Fed Gov - Online Engagement Survey -- handguns and semi-automatic firearms

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

On the one hand it is definitely geared towards someone who is not a shooter. Even if they are not agains't handguns and (horrors) AR style rifles, it is worded in such a way that it will fit the mandate to limit ownership of these firearms.
On the other hand you can use the comment box to get exactly how you feel across...using reason and logic. You can damn well bet that those who go ballistic in their comments are only going to fuel the 'gun owners shouldn't be trusted with these firearms' agenda...so don't go out of your way to sound like a lunatic.
As to the ability to fill it out over and over...I filled it out about 15 times on every computer at work. Pretty sure the fed's are sophisticated enough to see multiple entry's coming from the same IP address.
And for those saying it's a shame not worth filling out...the old saying 'if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem' applies.

Not a sham just a waste of time. You can tell them what you think but if you actually believe it is part of the solution................

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Not a sham just a waste of time. You can tell them what you think but if you actually believe it is part of the solution................

When they take our guns we'll have people like you thank

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

When they take our guns we'll have people like you thank

Actually it will be guys like you who seriously think filling out a mickey mouse survey and suggesting it is really important, and will actually influence a Liberal to change there stance and save our guns is going to work.....LOL.

I belong to AFGA, CCFR and the NFA (these are all pro gun) and express my thoughts directly to my MLA. You want to do something, support these types of organizations. These organizations lobby directly to parliament but if filling out government surveys make you feel all warm and fuzzy......carry on with that.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Actually it will be guys like you who seriously think filling out a mickey mouse survey and suggesting it is really important, and will actually influence a Liberal to change there stance and save our guns is going to work.....LOL.

I belong to AFGA, CCFR and the NFA (these are all pro gun) and express my thoughts directly to my MLA. You want to do something, support these types of organizations. These organizations lobby directly to parliament but if filling out government surveys make you feel all warm and fuzzy......carry on with that.

And yet you sneer at those expressing how they feel to the actual government that is sitting.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

And yet you sneer at those expressing how they feel to the actual government that is sitting.

Are you suggesting that the UPC have the same view on guns as the Liberals and NDP
I really couln't care less, fill out surveys to your hearts content, I just feel there are much better ways to spend your time and money if you are seriously trying to support legal gun owners.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Are you suggesting that the UPC have the same view on guns as the Liberals and NDP
I really couln't care less, fill out surveys to your hearts content, I just feel there are much better places to spend your time and money if you are seriously trying to support legal gun owners.

Of course not. What do you think happens when your MLA that opposes everything the Libs do, stands up and says I got a letter from a gun owner. The Libs roll their eyes and carry on. Hopefully a survey commissioned by the sitting government carries a lot more weight. I filled it out and directed my comments to the government. In my mind that carries more weight than an MLA that opposes everything the government does, making a comment. Just my opinion.

You do know this survey was commissioned by the government right, and yes I do understand it has all sorts of blemishes, but at least they can read my comments.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

Of course not. What do you think happens when your MLA that opposes everything the Libs do, stands up and says I got a letter from a gun owner. The Libs roll their eyes and carry on. Hopefully a survey commissioned by the sitting government carries a lot more weight. I filled it out and directed my comments to the government. In my mind that carries more weight than an MLA that opposes everything the government does, making a comment. Just my opinion.

You do know this survey was commissioned by the government right, and yes I do understand it has all sorts of blemishes, but at least they can read my comments.

Got a letter??? The UPC sponsored e-petition on bill c-71 is the second most popular e-petition ever............will it do any good???? but bill c-68 had hundreds of thousands of e-petitions and helped put an end to the gun-registry.
My problem is that I have seen very few results from a survey and like already mentioned they are specifically worded to illicit specific results. I do not trust surveys, especially ones where names, emails, etc are not required, they are not required because your views are not really wanted.......once again just a "feel good" sort of thing.

[threeforthree]

Come Wednesday, the country will be ,,ya mellow

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Actually it will be guys like you who seriously think filling out a mickey mouse survey and suggesting it is really important, and will actually influence a Liberal to change there stance and save our guns is going to work.....LOL.

I belong to AFGA, CCFR and the NFA (these are all pro gun) and express my thoughts directly to my MLA. You want to do something, support these types of organizations. These organizations lobby directly to parliament but if filling out government surveys make you feel all warm and fuzzy......carry on with that.

Well my friend I too am a member of all the organizations you list and send letters (actual snail mail instead of just emails which they delete) to my MLA.
The difference between you and me is I take advantage of all the options to get my point to the powers that be.
You make a lot of assumptions of stuff you know jack all about.

[32-40win]

Takes a consistent barrage of communications of all forms, to make them very aware that they are barking up the wrong tree. I wouldn't worry too much about the Con MP's, but, the Libs and NDP have to be told they are now unelectable to a whole bunch of the population, and that they are getting themselves in deeper. Need to contact local Lib & NDP constituencies as well, and let them know where they stand. Make 'em sweat.

[Mr Conservation]

Done !!

Even though I voted no to all questions about further restrictions I did put long comments in the boxes.

Under the "ethnicity" question, if you ticked "other" there was no box to describe what "other" was. I would have put down "Caucasian Canadian".

I am afraid the results of the questionaire have already been determined, and this was just an exercise by the Liberals to say that they actually consulted the people of Canada.

Mr Conservation

[Scott N]

Originally Posted by Mr Conservation

Done !!

Even though I voted no to all questions about further restrictions I did put long comments in the boxes.

Under the "ethnicity" question, if you ticked "other" there was no box to describe what "other" was. I would have put down "Caucasian Canadian".

I am afraid the results of the questionaire have already been determined, and this was just an exercise by the Liberals to say that they actually consulted the people of Canada.

Mr Conservation

It's almost as if they give more credence to people if they aren't white males.

[ReconWilly]

Originally Posted by Scott N

It's almost as if they give more credence to people if they aren't white males.

Affirmative action is cultural Marxism, society suicide.

[kritz]

Originally Posted by beltburner

That entire survey is aimed at the American gun laws; not ours.
What is wrong with the government that they don't even know their own laws?

Yes this is a huge issue, Most of the public do not know what Canadian guns laws are like. When a gun crime happens and it hits the media from the US, Canadians backlash and demand change even though our laws are stricter ( but the consequences are not). That is the people that get the survey that is making our laws when they ask 10 people on a city street that they know will not know Canadian gun laws. then they can say 90 % of the people want change.

[hermn8r]

As stated above, the last two questions are regarding whether you own firearms or handguns. I have a strange feeling some of the responses who have "yes" for those two last questions will be thrown out and not considered...

[ReconWilly]

Originally Posted by hermn8r

As stated above, the last two questions are regarding whether you own firearms or handguns. I have a strange feeling some of the responses who have "yes" for those two last questions will be thrown out and not considered...

Or they will be added to the appropriate lists.

Anything that you say can and will be held against you.

[IronNoggin]

Serious flaws in Ottawa's handgun ban consultations

The Trudeau government said they would consult far and wide on banning handguns, they just didn’t specify that it would be world-wide.

Last week the Trudeau Liberals, under Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction Bill Blair, launched an online consultation.

Remarkably, given that it is 2018, the online consultation has a number of serious flaws.

Firstly, there is no limit on how many times any individual can fill out the online survey.

Secondly, it isn’t restricted to Canada.

“An honest and serious public consultation survey on the opinions of Canadians shouldn’t be open to anyone from any country,” said Tracey Wilson.

Wilson is VP of public relations for the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, a lobby group for gun owners.

“The simplest on polls use technology that prohibits people from doing them over and over. I wonder why Public Safety wouldn’t implement such a simple standard,” Wilson said.

It’s a valid point.

It wouldn’t be hard to fix this but maybe the government doesn’t want to. Tech experts say stopping people from repeatedly filling out the survey or filling it out from outside the country would not be hard.

“Absolutely not,” said one tech expert when asked if it would be difficult to stop the average person from filling out the form over and over again.

The tech, who gets contracts in Ottawa and doesn’t want to be identified, says stopping people from outside the country is also an easy fix.

“Netflix has those kinds of controls. They stop you from watching American programming and make you watch an Anne of Green Gables reboot,” he said.

Meanwhile, Trudeau’s government says they are consulting Canadians.

Truth is, we don’t know who they are consulting.

“We’ve got reports from people all around the world filling in the survey,” Wilson told me.

“Sri Lanka, Cuba, the US, Mexico, Germany. Why is the government of Canada allowing outside opinions to influence legislative considerations?”

It’s a good question and one that the government could not answer.

Several emails and calls to the office of Minister Bill Blair saw questions go unanswered in why the government was wide open, as in world wide open, in terms of seeking input.

Perhaps the answer is found in the statement Blair put out when he announced the consultation last week.

“I am committed to examining all options and hearing all perspectives on this issue,” Blair said.

We just didn’t know it meant the views of people in the United States, Cuba or Sri Lanka.

Or maybe we will be the victim of a Russian hack, it is easy enough to do on the Public Safety website where basic security is apparently optional for a survey.

The Trudeau government said they would study the possibility of a ban on handguns and so-called “assault weapons” but the fix is already in.

The questions are loaded in the survey, the technology is weak.

One of the questions asks, “Should more be done to limit access to assault weapons?”

There is no accepted definition of assault weapon. If I pick up a chair and beat you over the head with it that is technically an assault weapon.

But the Trudeau Liberals point to an old American definition from the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004.

They say in the survey, “in general, assault weapons are semi-automatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire.”

Or …… firearms already illegal in Canada.

You already can’t legally own a large capacity magazine for most rifles.

Why bother telling the public that when you can scare them.

We have a problem with criminals and gangs using guns in turf and drug wars in Canada but police and politicians don’t know how to deal with that.

So politicians are dealing with what they can control, law-abiding gun owners.

There are more than 900,000 handguns registered in Canada — yes handguns are still registered. The owners of those guns are not the source of the criminal problem in this country.

Yet because Justin Trudeau know he can beat them up for political gain and win votes in the next election, they will be the focus on the crackdown on guns.

The gangbangers shooting up your neighbourhood, that can be someone else’s problem.

https://torontosun.com/news/crime/li...-consultations

[TrollGRG]

Typical liberal BS

This is our policy now what facts can we make up to prove it?

instead of

These are the facts. What should our policy be.

[raab]

I told them how I feel and hopefully they listen. I had two points. One is that banning handguns/semi autos they'd be making new criminals out of law abiding citizens. As I'm sure there will be many who don't give up their guns.

Second I think they should give more power to municipalities and provinces. Allowing the municipalities to dictate gun laws makes the most sense to me. The reason I say that is the gun laws in say Toronto should be different then northern Alberta. Told them a blanket gun law for the country won't work as were to diverse.

[ReconWilly]

Originally Posted by raab

I told them how I feel and hopefully they listen. I had two points. One is that banning handguns/semi autos they'd be making new criminals out of law abiding citizens. As I'm sure there will be many who don't give up their guns.

Second I think they should give more power to municipalities and provinces. Allowing the municipalities to dictate gun laws makes the most sense to me. The reason I say that is the gun laws in say Toronto should be different then northern Alberta. Told them a blanket gun law for the country won't work as were to diverse.

But that's not how central planning works...

They don't care about anyone's feeling's unless you have gender issue's or some other diversity issue.

They have already signed on to United Nation's agenda 21 and 2030 for sustainable development long ago,we've been sold out, the decision's are not up to them, they are sock puppet's towing the line.

[ghostguy6]

Originally Posted by ReconWilly

But that's not how central planning works...

They don't care about anyone's feeling's unless you have gender issue's or some other diversity issue.

When they asked how do you identify your gender I chose other then indicted heterosexual hunter and target shooter. Maybe that will make them listen, if anyone actually gets the results of the survey.

[dgl1948]

Originally Posted by raab

Second I think they should give more power to municipalities and provinces. Allowing the municipalities to dictate gun laws makes the most sense to me. The reason I say that is the gun laws in say Toronto should be different then northern Alberta. Told them a blanket gun law for the country won't work as were to diverse.

Giving power to each municipality would create a nightmare. That would mean you could have hundreds of municipalities across the country with different laws. Hunters would have to check the laws in each RM before you entered. Could be one allows the use of a semi automatic, others not, some my require all firearms to be encased, some may have a complete firearms ban, and the list could go on and on.

[2 Tollers]

Originally Posted by raab

Second I think they should give more power to municipalities and provinces. Allowing the municipalities to dictate gun laws makes the most sense to me.

Giving more powers to municipalities would be a fast slippery slope down for gun owners. We had a mayor in Edmonton - Jan R that openly stated she did not understand why all legal gun owners could not store their firearms in a central armoury run by the city. Put that in place and now go with the current Mayor that is always short of cash and loves looking for ways to get money what would your access fee (check and check out) be, how long until the municipality loses or damages your gun, how long until they decide you do not need that many or a gun at all. Look at the nut running Toronto -- no need for legal / legitimate gun owners to have guns in the City.

[BlackHeart]

Why would gender or ethnicity have ANY relevance to the survey.

More of the crap Trudeau identity politics he has been big on.

[Reaver]

Originally Posted by Scott N

It's almost as if they give more credence to people if they aren't white males.

I think I identified as a South Asian female in the 50 years old range at the time of taking the survey.

[raab]

Originally Posted by 2 Tollers

Giving more powers to municipalities would be a fast slippery slope down for gun owners. We had a mayor in Edmonton - Jan R that openly stated she did not understand why all legal gun owners could not store their firearms in a central armoury run by the city. Put that in place and now go with the current Mayor that is always short of cash and loves looking for ways to get money what would your access fee (check and check out) be, how long until the municipality loses or damages your gun, how long until they decide you do not need that many or a gun at all. Look at the nut running Toronto -- no need for legal / legitimate gun owners to have guns in the City.

Yes that could happen. The great part is if that did happen in Edmonton, gun owners could simply move to one of the surrounding counties. If the whole country does the same thing, its much harder to switch countries.

[raab]

Originally Posted by dgl1948

Giving power to each municipality would create a nightmare. That would mean you could have hundreds of municipalities across the country with different laws. Hunters would have to check the laws in each RM before you entered. Could be one allows the use of a semi automatic, others not, some my require all firearms to be encased, some may have a complete firearms ban, and the list could go on and on.

And whats the problem with that? We already have to check different laws going through provincial and national parks. Also the reason I said to include the province is we could have a blanket law across the province that allows for the transportation of firearms on provincial highways. I would way rather check and see if a municipality allows me to carry a semi auto, then be told I can't have a handgun because the idiots in Toronto don't think I need one. Most rural municipalities Im sure would have less restrictions on guns then whats in place now. For example I wouldn't be shocked to see some counties allow you to transport/carry a hand gun without an ATC. I could see Toronto saying you need an ATC for both Rifles, and Hand Guns.

[raab]

Originally Posted by ReconWilly

But that's not how central planning works...

They don't care about anyone's feeling's unless you have gender issue's or some other diversity issue.

They have already signed on to United Nation's agenda 21 and 2030 for sustainable development long ago,we've been sold out, the decision's are not up to them, they are sock puppet's towing the line.

Then if they come for our guns, I say we don't give them up. There's a difference between whats moral and whats law.

[ReconWilly]

Originally Posted by raab

Then if they come for our guns, I say we don't give them up. There's a difference between whats moral and whats law.

Law's written by sociopath's are immoral.

[dgl1948]

Originally Posted by raab

And whats the problem with that? We already have to check different laws going through provincial and national parks. Also the reason I said to include the province is we could have a blanket law across the province that allows for the transportation of firearms on provincial highways. I would way rather check and see if a municipality allows me to carry a semi auto, then be told I can't have a handgun because the idiots in Toronto don't think I need one. Most rural municipalities Im sure would have less restrictions on guns then whats in place now. For example I wouldn't be shocked to see some counties allow you to transport/carry a hand gun without an ATC. I could see Toronto saying you need an ATC for both Rifles, and Hand Guns.

Have you any idea how many municipalities there are on the prairies. Could take a lot of checking laws. If you are traveling to a range it may take a lot of travel to get by the gun free ones. It’s bad enough now without having to worry about dozens of laws in each RM.