Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesB
Prohibited categories are the result of a gutless government producing shadow theater.
The guns are apparently so dangerous to the public that they must be banned. But, the owners can keep them (so are they a threat or not?)
Actually collecting the guns up would cost money, so instead the government comes up with the cheaper alternative that deprives the owner of the value of his property AND at the same time has no effect on public safety.
Only in Canada.
|
I like that rationale, either they're dangerous or they aren't, they should have the stones to stand by their convictions and say what they really mean. Why prohibit something that they still feel comfortable leaving in the hands of citizens for anywhere from 1 to 8 decades, depending on the age of the licensee? This proposed bill is clearly written the way it is because they want to undertake eventual bans without the push-back, its a ban at a glacial pace. If a 23 year old has a Black Special he's still own it long after PM Trudy passed away of old age, provided they both live to approximately the same ripe old age. Of course by this point they would intend that the CFO's stop 'permitting' things such as ATT's. The same goes for the ambiguous open-ended "we'll just put this 12(9)category here" to be abused at will by unelected RCMP firearms lab drones who are given their directives by the head of the RCMP who is given her directives by the Liberals who appointed her.