Right Wrong Or indifferent

[Couliewalker]

This is a dark day in Cdn history.I have never been so disappointed in our political system.Right,wrong,or indifferent,how can a leader of a democracy which he has sworn to uphold ,sweep aside that very democracy which started over 150 years ago just like that.Irregardless of his intentions,we have protocols.
How many of us knew a minority leader even had the power. If you think this is merely about gun control you are totally missing the point.Whats on the next list? 8 cylinder cars,they pollute too much.
Why are Indigenous people exempt?
Trudeau says they use them for hunting.He also says the guns on his list are only made to kill people.
Which is it.?
Remember Oka.Maybe those people still have those AK's they showed on the news.
Maybe Trudeau knows they wont give them up so paciflly as the rest of us sheep.

[fishfood]

Just another kick in the face to Canadians.



Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[JBen]

Nicely said.

Everyone, is allowed their opinions. Freedom always cuts both ways.

It staggers me, people are overlooking this aspect. Both here on the forums, and out there in society.

The email I fired off to the Liberal party, and JT focused on this. Made it clear, I would be talking to every single moderate/centrist I knew. Not about the ban. About the abuse of power, undermining of democracy. And this isn’t the first time.

[Badenoch]

Here's how democracy works: Trudeau campaigned on a gun ban, was elected and is now doing it. The Criminal Code, also duly passed by a democratically-elected government, has provisions in it to prohibit firearms by regulation and Trudeau has used the regulations like previous governments before him.

If you want to be taken seriously save the overwrought drama queen routine. It's not a "dark day for Canada," a "kick in the face to all Canadians," nor is it an "abuse of power" or "undermining democracy."

[fishermccann]

Well said. ^^^^

[Couliewalker]

Here's how democracy works: Trudeau campaigned on a gun ban, was elected and is now doing it. The Criminal Code, also duly passed by a democratically-elected government, has provisions in it to prohibit firearms by regulation and Trudeau has used the regulations like previous governments before him.

If you want to be taken seriously save the overwrought drama queen routine. It's not a "dark day for Canada," a "kick in the face to all Canadians," nor is it an "abuse of power" or "undermining democracy."

The overwrought drama is exactly what Trudeau is using.His timing is perfect.His reasonings are fictious
A debate in parliament would have smoked out the truth.How will this make us safer?
How does this disarm criminals.How would this have prevented the NS shootings?Those guns were illegal and the shooter was prohibited from owning firearms since 2001!! Whose using drama ?..
Look closely at Gun control since 1977 to now.Fac ,storage laws,registration etc.
If it worked why are police who carried 6 shot revolvers prior to 1977 now carry bullet proof vests and semi auto pistols and assault rifles.How do you explain that? They are looking in the wrong place for the answers.Crime doesn't come out of my gun safe, or yours,so stop looking there.But these banned guns do.Trudeau told the BBC you dont need an assault rifle to kill deer.
Firstly most of those guns were already restricted,couldn't be used for deer hunting.
Secondly,when did he ever deer hunt.
Thirdly when his next list comes out and our "Deer rifles" are on it he will simply say We dont need to shoot deer period.
.Its about transparency and accountability.
He did not get the popular vote,the conservatives did.
Canadians did speak at the last election.WE gave the Liberals a Minority Government.We did not give him Dictatorial powers.How many Canadians knew he could do what he did On his own.
I didnt.Did anyone else?
Drama,hes full of it.

[Bluebulldog]

Based on the the recent move that the Federal Government has made with regard to banning certain firearms, and their variants, I can offer the following comments / observations.

This is not about crime reduction. This is about optics. The information about gun crime has been readily available to policy makers. Its analysis is quite easy to perform.

The hue and cry from gun owners which came immediately following the news was not unexpected, nor was it counter to what anyone expected the narrative to be. What is disappointing, is just that...it is the same as it always has been.

There is a very large group of legal, lawful gun owners in this country. By extension we are also the most law abiding and aware portion of the public.

We need to change the narrative.

Arguing from a "Yeah, but..", or the "but what about...?" Is juvenile, and pedantic. The "No Compromise" narrative on some of the more militant groups ( NFA) is another which can be viewed as counter productive.

We need to have discussions around what gun ownership looks like. We need to develop awareness and understanding, and bring that forward. Our gun lobby had an opportunity post NS incident to get out in front, and make a statement in absence of any other info coming from the RCMP and the Feds. *crickets*.

We can all agree gun ownership in Canada will never look like it does in the US ( we don't have it as a guaranteed right for one). We also can't seek it. As the gun culture in the US is the main reason for illegal gun crime in Canada.

The conversation needs to change.

I have a saying I learned years ago, and it applies well:

"If you can't defend your position effectively, you need to change, or abandon your position".

This doesn't mean give up, but in the vernacular of the Army, a flanking maneuver will often succeed where a direct assault will not.

We as gun owners have been so focused on the direct "assaults" that we are being flanked, and outflanked. Still we focus on loopholes, and banking on a firearms system that catches some things, but then rejoice when an FRT # is given to a variant. We need to flip the script.

We are better than the juvenile whining that is taking place across social media platforms, let's start by acting like it.

[fishermccann]

BBD. very nice post.

[JBen]

You are allowed your opinions.

I might remind you both ( world of difference in telling you your “wrong”)That they took a beating. And are a

Minority government.

[Bluebulldog]

You are allowed your opinions.

I might remind you both ( world of difference in telling you your “wrong”)

That they took a beating. And are a

Minority governemnt

2 year amnesty.

Minority government.

OIC, which means it only puts measures in place immediately, but must be debated in HOC in order to become law.

Election in that period.