RCMP move to ban semi-automatic rifles

[BuckCuller]

Pot Heads.

[raab]

Originally Posted by rugatika

What will that make the people that voted for them?

Better then voting for someone trying to destroy healthcare and put firewalls around Alberta. And wheres that great economy Harper was talking about? Back in another recession thanks to his ridiculous policies.

[raab]

Originally Posted by sillyak

You obviously have no understanding of our current magazine laws.

You are either a troll or a idiot.

Our laws currently hassle honest people while the gangsters do whatever they want. Do you honestly think someone going on a rampage or involved in a gang shoot out will have a mag pinned to 5? Please.

I understand the laws, which is why I don't mind them looking at guns that might be made fully automatic that have magazines that can be easily modified to hold more rounds. I'm not fully in support of this, just think some people are jumping to conclusions as usual on this board. We have no facts to go on right now, besides that they may make some guns prohibited. Does anyone have a list of the guns they're even looking at?

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by raab

Better then voting for someone trying to destroy healthcare and put firewalls around Alberta. And wheres that great economy Harper was talking about? Back in another recession thanks to his ridiculous policies.

You really have no clue. Canada was doing better in this recession than the other G8 countries because of Harper and his government. So now that Harper is gone, is our economy improving or worsening? How is the Canadian dollar doing under Trudeau and the Liberals?

[deerassassin]

Originally Posted by raab

Canada has a 30.8 guns per hundred people. Not everyone owns a gun but most people at least know someone with a gun. I know a few people who will come out shooting with me who don't own guns. Doesn't mean they're against them. As I said if the Libs go after guns again they're idiots. The last time they did it they didn't govern again for 10 years.

Ok so you say there is 30.8 guns per 100 people. That may be true it may not be I don't know. What I do know is that most people that are liberals are urbanites. I mean real urbanites. They don't have any true knowledge about firearms. They get there knowledge from the media because it is so trustworthy.... As far as most liberals are concerned guns go bang and are ment to take human lives. They can't tell the difference between hardened criminals or the father out hunting with his son. I recently completed my apprenticeship. I was at NAIT when the attacks happened in Paris. One of the guys was talking about how Donald trump had said that the solution to the problem is to arm all the citizens. A bunch of the guys in my class said that was stupid because than everyone would just shoot each other. They looked at me with absolute shock when I said trump was right. These are the kind of people we are dealing with. They have no clue. It are allowed to make the decisions. We as the firearms community are very small. Until we get more TRUE education out there (not the bs that cbc puts out can't watch or read that without wanting to lose my mind) things will not change.

[deerassassin]

Originally Posted by raab

I understand the laws, which is why I don't mind them looking at guns that might be made fully automatic that have magazines that can be easily modified to hold more rounds. I'm not fully in support of this, just think some people are jumping to conclusions as usual on this board. We have no facts to go on right now, besides that they may make some guns prohibited. Does anyone have a list of the guns they're even looking at?

The criminals get the guns anyways whether you ban them or not. Why would you ban them? I'm curious what you're reasoning is.

[raab]

Originally Posted by deerassassin

Ok so you say there is 30.8 guns per 100 people. That may be true it may not be I don't know. What I do know is that most people that are liberals are urbanites. I mean real urbanites. They don't have any true knowledge about firearms. They get there knowledge from the media because it is so trustworthy.... As far as most liberals are concerned guns go bang and are ment to take human lives. They can't tell the difference between hardened criminals or the father out hunting with his son. I recently completed my apprenticeship. I was at NAIT when the attacks happened in Paris. One of the guys was talking about how Donald trump had said that the solution to the problem is to arm all the citizens. A bunch of the guys in my class said that was stupid because than everyone would just shoot each other. They looked at me with absolute shock when I said trump was right. These are the kind of people we are dealing with. They have no clue. It are allowed to make the decisions. We as the firearms community are very small. Until we get more TRUE education out there (not the bs that cbc puts out can't watch or read that without wanting to lose my mind) things will not change.

I know quite a few urbanites that hunt and shoot. No need to label them. I think shooting is actually making a comeback with a lot of young people. While I agree that people may not be as educated on the issue as they should be. I think its our responsibility as gun owners to educate our friends and relatives on why gun rights are important.

[deerassassin]

Originally Posted by raab

I know quite a few urbanites that hunt and shoot. No need to label them. I think shooting is actually making a comeback with a lot of young people. While I agree that people may not be as educated on the issue as they should be. I think its our responsibility as gun owners to educate our friends and relatives on why gun rights are important.

Im not labelling all people who live in the city as urbanites. Now my family and group of friends are all outdoorsmen. What about the people who there only way of education is the media? Plus you dodged my last question. Why should we have a ban an these firearms?

[raab]

Originally Posted by deerassassin

Im not labelling all people who live in the city as urbanites. Now my family and group of friends are all outdoorsmen. What about the people who there only way of education is the media? Plus you dodged my last question. Why should we have a ban an these firearms?

I don't even know what firearms they want to ban. I might not even be of the stance they should be banned. I will say mental health is still a huge issue here in Canada and most mass shootings are done by those with mental health issues. I don't want someone like Justin Bourque being able to buy a a semi auto rifle, do a simple modification, drill out the magazine and end up with a fully automatic rifle with a mag holding 15+ rounds.

Now in saying I'd like to see something that would allow people to buy prohibited weapons with strict conditions like: a thorough mental health assessment, the gun must be stored at a secure central location, and to take it out you need to get issued a transport pass detailing your route(no stops) and range your taking it to.

I think the above suggestion would be a nice compromise for our policing agencies and their worries regarding prohibited weapons in homes as well as allowing the average citizen to collect and use prohibited weapons.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by raab

I understand the laws, which is why I don't mind them looking at guns that might be made fully automatic that have magazines that can be easily modified to hold more rounds. I'm not fully in support of this, just think some people are jumping to conclusions as usual on this board. We have no facts to go on right now, besides that they may make some guns prohibited. Does anyone have a list of the guns they're even looking at?

raab, please stop. What is wrong with a fully automatic firearm? Whether it's a ball pein hammer or a hydrogen bomb, it will only be as dangerous as the person wielding it.
Look, any machinist worth his salt can easily produce a fully automatic weapon that will not even have a serial number. Want to ban machinists? Or milling machines?
Laws can't legislate safety. It is up to people to use their head. Which you clearly don't understand. Any regulation or law concerning firearms does nothing except infringe on law abiding citizens. Criminals don't care about the law. Is this too hard to understand? Looking at other threads you have posted on, it is clear you are anti-conservative. You didn't like Harper. You wanted change. Well, change is what you will get. But the changes we are about to see will not be conducive to a safe and peaceful society. If you want to promote this on this forum, great. But just understand that you will be proven wrong over and over again.

[deerassassin]

Originally Posted by raab

I don't even know what firearms they want to ban. I might not even be of the stance they should be banned. I will say mental health is still a huge issue here in Canada and most mass shootings are done by those with mental health issues. I don't want someone like Justin Bourque being able to buy a a semi auto rifle, do a simple modification, drill out the magazine and end up with a fully automatic rifle with a mag holding 15+ rounds.

Now in saying I'd like to see something that would allow people to buy prohibited weapons with strict conditions like: a thorough mental health assessment, the gun must be stored at a secure central location, and to take it out you need to get issued a transport pass detailing your route(no stops) and range your taking it to.

I think the above suggestion would be a nice compromise for our policing agencies and their worries regarding prohibited weapons in homes as well as allowing the average citizen to collect and use prohibited weapons.

Ok but guys like justin bourque are going to get a firearm that can hold 15 or more rounds of they want illegally. So why not let the citizens be armed? Look at the attack on parliament hill. The one guy with a gun stopped it. Had he not been there or armed it could have been worse.

[purgatory.sv]

Originally Posted by raab

Canada has a 30.8 guns per hundred people. Not everyone owns a gun but most people at least know someone with a gun. I know a few people who will come out shooting with me who don't own guns. Doesn't mean they're against them. As I said if the Libs go after guns again they're idiots. The last time they did it they didn't govern again for 10 years.

Where did you get this statistic?

As has been alluded to do have skin in the game?

[purgatory.sv]

Originally Posted by raab

I don't even know what firearms they want to ban. I might not even be of the stance they should be banned. I will say mental health is still a huge issue here in Canada and most mass shootings are done by those with mental health issues. I don't want someone like Justin Bourque being able to buy a a semi auto rifle, do a simple modification, drill out the magazine and end up with a fully automatic rifle with a mag holding 15+ rounds.

Now in saying I'd like to see something that would allow people to buy prohibited weapons with strict conditions like: a thorough mental health assessment, the gun must be stored at a secure central location, and to take it out you need to get issued a transport pass detailing your route(no stops) and range your taking it to.

I think the above suggestion would be a nice compromise for our policing agencies and their worries regarding prohibited weapons in homes as well as allowing the average citizen to collect and use prohibited weapons.

don't know

[purgatory.sv]

Originally Posted by raab

I know quite a few urbanites that hunt and shoot. No need to label them. I think shooting is actually making a comeback with a lot of young people. While I agree that people may not be as educated on the issue as they should be. I think its our responsibility as gun owners to educate our friends and relatives on why gun rights are important.

don't know???

[purgatory.sv]

Originally Posted by raab

I understand the laws, which is why I don't mind them looking at guns that might be made fully automatic that have magazines that can be easily modified to hold more rounds. I'm not fully in support of this, just think some people are jumping to conclusions as usual on this board. We have no facts to go on right now, besides that they may make some guns prohibited. Does anyone have a list of the guns they're even looking at?

do you?

[raab]

Originally Posted by Newview01

raab, please stop. What is wrong with a fully automatic firearm? Whether it's a ball pein hammer or a hydrogen bomb, it will only be as dangerous as the person wielding it.
Look, any machinist worth his salt can easily produce a fully automatic weapon that will not even have a serial number. Want to ban machinists? Or milling machines?
Laws can't legislate safety. It is up to people to use their head. Which you clearly don't understand. Any regulation or law concerning firearms does nothing except infringe on law abiding citizens. Criminals don't care about the law. Is this too hard to understand? Looking at other threads you have posted on, it is clear you are anti-conservative. You didn't like Harper. You wanted change. Well, change is what you will get. But the changes we are about to see will not be conducive to a safe and peaceful society. If you want to promote this on this forum, great. But just understand that you will be proven wrong over and over again.

Tell you what I get a M16 you get a ball point pen. We stand 50 yards away from each other in a fight to the death. Who wins?

Gun owners are only hurting themselves when they don't realize the damage that can be done with a gun. Once we can admit that our guns can be very dangerous in the wrong hands, we as guns owners can start making progress in our legislation. With the progress I'd hope that those who have shown they can handle the responsibility of the full automatics weapons would have that opportunity.

[raab]

Originally Posted by purgatory.sv

Where did you get this statistic?

As has been alluded to do have skin in the game?

google is your friend... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number...ita_by_country

[deerassassin]

Originally Posted by raab

google is your friend... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number...ita_by_country

Wikipedia is a poor source I could have written that for all you know.

[purgatory.sv]

Originally Posted by raab

google is your friend... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number...ita_by_country

Ok at this point in time I am at 3050 posts, and I know I troll.

Ok 3051.

You are trolling.

[raab]

Originally Posted by deerassassin

Ok but guys like justin bourque are going to get a firearm that can hold 15 or more rounds of they want illegally. So why not let the citizens be armed? Look at the attack on parliament hill. The one guy with a gun stopped it. Had he not been there or armed it could have been worse.

I don't think he could, you need to have the right connections to get a firearm like that in Canada. According to someone else in this thread Justin Bourque admitted to trying to make his rifle fully automatic, why wouldn't he have just got one if it was that easy?

[raab]

Originally Posted by deerassassin

Wikipedia is a poor source I could have written that for all you know.

Or you could check the references. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...nership/table/

[deerassassin]

Originally Posted by raab

Tell you what I get a M16 you get a ball point pen. We stand 50 yards away from each other in a fight to the death. Who wins?

Gun owners are only hurting themselves when they don't realize the damage that can be done with a gun. Once we can admit that our guns can be very dangerous in the wrong hands, we as guns owners can start making progress in our legislation. With the progress I'd hope that those who have shown they can handle the responsibility of the full automatics weapons would have that opportunity.

You get an m16 I'll get a slingshot. I may getcha. Just saying. It's a poor comparison.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by raab

I don't even know what firearms they want to ban. I might not even be of the stance they should be banned. I will say mental health is still a huge issue here in Canada and most mass shootings are done by those with mental health issues. I don't want someone like Justin Bourque being able to buy a a semi auto rifle, do a simple modification, drill out the magazine and end up with a fully automatic rifle with a mag holding 15+ rounds.

Now in saying I'd like to see something that would allow people to buy prohibited weapons with strict conditions like: a thorough mental health assessment, the gun must be stored at a secure central location, and to take it out you need to get issued a transport pass detailing your route(no stops) and range your taking it to.

I think the above suggestion would be a nice compromise for our policing agencies and their worries regarding prohibited weapons in homes as well as allowing the average citizen to collect and use prohibited weapons.

So you want extreme controls on firearms that can hold 15+ rounds?
What do you think of this situation?
An individual stops at a restaurant and leaves a rifle with a large capacity magazine in his vehicle, while he goes into the restaurant for a meal or a drink? That firearm is then stolen from that vehicle, which is easy to break into. Do you think that the person should be charged with a crime for leaving that firearm in the vehicle while he stops for a meal or a drink? If you think a charge is appropriate, what do you think a fair penalty would be??

How about someone leaving a loaded handgun that holds 15+ rounds, on a B.C ferry and then walking away leaving the gun lying where anyone could find it? Should that person face criminal charges for this? What do you think a fair penalty would be?

I don't think he could, you need to have the right connections to get a firearm like that in Canada. According to someone else in this thread Justin Bourque admitted to trying to make his rifle fully automatic, why wouldn't he have just got one if it was that easy?

Both of the situations mentioned above actually happened , the first in Alberta, the second in B.C. , and no charges were laid against either of the people leaving the firearms. And the people that ended up with the firearms didn't require any " special connections" to get them.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by raab

Tell you what I get a M16 you get a ball point pen. We stand 50 yards away from each other in a fight to the death. Who wins?

Gun owners are only hurting themselves when they don't realize the damage that can be done with a gun. Once we can admit that our guns can be very dangerous in the wrong hands, we as guns owners can start making progress in our legislation. With the progress I'd hope that those who have shown they can handle the responsibility of the full automatics weapons would have that opportunity.

Seriously?! You just explained the problem.. If open carry was legal, you wouldn't be brandishing an M16 i with intent to harm. Also, the fact that you said M16 shows you know little about modern guns. M16s are so 80s.. The three shot burst is obsolete. We've moved on to M4s.

[raab]

Originally Posted by deerassassin

You get an m16 I'll get a slingshot. I may getcha. Just saying. It's a poor comparison.

The point is we need to respect our guns. If we can't be empathetic to the general public we'll never get anywhere with legislation. You guys can keep your head in the sand and continue to watch our firearms be taken. I'm more open to doing something different that may produce different results. JMO

[Newview01]

raab, this ones for you. Tell me more how gun control is effective. (El Salvador, Honduras, etc..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...ted_death_rate

[deerassassin]

Originally Posted by raab

The point is we need to respect our guns. If we can't be empathetic to the general public we'll never get anywhere with legislation. You guys can keep your head in the sand and continue to watch our firearms be taken. I'm more open to doing something different that may produce different results. JMO

Raab the only point you've made is that you are against people having semi automatics because it doesn't effect you. As for being empathetic. That's what they said in Australia. They gave and gave till there's nothing left. If you give the antis a metre they try to take a mile. Our biggest problem is how the media portrays firearms and the people who own them.

[purgatory.sv]

Originally Posted by raab

google is your friend... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number...ita_by_country

Post 3052.


Are you a worker or an administrator?

[raab]

Originally Posted by deerassassin

Raab the only point you've made is that you are against people having semi automatics because it doesn't effect you. As for being empathetic. That's what they said in Australia. They gave and gave till there's nothing left. If you give the antis a metre they try to take a mile.

I never said I was against anyone have semi autos. I said I was against people who haven't had a thorough mental health check owning a gun that only requires a simple modification to make it fully automatic and has a magazine that can be easily drilled out to become a high capacity mag.

I hope that people can have more access to guns, but I want to ensure that the guns don't fall into the wrong hands.

[purgatory.sv]

Originally Posted by BRU375

So, I almost threw up in my coffee this morning. CBC reports that the RCMP is moving agressively under the Criminal Code to ban semi-automatic firearms. They said that they requested the update to the criminal code under the Conservatives they were ignored but the Liberals have confirmed they will go ahead with the update immediately "while undergoing consultations" which means they will arrange to have at least some, (probably all) semi-automatic rifle owners turn in their rifles in or be found in contravention of the criminal code.

I dont think anyone on here will be surprised by this move. next they will probably go after hunting and fishing rights.

From the CBC this morning

The number of military-style firearms that can be temporarily jury-rigged to become automatic weapons has increased "dramatically" in Canada over the last decade — and so has the public-safety risk.

That's the stark conclusion of an internal RCMP laboratory report on improvised methods for upgrading semi-automatic weapons, and for illegally altering magazine clips to allow for rapid continuous fire.


The lab report notes that Criminal Code regulations designed to thwart makeshift upgrades may not apply to newer generations of weapons, creating a legal void.

"The restricted and prohibited firearm provisions of Criminal Code regulations were last updated in 1995, and there are presently numerous models of military and paramilitary firearms on the Canadian market which are outside the scope of the Criminal Code regulations, many being non-restricted in classification," says the 15-page report.

"The Canadian introduction of new types of military and paramilitary firearms not mentioned in the Criminal Code regulations, nearly all with large capacity magazines sizes, started circa 2005 and has accelerated since."

"The public safety threat posed by improvised conversion to full automatic fire has correspondingly increased."


RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson alerted then public safety minister Steven Blaney last year to potential legislative gaps in Criminal Code gun provisions. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

A heavily censored version of the internal report, dated November 2014, was obtained by CBC News under the Access to Information Act.

CBC News has previously reported on the RCMP's concerns about improvised assault-weapon upgrades, an issue raised by RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson directly with then public safety minister Steven Blaney last year. But the detailed Mountie lab work documenting the issue was released only in the last week.

Last summer, Blaney rejected legislative changes to close any regulatory gap, saying the current law was sufficient. The Conservative government also passed Bill C-42 giving cabinet — not the RCMP — the final say about which weapons to restrict or ban, after the Mounties were slapped down for trying to get a popular semi-automatic withdrawn from Canada.

Some rifles could be banned

But the new Liberal government has promised to "put decision-making about weapons restrictions back into the hands of police, not politicians," raising the possibility the RCMP may yet be able to get some semi-automatics taken off the market.

A Mountie spokesman, Sgt. Harold Pfleiderer, would not say whether the RCMP is pressing the new Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale to act on the issue. "The RCMP does not comment on the advice it provides to the minister," he said in an email.

A spokesman for Goodale reiterated the Liberal government's commitment to get "assault weapons off our streets," but said consultations are needed first.

'We will work ... to move forward on this commitment.'
–Spokesman for Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale
"We will work with all levels of government, our stakeholders and the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee to move forward on this commitment," said Scott Bardsley.

Among the Liberals' election commitments is to broaden membership of the firearms committee to include representatives of women's groups and public-health advocates. Critics have said the committee is stacked with gun proponents.

The RCMP lab tested 11 models of rifles and one pistol, including the weapon used by Marc Lepine in the 1989 Montreal massacre and the semi-automatic used by Justin Bourque in the 2014 Mountie shootings in Moncton, N.B.

The testing was prompted by Bourque's statement to police that he had considered using an improvised technique to turn his rifle into an automatic weapon.

The report says more than 1,200 test shots were fired between July and November 2014, using a technique that is "widely reported on the internet complete with installation and fitting instructions." The name of the technique is blacked out in the documents, but has been known in gun circles for decades, and information about at least one other technique also circulates.

New firearms on market

The Criminal Code regulations in the 1990s effectively protected against any upgrades "by taking the firearms most practical for conversion to full automatic fire off the civilian market," says the document, authored by Murray A. Smith, manager with the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program.

"Thus, the public safety risk posed by improvised conversion techniques was largely negated and rendered moot, and not requiring much police attention."

But the proliferation of new firearms since 2005 has increased the risk to the public, augmented by the availability of new magazines.

Ralph Goodale
Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale will be reviewing Canada's gun legislation to restore decision-making about restricted weapons to the RCMP rather than leaving it to cabinet. (CBC)

"Large capacity magazines are widely available for the military and paramilitary firearms, and although limited in capacity by law and generally reduced to five shots by a pin or similar modification, the original capacity is typically readily restorable."

"The materials required for improvised full automatic fire are ordinary everyday products."

Upgrading any weapon to fully automatic status is clearly prohibited by Section 102(1) of the Criminal Code, with prison terms of up to 10 years. But Smith's report raises questions about the current effectiveness of 20-year-old Criminal Code regulations as they apply to newer weapons shown in lab tests to be "amenable to the improvised full automatic fire technique."

Who is trolling who, post # one is the winner.