Recent content by Eaglelord17

As much as we pretend to be the bastion of morals, we are morally bankrupt. Lots of works, lack of deeds.

Here is some stats from the States on mass shootings and casualties. The basic summary is most shootings kill about 5-6 people no matter what is used. There is a slight increase in average deaths with a ‘assault weapon’ (6 vs 5) but that really isn’t that much of a difference in the grand scheme...

So for the record I am not against some level of gun control. My laws would look something like this. Still 3 classes of firearms, Non-Restricted, Restricted, Prohibited. Non-Restricted would be any long gun, provided it isn’t full auto (this includes allowing converted autos to be...

My question to you is what does PWT1 prove? For the military it is to prove you can effectively use a firearm to a basic standard in combat. That isn’t what civilian shooting is about. Your PAL should cover the legalities of when and where you can shoot, but proving capability well doing so...

Ownership of private property shouldn’t be tied to marksmanship or recertification. Marksmanship means nothing, only knowing the law about where and when you can shoot matters. That should be covered in your PAL course. Recertification is the status of your always illegal property being given...

Not to mention all the instant information has resulted in a lack of attention span and the ability to critically think. I watched a interesting video where they were talking about in the future what shall be the determining factor in success won’t be income or where you came from, family money...

There is a reason why Republicans and Democrats didn’t want it released. The push to release only came once one side decided that the benefit was greater than the cost.

Quebec opened fire when they unilaterally amended the constitution illegally (and no one had the balls to stand up to them). Besides this is parliamentary sovereignty, just a higher level than the Provincial. If the NWC is fair game, so is disallowance.

I would love to see it. I would also call for it to be used on every NWC law in effect, not just AB and SK. Rights are rights, setting the precedent of protecting them isn’t a bad thing.

Up until 1978 you could buy full autos. That is parity with what we were issuing (you could even buy directly from Canadian Arsenals a brand new C1 or C2 if you wished). A gun is a gun. If your going to do harm with it whether its a full auto, shotgun, or bolt action it changes nothing. It is...

The levels of control we have now are the divergence from the norm. Not the other way around.

Civilian ownership begins well before the 30s. It starts with everyone being armed in the early years (with such arms being suitable for military usage in the time frame) and it is only in the last 50 years has parity been lost between civilians and the military. What has changed isn’t how...

They are unpleasant because they are willing to sell out everyone else to protect ‘their’ interests. It is like someone who is very religious and believes that their religion is the only option and everyone else deserves to rot in hell and is vocal on it. Vocal on it to the point of...

I think your ignoring the surplus bonanza of the era, the catalogs of what was available was huge. This myth that Canada only had ‘hunting’ rifles and such kicking around is a myth. Canada has alway had a fairly martially armed population. Just what is martial arms has changed. That bolt...

Firearms ownership falls into 4 main uses (in no particular order, all are valid). 1) Hunting 2) Self defence 3) Collecting 4) Sport shooting One of those tools that you would rather have and not need than need and not have. Besides in a free and democratic society the onus isn’t on me to...