Where hunters should aim in discussing Bill C-21 on gun control

The title of this Opinion piece caught my eye....surely a right wing rag like the Ottawa Citizen wouldn't be offering good advice...

Turns out they didn't...

This is the punch line of the Bad joke...

Quote:

---

As licensed hunters in Ontario, many of us belong to the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, a highly respected hunter-angler and conservation federation with long-held values and standards. The federation is made up of both responsible firearms owners and science-based conservationists.

In addition, as Canadian hunters, many of us tend to be somewhat conservative about our traditional hunting firearms: unlike our American cousins, we regard gun ownership in Canada not as a right but as a privilege.

So as responsible hunters and firearms owners, we have a duty to be part of the solution and not part of the problem. Canadian hunters should raise the bar and aim to support the ban on “assault-style firearms” — which have no legitimacy in our hunting gear. We should speak out for our time-honoured traditions and legitimate firearms ownership, but also for the greater good and public safety.

---

read more: https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/pa...on-gun-control

Weird because he also spoke out against the gun registry.
You would also think that black guns would not bother him.

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/5053...ttawa-citizen/

Constance Bay resident Don Pajot is a senior Canadian hunter and former firearms and hunter safety training instructor, and a Liaison Officer with the Canadian Forces Ottawa Fish and Game Club.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/pa...on-gun-control

Sounds pretty reasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/pa...on-gun-control

Sounds pretty reasonable.

---

If you're a FUDD..yea.

Quote:

---

FUDD; Short for Elmer Fudd. A form of gun enthusiast who thinks guns are only for hunting or that there's only certain purposes to guns. i: “A gun-owner who supports traditional hunting guns but favors gun control for other guns such as handguns or tactical rifles.” You'll often find fudds at the range acting tacti-cool, but in no way politically invested.

---

It's unreasonable to demand all hunters "support" the ban on "assault-style firearms." It is equally unreasonable to demand hunters get involved in the fight against the ban. The impact on hunting is minimal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

If you're a FUDD..yea.

---

I guess if I was in the U.S.A. I could be called that, but fortunately I am in Canada and not to worried about second amendment rights. Now I don't treat owners/users of so called "non sporting" firearm's like handguns or semiautomatic rifles with scorn or contempt as my "hunting rifle" is a semiautomatic. LOL But I must admit I have made the odd reference to weekend warriors and user's of AR 15,s......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I guess if I was in the U.S.A. I could be called that, but fortunately I am in Canada and not to worried about second amendment rights. Now I don't treat owners/users of so called "non sporting" firearm's like handguns or semiautomatic rifles with scorn or contempt as my "hunting rifle" is a semiautomatic. LOL But I must admit I have made the odd reference to weekend warriors and user's of AR 15,s......

---

Wait, you do not treat other owners/users with scorn? Your statements here directly contradict that.

You are aware that Bill C-21 bans a lot of bolt action rifles as well as a significant number of current non-guns, as is the case with airsoft and air rifles and pistols right?

Oh wait, they are not after exactly what you have, therefore you do not care, this does make you a FUDD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Wait, you do not treat other owners/users with scorn? Your statements here directly contradict that.

You are aware that Bill C-21 bans a lot of bolt action rifles as well as a significant number of current non-guns, as is the case with airsoft and air rifles and pistols right?

Oh wait, they are not after exactly what you have, therefore you do not care, this does make you a FUDD.

---

I don't feel the need to label people that are of a different mindset...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I don't feel the need to label people that are of a different mindset...

---

Well, you have done it, you have labelled people who have done nothing wrong bad enough to steal their property from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Wait, you do not treat other owners/users with scorn? Your statements here directly contradict that.

You are aware that Bill C-21 bans a lot of bolt action rifles as well as a significant number of current non-guns, as is the case with airsoft and air rifles and pistols right?

Oh wait, they are not after exactly what you have, therefore you do not care, this does make you a FUDD.

---

Calling someone a FUDD isn't treating others with scorn? Besides this is a hunting and fishing forum.

C-21 only bans a handful of bolt-action rifles firing cartridges above a certain energy level which are needlessly over-powered for Ontario hunting. Airsoft and other toy guns are never used to hunt. The impact on hunting is minimal and the vast majority of hunters will not notice a difference.

The "sport shooters" who are most affected should understand that when trying to recruit the support of people who are not affected insulting them and calling them names is not the best way to go about it.

Sport shooters should be able to enjoy any firearm they want at the range.
A 243 or 5.56 in the hands of someone who is intent on causing harm to others is just as lethal regardless if it is black or wood in colour.
The same goes with handguns. Heck, I admire the Americans being able to shoot 50 cal machine guns.

The real reason for the bans is that the government is terrified of a population uprising and needs to disarm.
The Liberals are big with their mouths all the while imposing restrictions on civil liberties.

CSIS is right when they say our government has been infiltrated by globalists with an agenda.
Insinuating that this is a hunting and fishing forum and that firearms of black colour should not be discussed is insulting to the members. It smacks of censorship. On occasion, when I go to a shooting range and see someone banging off rounds in a black gun I don't get upset. That is their hobby and respect it just like they respect mine. Brothers in a shooting fraternity.

You claim to be a member of a shooting club. Many of the members must hate your presence if you so adamantly support banning of firearms like you do on this forum. Or, do you simply do it hiding behind a computer screen?

I guess some of us feel that coming onto a "hunting forum" and then running around wanting all of us to back a hobby that has nothing to do with hunting is a big ask. Maybe there are other forums better suited to promote your needs and wants.
The main break down I see here is that some folk's see gun ownership as a God given right and others believe its a priveledge extended to us by the government of the day, I have noted over the years that the Conservative government has not availed itself even with back to back majorities to enshrine gun ownership as a RIGHT, how come?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I guess some of us feel that coming onto a "hunting forum" and then running around wanting all of us to back a hobby that has nothing to do with hunting is a big ask. Maybe there are other forums better suited to promote your needs and wants.
The main break down I see here is that some folk's see gun ownership as a God given right and others believe its a priveledge extended to us by the government of the day, I have noted over the years that the Conservative government has not availed itself even with back to back majorities to enshrine gun ownership as a RIGHT, how come?

---

Wait, so a semi auto rifle or shotgun has nothing to do with hunting? That is one of the dumbest things I have read, even from you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Sport shooters should be able to enjoy any firearm they want at the range.
A 243 or 5.56 in the hands of someone who is intent on causing harm to others is just as lethal regardless if it is black or wood in colour.
The same goes with handguns. Heck, I admire the Americans being able to shoot 50 cal machine guns.

The real reason for the bans is that the government is terrified of a population uprising and needs to disarm.
The Liberals are big with their mouths all the while imposing restrictions on civil liberties.

CSIS is right when they say our government has been infiltrated by globalists with an agenda.
Insinuating that this is a hunting and fishing forum and that firearms of black colour should not be discussed is insulting to the members. It smacks of censorship. On occasion, when I go to a shooting range and see someone banging off rounds in a black gun I don't get upset. That is their hobby and respect it just like they respect mine. Brothers in a shooting fraternity.

You claim to be a member of a shooting club. Many of the members must hate your presence if you so adamantly support banning of firearms like you do on this forum. Or, do you simply do it hiding behind a computer screen?

---

Don't confuse apathy with opposition or support for a ban. It's hardly a surprise that people wouldn't particularly care if a gun that they don't own, have no interest in or use for is banned. Just because someone isn't fulminating in outrage does not mean they "adamantly support banning of firearms."

And the point remains that if you want to recruit a gun owner to support your cause don't yap off about "brothers in a shooting fraternity" and them proceed to insult them and call them names.

Divide and concur is what our corrupt dictatorship is doing with firearms owners.

Its always great when you have one group of firearms owners not supporting each other. Hunters not supporting sport shooters claiming they are weekend warriors that should choose a different hobby is exactly how divide and concur works.

The sport shooters will laugh when your bar or semi duck guns are banned in the name of public safety. Really why would half of gun owners (sport shooters) support hunters that continue to throw them under the bus. Some people are far to blind to see the big picture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Don't confuse apathy with opposition or support for a ban. It's hardly a surprise that people wouldn't particularly care if a gun that they don't own, have no interest in or use for is banned. Just because someone isn't fulminating in outrage does not mean they "adamantly support banning of firearms."

And the point remains that if you want to recruit a gun owner to support your cause don't yap off about "brothers in a shooting fraternity" and them proceed to insult them and call them names.

---

If you read Gilroy's posts he is pro gun ban on things that he does not deem to be hunting arms, so that part of it is true.

Remember, bolt action hunting rifles were banned too. Pellet pistols are being banned. Airsoft guns are being banned. Low powered pellet rifles are being banned. Bolt action black rifles are banned. Post 1898 muzzle loading fowler shotguns have been banned (over 20mm diameter). This is not a ban on the AR-15, this is a ban on whatever the heck the JT government decides to ban. They are even banning some 22LR rifles, how many people are out there doing mass shootings with a 22?

I guess by some peoples logic on here it would be OK if the government limited public & private ranges to Hunting guns only...and they provided the list of what was allowed.

I still find it amazing that some people think these guns are something more powerful because they look military. Gilroy if I put a military stock on my gun does it get super powers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I guess some of us feel that coming onto a "hunting forum"

---

Since when was this a 'Hunting' forum Gilly...it's hosted by the Ontario OUT of DOORS Community and the forum we are having this discussion in the Firearms and Ammo section.

A firearm is a tool plain and simple. I'd hunt with my AR-15 if allowed. Everyone is aware that Euegen stoner designed the AR-15 to be a lightweight modern hunting and sporting carbine. That's not the exact quote from his patent but it's close enough.

Calling people Fudds doesn't help and ignoring the problem isn't going to help either. The eventual goal of the liberal party is to completely disarm the population. It's right there in their mission statement. You may be fine but the next generation of hunters will not be if this is allowed to move forward unchecked. Many people see this as a cessation of a hobby that they don't participate in but that isn't where the buck stops. Today they want all the "black" rifles. Next they will want the "high powered military sniper rifles" gone. That's your hunting rig. That is their code word for bolt action rifle with and optic in it. The ostrich defense only works until the lions start to bite your bottom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Since when was this a 'Hunting' forum Gilly...it's hosted by the Ontario OUT of DOORS Community and the forum we hare having this discussion is in the Firearms and Ammo section.

---

This site is owned and operated by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters not the CSSA, CCFR, NSA or one of the gun rights organizations. The Firearms and Ammo forum would therefore logically be focused on hunting activities not sport or target shooting much less on "assault-style" firearms or even bolt-action rifles shooting rounds created specifically to hunt game not found in the province.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terrible_E

A firearm is a tool plain and simple. I'd hunt with my AR-15 if allowed. Everyone is aware that Euegen stoner designed the AR-15 to be a lightweight modern hunting and sporting carbine. That's not the exact quote from his patent but it's close enough.

Calling people Fudds doesn't help and ignoring the problem isn't going to help either. The eventual goal of the liberal party is to completely disarm the population. It's right there in their mission statement. You may be fine but the next generation of hunters will not be if this is allowed to move forward unchecked. Many people see this as a cessation of a hobby that they don't participate in but that isn't where the buck stops. Today they want all the "black" rifles. Next they will want the "high powered military sniper rifles" gone. That's your hunting rig. That is their code word for bolt action rifle with and optic in it. The ostrich defense only works until the lions start to bite your bottom.

---

Here,now,don't you dare start making sense. :)Someone may call you a FUDD. :rolleye:BTW,welcome to the forum.:moose:

What's even the point of this ban ?

How does it make it a safer place to live how does it make our streets safer .

Heard of multiple bust recently with grenades and grenade launchers in the past month .

Seriously people what does this ban accually accomplish ?



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

This site is owned and operated by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters not the CSSA, CCFR, NSA or one of the gun rights organizations. The Firearms and Ammo forum would therefore logically be focused on hunting activities not sport or target shooting much less on "assault-style" firearms or even bolt-action rifles shooting rounds created specifically to hunt game not found in the province.

---

But it's an offshoot of the 'Out of Doors' magazine (the title on the Forum home page) so it's not restricted to just angling and fishing.

And the Forum is called 'Firearms and Ammo'...with no restricted list as to what firearms are deemed Hunting specific...or do you suggest we let the Liberals list be used to restrict conversations on sport shooting guns ?

If I put an assault style rifle stock on my rifle does it become super powerful? Essentially that is what is being implied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

This site is owned and operated by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters not the CSSA, CCFR, NSA or one of the gun rights organizations. The Firearms and Ammo forum would therefore logically be focused on hunting activities not sport or target shooting much less on "assault-style" firearms or even bolt-action rifles shooting rounds created specifically to hunt game not found in the province.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

This site is owned and operated by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters not the CSSA, CCFR, NSA or one of the gun rights organizations. The Firearms and Ammo forum would therefore logically be focused on hunting activities not sport or target shooting much less on "assault-style" firearms or even bolt-action rifles shooting rounds created specifically to hunt game not found in the province.

---

I used an SKS last year while deer hunting. It is amazing how many Lee Enfield and Mauser rifles have been used for hunting since their creation, you know that they were created as a weapon of war right? Funny enough, the AR-15 was the first civilian gun adopted by a main military in history, so, the AR-15 started out as a sporting arm and the Lee Enfield in most gun cabinets in Canada started out as a military weapon and was used for the destruction of human life.

This is not a gun rights group but it is pretty hard to hunt with a gun when guns are banned.

Are you against target shooting? The 60lb 50 BMG rifles used for long range paper punching has never been used in a shooting in Canada.

The win 1894 was used in a terrorist shooting in Canada though, just food for thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

The win 1894 was used in a terrorist shooting in Canada though, just food for thought.

---

was that the man decades ago who went around rural ontario shooting people in the back from like 100s of yards away in the bush? said he was "hunting" people?

say that documentary on the history channel i believe

It was used by the guy who shot the young soldier in Ottawa near Parliament, the guy also made it into Parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowjob

was that the man decades ago who went around rural ontario shooting people in the back from like 100s of yards away in the bush? said he was "hunting" people?

say that documentary on the history channel i believe

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowjob

was that the man decades ago who went around rural ontario shooting people in the back from like 100s of yards away in the bush? said he was "hunting" people?

say that documentary on the history channel i believe

---

Nope, Oct 22nd 2014, Parliament Hill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Wait, so a semi auto rifle or shotgun has nothing to do with hunting? That is one of the dumbest things I have read, even from you.

---

As you can READ from my initial post I mentioned I had a semi auto rifle (see below). I did not mention a shotgun at all. But just so you know I also have a semi auto shotgun. The reference to "non-sporting firearms" like handguns or semi automatic rifles comes from Mikepal,s post on a definition of a FUDD where he names the guns and calls semi automatic rifles tactical rifles.

"I guess if I was in the U.S.A. I could be called that, but fortunately I am in Canada and not to worried about second amendment rights. Now I don't treat owners/users of so called "non sporting" firearm's like handguns or semiautomatic rifles with scorn or contempt as my "hunting rifle" is a semiautomatic. LOL But I must admit I have made the odd reference to weekend warriors and user's of AR 15,s......"

Here are a few links to what Bill C-21 will be banning

Air Pistols - under 500fps like these

https://www.cabelas.ca/product/10028...l-177cal-black
https://www.cabelas.ca/product/66277...415-air-pistol
https://www.cabelas.ca/product/12892...ack-air-pistol

Airsoft guns like this

https://www.cabelas.ca/product/11699...airsoft-pistol - orange tips will not change status

Also illegal, glad they are telling us what they can use to hunt with.

https://weatherby.com/caliber/460-wby-mag/

Shotguns - Not quite antique but percussion cap muzzle loaders made after Jan 1 1898 have been banned.

https://www.dogsanddoubles.com/tag/8-gauge/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

As you can READ from my initial post I mentioned I had a semi auto rifle (see below). I did not mention a shotgun at all. But just so you know I also have a semi auto shotgun. The reference to "non-sporting firearms" like handguns or semi automatic rifles comes from Mikepal,s post on a definition of a FUDD where he names the guns and calls semi automatic rifles tactical rifles.

"I guess if I was in the U.S.A. I could be called that, but fortunately I am in Canada and not to worried about second amendment rights. Now I don't treat owners/users of so called "non sporting" firearm's like handguns or semiautomatic rifles with scorn or contempt as my "hunting rifle" is a semiautomatic. LOL But I must admit I have made the odd reference to weekend warriors and user's of AR 15,s......"

---

They are not just banning what you consider "non-sporting arms" I do not understand how you cannot see this. An 8ga shotgun made in 1898 with percussion caps has been banned, these were numerous and worth a lot of money, nobody is going to use this to kill large numbers of people.

This is not a ban on the AR-15, this is a very wide ban that is affecting many many guns that many Canadians own.

How thick are you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Divide and concur is what our corrupt dictatorship is doing with firearms owners.

Its always great when you have one group of firearms owners not supporting each other. Hunters not supporting sport shooters claiming they are weekend warriors that should choose a different hobby is exactly how divide and concur works.

The sport shooters will laugh when your bar or semi duck guns are banned in the name of public safety. Really why would half of gun owners (sport shooters) support hunters that continue to throw them under the bus. Some people are far to blind to see the big picture

---

I do not think half of gun owners are sports shooters, not even close, unless you can provide some evidence.

On this forum we have 13,000 members but only about the same dozen constantly beating the drum about this ban.
Do you not feel you would have a lot more folk's voicing their opinion. Mind you if your right about half of gun owners being
sports shooters, they are probably on other forums as this is a hunting forum and they may not expect a lot of support. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I do not think half of gun owners are sports shooters, not even close, unless you can provide some evidence.

On this forum we have 13,000 members but only about the same dozen constantly beating the drum about this ban.
Do you not feel you would have a lot more folk's voicing their opinion. Mind you if your right about half of gun owners being
sports shooters, they are probably on other forums as this is a hunting forum and they may not expect a lot of support. LOL

---

Well we have 2.2 million PAL holders and roughly 500, 000 Rpal holders. So that gives us about a quarter of the gun owners who have pistols. Take away people who collect hand guns and add in people who do sport shooting without handguns and you probably are left with about a quarter of gun license holders using their firearms for sporting competition. These are very rough numbers but are well within what you could reasonably assume without doing any hard research.

Due to this being mainly a hunting forum you are not going to see as much engagement from sport shooters. So you have to consider bias of your source material.

We owe it to ourselves to fight draconian laws regardless of their direct influence on our lives. I don't want to live under the tyranny of the majority and I don't want anyone else to either. I happen to be a man but I will always support women's right to vote. It doesn't affect me directly because my right to vote isn't being called into question but I certainly want everyone to be able to vote so I support it because that's the country I want to live in. I don't want to hunt with spear but if you happen to be an Olympic level javelin thrower and can safely and humanely kill a bear with a spear why shouldn't you be allowed to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Since when was this a 'Hunting' forum Gilly...it's hosted by the Ontario OUT of DOORS Community and the forum we are having this discussion in the Firearms and Ammo section.

---

"Ontario OUT of DOORS forum is the place for avid anglers and hunters to share stories, information, and resources online. Join the more than 12,700 registered users of the forum."

Well Michael this is from the home webpage of the Ontario Federation of HUNTERS and Anglers.

How many of the 13000 members post at all?

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Terrible_E " Well we have 2.2 million PAL holders and roughly 500, 000 Rpal holders. So that gives us about a quarter of the gun owners who have pistols."

Reply. No that is not correct for instance there are thousands of armed security guards who need a RPAL and never own a gun.

There are also thousands of people who took the RPAL course because it was available with a PAL course and or a hunters course and simply have no intention of ever owning a handgun.



Take away people who collect hand guns and add in people who do sport shooting without handguns and you probably are left with about a quarter of gun license holders using their firearms for sporting competition. These are very rough numbers but are well within what you could reasonably assume without doing any hard research.

Reply. So adding in my security guards and folk's who simply took the course because they could with a PAL COURSE and right away your well below the quarter of gun license owners WHO MIGHT BE ENGAGED IN SPORTING COMPETITION.

Due to this being mainly a hunting forum you are not going to see as much engagement from sport shooters. So you have to consider bias of your source material.
Reply. Well it is a hunting forum some folk's would high jack it for their own political purposes as we see.

We owe it to ourselves to fight draconian laws regardless of their direct influence on our lives. I don't want to live under the tyranny of the majority and I don't want anyone else to either.

Reply. Well unfortunately you are in a democracy and the majority rule, some folk's do not see the present government representing the majority but its seems to be how our electoral system works.

I happen to be a man but I will always support women's right to vote. It doesn't affect me directly because my right to vote isn't being called into question but I certainly want everyone to be able to vote so I support it because that's the country I want to live in.
Reply. So that bring's us back to being in a democracy, I suppose.

I don't want to hunt with spear but if you happen to be an Olympic level javelin thrower and can safely and humanely kill a bear with a spear why shouldn't you be allowed to?[/QUOTE]

Reply. I suppose the answer to that is the government representing "the voters" deems it unsporting or unethical to hunt a bear in that manner and there are more humane ways to dispatch the animal that causes less pain and suffering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

I still find it amazing that some people think these guns are something more powerful because they look military. Gilroy if I put a military stock on my gun does it get super powers?

---

It probably does in your mind GW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terrible_E

A firearm is a tool plain and simple. I'd hunt with my AR-15 if allowed. Everyone is aware that Euegen stoner designed the AR-15 to be a lightweight modern hunting and sporting carbine. That's not the exact quote from his patent but it's close enough.

Calling people Fudds doesn't help and ignoring the problem isn't going to help either. The eventual goal of the liberal party is to completely disarm the population. It's right there in their mission statement. You may be fine but the next generation of hunters will not be if this is allowed to move forward unchecked. Many people see this as a cessation of a hobby that they don't participate in but that isn't where the buck stops. Today they want all the "black" rifles. Next they will want the "high powered military sniper rifles" gone. That's your hunting rig. That is their code word for bolt action rifle with and optic in it. The ostrich defense only works until the lions start to bite your bottom.

---

I find "fear mongering" a tool used by mostly Conservative/Right wing folk's to stir the base. I have all the same guns I had 40 years ago, despite back to back Liberal Governments, who as you allege are out to get all our guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

I used an SKS last year while deer hunting. It is amazing how many Lee Enfield and Mauser rifles have been used for hunting since their creation, you know that they were created as a weapon of war right? Funny enough, the AR-15 was the first civilian gun adopted by a main military in history, so, the AR-15 started out as a sporting arm and the Lee Enfield in most gun cabinets in Canada started out as a military weapon and was used for the destruction of human life.

This is not a gun rights group but it is pretty hard to hunt with a gun when guns are banned.

Are you against target shooting? The 60lb 50 BMG rifles used for long range paper punching has never been used in a shooting in Canada.

The win 1894 was used in a terrorist shooting in Canada though, just food for thought.

---

Except that not all guns are banned only a few. Lots of guns still left over. You can still hunt with your SKS. It's not on the banned list.

And the terrorist that attacked Parliament Hill with a Winchester 94 took one life. He'd have killed a lot more with an AR and a high-capacity magazine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I do not think half of gun owners are sports shooters, not even close, unless you can provide some evidence.

On this forum we have 13,000 members but only about the same dozen constantly beating the drum about this ban.
Do you not feel you would have a lot more folk's voicing their opinion. Mind you if your right about half of gun owners being
sports shooters, they are probably on other forums as this is a hunting forum and they may not expect a lot of support. LOL

---

Its not just sport shooters who have been effected with the gun ban, many non-restricted firearms are now banned do to their asthetics. Bolt action hunting rifles are banned adding to the number of hunters effected.

It's so pathetic that our government banning toy guns used by children. I wasn't aware children that play with toy airsoft are RPAL holders or PAL holders.

Then we have some here claiming the hunting rifles banned are not for hunting any game in this province Newsflash this gun ban is country wide not just in Ontario. Further more I was unaware that there has been a limit on the cartridge used for hunting moose or any other big game in Ontario or our whole country.

What is the biggest slap in the face to all Canadians, is having our PM announce a gun ban telling Canadians, "nobody needs an AR-15 to take down a deer. Then says, "FN's can keep their AR-15 for hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Terrible_E " Well we have 2.2 million PAL holders and roughly 500, 000 Rpal holders. So that gives us about a quarter of the gun owners who have pistols."

Reply. No that is not correct for instance there are thousands of armed security guards who need a RPAL and never own a gun.

There are also thousands of people who took the RPAL course because it was available with a PAL course and or a hunters course and simply have no intention of ever owning a handgun.



Take away people who collect hand guns and add in people who do sport shooting without handguns and you probably are left with about a quarter of gun license holders using their firearms for sporting competition. These are very rough numbers but are well within what you could reasonably assume without doing any hard research.

Reply. So adding in my security guards and folk's who simply took the course because they could with a PAL COURSE and right away your well below the quarter of gun license owners WHO MIGHT BE ENGAGED IN SPORTING COMPETITION.

Due to this being mainly a hunting forum you are not going to see as much engagement from sport shooters. So you have to consider bias of your source material.
Reply. Well it is a hunting forum some folk's would high jack it for their own political purposes as we see.

We owe it to ourselves to fight draconian laws regardless of their direct influence on our lives. I don't want to live under the tyranny of the majority and I don't want anyone else to either.

Reply. Well unfortunately you are in a democracy and the majority rule, some folk's do not see the present government representing the majority but its seems to be how our electoral system works.

I happen to be a man but I will always support women's right to vote. It doesn't affect me directly because my right to vote isn't being called into question but I certainly want everyone to be able to vote so I support it because that's the country I want to live in.
Reply. So that bring's us back to being in a democracy, I suppose.

I don't want to hunt with spear but if you happen to be an Olympic level javelin thrower and can safely and humanely kill a bear with a spear why shouldn't you be allowed to?

---

Why don't you provide us with links to who owns what guns in Canada? I wasn't aware you have access to who all owns certain types of guns in Canada?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

They are not just banning what you consider "non-sporting arms" I do not understand how you cannot see this. An 8ga shotgun made in 1898 with percussion caps has been banned, these were numerous and worth a lot of money, nobody is going to use this to kill large numbers of people.

This is not a ban on the AR-15, this is a very wide ban that is affecting many many guns that many Canadians own.

How thick are you?

---

I, am not that thick but thanks' for asking, a 8ga shotgun made in 1898 is not at the top of my Christmas list ( x mas in case your offended) and I suspect its not on to many other "normal hunters x mas list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Its not just sport shooters who have been effected with the gun ban, many non-restricted firearms are now banned do to their asthetics. Bolt action hunting rifles are banned adding to the number of hunters effected.

It's so pathetic that our government banning toy guns used by children. I wasn't aware children that play with toy airsoft are RPAL holders or PAL holders.

Then we have some here claiming the hunting rifles banned are not for hunting any game in this province Newsflash this gun ban is country wide not just in Ontario. Further more I was unaware that there has been a limit on the cartridge used for hunting moose or any other big game in Ontario or our whole country.

What is the biggest slap in the face to all Canadians, is having our PM announce a gun ban telling Canadians, "nobody needs an AR-15 to take down a deer. Then says, "FN's can keep their AR-15 for hunting.

---

I know from your past posts you have a special "hate on" for aboriginal's as its evident many, many of your posts. You should know enough by now about treaty rights that FN are considered almost as sovereign nations with special rights. If you have a problem with this contact Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth at Buckingham Palace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Why don't you provide us with links to who owns what guns in Canada? I wasn't aware you have access to who all owns certain types of guns in Canada?

---

Well here is one that is kinda interesting https://rightforcanada.ca/canadian-news/facts-stats/

My other opinions are formed from being a local firearms officer for a number of years and vetting scores of potential firearms applicant's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I know from your past posts you have a special "hate on" for aboriginal's as its evident many, many of your posts. You should know enough by now about treaty rights that FN are considered almost as sovereign nations with special rights. If you have a problem with this contact Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth at Buckingham Palace.

---

I know thats the answer from the radical left to accuse others as racists when the truth hurts and they have no way of disputing the sad truth.

In the name of public safety at least, the federal gun ban has already proven how much of a failure its been. Shootings in the city have not stopped or even slowed. I was asking my friends how they feel about the gun ban. They sent me a picture and said a picture is the easiest way to answer your question
Attachment 41656

Even the Donald knows the truth about Justeen
Attachment 41657

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Except that not all guns are banned only a few. Lots of guns still left over. You can still hunt with your SKS. It's not on the banned list.

And the terrorist that attacked Parliament Hill with a Winchester 94 took one life. He'd have killed a lot more with an AR and a high-capacity magazine.

---

The high capacity magazine is already banned in is it not ?

You can fire off the same amount of shots with both guns in Canada if I am correct lol. I could be wrong thought .





Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

How many of the 13000 members post at all?

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

---

There's has never been more that 50 active members on this forum since 2008...now you're lucky if there is even 25.

They show that number so that they can sell advertising space :)

Oh Gilroy, that's not how our "democracy" works. We use the first past the post system which has been proven to not represent the majority of the public. If you're unfamiliar with the different versions of democracy there are many great resources out there for you to educate yourself.

I explained that the numbers were a rough estimation. You have not provided any evidence to support the fact that armed security guards do not participate in shooting sports. In fact the number of registered restricted firearms, when compared to the amount of RPAL holders, indicates that the majority are not single firearms owners. If a significant number of security guards/shooters were getting their RPAL just for work/convenience then the numbers would be much closer to a 1:1 ratio. As a former member of the military who looked into armed guard work I have to tell you there isn't a lot of it here in Canada.

The spear hunting case I referred to happened in Alberta you may remember it if you were hunting all those years ago. If your argument is that they should not have been able to use a spear to hunt because of efficiency and efficacy then by the same virtue all bow hunting should be shut down immediately. So are you saying you support the cessation of bow hunting Gilroy?

The issue is that you have a large population of city dwellers trying to make rules for people who live close to the land. A well placed spear throw is no different from a well placed arrow or a well placed bullet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terrible_E

Oh Gilroy, that's not how our "democracy" works. .

---

Gilroy and the Village Idiot went to the same math class..they both think 36% represents a majority. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

There's has never been more that 50 active members on this forum since 2008...now you're lucky if there is even 25.

They show that number so that they can sell advertising space :)

---

Seam's to be enough to keep you entertained Michael.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Gilroy and the Village Idiot went to the same math class..they both think 36% represents a majority. :)

---

Math was never my strong point I must admit, I just know we keep winning elections. Ouch..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Seam's to be enough to keep you entertained Michael.

---

We only need one class clown to be amused....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Well here is one that is kinda interesting https://rightforcanada.ca/canadian-news/facts-stats/
.

---

Anti-gun propaganda, the picture at the top says it all...lol

Terrible_Oh Gilroy, that's not how our "democracy" works. We use the first past the post system which has been proven to not represent the majority of the public. If you're unfamiliar with the different versions of democracy there are many great resources out there for you to educate yourself.

Reply. Everybody from Trump to Harper is happy with the system when they WIN . LOL

I explained that the numbers were a rough estimation. You have not provided any evidence to support the fact that armed security guards do not participate in shooting sports.

Reply. Having investigated many armed security guards for their firearm's license I can tell you not one I came across owned their own guns, the license was needed for work purposes only.

In fact the number of registered restricted firearms, when compared to the amount of RPAL holders, indicates that the majority are not single firearms owners. If a significant number of security guards/shooters were getting their RPAL just for work/convenience then the numbers would be much closer to a 1:1 ratio. As a former member of the military who looked into armed guard work I have to tell you there isn't a lot of it here in Canada.

Reply. perhaps you did not work in a large urban setting?

The spear hunting case I referred to happened in Alberta you may remember it if you were hunting all those years ago. If your argument is that they should not have been able to use a spear to hunt because of efficiency and efficacy then by the same virtue all bow hunting should be shut down immediately. So are you saying you support the cessation of bow hunting Gilroy?

Reply. The powers that be have decided chucking spears at bears is not a good idea for bears and might not be a good idea for
hunters. LOL

The issue is that you have a large population of city dwellers trying to make rules for people who live close to the land.

Reply. I agree with you here, I have stated this many times on this forum and have thrown out many idea's of my own on this topic. I live up at my cabin for more than half the year, I hunt with locals, I know exactly how they feel.


A well placed spear throw is no different from a well placed arrow or a well placed bullet.[/QUOTE]

Reply. I am pretty sure the spear came first in hunting history, the bow and arrow was probably developed second and the gun and bullet last.
Why go backwards and cause an animal pain and suffering and maybe endanger the hunter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

We only need one class clown to be amused....

---

"I have been called worse thing's by better people." Pierre Trudeau.

The original posted article ... punch line says it all and I have NO POLITE COMMENT ON THE STENCH... smells like Tru-Anon Cult, take the few facts, mix in rhetoric and fiction and add virtue pretention.
* Tru-Anon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

The cult around Trudeau. Tru-Anon
https://torontosun.com/opinion/colum...on-is-perfect?
.. they can’t take any criticism of their leader no matter how warranted.
He can stand in the House of Commons and tell bald-faced lies –.. and the Tru-Anon crowd will repeat it.
The words of their dear leader are gospel to them.

---

The Lies are always a good spot to start, rats and Tru-Anon hate the light and truth so if they freak, they are a lost cause and no point further straight forward discussion or you may cause mental duress. A long term plan to introduce them to facts will possibly be required or you may have a meltdown on your hands.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Scvt19zx-ug


The list of lies by Bill Blair is probably a good start too for most, the Tru-Anon cult members won't care about facts because as Brian Lilley said, that Trudeau said is unquestionable gospel regardless of the evidence. SOME of Bill's lies are recorded here:
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...=1#post1151424


Of course pointing out that the only thing it will accomplish is banning airsoft/paintball and attack the honest law abiding while doing nothing to prevent crime is essential and pointing out the requirements to get a firearm in the first place should make most Non-Tru-Annon members think hopefully.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxtKHey3f8Y


Facts often take alot longer to spread and be believed than lies sadly and as Churchill said many will trip over the truth and get up and run on like nothing happened and some truly hate the facts and responsibility and even thinking in an honest manner it seems sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

"I have been called worse thing's by better people." Pierre Trudeau.

---

and so many of them like liar, egotist, elitist, unethical etc. are true and you still back him... guess you meet the Tru-Anon qualifications.

Lumping tens of thousands of air soft and paintball players/gunners may have sealed JT's fate by getting the attention of a large segment of firearm users who would otherwise reply to our plight with a giant shoulder shrug. Now,if we just get the Libs to include golf clubs and curling rocks........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

There's has never been more that 50 active members on this forum since 2008...now you're lucky if there is even 25.

They show that number so that they can sell advertising space :)

---

59 members and 330 guests on here right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Lumping tens of thousands of air soft and paintball players/gunners may have sealed JT's fate by getting the attention of a large segment of firearm users who would otherwise reply to our plight with a giant shoulder shrug. Now,if we just get the Libs to include golf clubs and curling rocks........

---

I just sent Billy an e mail right now fella, legislation to follow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIA7j6T20WU

This makes more sense
https://youtu.be/AhLyilK6Rho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I just sent Billy an e mail right now fella, legislation to follow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIA7j6T20WU

---

Everybody is making a big deal over the guy falling UP the stairs....jus cuz he had a couple of extra drinks. ROFL

Gilroy you have an excellent knack for avoiding addressing any of my arguments with arguments of your own. Your appeals to authority are bland and your arguments don't hold weight when applied evenly across the board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

And the point remains that if you want to recruit a gun owner to support your cause don't yap off about "brothers in a shooting fraternity" and them proceed to insult them and call them names.

---

On this forum, you are far from being my brother....lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terrible_E

Gilroy you have an excellent knack for avoiding addressing any of my arguments with arguments of your own. Your appeals to authority are bland and your arguments don't hold weight when applied evenly across the board.

---

I don't like to argue I debate and considering you have been on here some 6 days in argue mode I am still deciding if your a worthy opponent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

On this forum, you are far from being my brother....lol

---

Count on it.

I am curious as a hunter why you want to see all guns banned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I just sent Billy an e mail right now fella, legislation to follow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIA7j6T20WU

---

I would consider you a Bud even thought we sometimes disagree and something quite often we agree. :)

And I am still planning to go camping soon probably April 30 if the weather prediction holds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

On this forum, you are far from being my brother....lol

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

I am curious as a hunter why you want to see all guns banned.

---

You would make a terrible investigator with your wee tricky questions that are so obvious. LOL

So please point out to the forum members where I said I wanted to see all guns banned?

You manage to nail gate keeping with a pretentious attitude, so that's pretty fun. Once again failing to come up with a cogent argument though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I don't like to argue I debate and considering you have been on here some 6 days in argue mode I am still deciding if your a worthy opponent.

---

Six days or 6 years what does that matter he does have a valid point.You evade his questions he has asked of you just like silly socks and Billy liar does when asked a question that seems to be too hot to handle for them. Deflect and defer typical play out of the liberal party play book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tigboy 304

Six days or 6 years what does that matter he does have a valid point.

---

It only took him 6 days to peg our Gilly for what he really is ....he passed the hazing ritual with flying colours, welcome to the forum !! :)

Thanks this is fun so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terrible_E

Thanks this is fun so far.

---

Welcome aboard neighbour!

Hey welcome, Some day when we can actually all sit down at a restaurant for breakfast, a group of us in Ottawa use to get together occasionally in Kemptville. I will pre-invite you. If we ever get to eat at restaurants again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terrible_E

Thanks this is fun so far.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

It only took him 6 days to peg our Gilly for what he really is ....he passed the hazing ritual with flying colours, welcome to the forum !! :)

---

Lol. I was thinking same thing.
Welcome Terrible E

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

Hey welcome, Some day when we can actually all sit down at a restaurant for breakfast, a group of us in Ottawa use to get together occasionally in Kemptville. I will pre-invite you. If we ever get to eat at restaurants again.

---

Right on, I appreciate that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terrible_E

Oh Gilroy, that's not how our "democracy" works..

---

He no fan of democracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

You would make a terrible investigator with your wee tricky questions that are so obvious. LOL

So please point out to the forum members where I said I wanted to see all guns banned?

---

There is a mentality among some gun owners that any government that bans a few guns wants to ban them all and any individual who does not furiously object to every restriction on gun ownership wants to ban all guns.

For the past 40 years I have listened to these types thunder on about "civilian disarmament." Then I open my safe door and conclude that if "civilian disarmament" were truly a government objective they are doing a piss poor job of it.

History shows that military small arms tend to migrate into civilian hands after a while due in part to affordability, availability and familiarity with the firearm. The ammunition that is mass produced and easily available helps in making them popular.
Examples would be the Lee Enfield 303, M1 Garand 308, Browning BAR 30-06 to name a few.

They are used stock for hunting or somewhat customized for individual tastes.
Shooting at the range is popular with them as well.
This has been done for over 100 years.

So, with the trend to synthetic stocks and materials over the last couple of decades what has made the Liberals so terrified of a black color firearm enjoyed by law abiding sportsmen that they need to be immediately banned from ownership.

Makes no sense unless they are terrified of the population.
They should be more concerned with banning tar and feathers because this is what is coming at them now like a freight train.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

History shows that military small arms tend to migrate into civilian hands after a while due in part to affordability, availability and familiarity with the firearm. The ammunition that is mass produced and easily available helps in making them popular.
Examples would be the Lee Enfield 303, M1 Garand 308, Browning BAR 30-06 to name a few.

They are used stock for hunting or somewhat customized for individual tastes.
Shooting at the range is popular with them as well.
This has been done for over 100 years.

So, with the trend to synthetic stocks and materials over the last couple of decades what has made the Liberals so terrified of a black color firearm enjoyed by law abiding sportsmen that they need to be immediately banned from ownership.

Makes no sense unless they are terrified of the population.
They should be more concerned with banning tar and feathers because this is what is coming at them now like a freight train.

---

Many, many examples, Swiss 7.5s, Swedish, Turk, German Mausers, Mosin Nagant, Ljungman even the old Remington 700 has been used by the military. Even .22 rifles for training, I know someone that has a Mauser .22 rifle with Israeli proof mark so it has definitely travelled around.
https://frontierfirearms.ca/firearms...us-rifles.html
https://www.tradeexcanada.com/produits/64
https://www.tradeexcanada.com/produits/95?page=16 * sporterized mil sup


It makes sense actually if you remember the "Reset" or "Realignment" as they decided to start to refer to it if you were watching the Liberal policy meetings at all and the kind of government that is admired by PM dopey socks, remember when asked his favourite government his answer was China. Trudeau admires a dictatorship that has killed tens of millions, would build military bases in the South China sea, put a million in reeducation camps and their atrocities and send tanks to run over hundreds and probably thousands of students etc. and the Tru-Anon crowd seem to accept a dictatorship and oppression without questions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZHUhfmlzXk


As for bulk ammo... :moose: :moose: :moose:
https://frontierfirearms.ca/ammunition/ammo-specials/


P.S.
I realized I had forgot some of the lies that the LIbErals and Justlied did on firearms. So to summarize:
1) Would never ban - lied
2) Authorization to Transport - lied
3) Requirements to get a firearm - lied
4) Who commits crime with a firearm - lied
5) Respects Canadians - lied
6) Tough on crime - lied
... oh heck if Justlied is talk he's lying, just look at COVID too. https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=3684264751664562
Start with the reality you can't trust them.

Lie, Repeat and lie and repeat, Trudeau and LIbErals use fear and lies on many things but especially on firearms, the Tru-Anon crowd won't care though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3Gs_mwWmTk&feature=emb_logo



MANY MORE LIBERAL LIES CAN BE FOUND HERE
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...=1#post1156358
and HERE
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...=1#post1151424

* Caps so people can notice and check out and be informed on the lies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

There is a mentality among some gun owners that any government that bans a few guns wants to ban them all and any individual who does not furiously object to every restriction on gun ownership wants to ban all guns.

For the past 40 years I have listened to these types thunder on about "civilian disarmament." Then I open my safe door and conclude that if "civilian disarmament" were truly a government objective they are doing a piss poor job of it.

---

There are a few on here that moan and groan about everything and anything, its their default position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

There is a mentality among some gun owners that any government that bans a few guns wants to ban them all and any individual who does not furiously object to every restriction on gun ownership wants to ban all guns.

For the past 40 years I have listened to these types thunder on about "civilian disarmament." Then I open my safe door and conclude that if "civilian disarmament" were truly a government objective they are doing a piss poor job of it.

---

There is no basis for what they are banning and the lack of knowledge of where the actual gun crime is coming from. If he wanted to ban the guns that were used in mass shootings in Canada the ban should not have had the AR-15, anything over a 20mm bore, airguns that look like real guns, airsoft that look like real guns, 120 year old shotguns, bolt action hunting rifles.

The facts are that Billy and Justin have no idea what the gun laws are in Canada and watch way too much US news and TV shows. If you take gang related shootings in Canada people are most often shot with run of the mill hunting rifles and shotguns, this is because that is what Canadians have. The AR-15 is the most popular arm in the US, that is why it is used in shootings, here it is generally suicides and then domestics, both situations where our laws pre C-21 has provisions to stop. If you are aware of a domestic violence potential the person can be reported and the guns can be taken. This can also happen in the case of mental health problems.

Another fact, there have been more military veterans that have committed suicide than Canadians killed in mass shootings, yet funnel the money from helping them into stopping people from playing airsoft or punching paper at their local club.

Yes, the ban makes no sense. Best not to put black composite stocks on your old Lee Enfield.
With its rate of fire in the range of 20 to 30 rounds per minute and in the hands of a trained marksman it is sure to be banned by Billy Liar.
Scary looking you know. The paid trolls are sure to report this as being a problem....lol

"These design features facilitate rapid cycling and fire compared to other bolt-action designs like the Mauser. The Lee bolt-action and 10-round magazine capacity enabled a well-trained rifleman to perform the "mad minute" firing 20 to 30 aimed rounds in 60 seconds, making the Lee–Enfield the fastest military bolt-action rifle of the day. The current world record for aimed bolt-action fire was set in 1914 by a musketry instructor in the British Army—Sergeant Instructor Snoxall—who placed 38 rounds into a 12-inch-wide (300 mm) target at 300 yards (270 m) in one minute."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee%E2%80%93Enfield

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

There is no basis for what they are banning and the lack of knowledge of where the actual gun crime is coming from. If he wanted to ban the guns that were used in mass shootings in Canada the ban should not have had the AR-15, anything over a 20mm bore, airguns that look like real guns, airsoft that look like real guns, 120 year old shotguns, bolt action hunting rifles.

The facts are that Billy and Justin have no idea what the gun laws are in Canada and watch way too much US news and TV shows. If you take gang related shootings in Canada people are most often shot with run of the mill hunting rifles and shotguns, this is because that is what Canadians have. The AR-15 is the most popular arm in the US, that is why it is used in shootings, here it is generally suicides and then domestics, both situations where our laws pre C-21 has provisions to stop. If you are aware of a domestic violence potential the person can be reported and the guns can be taken. This can also happen in the case of mental health problems.

Another fact, there have been more military veterans that have committed suicide than Canadians killed in mass shootings, yet funnel the money from helping them into stopping people from playing airsoft or punching paper at their local club.

---

I don't disagree with a single point you've made. However, the government's new legislation, as muddled and silly as it is, does not mean the government intends to ban "all guns" nor does it suggest that a hunter who is unperturbed by the prohibitions also wants to ban "all guns."

Hunter or not, why would anyone support something that is "muddled and silly?"
Bad laws should not be ignored and must be challenged.

Case in point, the recent stay at home order with roadside random checks fiasco. Does not affect me so I stay quiet? Absolutely not!
The Liberals are snakes in the grass. Can't trust or believe anything they say. History proves this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Hunter or not, why would anyone support something that is "muddled and silly?"
Bad laws should not be ignored and must be challenged.

Case in point, the recent stay at home order with roadside random checks fiasco. Does not affect me so I stay quiet? Absolutely not!
The Liberals are snakes in the grass. Can't trust or believe anything they say. History proves this.

---

Because some hunters might believe getting assault-style rifles out of general circulation is a positive particularly if they don't own one. Or like me they don't care because the firearms they own and use are not affected and don't buy into the conspiracy theory nonsense of "civilian disarmament" or "your guns are next!"

A bad law that doesn't affect me is easy to ignore.

A really selfish attitude to have in regards to supporting other firearm owners.
Assault style rifles is simply fear mongering. It could also apply to any former military firearm.
The list just does not make sense.
Can you provide the name of a group or organization of hunters supporting such a ban?
Otherwise it is your opinion only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I don't disagree with a single point you've made. However, the government's new legislation, as muddled and silly as it is, does not mean the government intends to ban "all guns" nor does it suggest that a hunter who is unperturbed by the prohibitions also wants to ban "all guns."

---

There has been a gun/ammo shortage in the US since they elected a leader back in 2009, to be the most powerful man on earth, that was quoted as saying:

https://i.imgur.com/sHjjMZBm.jpg

The US citizenry saw that as a threat to their civil liberties and began to stock up in defiance of those beliefs.

If it wasn't for the efforts of organisations like the NRA and in Canada the CSSA / CCFR that fight for the right of citizens to own firearms and to hold protest against these actions, they might well be bought to fruition. Any action to ban guns without merit or cause, is a reason for the citizens to revolt against such actions.

https://i.imgur.com/qUBXJJfm.jpg

It's amazing how you claim you like firearms , yet you could care less if they were banned.

I guess you don't remember that technically firearms are completely illegal in Canada because of the Liberals and this PAL system. Prior to 1995 Firearms were legal in Canada. We have proven time and time again if you give an inch they want a mile.

Also pretty selfish to say doesn't affect me so I could care less. Wow it's because of people like you that firearms will be pretty much gone by the time my grand kids grow up.

I have seen enough changes over 35 years to show that is true.

Out of curiosity if I put an assault style stock on my gun do you believe it becomes super powerful. Are these other guns super powerful?

My son's 22 rim fire if we had purchased the military looking version did you know that was banned. Same gun different stock.

You seem like the type of person that when you start to have something taken away from you I would probably look at you and laugh and call you a joke. I honestly would your an extremely selfish person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Because some hunters might believe getting assault-style rifles out of general circulation is a positive particularly if they don't own one. Or like me they don't care because the firearms they own and use are not affected and don't buy into the conspiracy theory nonsense of "civilian disarmament" or "your guns are next!"

A bad law that doesn't affect me is easy to ignore.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I does not mean the government intends to ban "all guns" nor does it suggest that a hunter who is unperturbed by the prohibitions also wants to ban "all guns."

---

In this time of an artificial crisis we have seen our constitution and charter rights violated repeatedly. You cannot say with any certainty that a future government would not continue striping it's citizen of their firearms in the name of public safety.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Hunter or not, why would anyone support something that is "muddled and silly?"
Bad laws should not be ignored and must be challenged.

Case in point, the recent stay at home order with roadside random checks fiasco. Does not affect me so I stay quiet? Absolutely not!
The Liberals are snakes in the grass. Can't trust or believe anything they say. History proves this.

---

I think the "snake in the grass" would be a better term for the Conservatives under Erin O Toole. The Liberals ran on this platform up front and square and fair. Erin on the other hand supports the "base" at the Convention's but being up front and honest about gun control to the Canadian public is way to much to ask of him.

So nothing said and he hopes the Canadian public and the PRESS will not hound him on his position before the next election.

Sticking his head in the sand is not a winning position, mind you after he does announced a policy like a Carbon Tax not a Carbon Tax but a levy he look's stupid and hand's the election to the Liberals, they actually don't need to do much just let him talk.

GW

"I have seen enough changes over 35 years to show that is true."

In 35 years I still have all the same firearms I had when I started.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

In this time of an artificial crisis we have seen our constitution and charter rights violated repeatedly. You cannot say with any certainty that a future government would not continue striping it's citizen of their firearms in the name of public safety.

---

Not True. Police Forces in Ontario refused to enforce the CONSERVATIVE Doug Ford dictators new laws' on Covid Restrictions.
If you want to see laws enacted by Dictators look no further than Conservatives, Robo Calls, suppression of votes in USA.......

Ahhh Gilly, your not supporting the firearms community?
The same selfish attitude as your buddy. Two peas in the same work group pod.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Ahhh Gilly, your not supporting the firearms community?
The same selfish attitude as your buddy. Two peas in the same work group pod.

---

My firearms community is hunters, that is why I post on a "hunting form" sponsored by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters. If I were a sports shooter and like punching holes on paper, dressed in army fatigues and Kevlar vest and back pack fantasizing killing "the enemy" with my AR 15 I would probably be on some other forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

My firearms community is hunters, that is why I post on a "hunting form" sponsored by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters. If I were a sports shooter and like punching holes on paper, dressed in army fatigues and Kevlar vest and back pack fantasizing killing "the enemy" with my AR 15 I would probably be on some other forum.

---

Very narrow minded comment. You need to be proficient with your firearm (practice shooting) in order to be successful at harvesting game.
You are simply creating a division between sports shooters and hunters where there is actually a blend.

Nice try at dividing the community though. We've got your number.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

My firearms community is hunters, that is why I post on a "hunting form" sponsored by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters. If I were a sports shooter and like punching holes on paper, dressed in army fatigues and Kevlar vest and back pack fantasizing killing "the enemy" with my AR 15 I would probably be on some other forum.

---

Don't forget the guys with bolt action rifles, shotguns, and even 22lr's.
The only people fantasies of killing the enemy are people like yourself slandering other law abiding licenced gun owners.

It obvious your ideologies of public safety
Attachment 41663

Looks like a coward to the rest of the world
Attachment 41664

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Very narrow minded comment. You need to be proficient with your firearm (practice shooting) in order to be successful at harvesting game.
You are simply creating a division between sports shooters and hunters where there is actually a blend.

Nice try at dividing the community though. We've got your number.

---

I don't need to worry about you having my number as like Justin and Billy Blair I have been up front on my views on here for as long as I have been on here, which BTW is longer than most all of you.

There is a division which you promote every day between political parties who have taken advantage of you to get your vote and your sole purpose and others on here is to keep sowing the seed's of that discontent. Your party's biggest problem is that they are not honest enough to say what they mean.

Maybe that is why Erin is asking them to change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

In this time of an artificial crisis we have seen our constitution and charter rights violated repeatedly. You cannot say with any certainty that a future government would not continue striping it's citizen of their firearms in the name of public safety.

---

I can say it with far more certainty than the hysterics who I've heard for the last 40 years babble on about "civilian disarmament" and "your guns are next" who call me a "Fudd" if I do not share their outrage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Don't forget the guys with bolt action rifles, shotguns, and even 22lr's.
The only people fantasies of killing the enemy are people like yourself slandering other law abiding licenced gun owners.

It obvious your ideologies of public safety
Attachment 41663

Looks like a coward to the rest of the world
Attachment 41664

---

Is there some better description for the folk's we see with their AR 15 and dress up soldier looks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I can say it with far more certainty than the hysterics who I've heard for the last 40 years babble on about "civilian disarmament" and "your guns are next" who call me a "Fudd" if I do not share their outrage.

---

There must be quite a few Fudd's as I get PM's supporting my views. LOL

BTW these are from hunters who are on this forum to speak with and learn from other hunters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Is there some better description for the folk's we see with their AR 15 and dress up soldier looks?

---

Since when is there 1500+ different models of AR-15's?
I wasn't aware shotguns, bolt-action rifles, 22lrs are all AR-15's

Truth of the matter
Attachment 41665

No wonder is so warm, early Spring this year
Attachment 41666

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

My firearms community is hunters, that is why I post on a "hunting form" sponsored by the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters. If I were a sports shooter and like punching holes on paper, dressed in army fatigues and Kevlar vest and back pack fantasizing killing "the enemy" with my AR 15 I would probably be on some other forum.

---

Is that your personal opinion punching holes in paper imagining he was a killer.

Why because they were shooting an ar 15 lol
To funny

Why hasn't the ar reck havoc in the Canada yet ?

More have died in Canada from hunting accidents than the ar 15 has killed. Maybe we should ban hunting as it kills far more than the ar in Canada.

It doesn't effect me all either but I'm smart enough to know the guns are not the problem .


People Play golf people shoot guns some have addictions some play poker just because you don't like it doesn't make it ok to ban it.

Your guns kill far more than some of the guns banned.





Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

It'll be interesting to see the Liberal's butts pucker when they see this.

Attachment 41667

Why are we afraid of guns whats so fearful of them ? Is it the misinformation that spreads through the media .

How did the ar 15 turn into so many other's this was a fight against the ar but many other models made the cut . For what ?

To save the public ? From what ?

A possibility ?

It does little to stop any gun crime is that not what we want ?


If looks could kill lol.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

It'll be interesting to see the Liberal's butts pucker when they see this.

Attachment 41667

---

If looks could kill. That looks like a killer lol.

Jk they can kill all of them even all the guns from Gilly and badnote have killed far more the than the guns banned.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Hey trimmer if that gun was black it would be way deadlier lol. It would kill far more people in black model it's appearance would be far more deadly for sure lol.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

It'll be interesting to see the Liberal's butts pucker when they see this.

Attachment 41667

---

That's like my AR-ML...HaHa...

https://i.imgur.com/pHZOQdDl.jpg

What is required in hunting is a projectile of sufficient power and performance to cleanly take a game animal fired out of a rifle or shotgun that is adequately accurate, easily portable and ergonomically suitable for the person using it. I care more about the projectile(s) I'm shooting than the firearm in which I am shooting it which is why I am not terribly fussed about the new legislation.

Even after C-21 passes there will still be plenty of guns left to own including some that fall into the "assault-rifle" category and if you are stuck with a banned rifle there will be a compensation program and the money can be applied to the purchase of something new.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

What is required in hunting is a projectile of sufficient power and performance to cleanly take a game animal fired out of a rifle or shotgun that is adequately accurate, easily portable and ergonomically suitable for the person using it. I care more about the projectile(s) I'm shooting than the firearm in which I am shooting it which is why I am not terribly fussed about the new legislation.

Even after C-21 passes there will still be plenty of guns left to own including some that fall into the "assault-rifle" category and if you are stuck with a banned rifle there will be a compensation program and the money can be applied to the purchase of something new.

---

Well if c-21 does manage to come to be it will only be the start. The liberals will not stop there and if you think they will all I will say is don't be so daft. If your not will to help support fellow legal firearms owners don't look for help when Billy liar comes looking for your model 70 winchester or your Remington 7400 or 870. I imagine from your past posts on attacks on legal firearms owners when the time comes and they want your legally own guns you'll go running to turn them in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I don't need to worry about you having my number as like Justin and Billy Blair I have been up front on my views on here for as long as I have been on here, which BTW is longer than most all of you.
.

---

Nah, I will pass on your red Commie ideology.....lol

https://i.imgur.com/44hGTHk.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/PuKDGWT.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

What is required in hunting is a projectile of sufficient power and performance to cleanly take a game animal fired out of a rifle or shotgun that is adequately accurate, easily portable and ergonomically suitable for the person using it. I care more about the projectile(s) I'm shooting than the firearm in which I am shooting it which is why I am not terribly fussed about the new legislation.

Even after C-21 passes there will still be plenty of guns left to own including some that fall into the "assault-rifle" category and if you are stuck with a banned rifle there will be a compensation program and the money can be applied to the purchase of something new.

---

So only hunters should have guns? To what cripple birds wound a moose or deer ? Don't say it doesn't happen, happens all the time.

Can't just have guns as a hobby or collector's or for sport shooting ? Wouldn't want to cripple a piece of paper


Did you know your guns kill more people than the ones banned? To shut them out of law abiding citizens only opens another door to the black market. The black market is running wild with guns and that are not on the banned list because they are already banned and prohibited in Canada. Wake up some

Ps your guns are next they already warned of that. They already said they would take more guns away . For what reason?

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Most Liberals believe if you own a gun you are likely to shoot someone.

When my mom was a kid in the 1950's she use to bring her 22 to school to go rabbit hunting at lunch hour, everyone had to put the gun in the corner of the class room.

In the 1980's I use to bring my gun to School so I could go hunting after school. Many schools in NB were teaching hunter safety and now kid's are taught in School that guns are bad. Yes they actually teach stuff like that.

Allan Rock specifically stated that the Liberals will eventually ban all gun ownership over time and yes we can see it happening I suggest you take off your rose coloured glasses. Even Liberal Senators are in favour of outright banning gun ownership.

What is amazing is Liberals in general see no issue with criminals having guns but they do see an issue with law abiding gun owners.

Some gun facts I mean fun facts lol.

More will die in Canada from a drug overdose in 24 HR than the ar 15 has killed in the last decade.

More will die in a week from an opioid related death than the Minni rugger 14 in its biggest shooting in Canadian history.


3/4 of Canadian gun death's from 2000 tp 2016 were suicide related.


https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...0c635d4a85.jpg

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tigboy 304

Well if c-21 does manage to come to be it will only be the start. The liberals will not stop there and if you think they will all I will say is don't be so daft. If your not will to help support fellow legal firearms owners don't look for help when Billy liar comes looking for your model 70 winchester or your Remington 7400 or 870. I imagine from your past posts on attacks on legal firearms owners when the time comes and they want your legally own guns you'll go running to turn them in.

---

I've been hearing this type of bushwah for decades. Still have a safe full of guns. Nice ones too. The time won't come that I will have to turn mine in unless I specifically do something that causes them to be seized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I've been hearing this type of bushwah for decades. Still have a safe full of guns. Nice ones too. The time won't come that I will have to turn mine in unless I specifically do something that causes them to be seized.

---

Baaa baaaa baaaa keep drinking the kool-aid buddy it seems to suit you fine. Cheers

Some regular firearms were on that ban list as well.

Even the Trudeau government has said they will continue banning guns.

It is because of people specifically like you why more guns will be banned.

It is because of people like you who will ruin owning firearms in the future. It has been proven that if you give an inch they will want a mile.

You claim you have heard this for decades and that nothing has happened I suggest you open your eyes. What I think you meant to say is you could care less about if others firearms are banned as long as it isn't yours. Pretty sure I am correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I've been hearing this type of bushwah for decades. Still have a safe full of guns. Nice ones too. The time won't come that I will have to turn mine in unless I specifically do something that causes them to be seized.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

Some regular firearms were on that ban list as well.

Even the Trudeau government has said they will continue banning guns.

It is because of people specifically like you why more guns will be banned.

It is because of people like you who will ruin owning firearms in the future. It has been proven that if you give an inch they will want a mile.

You claim you have heard this for decades and that nothing has happened I suggest you open your eyes. What I think you meant to say is you could care less about if others firearms are banned as long as it isn't yours. Pretty sure I am correct.

---

What I've been hearing for 40 years is that "ALL GUNS WILL BE BANNED!!!" along with similar nonsense.

It hasn't happened and won't. Some guns certainly have been banned but nowhere near all of them. Many guns remain and will continue to remain for hunting and target shooting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I've been hearing this type of bushwah for decades. Still have a safe full of guns. Nice ones too. The time won't come that I will have to turn mine in unless I specifically do something that causes them to be seized.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

What I've been hearing for 40 years is that "ALL GUNS WILL BE BANNED!!!" along with similar nonsense.

It hasn't happened and won't. Some guns certainly have been banned but nowhere near all of them. Many guns remain and will continue to remain for hunting and target shooting.

---

Thanks you saved me a bunch of typing. LOL

It's by a thousand cuts, obviously you cannot see what has happened since the 1980's.

Since it is a know Fact that the Liberals have stated they want to eventually ban all guns over time.

Do you know what that actually means?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

What I've been hearing for 40 years is that "ALL GUNS WILL BE BANNED!!!" along with similar nonsense.

It hasn't happened and won't. Some guns certainly have been banned but nowhere near all of them. Many guns remain and will continue to remain for hunting and target shooting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

It's by a thousand cuts, obviously you cannot see what has happened since the 1980's.

Since it is a know Fact that the Liberals have stated they want to eventually ban all guns over time.

Do you know what that actually means?

---

The only Liberal that has anything close to that was Alan Rock and he's long gone from the political arena. There is nothing in current Liberal policies or public statements by current ministers to suggest all guns will be banned over time.

The closest examples to Canada would be Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand. In those countries certain guns are banned but private firearm ownership remains. It will remain here too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The only Liberal that has anything close to that was Alan Rock and he's long gone from the political arena. There is nothing in current Liberal policies or public statements by current ministers to suggest all guns will be banned over time.

The closest examples to Canada would be Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand. In those countries certain guns are banned but private firearm ownership remains. It will remain here too.

---

Yeh I had a shotgun at aged 16 in Scotland, two references and no trouble, been in Australia, shops full of guns.

I think a few lads on here have never left their villages.....

Semi's, pump action and levers are banned in Australia. So now you admit you want most guns banned at least we have that settled. Anothere anti gun person on this site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The only Liberal that has anything close to that was Alan Rock and he's long gone from the political arena. There is nothing in current Liberal policies or public statements by current ministers to suggest all guns will be banned over time.

The closest examples to Canada would be Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand. In those countries certain guns are banned but private firearm ownership remains. It will remain here too.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

Semi's, pump action and levers are banned in Australia. So now you admit you want most guns banned at least we have that settled. Anothere anti gun person on this site.

---

GW making statement like that really makes you appear well "not smart" most all of us on here hunt so we have guns, so therefore cannot be anti gun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

Semi's, pump action and levers are banned in Australia. So now you admit you want most guns banned at least we have that settled. Anothere anti gun person on this site.

---

Lever actions banned in Australia? Better tell the guys at this Down Under gun shop.
https://www.gunworld.com.au/rifles/winchester/

Pump guns banned in Australia? Guess they didn't get the message about pumps either.
https://www.gunworld.com.au/shotguns...17%7C969&rf=cn

Semi-autos banned in Australia? Here's a store that didn't get the memo.
https://www.adelaidegunshop.com.au/n...ns/beretta_204
https://www.adelaidegunshop.com.au/n...tricted-rifles

Handguns too!
https://www.adelaidegunshop.com.au/n...s/new-handguns

To avoid making ill-informed statements about guns in Australia in future this link may help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_of_Australia#

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Lever actions banned in Australia? Better tell the guys at this Down Under gun shop.
https://www.gunworld.com.au/rifles/winchester/

Pump guns banned in Australia? Guess they didn't get the message about pumps either.
https://www.gunworld.com.au/shotguns...17%7C969&rf=cn

Semi-autos banned in Australia? Here's a store that didn't get the memo.
https://www.adelaidegunshop.com.au/n...ns/beretta_204
https://www.adelaidegunshop.com.au/n...tricted-rifles

Handguns too!
https://www.adelaidegunshop.com.au/n...s/new-handguns

To avoid making ill-informed statements about guns in Australia in future this link may help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_of_Australia#

---

Well a few semi auto rim fires etc. are allowed.... as restricted firearms, even the URL says that "restricted-shotgun" etc.

Let's take a look at what the police actually say are Prohibited... crossbows, slingshots.... lots there but
https://www.australianpolice.com.au/prohibited-weapons/

On to the firearms.... https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2018Q00081
Seems those are Category C firearms, even if they are .22 rifles so yep there are some... like there are a few that can get Restricted firearms here too, their actually require a police approval too.


So let's see the Categories...
https://www.police.wa.gov.au/About-U...and-categories
the applicant is required to satisfy the Commissioner that a firearm of category A would be inadequate or unsuitable for the purpose for which the firearm is required.

* Unlike our Restricted where you apply and as long as you qualify you can get it



Category C rimfires... C1 a self loading rim fire rifle with a magazine capacity no more than 10 rounds
So the Ruger 10/22 is OK but the Remington Speedmaster would be a C1 and equivalent of a Restricted here.


So essentially Badenoch is correct if you ignore the legalities and GreatWhite has overstated it, but if you include the legalities and Categories and the details about the firearms and licensing.... if you include it for the majority of the population and shooters for the most part GreatWhite is correct.


Rather that worrying and distracting about Australia, let's get back to the facts and the lies and how to get rid of this POS C-21.
The lies and links to more lies are here by the way.
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...=1#post1156518


"Overview of The Terrible Proposed Gun Laws (Bill C-21)" * using this as election fodder, terrible and likely to be brought back, a broad overview here for those interested in an lawyers view of it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtjlD8v2SZc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

So essentially Badenoch is correct if you ignore the legalities and GreatWhite has overstated it, but if you include the legalities and Categories and the details about the firearms and licensing.... if you include it for the majority of the population and shooters for the most part GreatWhite is correct.

---

Anyone who says pumps, semis and lever actions are banned in Australia is either grossly misinformed and can't do a Google search or a flat-out liar.

And we require police approval in Canada to acquire a restricted firearm. Perhaps you don't own one and didn't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tigboy 304

Well if c-21 does manage to come to be it will only be the start. The liberals will not stop there and if you think they will all I will say is don't be so daft. If your not will to help support fellow legal firearms owners don't look for help when Billy liar comes looking for your model 70 winchester or your Remington 7400 or 870. I imagine from your past posts on attacks on legal firearms owners when the time comes and they want your legally own guns you'll go running to turn them in.

---

He will if the government tells him to. But the government hasn't banned his kind, thats why he's doesn't care about the ban. He likes heavy hitters, check it out
Attachment 41670
He keeps saying his are not on the list....lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Anyone who says pumps, semis and lever actions are banned in Australia is either grossly misinformed and can't do a Google search or a flat-out liar.

And we require police approval in Canada to acquire a restricted firearm. Perhaps you don't own one and didn't know.

---

Oh really, since when, in Canada you have to qualify to get it, not

Quote:

---

the applicant is required to satisfy the Commissioner that a firearm of category A would be inadequate or unsuitable for the purpose for which the firearm is required.

---

You seem uninformed about the RPAL requirements, first you take a course and exam, then you fill out the form and they do a background check and if you qualify you get it, no explaining the justifications unless the Liberal's added that to their sh** list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

He will if the government tells him to. But the government hasn't banned his kind, thats why he's doesn't care about the ban. He likes heavy hitters, check it out
Attachment 41670
He keeps saying his are not on the list....lol

---

Better check if that isn't prohibited if you go to Australia, you can check out the prohibited list above and on the Prohibited page it says:

"Sling shot
a device consisting of an elasticised band secured to the forks of a Y shaped frame other than a home made sling shot for use by a child in the course of play."

Looks more than a child's play one.

Fudds and Tru-Anon, both a curse on Canada's hope for a better future and better laws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

Oh really, since when, in Canada you have to qualify to get it, not

---

When you apply to acquire a restricted firearm in Canada you are asked by the Firearms Centre (operated by the RCMP) to provide a reason for having it. If your answer is not acceptable your application is not approved. It is not much different than in Australia.

Until about 20 years ago, you had to visit the local police station two, perhaps three times, to obtain ATTs and justify your purchase to the area firearms officer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

When you apply to acquire a restricted firearm in Canada you are asked by the Firearms Centre (operated by the RCMP) to provide a reason for having it. If your answer is not acceptable your application is not approved. It is not much different than in Australia.

Until about 20 years ago, you had to visit the local police station two, perhaps three times, to obtain ATTs and justify your purchase to the area firearms officer.

---

I was the provincial firearms officer then, there was no such requirement during my tenure .....

I've been away from this site for awhile - and the gun debate continues. Here is some more stuff to chew on.
We all agree that no matter what politician gets in power there are two things that make them tick: MONEY and VOTES. We, as an outdoors forum group, make up a fairly small number of votes compared to the urban dwellers in Ontario that cannot tell the difference between a chickadee and a grouse or a cedar tree and a white pine.
BUT - we spend a lot of money. https://oodmag.com/13-2-billion-spen...port-shooting/
From this big ole chunk of fudge is 6.5 billion just in Ontario alone. I would not want to lose those tax revenues or votes. Even Lord Emporer Justinius Trudough knows that. He will try to get rid of "scary" guns but he won't want to lose all that revenue.
Just my opinion, but I have never seen a politician last very long who would eliminate 6.5 BILLION worth of tax dollars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

I was the provincial firearms officer then, there was no such requirement during my tenure .....

---

When I was a provincial local firearms officer you needed a reason to acquire a restricted firearms or even be approved for a license to aquire one. If you said you wanted a handgun for protection you were automatically gonged. For a restricted weapon you needed to belong to a range as a member or a collector. Security guards got their licenses for possession of the gun at work but they were left at the place of business after work hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

I was the provincial firearms officer then, there was no such requirement during my tenure .....

---

The process was:

Step #1: Buy restricted firearm

Step #2: Go to police station and see Firearms Officer. Present receipt with gun details, explain the reason for buying the gun, wait for him/her to type out short-term ATT.

Step #3: Go back to store. Show paperwork, sign book, go back to police station, present restricted firearm to Firearms Officer for examination.

Step #4: If he was an accommodating sort the Firearms Officer typed out a short-term ATT and you could take the firearm home after a warning not to take it to the range until the registration certificate arrived.

(Less accommodating Firearms Officers (e.g. Halton) would keep the firearm until the registration certificate arrived meaning another trip back to the police station to acquire a short-term ATT, pick it your firearm and take it home.)

Step #5: Registration certificate arrived in the mail and you could take your new firearm shooting.

Each registration certificate listed the reason for owning the firearm as shown here.

https://i.imgur.com/1SLVQTP.jpg

So what's the big fuss about ?

Take guns from law abiding citizens ?
These are good people who mostly respect the firearm . They are not being taken away from criminals so why take them from the good guys. Good people with good intentions not intentions to go on a killing spree.


We already know this ban does little to save lives. We are taking them away from law abiding citizens who have background checks .


This is all silly nonsense that does nothing to stop the st crime .

Anyone who thinks these guns need to be banned is a fool.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Only an overhaul in the media will change things.
As long as they're allowed to continue to brainwash characters like Gilroy and Banananoc, there'll be division and mistrust throughout all of our communities.

Criminal checks , mentally ill checks background checks. All from law abiding citizens . Clean records to even own one legally this is not the answer this is another fear mongering scam.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

When I was a provincial local firearms officer you needed a reason to acquire a restricted firearms or even be approved for a license to aquire one. If you said you wanted a handgun for protection you were automatically gonged. For a restricted weapon you needed to belong to a range as a member or a collector. Security guards got their licenses for possession of the gun at work but they were left at the place of business after work hours.

---

One of the ironies of Bill C-68 was it made acquiring a restricted firearm much easier and a long gun more complicated.

Another fun fact

You are more likely to be killed in Canada from a terrorist attack than killed by an ar 15.

LoL. We are afraid of a gun a that hasn't killed anyone one in years. Why is it so horrible. Why did it get picked on when it's not out there killing people. What harm did it do in the last 50 years in Canada.




Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The process was:

Step #1: Buy restricted firearm

Step #2: Go to police station and see Firearms Officer. Present receipt with gun details, explain the reason for buying the gun, wait for him/her to type out short-term ATT.

Step #3: Go back to store. Show paperwork, sign book, go back to police station, present restricted firearm to Firearms Officer for examination.

Step #4: If he was an accommodating sort the Firearms Officer typed out a short-term ATT and you could take the firearm home after a warning not to take it to the range until the registration certificate arrived.

(Less accommodating Firearms Officers (e.g. Halton) would keep the firearm until the registration certificate arrived meaning another trip back to the police station to acquire a short-term ATT, pick it your firearm and take it home.)

Step #5: Registration certificate arrived in the mail and you could take your new firearm shooting.

Each registration certificate listed the reason for owning the firearm as shown here.

https://i.imgur.com/1SLVQTP.jpg

---

That was well prior to our service appointing police officers as AFO and PFO.
We had a civilian doing the job back then, but yes, that was the procedure back then...

Last gun fact for the day

You are more likely to be killed by an animal attack than ar 15 .

Dogs have killed more in the last few years then the ar 15 has in Canadian history. Wow more likely to be taken out by a dog then the most scariest gun in Canada.





Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

That was well prior to our service appointing police officers as AFO and PFO.
We had a civilian doing the job back then, but yes, that was the procedure back then...

---

Every transfer I did in those days was with a police officer. In the city of Guelph, the Firearms Officer also had other duties so it could be hit and miss whether you got your transfer done. He was a bit crusty but always fair. My last transfer under the old system was with Guelph OPP and it was a breeze. The most complaints heard were from shooters in Halton Region.

I find it difficult to understand all the prejudice surrounding the AR platform. Realistically, it is an evolution of the firearm, where once was wood, that looked good, but,that when wet could shift or crack, to plastic, which does not look as good as wood, but will not shift or crack and is waterproof as well. Where once we had to modify ourselves to our firearm, the AR platform allows for a more modular platform, where we can adapt it to our shooting style, not only that, but the uppers can be switched to other calibres as well. All in all, these evolutions make it a superior tool for hunting and target pursuits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishtail

I find it difficult to understand all the prejudice surrounding the AR platform. Realistically, it is an evolution of the firearm, where once was wood, that looked good, but,that when wet could shift or crack, to plastic, which does not look as good as wood, but will not shift or crack and is waterproof as well. Where once we had to modify ourselves to our firearm, the AR platform allows for a more modular platform, where we can adapt it to our shooting style, not only that, but the uppers can be switched to other calibres as well. All in all, these evolutions make it a superior tool for hunting and target pursuits.

---

Exactly! Look at the evolution of bows and crossbows as another example.
Simple technological progression otherwise we would still be driving around in a cart pulled by a donkey.

But, it is political at the highest level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

Many, many examples, Swiss 7.5s, Swedish, Turk, German Mausers, Mosin Nagant, Ljungman even the old Remington 700 has been used by the military. Even .22 rifles for training, I know someone that has a Mauser .22 rifle with Israeli proof mark so it has definitely travelled around.
https://frontierfirearms.ca/firearms...us-rifles.html
https://www.tradeexcanada.com/produits/64
https://www.tradeexcanada.com/produits/95?page=16 * sporterized mil sup


It makes sense actually if you remember the "Reset" or "Realignment" as they decided to start to refer to it if you were watching the Liberal policy meetings at all and the kind of government that is admired by PM dopey socks, remember when asked his favourite government his answer was China. Trudeau admires a dictatorship that has killed tens of millions, would build military bases in the South China sea, put a million in reeducation camps and their atrocities and send tanks to run over hundreds and probably thousands of students etc. and the Tru-Anon crowd seem to accept a dictatorship and oppression without questions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZHUhfmlzXk


As for bulk ammo... :moose: :moose: :moose:
https://frontierfirearms.ca/ammunition/ammo-specials/


P.S.
I realized I had forgot some of the lies that the LIbErals and Justlied did on firearms. So to summarize:
1) Would never ban - lied
2) Authorization to Transport - lied
3) Requirements to get a firearm - lied
4) Who commits crime with a firearm - lied
5) Respects Canadians - lied
6) Tough on crime - lied
... oh heck if Justlied is talk he's lying, just look at COVID too. https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=3684264751664562
Start with the reality you can't trust them.

Lie, Repeat and lie and repeat, Trudeau and LIbErals use fear and lies on many things but especially on firearms, the Tru-Anon crowd won't care though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3Gs_mwWmTk&feature=emb_logo



MANY MORE LIBERAL LIES CAN BE FOUND HERE
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...=1#post1156358
and HERE
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...=1#post1151424

* Caps so people can notice and check out and be informed on the lies.

---

As part of the topic, sort of, well I noticed they have boxes of 7.62x39 .... 1,400 rds
https://frontierfirearms.ca/russian-...n-fmj-1400rds/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Exactly! Look at the evolution of bows and crossbows as another example.
Simple technological progression otherwise we would still be driving around in a cart pulled by a donkey.

But, it is political at the highest level.

---

Well the Liberals have put small crossbows on the prohibited list in Canada and as now talking about making the Internet "safe" .... at this rate they will want the donkey and the cart too now that they have the "COVID Opportunity"

Well crossbows have killed far more than the ar 15 in Canadian history.

Still no reason to ban them.

It's strange how our government thinks taking away guns that don't kill will do good. It's amazing they can spend a billion dollars to target a gun that kills less then a pet lol.


Talk about priorities lol.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

When you apply to acquire a restricted firearm in Canada you are asked by the Firearms Centre (operated by the RCMP) to provide a reason for having it. If your answer is not acceptable your application is not approved. It is not much different than in Australia.

Until about 20 years ago, you had to visit the local police station two, perhaps three times, to obtain ATTs and justify your purchase to the area firearms officer.

---

The AR-15 should not even be restricted in this country. It is a 5 shot detachable magazine semi auto, most often chambered in 5.56 NATO. This is no more dangerous than a BAR that is used for deer and moose hunting every year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

The AR-15 should not even be restricted in this country. It is a 5 shot detachable magazine semi auto, most often chambered in 5.56 NATO. This is no more dangerous than a BAR that is used for deer and moose hunting every year.

---

Yea, but it looks scary!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

Yea, but it looks scary!!!!

---

Exactly!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

Yea, but it looks scary!!!!

---

I have seen a lot of wood and steel guns with rusted bores that would scare me a lot more than an AR, safe for anything they are aimed at though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Divide and concur is what our corrupt dictatorship is doing with firearms owners.

Its always great when you have one group of firearms owners not supporting each other. Hunters not supporting sport shooters claiming they are weekend warriors that should choose a different hobby is exactly how divide and concur works.

The sport shooters will laugh when your bar or semi duck guns are banned in the name of public safety. Really why would half of gun owners (sport shooters) support hunters that continue to throw them under the bus. Some people are far to blind to see the big picture

---

What you say canadaman30 makes a good deal of sense:” Really why would half of gun owners (sport shooters) support hunters that continue to throw them under the bus. Some people are far to blind to see the big picture” But let me expand the hunting community a bit further, Because like the sport shooter there is another part of the hunting community itself that from time to time gets thrown under the bus as well, the indigenous hunter. I imagine Gilroy see that as a plus as it seems to mean more votes for his side. Also it has never been clear to me why they should be excluded from the hunting community because they have special treaty privileges.

You don’t stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun nut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gun Nut

What you say canadaman30 makes a good deal of sense:” Really why would half of gun owners (sport shooters) support hunters that continue to throw them under the bus. Some people are far to blind to see the big picture” But let me expand the hunting community a bit further, Because like the sport shooter there is another part of the hunting community itself that from time to time gets thrown under the bus as well, the indigenous hunter. I imagine Gilroy see that as a plus as it seems to mean more votes for his side.

You don’t stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun nut

---

This seems to be the standard of the extreme radical left. They now employ divide and concur across all groups. Think,..me too, cancel culture, global warming, shutting down oil industry, racism, transgender, defund police, be less white, covid fear, lockdowns, destruction of small business, open borders to illegal immigration, record national spending and debt, censorship, the list go's on.

Creating fear, confusion, anger and division, while claiming equality. What better way to push agendas amongst a nation so divided.

The Great Reset was a joke more than a year ago, making fun of conspiracy theorist kooks and nutjobs. Sadly some of our MP's, Freeland and Trudeau are deeply involved in Klaus Schwabs cult of globalist wannabes. Maybe not so much a joke?..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

This seems to be the standard of the extreme radical left. They now employ divide and concur across all groups. Think,..me too, cancel culture, global warming, shutting down oil industry, racism, transgender, defund police, be less white, covid fear, lockdowns, destruction of small business, open borders to illegal immigration, record national spending and debt, censorship, the list go's on.

Creating fear, confusion, anger and division, while claiming equality. What better way to push agendas amongst a nation so divided.

The Great Reset was a joke more than a year ago, making fun of conspiracy theorist kooks and nutjobs. Sadly some of our MP's, Freeland and Trudeau are deeply involved in Klaus Schwabs cult of globalist wannabes. Maybe not so much a joke?..

---

It is not a far stretch of the imagination to say that we are now in a cyber war with the Globalists. They are the instigators of all this unrest.
Stir the pot and bring in the Great Reset.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

It is not a far stretch of the imagination to say that we are now in a cyber war with the Globalists. They are the instigators of all this unrest.
Stir the pot and bring in the Great Reset.

---

They globalists are definitely putting in their greatest efforts. It's going to be a bumpy ride for some time...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gun Nut

What you say canadaman30 makes a good deal of sense:” Really why would half of gun owners (sport shooters) support hunters that continue to throw them under the bus. Some people are far to blind to see the big picture” But let me expand the hunting community a bit further, Because like the sport shooter there is another part of the hunting community itself that from time to time gets thrown under the bus as well, the indigenous hunter. I imagine Gilroy see that as a plus as it seems to mean more votes for his side. Also it has never been clear to me why they should be excluded from the hunting community because they have special treaty privileges.

You don’t stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun nut

---

I don't see indigenous hunters being "thrown under the bus" but resented by some people because they are not under the same restrictions as non-indigenous hunters.

Gun ownership covers a wide range of uses and activities. The expectation that one group should instantly rally around another is sorely misguided. For example, if government decided to ban jet-skis it would be unlikely that kayakers or sailors would give a damn. Sport shooters should be content that people who own firearms primarily to hunt are not vocally supporting the ban on "assault style rifles" which is what the original post in this thread suggests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I don't see indigenous hunters being "thrown under the bus" but resented by some people because they are not under the same restrictions as non-indigenous hunters.

Gun ownership covers a wide range of uses and activities. The expectation that one group should instantly rally around another is sorely misguided.

---

There are a raft of 'hunters' who are also 'sport shooters'...finding sport shooters who Do NOT hunt would probably be the exception rather than the rule.

Anyone who owns a firearm should be against any gun ban as a matter of principle, because the insinuation is that the legal gun owners are the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Gun ownership covers a wide range of uses and activities. The expectation that one group should instantly rally around another is sorely misguided. For example, if government decided to ban jet-skis it would be unlikely that kayakers or sailors would give a damn. Sport shooters should be content that people who own firearms primarily to hunt are not vocally supporting the ban on "assault style rifles" which is what the original post in this thread suggests.

---

Thanks for defining, divide and concur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

There are a raft of 'hunters' who are also 'sport shooters'...finding sport shooters who Do NOT hunt would probably be the exception rather than the rule.

Anyone who owns a firearm should be against any gun ban as a matter of principle, because the insinuation is that the legal gun owners are the problem.

---

Anyone that cares about having a firearm or their rights should be against C-21, if you listen to the lawyers take on C-21, it is just plain terrible
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUV...KnF3heA/videos

The lies are huge and this article lists a few of them to go off in a different source from the CCFR and Runkles of the Bailey's videos
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...action-rifles/
In addition to banning a number of long range, bolt action rifles, Trudeau’s ban also bans .22 caliber rifles that are built on the AR-15 platform. Two such guns are the Smith & Wesson M&P 15-22 and Mitchell Arms Car 15/22, both banned under Trudeau’s announcement.

or from another article
https://www.westernjournal.com/canad...mi-automatics/
“Minister Blair is either too inept to comprehend the scope of his regulations… or he lied to the government and Canadians,” the CSAAA said in a statement.


Incoherent and useless ... but some Fudds and Tru-Anon and all anti-firearms don't care about the realities, what next banning cars because there have been drunk drivers or hit and runs? If Justlied said it was to protect I am sure the Tru-Anon would be on board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I don't see indigenous hunters being "thrown under the bus" but resented by some people because they are not under the same restrictions as non-indigenous hunters.

Gun ownership covers a wide range of uses and activities. The expectation that one group should instantly rally around another is sorely misguided. For example, if government decided to ban jet-skis it would be unlikely that kayakers or sailors would give a damn. Sport shooters should be content that people who own firearms primarily to hunt are not vocally supporting the ban on "assault style rifles" which is what the original post in this thread suggests.

---

100% agree.

I guess these folk's will be mad that the Supreme Court yesterday decide in favor on American aboriginal hunters now being able to cross the border to hunt on ancestral lands in Canada

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...tish-columbia/


[COLOR=#2A2A2A]Persons who are not Canadian citizens and who do not reside in Canada can exercise an Aboriginal right that is protected by s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act,” Justice Malcolm Rowe said, writing for the majority, adding that “the expression ‘aboriginal peoples of Canada’ means the modern-day successors of Aboriginal societies that occupied Canadian territory at the time of European contact, and this may include Aboriginal groups that are now outside Canada

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I don't see indigenous hunters being "thrown under the bus" but resented by some people because they are not under the same restrictions as non-indigenous hunters.

Gun ownership covers a wide range of uses and activities. The expectation that one group should instantly rally around another is sorely misguided. For example, if government decided to ban jet-skis it would be unlikely that kayakers or sailors would give a damn. Sport shooters should be content that people who own firearms primarily to hunt are not vocally supporting the ban on "assault style rifles" which is what the original post in this thread suggests.

---

Why do you insist on defending the governments confiscation of legally acquired firearms?
What is your motive?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Why do you insist on defending the governments confiscation of legally acquired firearms?
What is your motive?

---

Well that's easy: They do it to be "deliberately provocative with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument"

It's the game they play on almost every thread running.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Well that's easy: They do it to be "deliberately provocative with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument"

It's the game they play on almost every thread running.

---

I would say that about almost every thread you ever put up. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Well that's easy: They do it to be "deliberately provocative with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument"

It's the game they play on almost every thread running.

---

The game of Troll..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Why do you insist on defending the governments confiscation of legally acquired firearms?
What is your motive?

---

I am neither defending or opposing Bill C-21. Just because someone is not enraged by the legislation does not mean they are defending it.

The subject of this thread is where hunter's should "aim" on C-21. The author of the article in the first post believes we should support it. I disagree with him but am not in a wild-eyed fury because a dozen or so "assault-type rifles" are being banned. There are still plenty of guns to go around.

100% disagree, I know lot's of people who would voice an opinion, but I do find you to be arrogant when you once said that as long as you can keep your guns you don't care. This is exactly why in the future guns will be banned. Even the Liberals do not deny they want to eventually ban all guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I don't see indigenous hunters being "thrown under the bus" but resented by some people because they are not under the same restrictions as non-indigenous hunters.

Gun ownership covers a wide range of uses and activities. The expectation that one group should instantly rally around another is sorely misguided. For example, if government decided to ban jet-skis it would be unlikely that kayakers or sailors would give a damn. Sport shooters should be content that people who own firearms primarily to hunt are not vocally supporting the ban on "assault style rifles" which is what the original post in this thread suggests.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I am neither defending or opposing Bill C-21. Just because someone is not enraged by the legislation does not mean they are defending it.

The subject of this thread is where hunter's should "aim" on C-21. The author of the article in the first post believes we should support it. I disagree with him but am not in a wild-eyed fury because a dozen or so "assault-type rifles" are being banned. There are still plenty of guns to go around.

---

You never answered my question from another thread.

"So, based on your assumptions of a superior Canadian system, why are the Liberals banning guns from law abiding citizens who have been properly vetted by the government and deemed to be safe and sane to own guns?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Well that's easy: They do it to be "deliberately provocative with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument"

It's the game they play on almost every thread running.

---

Yes, Lieberals are all snakes in the grass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

Yes, Lieberals are all snakes in the grass.

---

Oh dear, how to win friends and influence people, there goes any support from Liberal gun owners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Oh dear, how to win friends and influence people, there goes any support from Liberal gun owners.

---

LOL....

https://i.imgur.com/hclm9xH.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

You never answered my question from another thread.

"So, based on your assumptions of a superior Canadian system, why are the Liberals banning guns from law abiding citizens who have been properly vetted by the government and deemed to be safe and sane to own guns?"

---

It's not my question to answer. Ask a Liberal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

It's not my question to answer. Ask a Liberal.

---

You act like one. That is why I was asking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

I don't see indigenous hunters being "thrown under the bus" but resented by some people because they are not under the same restrictions as non-indigenous hunters.

Gun ownership covers a wide range of uses and activities. The expectation that one group should instantly rally around another is sorely misguided. For example, if government decided to ban jet-skis it would be unlikely that kayakers or sailors would give a damn. Sport shooters should be content that people who own firearms primarily to hunt are not vocally supporting the ban on "assault style rifles" which is what the original post in this thread suggests.

---

Well we sure got a lesson how resentment of the indigenous race plays out, during the antics down on the east coast over the lobster fishery. It clear set out something of a divide. You would have to pick on the jet skiers in your illustration, they were reason #1 why our right to use a motorize watercraft got changed to a privilege. The behaviour of some of them on the water ran a close second to school shootings, so everyone who had motorize watercraft ended up having to have a license. That said, I could still support those who handle their craft in a matter that shows respect for all others carrying on activities on the water. There is nothing the thrill and the almost noiseless rush as the wind fills the sail.

You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

You act like one. That is why I was asking.

---

The problem with certain reactionary elements within the firearms community is if you do not share their paranoia and hysteria you are accused of being a "Liberal" or a "Fudd." Then after insulting you they still expect you to help them.

Why are some paintball guns being banned in this ban?

If I am correct they are banning some with this ban.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

Why are some paintball guns being banned in this ban?

If I am correct they are banning some with this ban.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

---

They are, you can check out a lawyers talk on C-21 here and yes it is banning airsoft and many paintball. They moved that thread to Politics.
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...-looks-at-C-21


There are a few relevant posts but this one probably fits best so I will add it here but there is much more on that thread or you can go to the Youtube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUV...KnF3heA/videos

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

Bill Blair lying about airsoft. "even idiots sometimes land on the right answer, but Bill Blair about C-21 does not do this"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxtKHey3f8Y

CBC "expert" - an hour of research. #DefundCBC Wrong about impact etc. etc. deer exploding, laughably bad....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgHaH56rPuA



Listen to both, when you listen to the CBC radios... do you agree CBC should be defunded if this is the type of "expert" they bring on.... pathetic! #DefundCBC

---

I thought this bill was supposed to be about protecting the people and saving life's .

Not just disarming the public from looks and appearance. So far it does little to save people and protect our citizens of gun crimes.

More useless wasted tax dollars.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The problem with certain reactionary elements within the firearms community is if you do not share their paranoia and hysteria you are accused of being a "Liberal" or a "Fudd." Then after insulting you they still expect you to help them.

---

You got it, its amazing these folk's cannot figure out they are in Ontario a big portion of urban voters hunt and they just happen to be Liberal, so they are on here not vocal but are seeing the insult's.

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2021/04/...order-toronto/

More help at the border and with undercover stings would be a better use of taxpayers money than banning paintball guns.
I just don't get why any politician understands this....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

You got it, its amazing these folk's cannot figure out they are in Ontario a big portion of urban voters hunt and they just happen to be Liberal, so they are on here not vocal but are seeing the insult's.

---

I think other people see it differently.

What does this bill do to protect the citizens safety ? Nothing much so it is just a bunch of wasted resources and a ton of tax payers money. So much more could be done with the Money than being spent on this useless bill.

Admit it it has nothing to do with saving Live's.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moosehead

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2021/04/...order-toronto/

More help at the border and with undercover stings would be a better use of taxpayers money than banning paintball guns.
I just don't get why any politician understands this....

---

100 percent agree with your statement but with what you suggest would require work on the part of the current liberal government. In my life time I have yet to see a liberal put any sweat equity into anything as that would require some ambition so that would be the reasons for going after paint ball guns aka low hanging fruit just as the same reason of going after vetted legal gun owners as it is easy for them to do. As with most liberal brain dead ideas bill c-21 will accomplish nothing to strengthen public safety.

2nd Reading of C-21
https://web-extract.constantcontact....D1619547500000


and if you haven't noticed ... C-10 where they removed internet exemptions and will now censor the internet too.
https://www.facebook.com/PierrePoili...58252169047379

It would be easier to find Hens teeth then believe Trudeau

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

2nd Reading of C-21
https://web-extract.constantcontact....D1619547500000


and if you haven't noticed ... C-10 where they removed internet exemptions and will now censor the internet too.
https://www.facebook.com/PierrePoili...58252169047379

---

It would be interesting to learn about the higher caliber. I want to practice, but I don't dare yet, because the recoil there is unbelievable.
I've tried many variations of firearms, but the one that works best for me is this one: https://g4gguns.com/product/christensen-arms-ridgeline/ I've tested it often for hunting or just shooting at tin cans, and I like how comfortable it is in my hands. It's incredible, especially when it comes to recoil; it's a fairy tale. This is the smoothest I've ever fired a gun.