Liberal gun bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

Assault rifle .... has ONE ever been used in a crime in Canada, I have never heard of it.....

---

Hmmm, well....

Assault rifle: a centre-fire, select-fire or semi-automatic rifle firing an intermediate cartridge, fed by a detachable box magazine with a standard capacity typically of 30 rounds; may also refer to similar rifles firing full bore rifle cartridges and with correspondingly smaller magazines (FN FAL, M14), although some authorities insist on treating these as "battle rifles."

Now, someone will insist that assault rifles by definition are select-fire and not semi-auto. I used to believe that, but I've collected a pile of primary source examples, such as Guns & Ammo magazine, predating the US assault weapons ban (i.e., 1980s, early 1990s) that refer to semi-auto variants as "assault rifles." Indeed, "assault weapon" has the same origin: not from the mouths of politicians, but from the printing presses of gun magazines. Nobody in the gun world objected to this terminology until it became a political problem.

Note that this definition is also popular usage today.

So, based on that definition, we won't have to look too far to find a crime done with an "assault rifle."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

The lifetime check,that may be a problem for some, what are their cutoff offenses, if you had antidepressants 20 years ago or a woman after birth a decade ago wants to take up shooting .... not allowed based on, someones discretion????

---

Yup, based entirely on police discretion. But what they're looking for is violence.

The legislation is no big surprise. The Liberals announced it before the last election. It's also not that big of a deal. CZ and Swiss Arms owners get to keep their firearms, ATTs return to what they were before C42, dealers will once again record sales like they did pre-2005 and CFO's will look back more than 5 years when issuing a license which they did already.

The biggest change is if we sell a gun privately the option of verifying the buyer's PAL is now mandatory. I have verified PALs a couple of times since the end of the registry and there was no requirement to provide the serial number or description of the firearm. There is nothing to suggest in this legislation that they will be required. So once the dust settles the degree of inconvenience in this bill is relatively minor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

... ATTs return to what they were before C42....

---

The change is even less significant than that. For restricted and 12(6), the automatic ATT created by C-42 still exists for transport from shop to home and to any range in your home province.

The old system is reinstated for transport to gun shop, gunsmith, gun show, border point, etc. The rationale here seems fairly clear: they want to impose control where there is an actual or potential change in possession.

Anyway, the effect on everyday activities from the ATT changes looks to be pretty small.



Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

The change is even less significant than that. For restricted and 12(6), the automatic ATT created by C-42 still exists for transport from shop to home and to any range in your home province.

The old system is reinstated for transport to gun shop, gunsmith, gun show, border point, etc. The rationale here seems fairly clear: they want to impose control where there is an actual or potential change in possession.

Anyway, the effect on everyday activities from the ATT changes looks to be pretty small.

---

Thanks. It helps prove the point this legislation is much ado about nothing except perhaps for the Swiss Arms and CZ owners who used them to hunt or don't belong to a range.

The previous double negative requirement (no reason not to believe) for a non-restricted transfer was too loose. Verifying the validity of a PAL before transferring is prudent and responsible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Hmmm, well....

Assault rifle: a centre-fire, select-fire or semi-automatic rifle firing an intermediate cartridge, fed by a detachable box magazine with a standard capacity typically of 30 rounds; may also refer to similar rifles firing full bore rifle cartridges and with correspondingly smaller magazines (FN FAL, M14), although some authorities insist on treating these as "battle rifles."

Now, someone will insist that assault rifles by definition are select-fire and not semi-auto. I used to believe that, but I've collected a pile of primary source examples, such as Guns & Ammo magazine, predating the US assault weapons ban (i.e., 1980s, early 1990s) that refer to semi-auto variants as "assault rifles." Indeed, "assault weapon" has the same origin: not from the mouths of politicians, but from the printing presses of gun magazines. Nobody in the gun world objected to this terminology until it became a political problem.

Note that this definition is also popular usage today.

So, based on that definition, we won't have to look too far to find a crime done with an "assault rifle."



Yup, based entirely on police discretion. But what they're looking for is violence.

---

So is calling a walleye a pickerel but then again the definitions of words are sometimes dynamic so I stand corrected.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dict...ssault%20rifle
Updated on: 17 Mar 2018
: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire

While others use the "walleye" definition..
An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.
and
That said, the gun industry's traditional definition of an "assault rifle" is a weapon the military generally uses and has "select fire capabilities," or the capability to switch between semi-automatic or a fully automatic mode.

So ... an Assault Weapon...

"The Ohio bill defines an assault weapon as "an automatic firearm that has not been rendered permanently inoperable, a semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine with the capacity to accept ten or more cartridges, and a semi-automatic firearm with a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept ten or more cartridges."

Or the dictionary again....
assault weapon
Updated on: 18 Mar 2018
: any of various automatic or semiautomatic firearms; especially : assault rifle


So according to the Ohio definition, there are none in Canada (other than some .22s since cal is not mentioned). Given the vague dictionary definition then you could say all semi's (even though that is not the way it is not intended BY MOST).

I didn't see anything specific about violence (I read it fast though) and did see some psychological there... and don't have time to look, sometimes you just need a break but tea is done back to database connection issues ....

An unaccountable group making decisions based on ambiguous wording based almost solely on appearance not function and a liberal agenda (insert long list of complete unethical etc sh**) driving it .... what can go wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The legislation is no big surprise. The Liberals announced it before the last election. It's also not that big of a deal. CZ and Swiss Arms owners get to keep their firearms, ATTs return to what they were before C42, dealers will once again record sales like they did pre-2005 and CFO's will look back more than 5 years when issuing a license which they did already.

The biggest change is if we sell a gun privately the option of verifying the buyer's PAL is now mandatory. I have verified PALs a couple of times since the end of the registry and there was no requirement to provide the serial number or description of the firearm. There is nothing to suggest in this legislation that they will be required. So once the dust settles the degree of inconvenience in this bill is relatively minor.

---

The voice of reason has spoken,well done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hunter John

Gilroy doesn't care cause he only has a flintlock rifle so don't ever expect him to stand up for our gun rights, unless they reclassify his flinter as prohibited.

---

Keep trolling brother hunter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

The change is even less significant than that. For restricted and 12(6), the automatic ATT created by C-42 still exists for transport from shop to home and to any range in your home province.

The old system is reinstated for transport to gun shop, gunsmith, gun show, border point, etc. The rationale here seems fairly clear: they want to impose control where there is an actual or potential change in possession.

Anyway, the effect on everyday activities from the ATT changes looks to be pretty small.



Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Thanks. It helps prove the point this legislation is much ado about nothing except perhaps for the Swiss Arms and CZ owners who used them to hunt or don't belong to a range.

The previous double negative requirement (no reason not to believe) for a non-restricted transfer was too loose. Verifying the validity of a PAL before transferring is prudent and responsible.

---

All of this remains to be seen. This legislation,by design, leaves the door wide open for regulation "creep" relatively without any checks and balances against bureaucratic abuse. There is ZERO measures in this entire legislation proposal for public safety as claimed by The Liberal Party of Canada. As usual,all of this is directed toward legal,lawful citizens who were never the problem in the first place. All the Liberal apologists posting here are being deliberately obtuse, bald-faced liars or at best,tragically naive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

A registry of a consumable product...makes sense.

Unless I'm mistaken that data has never gone any farther than the page on the book on the shelf at CT...the books aren't submitted to the RCMP but held in storage. So if that is called a registry.....I'm amused :)

---

There are a few people here who were contacted based on their purchase of certain ammo, I believe Werner bought 32 pistol ammo and the RCMP contacted him, they were used for a chamber adapter.

I asked a few shops and they said that the books have been reviewed before.

You can consult all the dictionaries you want. The primary sources are there.

And fighting about whether people are allowed to use the words "assault rifle" in this way establishes nothing.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk