one last ride
Posted Apr 6, 2019, 4:34 PM UTC
22876
Looks like c-71 is dead in the water, for now.
39
That would be nice... but how so?
16
Trudy has become quite unpopular lately, and with elections 6 months away there's a real possibility that a different party with a more permissive stance on guns will take the House of Commons in October.
42
Ohh I understand now, I thought you meant something about the bill directly.
6
What's his approval rating?
2
Last I checked (like a week ago) it was in the low 40s, lower than Trump at the time.
6
Trudy
Nice one
1
SNC slowed Parliament down so much there is not enough time before summer break. Then it's election time.
9
We didn't do anything. Trudy sank his own battleship lol
12
There was even talk of suspending the Democratic process so they could try to push C-71 and 11 other bills through without a vote.
Thankfully that motion was defeated.
10
Sounds like dictator moves to me
6
Wasn't it being forced through the Senate? Or was that all bull?
Either way preemptively ordered a type 97
3
The motion to force a timetable on the bills was withdrawn.
7
Ohhhh nooooooooo I guess I'll haaveee to keep my typee 97 ohhh nooooo
11
It’s been a long day without you my friend 😢
13
And I'll tell you all about it when I see you again.
3
Y’all lost your rights when you gave up the ability to carry firearms for self defense, aka the British game plan to make it easier to rule at the people’s expense.
At this point the Canadian government/lefties just are just tea bagging your open mouth and y’all complain the balls are to hairy instead of getting that fat bastard off your face/out of your lives.
I’m down for literally all the Canadian policies, aka healthcare, weed, lots of edu funding, strong social safety net, prison focus on rehabilitation, etc y’all do a lot of great stuff. But on guns and weather y’all are dead wrong.
8
Y’all lost your rights when you gave up the ability to carry firearms for self defense
This happened before I was born. I didn't give up anything, I was born into this shitty state of affairs.
4
It’s getting better. Honestly if a few court cases are ruled correctly, couldn’t it be seen as the right of the people?
2
Self-defence is already seen as a right, even though it's not explicitly laid out in our constitution. That said, while there are a good number of us pushing for gun rights (the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights is growing rapidly and making headlines), the right to self-defence and the concept of carrying a firearm are still considered very separate. Canada is one of the most armed countries in the world, with a ton of guns, and there are a lot of people who have defended their homes with guns and either were exonerated of all charges, or weren't charged in the first place. We also do have a carry permits, even though they're almost never issued, and castle doctrine is the rule for home defence.
The problem is that our population is mostly urban, and have never interacted with a gun in their lives. Picture NYC being 70% of your population, and you have an idea of what we're dealing with here.
4
There's also the issue that the Canadian legal concept of a "right" is something that can be overridden if it's in the interest of the state, which isn't a right at all.
We won't gain ground regarding RKBA (or property rights, or free speech, or freedom from search and seizure, or anything else) until sections 1 and 33 of the charter are gone.
2
To be fair, the balls aren’t just hairy. They’re also sweaty and greasy.
3
Hey there. What does C-71 entail?
I heard it removes the government oversight on the RCMP when it comes to firearms, but I doubt that actually is a thing because what sane person would allow a police force to run basically rogue.
7
A few main changes it proposes are,
-
background checks would no longer be limited to just the previous five-year period
-
transfer of non-restricted firearms would require PAL verification and record keeping by businesses
-
removal automatic Authorization to Transport prohibited and restricted firearms in certain situations
-
repeals some important parts of the plan to end the Long-gun Registry to preserve some of the functions of the Registry
7
Pretty sure they're totally allowed to do lifetime checks already if they want. They don't even have the resources to do in depth 5 year checks, so this will likely lead to even less in depth checks since they'll be wasting time reviewing crap from 25 years ago.
PAL verification process becomes convoluted and as much of a PITA as during the LGR. It will be a criminal offense to sell a NR to a friend who you know has a valid PAL unless you go through the RCMP and tell them you are doing a transaction with that person.
Removing automatic authorization to a gunsmith is just reckless and stupid. I'll bet everyone's CFO will just issue 10 year paper ATT's for this purpose anyway. I've always had a paper ATT for gunsmith anytime. Literally has only added either a piece of paper, or a phone call. This is one of the dumbest parts of C-71.
Also removes the ability of OiC to override an RCMP classification, prohibiting the Swiss arms and cz 858. The government can still move a NR to prohibited by name, but not back. Also gives the power back to the RCMP to prohibit a completed AR 15 lower if they feel like it.
1
They do conduct automatic background re-checks on a constant basis for license holders; however, C-71 includes changes that would allow them to do background checks beyond 5-years for new applicants. People have expressed concern over the possibility of applicants who are a public safety risk waiting for that 5-year clock to run out.
It has always been optional to verify that a transferee's PAL is valid when transferring a non-restricted. I don't personally take issue with changing the verification from optional to mandatory, because I'd rather know. I do wonder if they would use an automated system for verifying and issuing the reference numbers via the toll-free number. Right now it's optional and no record is kept when you call and verify.
I agree about the ATTs. I haven't seen or heard of any reason why the legislation would need to change.
1
People have expressed concern over the possibility of applicants who are a public safety risk waiting for that 5-year clock to run out.
This one makes me laugh. Have they considered that maybe, just maybe, if someone's gone 5 years without doing anything that would disqualify them, they're not a public safety risk anymore?
Like if you're going to kill someone, would you wait 5 years, take a course, apply for a license, then buy a gun; or would you just stab/beat/run the bitch over? Or buy a gun from some guy named "switchblade" in an alley off 118ave in Edmonton?
That argument is just so dumb.
2
They already can go back further than 5 years if they want. C-71 makes it mandatory that they do, which is a waste of resources. If someone is good for 5 years they aren't likely a hazard. Any serious offense carries 10 year firearm bans anyway.
There is no reason to require clearing with the RCMP to transfer a non restricted to my wife, mother, or close friend. That is an asinine waste of resources. It's a criminal offense to sell to someone without a license, so when selling to strangers PAL are mandatory to check by due diligence anyway.
These are just surface changes that look good to people who don't understand how the system works. Realistically they've only added a few burdens to law abiding owners and the CFO, without doing anything positive to curb criminal misuse.
1
Trudeau is not insane, but he is incredibly stupid.
Yes, C-71 does give the RCMP final and complete authority over classification.
6
Can you clarify where it says that the RCMP would have authority over classification? I can't find anything like that, neither direct statement nor indirect implication, in the Bill.
2
They already have authority over classifications. C-71 will remove ability to overrule them through OiC.
The people enforcing the law shouldn't be the ones with what amounts to the final say on interpretation.
4
While definitions of the three classes of firearms — non-restricted, restricted and prohibited — will continue to be set by Parliament, the Liberal government is giving the RCMP the power to decide how individual firearms are classified.
"After the definitions have been set in law by Parliament, it should be firearms experts who make the technical determination as to which firearm fits into which category. That is a factual, technical function, and it should not be politicized. Bill C-71 makes that point very clear," Goodale said.
The Liberals say that, under Harper, cabinet was able to "contradict the experts" and assign a lower category to a particular firearm. Those opposed to C-71 say the government is abdicating its legislative responsibilities by allowing police to make these choices without political approval.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tasker-gun-bill-c71-explainer-1.4833034
3
Yeah, I meant within the actual Bill itself as opposed to in a news article, but I ended up finding it. It's definitely not stated as clearly as Goodale says it is. The whole classification thing has long been a bit of a patchwork, with plenty of examples of individual firearms that seem out of place.
1
As jimmy digs the hole in the yard where the boat is going to crash.
3
Will some types of vz58 still be allowed?
1
Yup, the cz858's are the only ones affected. CSA VZ58's are ok.
2
[removed]
1
Wait, if i currently own a cz858, then what?
1
I dont remember the details exactly, its been a while since they were posted, but from what I remember they intend to create a new prohib class for them, which seems to involve grandfathering. Beyond that, I would recommend you read the bill over, get it from the source.
3
Some 858s are not affected. There's am rcmp info page with years and receiver stamps.
If yours is affected it will go prohibited and you'll get a prohib class on your license (just for 858 - don't get excited).
2
What guns are those?
1
Top: Swiss arms PE-90/SG 550 (5.56 NATO)
Bottom: Czech Small Arms VZ-58 (7.62x39)
Both are currently non-restricted in Canada.
7
Bottom one is actually a CZ858. C71 is affecting them only, not the CSA vz58.
3
Top: SIG SG 550 Bottom: VZ-58
4
[deleted]
1
Do you... are you the one they put in charge of banning guns die to appearance?
3
So, so wrong.
2
[deleted]
1
Wait , if i currently own a cz-858 tactical, am i screwed?
1
Depends on year. google for rcmp info.
1
Are you seriously just hearing about this now lol a lot of guys on CGN dumped them for half of what they were selling for as soon as the news came out. Either check the date of manufacture on your firearm on the ramp website or post the year here and we can tell you if it’s going prohibited.
If I were you I would hang on to it, they say that you will still be able to get an att for the new prohib classes just like a 12.6
1
I heard about this a while ago before any decisions were made about the bill and just kind of put it at the back of my mind... Seeing this post reminded me... Mine is one of the affected models but I still think i'll hold onto it because i love that gun.
1
Not sure if you’ve ever had a gun that went prohibited before, but they give you a prohibited status or something which will allow you to possess and acquire other prohibited status long guns. This happened when derringers were prohibited, now I can own other prohibited pistols.
1
Nope, my Swiss Arms ain't going anywhere.
What swiss arms?
This guy gets it.
I don't own guns.
The ones attached to my torso.
Where does a swedish General keep his Armys? ... in his sleevies.