I note that Canada is broadening its gun control legislation. The Public Safety Minister there has talked about the assumptions behind the measures.
What we've done in the legislation is really create the set of circumstances and conditions that will facilitate the buy-back.
We are eliminating all legal use of these prohibited firearms. They can't be legally discharged. You can't fire them. You can't take them hunting or to a range. They can't sell them or transport them. They can't bequeath them or trade them in any way. They will be required to store them in a very secure safe or vault.
I think the vast majority of people who bought these guns to use as firearms, now that there is no legal way to do that, they'll be highly incentivized to surrender them for destruction, and then we'll have a fair compensation program available to them.
There's more at the link.
More measures are planned by some liberal Canadian cities. For example, Toronto is to call on the federal government to ban the sale of handguns within city limits, and for the province to ban the sale of handgun ammunition within those limits.
I think we can expect to see similar measures introduced in many US "blue states" controlled by the Democratic Party. If they can make firearms almost impossible to use legally, they can then put greater effort behind so-called "buy-back" campaigns (and yes, I know there's no such thing as a "buy-back", because they didn't own the guns in the first place). They want to demonize, not only gun possession, but also gun use.
Those of us living in "red states" are likely to be insulated from such pressures, at least for now, but they'll get to us eventually. The gun-grabbers mean to win. They'll use fair means or foul, and ignore the realities of the situation, because they don't care about anything except imposing their will on the rest of us. Our push-back is going to have to be just as strong, to avoid them steamrollering right over us.
One obvious line of attack is to require shooting ranges to keep records of who shoots there, and the type of weapon(s) and quantity of ammunition they shoot during each visit. There might also be a requirement for shooters to buy all the ammunition they use from the shooting range, rather than bring their own. They'll probably use the excuse that the safety of reloaded ammunition can't be guaranteed, and since there's no way to prove that shooters aren't using reloads, they must be prevented from using any of their own ammunition at all. That'll make it a lot more expensive to shoot. In response, I can see more and more regular gatherings of gun owners on farms and ranches out in the country, where they can spend a weekend shooting to their hearts' content, without being bothered by gun-grabbers. I daresay our annual Blogorado gathering might evolve into a quarterly event along those lines.
We'll need to be on our guard against such intrusive measures.
Peter
17 comments:
Definitely instituting salami tactics. Ratcheting up taxes, etc.
That Govidiot has clearly confused "may not" with "cannot".
He's betting that no one there will elect to discharge their "non-useable" firearms at those same public officials, and lather, rinse, and repeat.
As the Ceauçescus could attest, that's a sucker bet.
Germany 1928
We all know how that ended.
unable to post this on Facebook
The FB wienies are becoming more and more afraid of push-back
The local indoor range (they closed their doors during the early Wuflu problem) used commercial reloaded ammo for rentals, mostly.
They, and the outdoor range, kept track of who was shooting.
Yep, fascist Germany coming to a state near you...
Does the new law say they cannot be discharged at government officials on government property? Just wondering - not condoning. Government officials may want to include such a clause, not that it would stop a revolution. I imagine though, there will be no such revolution but I can imagine 30,000 armed civilians storming the U.S. Capitol building when in session; again, just imagining - not condoning!
Canada will definitely experience a much-expanded black market for firearms and firearm accessories, and smuggling from the United States will boom. Yes, this will work out so well for Canada.
It gets worse. A new bill on the floor of the house of commons is adding Airsoft air guns to the prohibited list as well. That's right, they are scared of toys and want them gone. If the bill passes it means the immediate closure of hundreds of businesses and making thousands of Canadian citizens criminals.
Government officials have said that is their intention.
It is amazing the there are millions of firearms in the hand of people yet there is only a extremely small radical group that is causing all the violence in this mostly peaceful exercise. In fact the vast majority of supporters of firearm ownership show support by simply staying home or occasionally, calmly, and safely using their firearm at established locations for said use. If out in public owners no not let their firearms run loose but keep tight control of them. Their firearms do not block roads or destroy and burn businesses. Also experts state that firearms are color blind and will only do their owner's commands. In general todays firearms have mean failure rate less than any other man designed machine and hold extreme heat and pressure like vehicles yet causing lower injury rates than vehicles could ever hope to attain (especially when the youths are involved). The real danger is di-hydrogen mono-oxide. Though initially this substance appear benign it is most deadly substance know to man. Every person who has had contact with this substance has or will die. This substance can be ingested, inhaled, or absorbed. In fact inhaling this substance will cause a painful death in less than a minute and once inhaled nothing can be done for the victim. If ingested it is only a matter of time before death will occur and is dependent on each individual. Why doesn't government address this existential threat? (Oh this substance has other names that try to hide the danger it poses. Some call it H2O other call it water). satire satire
The only way to combat this is massive non-compliance. And use of force when they try to enforce confiscation. They can't imprison us all, and there are more of us than them.
You do realize that there is really a very small number of these tyrannical bureaucrats trying to shove their beliefs and attitudes down our throats? Locally, just one mayor? A dozen or so council members? a few dozen legislators? And a handful of totally off the rails judges? Put them all together nationwide and they wouldn't even fill up a football stadium or two?
What they truly need (one at a time if necessary) is to be taken out behind the woodshed and educated to the fact that their opinions, attitudes and beliefs are not going to override our rights, that we are done with their bullshit.
They hung Mussolini upside down and slit his throat when they had had enough of him. I certainly hope it doesn't come to that. But if these puffed up, self-important, know-it-all egotistical and Narcissistic power-hungry little dictators who want to run our lives don't back off - and fast - I suspect they will find out the error of their ways the hard way.
It always end up being a choice between the hard or the easy way. Either way, it's time to act. Remember, without the ability to defend ourselves, we become the slaves and servants of these disgusting lying, unethical and immoral creatures.
There are millions and millions and millions of us. More than enough to full up all the football stadiums worldwide. And it's time we asserted ourselves and defended our freedoms.
Trump could not completely drain the swamp. But he got it low enough that we can see the disgusting creatures that live in it and what they are doing. Time to wade in and finish cleaning it out.
PS:
I live in Texas and this recent storm - one that should have been just another unusual cold snap - revealed what these incompetent fools have done to a once robust and reliable power system with their idiotic and foolish green policies. Because of them, lives were lost needlessly and billions in property damage occurred.
If we don't act, this is just the beginning.
I'll repeat what I wrote on Joe Huffman's blog:
Politicians always think they can legislate compliance and are stunned when they find out they can be just as easily ignored.
Gerry
The gun control plans were published last fall, one of the centerpieces seems to be turning semi-auto firearms into NFA items, and requring a tax stamp. This makes a lot more sense than an outright ban. It will sound like a good idea to my wife, who is a big proponent of the 2A, fully understands the advantage of an armed populace, but hates the sight of scary military style weapons (including the ones that I own).
My working assumption is that this is > 95 percent going to happen for centerfire rifles, and > 50 percent for centerfire handguns. Even if it is thrown out in the courts, there is still a three to five year period for the litigation to wind through the courts. And tax stamps don't happen quickly :)
From my perspective, here are some consequences if this happens:
1. Ranges: (I am an active RO at one of the NRA-affiliated ranges in the DFW area): there is an army of lawyers plus the ATF wanting to shut down every range in every Red State (see State of Virginia for proof). So Legal is our middle name. If AR-15's turn into NFA items, we will make sure that people showing up have stamps. The Feds spend a good bit of time running around the gun shows and other venues looking for paperwork infractions, and coming down like a ton of bricks when they find them. We don't live in Trump World any more. We live in Clinton World, and ask David Koresh or Randy Weaver what that is like.
2. LawShield. My policy covers me only in instances where I am legally permitted to carry. I assume that today if I used a non-stamped silenced SBR for self defense my LawShield card isn't going be a whole lot of help. I am planning for the future accordingly.
3. California legal. Texas requires LTC instructors to qual both with semi-auto and revolvers. One of the more entertaining parts of the three day LTC Instructor class in Austin is watching the number of potential instructors scrambling try to find a revolver. I have been pretty involved with the Appleseed program and the run and gun for some years, and if semi-autos are made NFA, I know a whole lot of people that will only own firearms that require stamps. Minimum is three revolvers set up for daily carry (one is none, two is one, three is two).
4. California Legal Rifles: hunting rifles are not self-defense guns. Hunting rifles are designed to be shot 20 times in a year: 3 rounds to take 2 deer, and 17 rounds to zero. A self defense rifle is one that can survive a 350 round Appleseed weekend. I had a Marlin 336 30-30 because the Internet says the lever action is a great home defense gun, but ten rounds through it and the barrel was hot enough to fry eggs. Sold it. I've currently got a Ruger Scout in 308, it can handle dozens and dozens of rounds (and has survived many Appleseed weekends). I don't think the current crop of California-Ugly rifles will survive the coming storm. These guys mean business, and there won't be an exception for Ugly.
5. The Sporting Loophole. What makes gun control "reasonable" is the carve-out for recognized sporting uses, as can be clearly seen in the article that Peter linked. Join a range. It's expensive. My home range is $200 a year, and a $300 one time sign-up fee. It's worth it. This will be where the Red State advantage shows up. The local Powers That Be can make all sorts of things about recreational shooting at local ranges painful, but that will be a whole lot less painful in the Red States. But, from my perspective, the coming storm makes getting involved in recognized recreational shooting an absolute necessity. But it might be good to do this sooner than later. Our range is open for new members, I knoow at least one other range in the metroplex that is open, but a year from now that door might be closed.
There is talk that the Liberals have decided to get the party started now, in order to divert attention from the appalling way they have utterly screwed up the vaccine roll-out process in Canada...
These are the usual tactics they employ. I predict massive, systemic non-compliance. Given that many of the guns on the list were formerly non-restricted, and have now been prohibited, the gov cannot say for sure who has what since there is no registry of NR firearms in Canada.
This also means that determining the cost of the buy-back cannot be done, even a rough guess; I suspect this means someone, somewhere will get rich off the program and we will never be the wiser.
A Charlie Foxtrot in the making.
Mike In Canada
Oh, and let's pay criminals not to criminalize:
https://nypost.com/2021/02/18/activist-suggests-paying-criminals-not-to-kill-to-cut-crime-rate/
To paraphrase a famous president whose initials were JFK,
"Those who make legally firing a gun impossible make firing a gun illegally inevitable".
Post a Comment