Throne Speech: Liberals to introduce Gun control measures

[Karl Marques]

Perhaps someone can answer this for me. Why are we so worried about a long gun registry? Yes, it would suck I agree, but it's not the worst that can happen. It's not even what they ( the Liberals) said they would do. I distinctly remember them repeating over and over again that they would not bring back the long gun registry. What I do remember, and this is way worse than a registry, is them saying that "there can be a lot done around classification.". Reclassifying guns would be the ultimate nightmare. Imagine this, all semi autos changed from non-restricted to restricted, and I'm sure in some cases, prohibited. Just like that, virtually over night, they could eff things up for so many of us. I think we're all being distracted by the unlikely event of a long gun registry. We're taking our eyes off what the real "threat" is. Reclassification is a total nightmare scenario. Am I wrong? Thoughts anyone?

[Hunter John]

You are 100% correct Karl. If they go the Australia model it will be much worse than any registry.

[terrym]

I expect Federal reclassification and Provincial Tax/Fees for ownership. Wynne sees a new revenue tool. Trudough will not start a Fed registry. He will let the Provinces take that heat.

[Bluebulldog]

Perhaps someone can answer this for me. Why are we so worried about a long gun registry? Yes, it would suck I agree, but it's not the worst that can happen. It's not even what they ( the Liberals) said they would do. I distinctly remember them repeating over and over again that they would not bring back the long gun registry. What I do remember, and this is way worse than a registry, is them saying that "there can be a lot done around classification.". Reclassifying guns would be the ultimate nightmare. Imagine this, all semi autos changed from non-restricted to restricted, and I'm sure in some cases, prohibited. Just like that, virtually over night, they could eff things up for so many of us. I think we're all being distracted by the unlikely event of a long gun registry. We're taking our eyes off what the real "threat" is. Reclassification is a total nightmare scenario. Am I wrong? Thoughts anyone?

Part of the issue around a registry is that then any re-classifying, etc. can be a pre-cursor to seizure. Imagine if the RCMPs sudden re-class of the Swiss Arms, and CZ858 was swiftly followed up with knocks on doors from local LEOs, and those guns were simply removed from private homes. Think High River, on a massive scale, at the whim of a Police Dept., or politician.

The fact that the RCMP knew that there were literally 1000s of those guns out there, but not where is one of the only things that gave a moment of pause enough for the Minister to review things.

[Waftrudnir]

Part of the issue around a registry is that then any re-classifying, etc. can be a pre-cursor to seizure. Imagine if the RCMPs sudden re-class of the Swiss Arms, and CZ858 was swiftly followed up with knocks on doors from local LEOs, and those guns were simply removed from private homes. Think High River, on a massive scale, at the whim of a Police Dept., or politician.

The fact that the RCMP knew that there were literally 1000s of those guns out there, but not where is one of the only things that gave a moment of pause enough for the Minister to review things.

yeah, both models go hand in hand...
that's why the registry is so bad - it's the precursor for way worse to come

[Karl Marques]

Part of the issue around a registry is that then any re-classifying, etc. can be a pre-cursor to seizure. Imagine if the RCMPs sudden re-class of the Swiss Arms, and CZ858 was swiftly followed up with knocks on doors from local LEOs, and those guns were simply removed from private homes. Think High River, on a massive scale, at the whim of a Police Dept., or politician.

The fact that the RCMP knew that there were literally 1000s of those guns out there, but not where is one of the only things that gave a moment of pause enough for the Minister to review things.

Yes, I see what you're saying. My point is that I don't think we need to worry about a new long gun registry. By reclassifying non-restricteds to restricted or prohib, you wouldn't need a new registry. You could just use the one that's already in place. Plus we'd get stuck with all the other crappy rules around restricted and prohibited firearms. If they were going to make "feel good" ineffective changes I'd rather have a new registry than reclassification. Our current arbitrary classification is already bad enough.

[terrym]

Yes, I see what you're saying. My point is that I don't think we need to worry about a new long gun registry. By reclassifying non-restricteds to restricted or prohib, you wouldn't need a new registry. You could just use the one that's already in place. Plus we'd get stuck with all the other crappy rules around restricted and prohibited firearms. If they were going to make "feel good" ineffective changes I'd rather have a new registry than reclassification. Our current arbitrary classification is already bad enough.

Very good points. The "devil you know".

[Karl Marques]

Very good points. The "devil you know".

Exactly!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[welsh]

Wynne sees a new revenue tool.

You keep saying this, Terry. Can you point to an occasion where she has actually said this? How do you know she's thinking about it?

Now: Regarding registries, there is the assumption that confiscations are planned. Gun owners are very good at making assumptions. Consider the paranoid speculation that a Lee Enfield could be deemed an "assault weapon." This comes out of thin air: there has been no serious suggestion that bolt action rifles in Canada should be restricted in any way. Yet we continually see dire warnings that this sort of thing could happen, based on the assumption that gun control is motivated by a desire to disarm everyone completely.

[Bluebulldog]

You keep saying this, Terry. Can you point to an occasion where she has actually said this? How do you know she's thinking about it?

Now: Regarding registries, there is the assumption that confiscations are planned. Gun owners are very good at making assumptions. Consider the paranoid speculation that a Lee Enfield could be deemed an "assault weapon." This comes out of thin air: there has been no serious suggestion that bolt action rifles in Canada should be restricted in any way. Yet we continually see dire warnings that this sort of thing could happen, based on the assumption that gun control is motivated by a desire to disarm everyone completely.

I'm reminded of the old adage...."Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you"....

Excellent point Welsh.

However, the firearms climate in this country has definitely changed lately. With the increased reportings of mass shootings in the US, public opinion is definitely being molded by our neighbors to the South. The RCMP and other entities have been quite aggressive in pushing an anti-firearms agenda ( see high river, and the aforementioned Swiss Arms and CZ858 fiasco). The current Federal Government has indeed made allusion to imposing more legislation, and the firearms community is very wary of this, since it was the previous Federal Liberal majority that pushed through C-68 under Allan Rock.