Trying to take a page from the Canadian Firearm Act are we?

[Bushwhacker]

Do you not agree that if the Liberals really wanted to ban ALL guns, that they could have done it in years they had back to back Liberal governments in Canada?

The fact that most hunters in Canada still have the same gun collection they had 40 years ago is any indication they did not want to ban all guns and that is why hunters actually favored restrictions on guns not used for hunting ie Ar15's.

They need to get clear on their messaging, because that's what it seems like whenever they talk about 'common sense gun reform'. What does that look like to them? Talking about banning weapons that are already banned, or that have not been responsible for the majority of shootings does not indicate common sense. Making it harder for police to actually police (be pro-active) and crack down on gangs/illegal guns does not indicate common sense. This is true both here and the U.S. The lazy solution? Just make more guns illegal and slowly make ownership more difficult and expensive for the average legal gun owner.

The vast majority of hunters and sport shooters object to this ban.

[Gilroy]

When were hunters polled to vote in favor of restricting AR15's?
It would have been political suicide and a revolt to ban all guns in Canada.
Besides, they collect way too much money in taxes from the shooting federation to ban anything.
Way too greedy!

I did not say they were polled you did. But reading sentiment by other hunters gives us a clue on how they feel.

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-honored traditions and legitimate firearms ownership, but also for the greater good and public safety.

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

[Bushwhacker]

I did not say they were polled you did. But reading sentiment by other hunters gives us a clue on how they feel.

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-honored traditions and legitimate firearms ownership, but also for the greater good and public safety.

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

Define an 'assault-style' firearm. A semi-automatic? A scary looking gun that's all black with no wood?
You're entitled to your opinion but I think you are definitely in the minority on this issue.

[canadaman30]

Do you not agree that if the Liberals really wanted to ban ALL guns, that they could have done it in years they had back to back Liberal governments in Canada?

The fact that most hunters in Canada still have the same gun collection they had 40 years ago is any indication they did not want to ban all guns and that is why hunters actually favored restrictions on guns not used for hunting ie Ar15's.

More false accusations, most hunters disagree with your anti rhetoric.
FB_IMG_1637960812421.jpg

[impact]

I did not say they were polled you did. But reading sentiment by other hunters gives us a clue on how they feel.

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-honored traditions and legitimate firearms ownership, but also for the greater good and public safety.

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

As you pasted above it was his sole opinion only....Next

[Tigboy 304]

I call bs on the above post. Why not deal with the actual problems instead of cherry picking on law abiding legal gun owners who acquired there firearms and use them legally. Oh I'm sorry I forgot that's not the liebral way.

[Gilroy]

Your religion is part of your ethnicity, or ethnos in Greek, which has historically been the correct marker of one's identity. We've been victims of identity theft here, where we now use terms like 'white guy'. What is a white guy anyways? A protestant who stopped going to church.

It's not that religion should solely determine one's entry, it's that there are many persecuted Christians from all over the world who would more easily assimilate into our historically Christian country and way of life. The argument that we must hoover up people from the 3rd world to both do the jobs that are 'beneath' us (servants, cleaners, cheap 24 hour ethnic food vendors for the drunken nights out of the urban upper class, etc.) and 'above' us (doctors) is a very racist one. In both cases it betrays our own people.

There also needs to be assimilation to the dominant culture, and not just by cheap consumerism. Learning the languages and history, understanding our values, if not converting (no Christian can force conversion) then giving reverence to the dominant religion, not setting up parallel legal systems like sharia, not making the country more like the communist dystopian hell hole you escaped, not being here for 8 months and feeling emboldened to tear down our statues and desecrate our institutions while garnering our social benefits, etc. That's the context.

The vast majority of anything can be quickly and easily changed by a very porous and lax immigration policy. Which is the whole point.

If they imported 2.5 million Hindu Indian doctors into a small country like Denmark, in what sense would it sill be Denmark?

Well hoping that Canada stays the same as she did over history in this globalized world , interconnected world makes no sense.

If your a purist why are we not all speaking Inuktitut and Ojibway or Cree? Why are the Scot's and Irish not speaking Gaelic?

So the dominant culture when we arrived was the aboriginal culture and next by immigration French?

Should statutes that reflect a bad time in history NOT BE TORN DOWN? Stalin and Lenin and Gadhafi would still be on their pedestals.

I see nothing to make me believe we are remotely like a communist regime here. There is not any sharia law here.

They have imported millions into Germany and its still Germany and its still missing statutes to HITLER.

[Gilroy]

They need to get clear on their messaging, because that's what it seems like whenever they talk about 'common sense gun reform'. What does that look like to them? Talking about banning weapons that are already banned, or that have not been responsible for the majority of shootings does not indicate common sense. Making it harder for police to actually police (be pro-active) and crack down on gangs/illegal guns does not indicate common sense. This is true both here and the U.S. The lazy solution? Just make more guns illegal and slowly make ownership more difficult and expensive for the average legal gun owner.

The vast majority of hunters and sport shooters object to this ban.

The Liberals have been crystal clear on gun control were up front and had an election platform and promise made and kept.

The Conservatives said one thing on gun control at the base and their leader changed it before the last election.

I do not believe the vast majority believe that, if you could show me a respectable poll?

[Gilroy]

Define an 'assault-style' firearm. A semi-automatic? A scary looking gun that's all black with no wood?
You're entitled to your opinion but I think you are definitely in the minority on this issue.

LOL I am probably the minority on this forum, but what counts is in a general election and most previous polls indicate majority of Canadians wanted the ban.

[Gilroy]

As you pasted above it was his sole opinion only....Next

Can you PRODUCE a verified poll by Angus Reid, Ipsos, anybody indicting your right in your assertion