r/canadaguns • u/AutoModerator • Jan 29 '24

Weekly Politics Thread

Please post all your Politics or Ban-related ideas, initiatives, comments, suggestions, news articles, and recommendations in this thread. Unless new information is published in the media, recurring articles related to the gov'ts ***possible*** legislation are to be posted here. These threads will be weekly, until it's necessary for another per-week.

Previous politics threads can be found here. Previous threads can be found here.

We understand that politics is a touchy subject, and at times things can get heated. A reminder of the subreddit rules, when commenting, where subreddit users are expected to abide.

20 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

109 comments sorted by

View all comments

51

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '24

[deleted]

28

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '24

[deleted]

3

u/floydsmoot Jan 30 '24

If it goes up.

worst case scenario is if some legal gun owner decides to go postal at the local Costco, then they will have a HUGE stick. This isn't the US where such things are just ignored for the most part.

24

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '24

Here's hoping he doesn't O'Toole us.

30

u/RydNightwish Jan 29 '24 edited Jan 29 '24

He won't risk it. Gun owners typically vote blue and are a reliable source of votes coast to coast. Unlike other aspects of govt, firearms laws have a rather immediate impact on the gun owner. As we have seen these last years that immediate effect has been used exclusively to cause harm to otherwise law abiding people. If the Cons were to screw gun owners over like O'toole did, a lot of us would jump ship to the next party offering a real pro-gun stance. Vote splitting has been shown to hurt the parties on the left and its in the cons best interests to ensure that vote splitting to the same degree doesnt happen on the right.

17

u/Beneficial-Ride-4475 Jan 29 '24

Gun owners typically vote blue

Which is a shame, because gun owners should be able to vote for who they actually agree with. You shouldn't have to go against your ideals or principles, purely because you may become a criminal next week.

25

u/FunkyFrunkle Jan 30 '24 edited Jan 30 '24

It’s like I said before.

I’m not voting conservative because I lean right more than left. I consider myself very left leaning on most if not all social issues.

But here’s the catch. I’m not voting for my own marginalization. I’m not voting for the party that’s campaigning on banning my property, actively diminishing the value of my money, etc. just because someone else has been led to believe that conservatives are somehow going to strip the rights away from someone who’s XYZ. For one thing, I don’t buy that shit for one second.

I’m not putting your social issues on my priority list at my own personal expense. The party that wants to ban and confiscate my stuff to appease some contemporary social trend can kiss my vote goodbye right then and there.

Just because I care about those social issues doesn’t necessarily mean I have a dog in those particular fights, and to be completely honest, wether you believe that makes me a bad person or not doesn’t really mean anything to me. You’re not fighting for me, so why should I fight for you?

If you want me to start helping out with those social issues with my vote, then my political price is and should be very cheap. Take the subject of my property off the table, then, and only then will we talk.

6

u/crouchingruger Jan 31 '24

very sensible. hear hear!

27

u/lee--carvallo Jan 29 '24

This. The ideal outcome should be complete de-politicization of firearms. I don't care for shyster politicians using my hobby (and some people's livelihood for that matter) as a way to get votes and advance their own careers

9

u/CanadianGunNoob Jan 31 '24

I just want the de-politicization of just about everything. I want a government so small and with so little power that I don't have to care about who gets elected.

16

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '24

Well the NDP, Liberals and Greens have all made their stances known. They want gun owners to disappear and are happy not to have us amongst them.

So either someone within those parties needs to realize that having a reasonable stance on gun ownership in Canada could get them votes or a new center-left party needs to gain traction that supports property rights.

7

u/WhoaUhThray Jan 31 '24

We had a pro-gun Green party for a few months...

...It was a nice feeling.

-1

u/jakethesequel Feb 02 '24

Did they roll back Nick Tan's policy? I didn't hear about that

10

u/rastamasta45 Jan 29 '24

Saddest part is the NDP literally the workers party and they got run into the ground by Versace Singh. Dude aligned with identity politics over Canadians having a living wage. Our parties suck :(

-6

u/OxfordTheCat Feb 02 '24

Well the NDP, Liberals and Greens have all made their stances known. They want gun owners to disappear and are happy not to have us amongst them.

Not an accurate statement.

They want people that are LARPing for when-the-revolution-comes to disappear.

No issues with hunting and traditional sport shooting.

It's a pretty important distinction.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '24

No issues with hunting and traditional sport shooting.

Ya thats why they all supported banning handguns, the most popular competition rifles, looking to ban currently legal magazines and finger wagging violent criminals.

-5

u/OxfordTheCat Feb 03 '24

hunting and traditional sport shooting

banning handguns, the most popular competition rifles, looking to ban currently legal magazines

None of those impact hunting or traditional sport shooting (trap, skeet, sporting clays).

Even amongst gun owners, I'd bet the majority don't care about the legislative changes, and in my experience most have no idea that the changes are even taking place.

The vast majority of Canadian gun owners aren't a handgun owner, aren't an AR-15 or similar 5.56 semi owner, or a guy building out some chest rig and plate carrier kit wanting to play SEAL dress up.

They're guys that hunt a couple weeks a year (if that) and who might shoot trap twice a year if they're a member of a gun club, and who look at a box of 20 rounds and see a decade or more of shooting in it.

3

u/Goliad1990 Feb 04 '24

  None of those impact hunting or traditional sport shooting (trap, skeet, sporting clays).

Fascinating insight. Perhaps if the Liberals just mean skeet when they say "sports shooting", they should just say "skeet", so that the participants of the myriad other internationally sanctioned sports don't get the wrong idea.

who look at a box of 20 rounds and see a decade or more of shooting in it.

Scary that there are people in the woods with loaded guns who never practice, but I'm sure you're right that some people are like that.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '24

Because no one, not a single person ever hunted with Mini-14/30, M1A/M14/M305, so clearly those scary "dress up" guns had to be banned.

Skeet and trap are far from the only "traditional" sports shooting. Between precision long distance, IPSC, cowboy action there are far more than merely shotgun blast clay.

-5

u/OxfordTheCat Feb 03 '24

Sure. Some people did.

But few and far between. And those that did were always viewed with skepticism.

And either you don't understand what "traditional" means, or you don't understand what IPSC and cowboy action is. Maybe both.

That's fringe shit at best.

Dress up just isn't mainstream. It is what it is.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/outline8668 Jan 30 '24

Only time will tell. Early on O'Toole was anti-gun spouting that as ex-military that only military and police should have guns. Then came the flip flopping. I don't recall if Pierre ever had a stated position on the matter before becoming party leader.

20

u/FunkyFrunkle Jan 30 '24

Only military and police should have guns

Love that logic. So the only two groups of people who should have access to guns are the only two groups of people who only ever use them to kill people.

But me shooting an empty Tim Hortons cup with a 120 year old rifle in some derelict gravel pit in the middle of bumble fuck nowhere is unacceptable, or someone using a neutered AR to shoot at paper at a range.

So by that logic anti-gun people are completely fine with killing people. They want to let soldiers and cops keep doing it, while using guns for non-violent purposes is somehow worse.

Do they ever listen to themselves?

10

u/MostEnergeticSloth Jan 30 '24

While I definitely agree with the OIC stuff, I hope there's a longer segment where he speaks more on the helicopter culls. I feel just as strongly as she does about the methods/tools used in the circumstances we currently live in.

BUT hearing this lady speak about the meat they received being "hamburgered" is beyond infuriating. It means these "hunters" the government hired absolutely riddled these animals with bullets, basically paying them hundreds of thousands of dollars to waste perfectly edible meat THAT THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT TO BE DONATED. Pardon the fuck me??

7

u/crouchingruger Jan 31 '24

why did they not sell or give away hunting permits for those deer instead? even giving away plane tickets to canadian hunters to get there would have been cheaper with no blowback.

11

u/MostEnergeticSloth Jan 31 '24

Somebody somewhere who knows someone with some sway made a bunch of taxpayer's money is my guess.

9

u/FunkyFrunkle Feb 01 '24 edited Feb 01 '24

Because the liberals are probably getting an earful from their buddies in the grocery business about hunters circumventing overpaying for meat at their grocery store.

It seems there are a lot of impotent, toothless pushovers in Canada that think self-reliance is a bad thing and that instead there’s plenty of milk from the government teat to go around. Usually the same people that scream “mOvE tO tHe UsA iF yOu WaN sHoOt GuNb!!1”

Allowing hunters to harvest the deer and take the meat, which many hunters also donate to food banks would have been a nice gesture especially during a time when most people are struggling to afford groceries and food banks are dried up. But I guess it would have riled up too many suburban pearl-clutching busy bodies, so no bueno.

7

u/itsyaboi6909 Jan 31 '24

Right! No reason they couldn’t have had Indigenous hunters harvest them, or issued supplement tags to non-indigenous hunters to partake as well.

3

u/IWIKapps Jan 31 '24

Do we take this to mean classes would be purely dimensions and capabilities based? Like no more prohibited just because?