Stand on Guard - Conservative Party of Canada

[u/GhostProtocolGaming]

https://www.conservative.ca/stand-on-guard-2/

The bill makes important changes to Section 34 of the Criminal Code so that force is presumed to be justified if used against an illegal intruder. Conservatives first announced the ‘Stand on Guard’ principle back in August, asking the government to introduce legislation in the fall session.

[u/Lumindan → u/[deleted]]

There's a fair bit to break down here and there's quite a bit of misinformation you've posted so let's clear that up.

Sure that sounds nice but often, like in the US these things are promised and never delivered by conservative parties, then they lower taxes on the wealthy instead and like in the US, RAISED taxes for the poor!

I never understand why people cite American politics when it comes to Canada as if it's some kind of hallowed source. You claim conservatives “promise cuts but raise taxes on the poor like in the US.” Also your claim is technically incorrect, when Stephen Harper was PM, the government cut the GST from 7% to 5%, which is literally the most progressive tax cut possible because everyone pays it. They also introduced things like the TFSA under Jim Flaherty which benefits regular savers, not just the rich. Meanwhile under Justin Trudeau Canadians got carbon taxes, payroll tax hikes, and bracket creep while deficits exploded. Spare everyone the “conservatives raise taxes on the poor” fiction. This is a commonly repeated Liberal talking point I see used by people who don't understand the subject.

maybe, sounds interesting I would have to hear more about how this just wouldn't be used as a loophole for the wealthy (Ill invest 200 mil in my sisters hair salon she runs out of her garage wink wink)

You're picking and choosing here because the current setup in Canada that has been run by the Liberals already empowers the wealthy. This isn't the gotcha you think it is. You’re pretending this is some billionaire loophole fantasy when it’s actually a common economic incentive used to encourage domestic investment. The point is to keep capital inside Canada funding businesses instead of being parked in U.S. markets. Your “$200M sister’s garage salon” example just shows you don’t understand how tax law or anti-avoidance rules work.

Infrastructure: Speed up approvals for projects like pipelines, mines, and LNG terminals Not at the expense of environmental or native issues but I do feel like drumpt has cornered us in this regard so I hope we can at least agree Carney eating shit from the voters to push this through is a win?

Ah good ol Trump bad. I had a feeling that would come up, classic. Your condition of “not at the expense of environmental or native issues” is a strawman. Nobody is proposing eliminating those processes the problem is they currently take a decade or more. Canada has resources it can’t even build because approval timelines are absurd. Meanwhile countries like the U.S. eat our lunch economically. If we had invested more heavily in the last decade into using our immense cache of resources, we wouldn't be 80 billion in deficit.

In terms of guns its mixed, I dont have my PAL, every time I get close there is another mass shooting or I get reminded how the people I would be shooting with likely hate my spouses skin color.

That's the most wild take I've seen you post and this comment is basically a pile of emotional vibes pretending to be an argument. Lawful canadian firearms owners aren't the problem in Canada, we're not the ones committing mass shootings and it's incredibly problematic that you're conflating legal ownership with illegal ownership. Also why the implication of racism? I'm a member at multiple ranges and it's incredibly diverse and the firearms community is one of the most welcoming ones I'm proud to part of.

canada has about 2.3 million licensed gun owners vetted through the system run by the RCMP, and they’re statistically one of the most law-abiding demographics in the country. If you’re judging an entire licensed community based on crimes usually committed with illegally obtained firearms, you’re already starting from a false premise. Also gun owners in Canada include immigrants, minorities, women, Indigenous hunters, sport shooters, kids and old folks, the whole spectrum. Acting like the entire community is racist because you saw some idiots online says more about your bias than theirs.

I think limitations of violent spouses owning guns or people mentally ill should always stay, in terms of the weaponry itself, while I would love to own big guns with big capacity that look really cool and scary, I understand why overall its a bad idea

Here's the knowledge gap. We already have red flag and yellow flag laws in place. You also don't quite understand the definiton of big guns and big capacity, we have pinned magazines in Canada and quite frankly, blaming the tool instead of the perpetrator shows how slanted your understanding of firearms is. We might as well ban knives, cars and pools if we're trying to play the danger game.

Does a gun with a wood stock make smaller holes in people than a conversion kit? I think not :)

and a gun is just a tool, it's upto the user to be responsible with it. We have one of the most strict and robust graduated licensing systems in the world. Functionally identical semi-auto rifles were banned by Justin Trudeau’s government based largely on cosmetic features, not mechanics. A rifle with a polymer stock and one with a wooden hunting stock can operate exactly the same way the difference is aesthetic, not ballistic. That’s been one of the main criticisms from firearms experts for years.

Also, capacity isn’t even the debate you think it is. Canada already has strict magazine limits generally 5 rounds for most semi-auto centre-fire rifles and 10 for handguns (which you can't even get now). The “big capacity scary gun” you’re imagining basically isn’t legal here already.

So the real takeaway from your comment is:

You don’t have a PAL and refuse to get educated about the systems you're criticizing, you don’t really know the laws, you’re assuming gun owners are racist And your policy position is based on vibes and aesthetics with a pinch of "GRRR CONS BAD, PIERRE BAD".

That’s not a serious argument against civilian firearms ownership or even a real discussion point, it’s just anxiety mixed with stereotypes posted in bad faith.

[u/Lumindan → u/[deleted]]

Thats because every time I come in here, Im greeted by reich wing politics, guns on dirty carpets with crusty cum socks and generally Maple-MAGA attitudes. You can deny it but that is the reality. Ill have to find a more liberal/neutral community, if one exists.

Sorry, but just because people lean more to the right wing of politics doesn't make them nazis. You throwing out the accusation of calling them that just shows your ignorance.

Also if Reddit is what pushes you away from getting a license in real life, you really need to disconnect.

guns on dirty carpets with crusty cum socks and generally Maple-MAGA attitudes

It's funny you keep citing MAGA when most of your comments have been enitrely negative and vibe based, the thing that is MOST MAGA if we're being frank. People have responded to you in good faith and all you've done is fling mud at them.

You can deny it but that is the reality. Ill have to find a more liberal/neutral community, if one exists.

I am denying it because people in this sub are incredibly civil and helpful. I've had plenty of debates and discussions with people. Even if I hate the paint job on their shotgun (you know who you are).

No one made you post here. You took the time out of your day to post insults and misinformation. When you got debunked you resorted to petty insults.

I get you don't like people who don't align with you politically, that's your prerogative, but smearing everyone in this sub as nazis is absolutely pants on head insane.

I say this from the bottom of my heart, you need to self reflect and do better, not for anyones sake but your own.