Gun Petition, Liberals taking away our guns ....

The whole thing is stupid... misleading fear mongering. The media starts spreading around misinformation and the politicians jump at the chance to please the heard of sheeple.
Then the lobbyists get involved and the next thing you know they are changing laws so the police can enter your home (without your permission) up to 2 hours after you had been reported having a beer and driving home and force you to give a breath sample or face the charge of refusing. Its absolute madness, the power of organizations such as MADD have over our rights and freedom. The best thing we can do is financially support organizations that are fighting for our rights so they can hire lobbyists to fight for us.
 
14ft_boat said:
Did not sign.
This post has no place on the FISHING report non-political board!
Click to expand...

The same government has already done a study on lead ammunition and fishing tackle. Don't be surprised when lead sinkers are next when outdoors people don't stand together
 
Scripe. lead in drinking water, not good? Lead in any water, not good. Lead in paint, bullets, fuel, kids toys from china, not good either? We don't use DDT anymore, or put butter on burns? So sinkers cost more, sure next generations will appreciate it, we can't think with our wallets.
 
Signed. They can try and take them But they better come with more and bigger ones then mine to take them from my cold dead body !!!!!!!!
 
moosey said:
signed and did not care if its on a fishing forum or what the fiberals say they are after, I remember the registry they will be after the rest of our firearms
Click to expand...

I didn't sign because I don't hunt anymore and because I don't hunt anymore, I don't own a gun anymore, and haven't for years. So to be honest, I really couldn't care less one way or the other. They're going to do what they're going to do. Some will be happy about it, others will be pissed. Same 💩, different day.

But, just to set the record straight here, it was NOT the Liberals who initiated the gun registry, it was initiated by the Conservatives. The first steps toward the Canadian long-gun registry began under the federal Progressive Conservative Party government of Prime Minister Kim Campbell. It was the child of former Conservative Senator Nathan Nurgitz, who wrote then Prime Minister Campbell requesting all guns be registered after the 1989 Ecole Polytechnique shooting.

Like so many other things the Liberals get blamed for, it was the government of Kim Campbell's Conservatives beginning in 1990, who had done a majority of the work towards implementing the gun registry with Bill C-80, a bill that died when the election of 1993 was called, an election that the Liberals won in a landslide. All the Liberals did is take what they liked from that dead Bill, (C-80) tweaked it a bit, and reintroduced it as Bill C-68. Had the Conservatives won the '93 election, THEY would have been the ones to implement the gun registry, NOT the Liberals. Then everyone against it would be pissed at the Conservatives, everyone but those who support the Conservatives. They'd be saying it was a really good idea.

Now, I don't like ANY politician. I think they're all crooked, and they all lie to us, and that is not a partisan thing. Doesn't matter what party they represent, they all lie, and they'll get elected based on how many of us, choose to believe their BS. When we stop believing or simply don't buy into the BS that comes out of their mouths, they don't get elected or re-elected. They're supposed to do what we who put them there tell them to do, but that is NEVER the reality. They get elected and then they tell us what is best for us.
 
Trevor M said:
I didn't sign because I don't hunt anymore and because I don't hunt anymore, I don't own a gun anymore, and haven't for years. So to be honest, I really couldn't care less one way or the other. They're going to do what they're going to do. Some will be happy about it, others will be pissed. Same 💩, different day.

But, just to set the record straight here, it was NOT the Liberals who initiated the gun registry, it was initiated by the Conservatives. The first steps toward the Canadian long-gun registry began under the federal Progressive Conservative Party government of Prime Minister Kim Campbell. It was the child of former Conservative Senator Nathan Nurgitz, who wrote then Prime Minister Campbell requesting all guns be registered after the 1989 Ecole Polytechnique shooting.

Like so many other things the Liberals get blamed for, it was the government of Kim Campbell's Conservatives beginning in 1990, who had done a majority of the work towards implementing the gun registry with Bill C-80, a bill that died when the election of 1993 was called, an election that the Liberals won in a landslide. All the Liberals did is take what they liked from that dead Bill, (C-80) tweaked it a bit, and reintroduced it as Bill C-68. Had the Conservatives won the '93 election, THEY would have been the ones to implement the gun registry, NOT the Liberals. Then everyone against it would be pissed at the Conservatives, everyone but those who support the Conservatives. They'd be saying it was a really good idea.

Now, I don't like ANY politician. I think they're all crooked, and they all lie to us, and that is not a partisan thing. Doesn't matter what party they represent, they all lie, and they'll get elected based on how many of us, choose to believe their BS. When we stop believing or simply don't buy into the BS that comes out of their mouths, they don't get elected or re-elected. They're supposed to do what we who put them there tell them to do, but that is NEVER the reality. They get elected and then they tell us what is best for us.
Click to expand...
Yes all the above
But one day the people of the lands will have enough and will up rise against totalitarian regimes regardless they got guns or not
Every Society restart goes great for a while till corruption gets better of some and down hill shit slides begins for the people of the lands
Time frames of the events of such very some regions/ countries within a generation or two some for centurys but it will happen
 
For some reason in this land we call Canada it is a "privilege" to own a firearm much unlike our cousins to the south that have it enshrined in their constitution. I could open a can of worms and start debating how our two systems work but really ???? If ever there was a country where you need to carry a firearm it would be Canada. Our settlers all carried. They had to... either to eat with or defend themselves against things that wanted to eat them. Personally I think we missed out when our Bill of Rights/Constitution was being written. Unfortunately it was written long after its due by a bunch of lawyer/politicians whose intent was to keep the masses from rising up against an unjust tyrannical government. Oh well 20/20 is always hindsight. Doesn't mean we should roll over and say "oh well nothing my little voice will change" It's attitude like that that will allow us to be led like sheep to the slaughter. Last I checked we are a democratic country and WE the legitimate owners of firearms have our rights too ! If the rest of Canada is fed up with senseless shootings committed by ILLEGAL possessors of firearms then nail the bad guys !!!! Make laws and sentencing that is not only directed to those who commit the crime but carry and fulfill a meaningful punishment that the rest of society can live with.

Okee dokee ! Now that I'm amped up who wants to argue if the dress is blue or grey ? LMFAO !
 
Old Cut LongPointer said:
For some reason in this land we call Canada it is a "privilege" to own a firearm
Click to expand...

That's because in this country we do understand the difference between what constitutes a "right" which is something that can NEVER be legally taken from or denied to you, and a "privilege" which is something that CAN legally be taken from or denied to you.

IE holding a driver's license is a "privilege" Abuse the privilege by drinking and driving, repeatedly speeding, being careless and any number of other HTA violations, and you can bet they're gonna take it away from you. I don't think anyone would have any issue saying that the same principals can and should apply to firearms as for any number of legally valid and justifiable reasons, if you abuse the privilege, guns can legally be taken from you, or you can be legally denied the ability to possess or own one.

If you look at the laws they have in their books in the US, and certain penalties their courts can impose, especially where they concern the commission of a crime involving a firearm including the use of, those laws and those penalties violate their Second Amendment because those laws, and those penalties allow for that "right" to be denied or revoked. They don't understand, it's never been a "right," it's always been a "privilege" because of those laws and those penalties that legally allow them to deny or revoke their ability to own or be in possession of a firearm and even the NRA has said that certain people shouldn't be allowed to possess firearms. Therefore, the biggest supporter of their Second Amendment "rights" admits, through that contradiction, that it's not a "right," but rather a "privilege"

While there is clearly some disagreement on the matter, our gun laws here in Canada are primarily centered around registration and licensing and how guns are classified, which is either prohibited, restricted, or non-restricted.

In Canada, handguns with a short barrel (less than 105 mm) and the .32 or .25 calibre, fully automatic weapons, guns with sawed-off barrels, and certain military rifles like the AK-47 are prohibited, as are many other weapons including brass knuckles, mace and pepper spray designed for use on humans, switch blade knives, butterfly knives, nunchaku sticks, spring batons, and throwing stars to name just a few of a long list of weapons prohibited in this country.

The firearm design commonly known as the M-16 rifle, and any variant or modified version of it, including any variant of the AR-15 and those like it, are all restricted. (Note: legally, restricted firearms can only be discharged at shooting ranges; so, while one can use them in competitions, one cannot use them for hunting) Non-restricted firearms are: any other rifle or shotgun not listed on the prohibited or restricted lists.

Old Cut LongPointer said:
Okee dokee ! Now that I'm amped up who wants to argue if the dress is blue or grey ? LMFAO !
Click to expand...
I'll play. IT"S PURPLE!!! ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top