How the anti-gun lobby infiltrated the Liberal government

This came across my feed, wasn't sure about posting it but wth. It's meant to be more of a thread on the antis and their tactics to eventually disarm or severely limit what firearms Canadian citizens are allowed to own. So I flipped a coin to decide to post it here rather than the general discussion. In function any of those "black guns" are no different than our normal semi auto hunting guns other than magazine capacity here in Canada. I realize it's hard to keep politics out of the discussion when the standing government is clearly facilitating the anti gun lobby, so it does pertain to the thread as well. Both videos are good watching.

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/ho...ral-government

Cheers

A really good article. I really can't understand why our Trudeau Liberals would appoint a anti gun lobbiest to Vice Chair of the CFAC. She shoukd have been let go when she refused to take the Firearms Safety Course, but then anti gun activists seldom listen to reason. I can relate a personal story. My cousin's wife is a rabid anti gun and anti hunting person. She attacked me on my f/b page after I posted a Brian Lilley article. Rather than engaging her in a war of words, I attempted to explain what it is to be a firearms owner in Canada. Her response was that she was speaking for the "World", and continued her attack. Ended up with me blocking her and a considrable amount of family drama. My point is, these people are not willing to listen to anything, no matter how strong your arguments are. You can no more expect rational behavior from an activist than you can expect a dog to talk.

Thanks for posting the article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smitty55

This came across my feed, wasn't sure about posting it but wth. It's meant to be more of a thread on the antis and their tactics to eventually disarm or severely limit what firearms Canadian citizens are allowed to own. So I flipped a coin to decide to post it here rather than the general discussion. In function any of those "black guns" are no different than our normal semi auto hunting guns other than magazine capacity here in Canada. I realize it's hard to keep politics out of the discussion when the standing government is clearly facilitating the anti gun lobby, so it does pertain to the thread as well. Both videos are good watching.

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/ho...ral-government

Cheers

---

In my opinion the most effective tool that firearms owners and hunters have in influencing public opinion is showing the rest of the world that we are normal. Show them that we love our spouses and our children, we pet our dogs, we are nice to our co-workers, we get along and are helpful to our neighbours, etc. Show them that we are just like them. Show them that we are not the stereotype that the anti-gun world believes personifies the hunter/shooter.

I know rude, foul-mouthed, blow-hard, braggart hunter/shooter who had a senior position in a large Ontario industrial complex (thankfully, he's retired now). The whole plant knew him or knew of him, and not in a good way. His behavior affirmed or reinforced the beliefs of a great many people that hunters/shooters are insensitive, knuckle-dragging maniacs.

Most of these people never heard of Nathalie Provost or PolySeSouvient, but they certainly heard of the blowhard. Its hard to imagine how just one person can do so much damage to our image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ninepointer

In my opinion the most effective tool that firearms owners and hunters have in influencing public opinion is showing the rest of the world that we are normal. Show them that we love our spouses and our children, we pet our dogs, we are nice to our co-workers, we get along and are helpful to our neighbours, etc. Show them that we are just like them. Show them that we are not the stereotype that the anti-gun world believes personifies the hunter/shooter.

I know rude, foul-mouthed, blow-hard, braggart hunter/shooter who had a senior position in a large Ontario industrial complex (thankfully, he's retired now). The whole plant knew him or knew of him, and not in a good way. His behavior affirmed or reinforced the beliefs of a great many people that hunters/shooters are insensitive, knuckle-dragging maniacs.

Most of these people never heard of Nathalie Provost or PolySeSouvient, but they certainly heard of the blowhard. Its hard to imagine how just one person can do so much damage to our image.

---

Hit the nail on the head!
Most of the law abiding gun owners almost never engage in gun discussions online/offline, and I believe it might be contributing to the problem.
Also, disinformation or rather lack of information is the root cause of antis without an agenda.

Remember last year that no one at the Toronto Council meeting had a freaking clue how does one legally obtain a firearm?
I am really pissed off at OFAH for not doing anything about informing the public, specifically the non-antis and antis alike on how vetted a person needs to be to get a firearm license, and even more so a restricted one. A simple information campaign online and offline would do.

Liberal prey on FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) and one ex police chief running as a candidate for Liberals mailed out pamphlet on what army style they're gonna ban if they get elected. (before they admitted 80% of the guns come illegally from the US) Of course they look scary to unaware and un-informed (or even misinformed) citizens, and this is how you get a non-gun activist to become one

I am a normal guy ( I think so -:) ) but never told anyone I know I have guns , I participate in skeet and clay competitions, or that I love hunting. I should....that would send the right message....gun owners are just normal people with a different hobbies.

Bottom line is, if antis use misinformation, we and our "voice" OFAH should use the information to counter the movement, alongside with being good stewards as hunters and gun owners

The making of a Liberal Anti Gun fanatic....

https://share.icloud.com/photos/0MXx...GYwYh0qL5AWmWA

I personally know of people who voted Conservative, and are Anti-gun. They are in line with Con. fiscal ideals, but not on the gun issue. Just like every Lib. supporter does not want to prohibit guns.

Jkhttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...62e14496a5.jpg

Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

I personally know of people who voted Conservative, and are Anti-gun. They are in line with Con. fiscal ideals, but not on the gun issue. Just like every Lib. supporter does not want to prohibit guns.

---

And I know hard core Liberals who own guns, and love hunting and fishing....and that's all OK.
Regardless of the political background, the problem is that "anti-gun term" needs to be defined properly - as in : I don't want or care to have a gun, or : I don't want anyone around me to own a gun. The latter is the core value of the "anti-gun" movement (defined as no one should have a gun) based on that irrational facts-less assumption that guns on the streets used in crimes are legal firearms, and by banning all of them we will have a "safer" society
As if, all illegal gets obtained through legal means

In a democracy, anyone is entitled to vice their opinion on any of the current society's challenges, but politicians would use anything for votes and political capital, even if they are illogical and nonsensical....and this makes it a hard uphill battle for the law abiding gun owners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

The making of a Liberal Anti Gun fanatic....

https://share.icloud.com/photos/0MXx...GYwYh0qL5AWmWA

---

hahahaha.......almost peed my pants off....god darn it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

I personally know of people who voted Conservative, and are Anti-gun. They are in line with Con. fiscal ideals, but not on the gun issue. Just like every Lib. supporter does not want to prohibit guns.

---

I'm related to a few anti-gun conservatives. I grew up without guns in the house and no hunters in the family. There's been many debates that end in "agree to disagree" but certainly no fanatical argument for either side.