• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.

darmil

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
I really hate what you have to do for renewing your firearms license.Why can't it be like renewing your driver's license geesh.
 

Inch

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
QV said:
Inch,

The charter protects against unreasonable searches.  A search authorized by a statute (like the Firearms Act) is deemed to be reasonable, hence no charter violation.  So there goes your charter defence. 

About sub section 2, so what?  You still have notice of the inspection.  If your firearms are locked up and legal, your good.  Even if they aren't locked up you have time to do it while the inspector goes for a warrant.  If you have illegal firearms or keep your loaded pistol where a kid can get at it, then you are screwed.  You are screwed because you broke federal statutes.  Breaking federal statutes are considered crimes - which would make someone who committed them a criminal.   How is this hurting the average "law abiding gun owner"?

Well, that's a matter of opinion then isn't it. I think it's unreasonable that I would have to submit to a search simply due to the number of hunks of metal in my safe. No one is subjected to that kind of search for owning anything else, only guns. I don't even need to break any laws for them to come search my residence, that is unreasonable in my eyes.
 

1feral1

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Well, its 0553 Saturday here, can't sleep as usual!

A little bit of a rant before 0600 my time on a cold winter morning (7C)
!
QV said:
When someone comes on relates a personal story I tend to be skeptical because there are ALWAYs three sides to every story.  I have found that most people lie or at least tweak the facts slightly to their favour by ommitting some information or exagerating other stuff.  Joe Bloggins will complain about how his guns were seized and he is just a "law-abiding gun owner" who had his "rights" violated ---  


.... now most of you (if you actually read my posts) will know that the police can't just arbitrarily come and kick your door in at any time to inspect your horde of guns and ammo.


Not me! I resent the fact that you would implicate me in such foolishness.

I was taken down at gunpoint, remember! Humiliated and embarrassed, upset, scared ( as was my family - my dad had recently passed away) , and was left wondering why would this happen to me, the master of firerarms storage and had the respect of many, won awards, and knew many people of influence!

My raid was based on a report by a 'confidential source' that I had in my possesion, such equipment had machine guns, was shooting them illegally, etc, and if I would have been professionally approached, I would have invited them in for inspection, and a Coke!

QV, I detect a hidden agenda here, and your true colour shows, and no I am not parinoid, and base my feeling on LIFE experience. Its obvious who's side you bat on.

As for Judges granting warrants, it was a traffic judge that signed mine.

To make things worse, I had a series of flags on my gun room walls, which included a Union Jack, A Canadian Flag, a WW2 German flag, US's Old Glory, US Stars and Bars, and a Metis Riel Rebellion 'infinity' flag. All based on the collectables I had under glass display cases, and the firearms I had under lock and key. It was a mini-museum. I was accused of being a member of the Aryan Nations, was interrogated about explosives and booby traps - and these clowns were serious!

At the end of the day, I was told 'we will not leave a rock unturned', and even interviewed previous girl friends and former work-mates. They found nothing, and realised within days that they had been duped, and had waisted there time, however to charge me with handguns which had already been registered was pointless, and to do absolutley everything to phuck me around not to get my property back was indeed spineless.

Until the investigation, the MPs had banned me from my trade as a 421, I had to answer to higher authority at my Unit, I was in  fear of having my CL B 'A' service terminated, having to lose my collection, which caused me much stress with a mortage to pay, and a family also stressed out, it was not easy for a second.

I am far from a criminal, and since then I have learned not to trust two commonwealth governments, the police, the firearms registry ( they approached me by phone from Canada in 2002 about an Uzi which I had donated to a museum in 1994 - they claim it was still registered to me and wanted to know it's status) and look at the authorities as a bunch of BUMBLING INCOMPETANT IDIOTS who know SFA about nothing, and have hidden agendas on gun control, making it difficult as possible for a decent law abiding citizen to enjoy a hobby and interest with at times direct harassment, and KMs of red tape.

Attitudes mean everything to me, always will, and frankly yours SUCKS!

So if you wanna bark out gun control, as far as I am concerned thats being able to hit your target.

I have had enough...

rant off.


Wes
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
821
Points
1,010
Inch,

Well it is the law right now, but the Supreme Court might have something else to say.  Then again I suspect the Supreme Court would say something along these lines :  

"While the inspection is an infringement of s. 8 of the Charter, the infringement is one that is reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.   Furthermore, there is no such intrusion where a person is required to produce a licence or permit or other documentary evidence of a status or to comply with some legal requirement that is a lawful condition of the exercise of a right or privilege."

But with respect to a person's home, you never know how it could go.  Courts tip toe around rulings regarding peoples homes.

 

Fry

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
QV said:
I never said I knew everything nor have I ever alleged expertise in anything.  Quit jumping to conclusions.  And I am not going to respond to personal attacks or snide remarks that many of you seem to be able to get away with around here, and your post has a few. 
No one is sending personal attacks to you.

Using the argument that gasoline is not regulated is as foolhardy and moot as arguing that your car can't be seized if left unattended and not locked (which it can BTW in case you missed that).  Or saying that all knives should now be regulated.  Hell lets just throw out any law as soon as one interest group complains about it.  What do you think would happen then? 
Well why single out firearms then? If knives can be more easily concealed make no noise and are highly lethal? You believe in gun control but not knife control?

What do I think would happen? I think that if everything were registered and regulated and controlled, we'd be more safe. That's what you think, right?  ::)

No they havn't.  They prove that you are jumping to conclusions. 
What conclusions am I jumping to?

The police need reasonable grounds AND exingent circumstances for such a raid you are talking about.  An anonymous tip that Jack Remington keeps his older then dust 12 Ga unlocked hardley meets the reasonable grounds and exingent circumstances criteria.  So again you are jumping to conclusions.  Quit stating that the police, for no other reason then to bring down a "law abiding gun owner" will break into your home in the dead of night and steal all your prized firearms and cart you off to jail.  That is pure unfounded speculation on your part not backed up with PROVEN sources. 
So, if I'm sitting at home, and Joe Rumpface next door is mad with me over some stupid neighbour crap. He knows I go to the range quite a bit by seeing me load and unload gun cases aboard my car, etc. He calls the police one day as an anonymous tip, says I'm improperly storing my firearms (for example) by letting my kids go aorund the house with my Tokarev or my Ruger and play cowboys. Cops come, I explain the situation, they want to see my firearms, I refuse. Think they'll be on their merry way? At the very least they'll take their time, go get their warrant and then strip my home, seize more than just firearms (scopes, books, bayonets, etc... which have been taken in other firearms seizures across the country) and then I have a situation sort of like Wesley Down Under's.

Actually I would hazard a guess that the majority of Canadians support gun control.   

Yeah, I'd agree there too. But what is gun control exactly? Is it controlling the firearms that need controlling such as those in the hands of criminals? Or, is it "controlling" all firearms, making responsible owners jump through bogus government hoops of crap to hold onto them?

Add the stereotype placed on guns, skew some facts like "ohh the registry gets thousands of hits a year, it must be working" bit, ban evil looking guns and bam. Lieberals back in power.

When thinking of gun control you should be thinking more about the criminal, QV, and less about the citizens that pay your salary.

For all of you gun enthusiests arguing that you need guns for protection and how society is so dangerous and an "armed people" is the only thing stopping the government from becoming some dictatorship, and that you need CCW because the police only shoot 50 rnds a year and are too far away  ---- that is definately the wrong road to take.  Most people in this country do not think the same way as you, and when they hear arguments like that the average citizen (gun owner or not) would probably think that is coming from: 

a.  a crazy gun nut
b.  an anti government militia; or
c.  someone with deep seated fears of society that probably needs treatment.

Everybody doesn't NEED CCW. Not everyone wants it. Some do, some don't. Because some don't, doesn't mean that those who do and are eligable (meet a long string of requirements and testing) should be punished. We've the right to self defense... but with what?

If someone (and I know people who would do this) decided to attack me or my family/neighbours with a firearm or other device that could be used as a weapon... we'll have to wait 45 minutes for someone to respond. I'm certainly not going to rely on you or any LEO to arrive in 45 minutes and sing campsongs and make it all better. Remember QV, in most violent situations, police arrive AFTER the fact.

Why?  If not, can't I debate about laws in the country that I live? 

If you're not a firearms owner, then you're not acquainted with the BS that firearms owners go through. Yet you come on here, pretending it's all good and that we're crazy or we don't know what we're talking about, that the registry is great and our arguements are moot.

We are not arguing that firearms need to be controlled. It's what firearms are controlled and how they're controlled that concerns us.

Points for YOU to remember QV.

1. My firearms registered regulates them not. Not in any way, shape or form. I can file the serials and sell on the street if I want. I can toss em around for children to play with, I can blow them up, I can bury them... unsafely store them, etc.

2. The registry IS (and we both agree) a total waste of tax dollars.

3. CCW is not for you to decide. You don't like it? Fine. I'm not one to settle for the boys in blue AFTER something's happened. You have a sidearm, no? Why? For protection of course. Granted, you'll encounter many more dangerous situations requiring it's use than I will, but that's not to say I'll never encounter at least one of those situations either. With proper training one can be just as efficient with it's use as law enforcement or otherwise. Don't forget that.

4. Taking without permission is stealing. Stealing is against the law, no? Does/did the government wrongfully seize(steal) firearms from many citizens who take the same precautions as the rest, only because they looked evil or had certain attributes? They all fire projectiles by definition. There are many more "dangerous" firearms such as high powered rifles like the .338 lapua or .300win mag which are allowed, but a shotgun with selective fire from semi to pump isn't? Where's the logic in that? Having said that, the same people that help make our laws, break them. I've no reason to question why people sometimes think ill of the boneheads who illogically "prohibit" firearms.

QV do you think we should have a constitutional right to bear arms?
 

Fry

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
Wesley  Down Under said:
I was taken down at gunpoint, remember! Humiliated and embarrassed, upset, scared ( as was my family - my dad had recently passed away) , and was left wondering why would this happen to me, the master of firerarms storage and had the respect of many, won awards, and knew many people of influence!

My raid was based on a report by a 'confidential source' that I had in my possesion, such equipment had machine guns, was shooting them illegally, etc, and if I would have been professionally approached, I would have invited them in for inspection, and a Coke!
QV, is this not a violation of his rights? Is anyone legally entitled to this crap?

As for Judges granting warrants, it was a traffic judge that signed mine.
There ya go.
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
821
Points
1,010
Hey Wes

I wan't referring to you.  But the fact that you state your warrant was signed by a "traffic judge" tells me a bit.  Actually the "traffic judge" was probably not a judge at all but a Justice of the Peace.  Justices sign all kinds of warrants.  It is their job to be an unassociated third party to review the information the police have.  If the Justice doesn't agree with the police, the warrant doesn't get signed.  

Like I said, I don't know the details about your event and nor was I there, so don't blame me for what happened to you in 1991.  

QV, I detect a hidden agenda here, and your true colour shows, and no I am not parinoid, and base my feeling on LIFE experience. Its obvious who's side you bat on.

What the hell is that supposed to mean?  

Can't carry on a debate without people getting all pissed off because you don't agree with them.  See me getting mad at all of these snide remarks?  For example:

Your a MP, and you don't know that?   ::)

LEOs aren't some sort of all seeing, all knowing (that's abundantly clear) demigods

In reference to me stating I don't have stats on whether the gun registry works
Judging by what you've been posting, I've thought as much.

nonsense that QV, in his infinite wisdom......

Are you sir really in law enforcement?

QV, your arguements lack depth. Your inability to explain why your arguements are correct is just a waste of space on these forums.  in your "oh so infinite wisdom" and your alleged police expertise make yourself look like a total fool

No you didn't.  
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
821
Points
1,010
confidential source'    QV, is this not a violation of his rights? Is anyone legally entitled to this crap?

Is everything that doesn't go your way a violation of rights?  I don't know the details of Wes's ordeal....how could I ever comment intelligently whether the Information to Obtain a search warrant contained all the necessary facts to form reasonable and probable grounds to believe that Wes had done something?  I can't so don't ask.



 

Fry

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
QV said:
Is everything that doesn't go your way a violation of rights?  I don't know the details of Wes's ordeal....how could I ever comment intelligently whether the Information to Obtain a search warrant contained all the necessary facts to form reasonable and probable grounds to believe that Wes had done something?  I can't so don't ask.

I don't know the entire situation either, but if what Wesley says is infact true, then I think it's just a little more than something "not going his way".
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,809
Points
1,160
The Firearms Act as currently written is merely one of the tools designed to further a Social-political agenda which pretends to use public safety as it’s reason for existence, yet anyone familiar with it and the background history knows that safety of the public is not the real reason. Hence the rather strong feeling of anyone who has been mishandled by the Act and those who enforce it.

Most senior police officials being political animals with keen noses have ensured they were on the “correct” side of the debate and also ensured that only politically correct policies in line with the above agenda are followed by the departments, regardless of the actually benefits to the public or police. While it is useful to educate rank and file members, the real thrust is to get rid of these posterior lickers or severely limit their influence. 
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
942
Points
1,060
LEOs aren't some sort of all seeing, all knowing (that's abundantly clear) demigods

I want to know why you consider this a personal attack? Do you believe all LEOs are infallable and know everything? It's a simple fact that neither you or the rest know it all, and many cases daily from around the country of cops making mistakes does make it abundantly clear. Get off your high horse, you are not any more special than the rest of us.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,181
Points
1,010
All the discussion about various conditional restrictions misses some key points.
1) Even mentally ill people have a right to self defence.
2) What other people, majority or not, desire or fear is irrelevant.  Whether a person is an extremely devoted firearm enthusiast ("gun nut") or an extreme political isolationist (anti-government) is irrelevant.  Fears are the responsibility of the fearful to confront and control, not of others to accommodate and assuage.  The operative principle is that people are innocent by default.
 

1feral1

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Only two questions from me QV.

1.  Do you have a valid firearms license to either possess/obtain?

2. Are you a firearms owner?


Wes
 

canadianblue

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Well why single out firearms then? If knives can be more easily concealed make no noise and are highly lethal? You believe in gun control but not knife control?

Because guns tend to be much more effective at killing then knives.

What do I think would happen? I think that if everything were registered and regulated and controlled, we'd be more safe. That's what you think, right? 

Probably, I think that when people make comments about buying guns to spite another person it tends to show infantile behavior.

He calls the police one day as an anonymous tip, says I'm improperly storing my firearms (for example) by letting my kids go aorund the house with my Tokarev or my Ruger and play cowboys.

Did you actually let your kids play with actual firearms. Now thats responsible gun ownership. ::)

Cops come, I explain the situation, they want to see my firearms, I refuse. Think they'll be on their merry way?

If you did let your kids play cowboys with real guns, I'd think a call to Family Services would be more appropriate.

Yeah, I'd agree there too. But what is gun control exactly? Is it controlling the firearms that need controlling such as those in the hands of criminals? Or, is it "controlling" all firearms, making responsible owners jump through bogus government hoops of crap to hold onto them?

Controlling all of them, thus fewer guns end up in the hands of people who would use them for intimidation. If you're not willing to take the time and effort to get a firearm legally you shouldn't own one in the first place.

When thinking of gun control you should be thinking more about the criminal, QV, and less about the citizens that pay your salary.

Humans are fallable beings.

Everybody doesn't NEED CCW. Not everyone wants it. Some do, some don't. Because some don't, doesn't mean that those who do and are eligable (meet a long string of requirements and testing) should be punished. We've the right to self defense... but with what?

Common sense.

If someone (and I know people who would do this) decided to attack me or my family/neighbours with a firearm or other device that could be used as a weapon... we'll have to wait 45 minutes for someone to respond. I'm certainly not going to rely on you or any LEO to arrive in 45 minutes and sing campsongs and make it all better.

Where do you live that it would take 45 minutes for the police to show up?

As well a firearm in the house may actually make the situation worse. A gun isn't the golden ticket to safety.

Remember QV, in most violent situations, police arrive AFTER the fact.

Like suicides, domestic disturbances, family violence, etc. In most situations we wouldn't want to add more guns to the mix.

3. CCW is not for you to decide. You don't like it? Fine. I'm not one to settle for the boys in blue AFTER something's happened. You have a sidearm, no? Why? For protection of course. Granted, you'll encounter many more dangerous situations requiring it's use than I will, but that's not to say I'll never encounter at least one of those situations either. With proper training one can be just as efficient with it's use as law enforcement or otherwise. Don't forget that.

To bad, the cost of living in a society is that you can't always get what you want. In most situations it is usually better to use common sense instead of engaging in a firefight. Society puts limits on what people can and cannot do.

QV do you think we should have a constitutional right to bear arms?

No, because then all the wackos [Aryan Nations, Cults, Michigan Militia types] will take advantage of it.

1) Even mentally ill people have a right to self defence.

I hope that you're not advocating arming people who may be suicidal.




 

2 Cdo

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Did you actually let your kids play with actual firearms. Now thats responsible gun ownership.

Read the entire post and see how it is worded. ::)

Where do you live that it would take 45 minutes for the police to show up?

As well a firearm in the house may actually make the situation worse. A gun isn't the golden ticket to safety.

Probably in an area similair to me. I think in the 5 YEARS I've lived here I've seen 1 cop. A friend of mine who popped in for a coffee.

Because guns tend to be much more effective at killing then knives.

And here in Kingston the police chief voiced that a KNIFE registry should be seriously looked at. Methinks the chiefs head should be seriously looked at. I'm sure you'll understand and comply with the knife registry, paying your fees and submitting to searches for no reason other than we think he has a knife in the house. ::)

You and QV have completely missed the boat and either are incredibly ignorant of the ways that laws are enforced in regards to firearms are deliberately being obtuse arses. Either way, trying to reason with either one is an exercise in futilty so I think I'll just go outside and blow off about 40-50 rounds shooting skeet. Have a nice night.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
942
Points
1,060
Sig Guy,

Either you didn't read Fry's post or you're purposly miscontruing what he said to inflame the thread, contrary to the guidelines. What he gave were examples of a fictiious situations. Yet you decide to use it as a slam against his parenting skills and family attributes, as if they were true and commited by him. Better watch it. You've already gained attention because of your attitude. I'm sure you don't want any more.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
942
Points
1,060
2 Cdo said:
You and QV have completely missed the boat and either are incredibly ignorant of the ways that laws are enforced in regards to firearms are deliberately being obtuse arses. Either way, trying to reason with either one is an exercise in futilty so I think I'll just go outside and blow off about 40-50 rounds shooting skeet. Have a nice night.

Which would be truly frightning as they're both involved in law enforcement.
 

canadianblue

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Either you didn't read Fry's post or you're purposly miscontruing what he said to inflame the thread, contrary to the guidelines. What he gave were examples of a fictiious situations. Yet you decide to use it as a slam against his parenting skills and family attributes, as if they were true and commited by him. Better watch it. You've already gained attention because of your attitude. I'm sure you don't want any more.

Well first of all, I said if he actually did let his kids play with firearms then I'd question his parenting skills. As for miscontruing people's posts, that never goes on here, as long as one is flowing with the current.

You and QV have completely missed the boat and either are incredibly ignorant of the ways that laws are enforced in regards to firearms are deliberately being obtuse arses. Either way, trying to reason with either one is an exercise in futilty so I think I'll just go outside and blow off about 40-50 rounds shooting skeet. Have a nice night.

No, we simply do not want to see a bunch of guns floating freely around. Since one suggestion was that people suffering from mental illness should also have firearms, I think we both can feel safe in knowing that CCW will never come. It seems to me that any opinion which goes against the current is considered trolling, especially when some members have suggested they need guns for protection from the police, or start delving into conspiracy theories which have little or no merit.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
942
Points
1,060
Sigs Guy said:
Well first of all, I said if he actually did let his kids play with firearms then I'd question his parenting skills. As for miscontruing people's posts, that never goes on here, as long as one is flowing with the current.

Bullshit. You took a hypothetical situation and tried to make him the actual player.

No, we simply do not want to see a bunch of guns floating freely around. Since one suggestion was that people suffering from mental illness should also have firearms, I think we both can feel safe in knowing that CCW will never come. It seems to me that any opinion which goes against the current is considered trolling, especially when some members have suggested they need guns for protection from the police, or start delving into conspiracy theories which have little or no merit.

Point us to these statements, I must have missed them.


Clocks ticking..........waiting.............waiting...........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top