the result will be bad for legal gun owners. The RCMP now have government support from an anti gun Liberal administration. Expect it to get worse when it's convenient for them to do so. Trudough will eventually have to face another election and if attacking legal gun ownership nets more seats than leaving us alone then get ready to get screwed.

lol Mosquito, should you ever desire a Sniper rifle, or plan a Western hunt for Rams and 700 yard shots.

Just like mother nature, tis a wonderful and at times frightening thing of beauty (Sans Bi pod)
http://jbenphotography.ca/img/s/v-2/p1259940322.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

Whenever a judgement call is left to the RCMP ( remember the High River gun confiscations) to make re: firearms the result will be bad for legal gun owners.

---

The quoted section does not leave a decision to the RCMP. Orders in Council are issued by the GG on the advice of Cabinet.

Bill S-223 proposes that all firearms will be considered restricted ("circumscribed") unless specifically identified as such by Order in Council. Essentially, it would reverse the onus: instead of being non-restricted unless specified otherwise, guns would be non-restricted only if specifically named as such. This is one of the problems this bill will face if it makes it to committee, as it would place a substantial burden on Cabinet.

But it's a moot point anyway, as S-223 will not pass. Senate bills very rarely become law, and this one conflicts with the government's plans.

Good. Because it it were ever to pass the committees of "experts" would be nothing but unqualified anti gun activists with a pinch of gun hating law enforcement to make it look legitimate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

lol Mosquito, should you ever desire a Sniper rifle, or plan a Western hunt for Rams and 700 yard shots.

Just like mother nature, tis a wonderful and at times frightening thing of beauty (Sans Bi pod)
http://jbenphotography.ca/img/s/v-2/p1259940322.jpg

---

Sweet rig JBen.

:D:D:D:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

lol Mosquito, should you ever desire a Sniper rifle, or plan a Western hunt for Rams and 700 yard shots.

Just like mother nature, tis a wonderful and at times frightening thing of beauty (Sans Bi pod)
http://jbenphotography.ca/img/s/v-2/p1259940322.jpg

---

Nice .... NOW... As loud as I can ..... :tongue::tongue::tongue::tongue::tongue: (insert childish raspberry sound here)!!!!


I ALMOST got one this year, there was a 308 takedown BLR on Canadian Gunnutz awhile ago at what I thought was a good price but the pictures only showed the one side. When I asked for a picture of the ejector side and barrel where it attaches (it was a takedown after all) he made a comment about he wouldn't take "weird pictures" etc. and I got suspicious and walked away. No proof but I suspect he had trashed the ejector side and was hoping for some sucker to not question it and pay up. The ad was gone the next week so ??? but now about once a week I take a peak at CGN and if a 223 or 308 came along that looked good ..... shhhhhh don't tell the wife!!! :scream::cool: I still have a few of my Dad's stuff to sell including a 16lb .22 falling block target that should be worth a fair bit more so I MAY survive her finding out if I sell that.

Senate bills like S-223 are rare to pass but when you look at the Liberal Youth resolution 151 and the Nova Scotia womens resolution 42 ??? in the past then look at that recent CBC radio show (the one in post 1 of this thread) on firearms I would actually put it alot higher odds than the usual senate nonsense make work bill. To be completely paranoid and suspicious it would be a good way to sneak all their changes through and try to not actually take the blame. The Liberals have proven themselves more than underhanded, about 10 months ago O'Reilly and Harper were both saying the Liberals would run it to a $30B deficit and no one would believe them... now they came out with the $29.6B deficit and then announced $2B in unbudgeted spending within 2 weeks so my trust of them ranks in the negative right now! :madman:

At first I was going to agree with the general consensus about how this was reported and what terms the police used. However, the more I thought about it, the more I am convinced this was reported correctly.

First, lets look at the term sniper. A sniper is an individual who shoots at individuals as opportunity offers from a concealed or distant position. Now the definition doesn't denote distances. Many who think of snipers think of military snipers who engage the enemy past distances of 800m. However, police tactical snipers routinely engage targets at ranges of 300m or less (mainly because their error of judgment is significantly smaller than a military sniper). Police snipers train within the same distance as many hunters. I could make the argument that many guys who hunt are as skilled as police snipers (how many of us routinely try to "drive tacks" on the range). Is hiding in a tree, ground blind or a deer blind not considered concealment? So under those qualifications, most guys who hunt in the fall fit the bill of a sniper. I read a great book about the Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment by Farley Mowat when I joined The Hasty P's (and have read it again and again) and in the book, the Germans and Italians had a real tough time when the Canadian Boys got ahold of a scope to put on their rifles as many of them hunted deer and the scope gave them a better view of their targets. They became for all intents and purposes defacto snipers.

Secondly, any rifle which is used by a sniper is a man portable, high precision, shoulder fired rifle designed to more accurate shooting at longer ranges than other small arms. This definition accurately describes most hunting rifles. Are some calibres better at longer distances than others? Absolutely but the definition still applies I think.

Lastly, the police describe whomever shot Yow Foo as a person with some considerable skill and some training. This statement is accurate because I think some folks are forgetting how much skill goes into hitting a target accurately. If you took Joe Blow with no firearms experience off the street today, set him up behind that rifle and told him to shoot a human sized target at 200 yards away in one shot without any experience on the rifle, do you think he could do it in one shot? Could we do it? Sure, however, we all know how to shoot (or at least we pretend to) and some of us are better shots than others.

If anything I can find about this is the detective describes this firearm as a "unique piece of kit" without elaborating or that the unique rifle would likely have been noticed by someone, as it isn't popular among hunters, who typically don't mount bipods on their guns. I am not sure what constitutes the rifle as not popular among hunters. Many lever action rifles have a bi-pod on them and if someone showed up to a range or a hunt camp with one, I wouldn't bat an eye.

Perhaps the media could have did a better job of why the detective made those statements (in the above paragraph) and included them in the story but they were reporting what the detective stated. If the police are looking for a suspect in a crime of a certain ethnicity, does the media need to do its own investigation to ensure the police have their facts correct? I don't think so. If you have a problem with the message, should you take it out on the messenger or the person who sent the message?

Dyth

Good take on it Dyth...