Libs are going for a gun grab whole emotions are high.

:heckno:

They do seem to be neglecting to mention (with much tenacity at least) that 9 out of the 22 deaths were the result of arson.

Lots of options here

https://vancouver.craigslist.org/van...116089072.html

https://images.craigslist.org/00404_...xg_600x450.jpg

https://vancouver.craigslist.org/van...114062496.html
https://images.craigslist.org/00q0q_...w7_600x450.jpg

https://vancouver.craigslist.org/rds...108964311.html

https://vancouver.craigslist.org/rds...108964311.html
https://images.craigslist.org/00r0r_...cq_600x450.jpg

The fact that he had been using hand guns with his previous ban on owning any firearms period likely suggests they were illegal.

Love it.

One of the best cars you can spend 12 hours a day in

:ahwow:

^ I suspect 12 hours in the front is much nicer than 12 hours in the back though.

And that's why we need stiffer gun laws. He should have got jail time for illegal discharge of a firearm.

This sheer stupidity of Trudeau has reached a new high, his reasoning of the current ban is because the 1989 shooting is still "fresh in his mind". It's been 30 years! This is only hurting lawful gun owners, if psychopaths want guns they will still find a way to obtain them and kill people. Gun laws don't prevent mass shootings.

For anyone interested in the “laws” the libs want to introduce this is the petition against the proposed bill:

https://petitions.ourcommons.ca/en/P...etition=e-2341

The proposed “buy back” program from legal gun owners of guns that look scary could cost up to 250 million. Keep in mind the govt. essentially has no idea how many guns are out there and how many guns will ever be turned in because there is no registry.

Also what they are proposing is essentially giving pennies on the dollar for valuable firearms worth 500-5000.

Good time to spend 250 million when we’re already gonna be paying for this covid shit for generations. I’m sure a buy back “scary” guns would have surely prevented this tragedy

Any facts to back that up or is that just your feeling.

The only time I used a gun was in Vegas and my aim was terrible. You could give me all the guns in the world but I would not know what to do with them. I don't know how to clean a gun, load a gun, unjam a gun, or even take off the safety. Also, my aim is so bad it would take me 10 to 12 shots to kill someone.

This idiot at one point was a legal gun owner so he had proper training on how to use a gun. That's why he was able to kill so many people. There is a reason why 50 cent was shot 9 times and survived. I doubt a hunter would take 9 shots to kill something.

My target from vegas. Used an M16 and a Glock 9.

https://scontent.fyvr4-1.fna.fbcdn.n...97&oe=5ED07B2E

Crazies will find a way to obtain weapons or if they can't do that, they'll just take a van and run over people on a busy street. Point is, a rifle or a van, people can find a way to inflict mass casualties with a good enough plan. The only difference is you can't ban vehicles, but guns are easy because they look scary.

Having shot a M16 style weapon multiple times, the full-auto mode is pretty much useless. Unless you are in very close quarters the bullet pattern just scatters in all direction, regardless of how good you are with recoil. At 200m a single aimed shot is very accurate if you know proper breathing and trigger squeezing techniques.

Dude, gun licensing training is not on how to shoot a gun. It is how to legally store a gun, and how to comply with regulations. It shows you how to clear the action of the gun before storage, and ensuring it is unloaded. It sure as hell doesn't teach you how to shoot well, or how to shoot in general.

Even the core course which is a week + long doesn’t train you how to shoot.

Your average person could not hit a dinner plate at 10 feet with a handgun.

As a licensed gun owner I could go to a gun range take courses and practice. There is a reason why you see drug dealers in the lower mainland survive multiple shootings.


So you have no facts.

not sure why you keep bringing up gangbangers who likely dont have legal firearms in the first place

and those shootings are risky because of hitting bystanders

i dont agree with blanket bans nor that it's a pressing concern in the canadian context

wow there are so much bullshit on here it's not even funny.

the "gun course" doesn't provide shit all on shooting.

Shooting in real life versus in the movies are so far off its not even funny.

Try shooting a moving target safely (skeet shooting) with a shotgun takes hella practice. Doing it with a hand gun like Will Smith in any of his movies will result in nothing but hitting thin air.

I'm so glad I have Manic on ignore and don't have to read whatever absolute trash he has to say any more. He is the most worthless poster on this forum.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/NaxKt9aSzAspO/giphy.gif

As for the new firearms being put on the prohibited list, good luck. Lots of rifles are going to be "stolen" and buried just long enough for the next government to reverse these changes the Liberals are implementing. People are not going to comply with this. Using someone's own tax dollars to confiscate their property at pennies on the dollar with ZERO logical precedent is quite frankly a slap in the face of democracy and responsible governance. For shame.

A 30 second video on youtube will pretty much teach you how to use any gun you can think of. Gun review videos dont teach you how to shoot but they do go through all the features such as how comfortable it is in your hand and how easily it is to access the safety etc all while showing what they're doing. How to field strip the gun to clean it.

He may have been a legal gun owner at one point but even if all firearms in canada were seized it would only be a matter of days before they get stolen from the US and smuggled in to canada and sold. Point I'm trying to get at is if someone wants a gun, they'll get it one way or another. We dont need stricter firearm laws we need a better justice system that doesn't let murderers and rapists out of prison after a few years of good behaviour. Thats what I find pathetic with this country.

What kind of guns is the Gov looking to ban here?

A friend and I were actually registered for our PAL course for May 2nd and 3rd, it was cancelled due to COVID.

My intent is to merely purchase a Remington and an SKS and/or .22 caliber rifle for the cheap ammo.

Most of the friends I've spoken to that own guns agree that being able to purchase an AR-15 or any assault rifle for that matter isn't necessary. Those weapons are designed for killing people, not hunting.

I'm not married to this topic, but given that majority of mass shootings involve assault rifles, I don't see the problem in such restriction here, nor do I feel like my rights are mitigated via not being able to purchase such a weapon.

One. There has been one shooting in the nearly 153 years of Confederation using an "assault rifle" - the Quebec City mosque. That semi-automatic rifle was functionally no different than the firearms you want to buy so your point is already lost in hypocrisy. Don't make the US comparison, we are not the United States. Neither is Switzerland, Finland, Germany, et al where the number of firearms per capita are high. It's been said that this wannabe-RCMP loser used rifles as well but what type has not been released. Either way they were acquired illegally.

Your friends opinions are just that, who cares. It's the same argument as saying that because you have a Camry that's all anyone needs to get from A to B so Ferrari's should be prohibited.

SO far

The ban includes guns that have been used in past Canadian shootings, including:

the Ruger Mini-14 which was used in the Ecole Polytechnique massacre in Montreal in 1989;
the M14 semi-automatic which was used in the 2014 Moncton shooting;
the Beretta CX4 Storm which was used in the Dawson College shooting; and
the CSA-VZ-58 which the gunman attempted to use in the Quebec Mosque shooting.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/feds...rces-1.4918623

The problem is in their vague wording imo.

Essentially the liberal stance has always been On banning “scary looking” guns, black rifles etc. They have a hard on for black, metal, magazine fed guns.

The SKS, an AK47 variant, has probably killed more people than all black guns combined. However, with its wood stock and relatively minimalist/old design, I have never heard it being on their radar once (although guns like it will likely be swept up in a broad law eventually)

Almost all legitimate black rifles are already restricted with restricted magazine capacities, M4 variants etc.

Then you get into other guns that look like black rifles but are non-restricted due to loop holes, JR carbine which shoots pistol mags (also how you can legally shoot an 8/9 round magazine) and Norinco T97 which looks as scary as can be, but it’s seemingly slipped through due to its bullpup design.

I don’t have problem with stiffer penalties for illegal guns and people using them in violent crimes etc. I absolutely support that. Imo if you have an illegal handgun in your possession regardless of circumstance that should mean minimum sentencing.

However it’s hard for me to get behind any law which takes away guns, or this “buy back” program because the govt. is so inept in effectively instituting laws that they will most certainly fuck this up and leave the legal, law abiding citizen high and dry.

An illegal gun is going to cost a lot more and be harder to get for a lot of people. You're not just gonna stroll up to some gangbangers and try to buy stuff.

As a non-lincensed person, I would still be able to go to the ranges and practice. You can rent guns and get instructors without having to have a license.

If you’re willing to go on a shooting spree you’re probably not averse to maxing our your credit cards and handing a crack head a couple grand to find you a gun and some ammo