r/canadaguns • u/AutoModerator • Aug 03 '26

Recurring Canadaguns Politics and Debate Thread

Please post all your Gun Politics or Ban-related ideas, questions, initiatives, comments, suggestions, news articles, and recommendations in this thread. This thread recurs every 14 days.

First and foremost, this is a Canadian Gun subreddit, so keep it at least decently related to both of those things.

This thread is not for general politics, there are plenty other subs that are meant for that. Off-topic threads may be removed, especially if they are leading to personal attacks, flame wars, etc.

To prevent the main sub being flooded with dozens of similar threads, text posts complaining about/asking about/chatting about gun politics will be sent 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.

Keep this Canadian gun politics related and polite. Off-topic stuff, flame wars, negative generalizations against groups, personal attacks and gate-keeping will be removed. Please flag any comments to bring to the attention of mods otherwise exercise your upvoting and downvoting ability.

16 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

334 comments sorted by

View all comments

10

u/-rifle-is-fine- Aug 03 '26

"Stir the pot" opinion:

I think Mark Carney wants to drop the wasteful confiscation he inherited but doesn't know how the Liberal Party as a whole digs out of this one and says no to Provost without pissing off Quebec.

What solutions would you offer him?

29

u/Abramshunter Aug 03 '26

Just send your worst lawyers to the Supreme Court case, let the CCFR win, admit the bans were unconstitutional and reverse them.

22

u/LordRaizer Aug 03 '26

I think that's copium

Let's be real, Carney is a liberal and is 100% onboard with the disarmament of the populace

41

u/boozefiend3000 Aug 03 '26

He wants to drop the confiscation? He’s the one that actually got it started lol no guns were being round up under Trudeau. I don’t know how anyone gets behind this theory that he secretly wants this scrapped.

24

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 03 '26

OP is a Liberal and he’s doing mental gymnastics to justify his awful choices

-8

u/-rifle-is-fine- Aug 03 '26

I voted CPC but ok. I can do Liberal next time if you prefer.

6

u/jbouit494hg Aug 03 '26

If Trudeau were still in power he would have banned the SKS by now.

13

u/boozefiend3000 Aug 03 '26

He wouldn’t be in power still though. Poilievre was too effective getting Trudeau to resign. It backfired terribly. Sure, Trudeau went on an insane ban spree, but he was also useless. Constantly delaying the actual confiscation was good for us. This fuck Carney comes in and actually implements it right away basically. A person trying to get out from this would’ve just kept delaying like Trudeau did

6

u/Lumindan Aug 03 '26

No because Trudeau also knew not to poke certain bears and the SKS is one of those items.

The optics nightmare would be insane.

2

u/-rifle-is-fine- Aug 03 '26

I'm not 100% sure the guy apologizing for treatment of Natives would have gone as far as trampling on a common hunting tool.

That would have been a spectacle though!

-4

u/Darthwilhelm on Aug 03 '26

I don't think he's entirely on board with this. Especially considering that the Tumbler Creek shooting was memoryholed like it was. Even if the guns were smuggled in or otherwise illegally procured, that didn't stop the Trudeau administration.

I suspect he's trying to get it over and done with, so that he can maintain Montreal without having to expand the program further than it was.

19

u/Lumindan Aug 03 '26

I don't think he's entirely on board with this. Especially considering that the Tumbler Creek shooting was memoryholed like it was.

Anyone paying attention knew why the government couldn't monopolize that tragedy. Optically bad.

suspect he's trying to get it over and done with, so that he can maintain Montreal without having to expand the program further than it was.

Except the program has accelerated under his tenure. He brought Provost on board.

If anything he could have simply left it in limbo. Instead he's pushed it forward and is burning even more money on it.

11

u/FunkyFrunkle Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 05 '26

It sure does look to me like he’s spent more time sidestepping and distancing himself from the program than he’s ever spent talking about it.

The only time he really mentioned anything about the program was on the campaign trail when he spoke of “reinvigorating” the buyback, but ever since the election he hasn’t mentioned it especially when asked about measures to prevent violent crime and gun violence. He mentioned border security, he mentioned increased police presence but mentioned nothing about the buyback.

When recently asked about banning the SKS, he totally sidestepped it and just passed the buck to the RCMP.

Trudeau mentioned it every chance he got. Carney avoids it every chance he gets.

Not defending the guy at all, but there’s a clear distinction between Carney and Trudeau when it comes to enthusiasm for this whole thing. I don’t think he’s necessarily positioning himself to scrap it. I can’t see that happening, but what I think is more likely is he’s establishing distance between himself and the program if it ends up falling apart which is not entirely unlikely.

Yes, he has Natalie Provost in there, but the program is facing opposition from provinces, police forces and people which isn’t something legislation or a finger-wagging activist is going to fix.

4

u/-rifle-is-fine- Aug 03 '26

Carney mentioned bail reform after being asked point blank about banning the SKS after the recent Montreal shooting. This is an important response to note for team pro-gun.

6

u/Lumindan Aug 04 '26

Carney has also actively pushed anything unsavory to his MPs to deflect heat. By bit saying nothing himself he keeps people assigning what they want to hear to him.

Take a look at the draconian spy bills. Its all his MPs but you can bet your ass it doesn't fly without the leadership.

Gary and Provost will take the heat for the gun grab, Carney is equally if not more to blame for it.

Not to mention the last couple shootings have all been optically horrible to assign blame to legal firearms owners because there's too much baggage.

-11

u/-rifle-is-fine- Aug 03 '26

Carney started the 2020 bans? News to me. Please educate me on how Carney started those.

5

u/boozefiend3000 Aug 04 '26

I said he started the actual confiscation, genius. Why would a person trying to wash their hands of this actually implement the hardest part of the program? It makes no sense. He’s not looking for a way out, he’s 100% on board for bans and theft 

18

u/Lumindan Aug 03 '26

I think Mark Carney wants to drop the wasteful confiscation he inherited but doesn't know how the Liberal Party as a whole digs out of this one and says no to Provost without pissing off Quebec.

I've been seeing this posted ever since Trudeau was dropped. Its a weird attempt at trying to paint Carney in a certain light and frankly, it's so off base it's not even funny.

Carney has had every opportunity to drop the program, dozens of free, vote winners but instead he and his party believe that keeping the wagon rolling is worth more. It's clear where he stands, if someone tells you they are something, odds are that's who they are. Every action and word he's taken has been clearly set to maintain the wedge issue (because dropping a free wedge and the illusion of public safety would destroy a liberal government cornerstone).

Carney brought Provost on board, he's platformed her harder than Trudeau has. He's accelerated the program under his tenure.

What solutions would you offer him?

I do not understand why people keep saying Carney wants to drop this, is this some kind of washing to paint him as a friend to firearms? He's absolutely not. So you think Gary and Provost function on their own? They are beholden to the leadership.

He doesn't care about our solutions because they know what both ends entail, they aren't stupid. They know actually addressing crime and the border would be a herculan task and that it would be admitting they've been dicking around for decades.

His solution is the same as the previous leaders, keep the ball rolling and bust it out when they need a good pr swing. He's not secretly praying this fails.

Absolutely ridiculous take.

Why do people so enthusiastically try to insert their hopes onto someone who's actively carving away their freedoms and quality of life?

17

u/Infinite_Price_3550 Aug 03 '26

Win seats in BC and Alberta to replace the ones you lose in Quebec 🤷🏻‍♂️

15

u/RydNightwish Aug 03 '26

Oh come now, you know the libs have no interest in the lives of anyone not along the luarentian strip.

Listen to thier concerns and try to earn thier support? Poppycock!

2

u/fyfnw Aug 03 '26

Would you actually trust them once they have your vote? And then you have buyers remorse for 4 years until the next election. No thank you.

11

u/fyfnw Aug 03 '26

Resign?

9

u/Weak-Coffee-8538 Aug 04 '26

Only way would be for a scandal to come out of her ministry and air her out to dry in the media.

Green slush fund anyone?

14

u/RydNightwish Aug 03 '26

Realistically, even in the event of a SCC win, I think the best outcome is either the court forces grandfathering or compensation into the billions. We will never be at the range with the ARs or T81's again and 2029 is so far down the road that its like time to move past the bans.

Now, a complete and baseless theory I have is that maybe a SCC loss translates into it shuffling into some kind of handing it all over to provincial autonomy. The cuts to the public sector and public safety (re:decentralize) in general as well as the push to get provinces involved in more things means maybe he decides to hand it to the provinces. Id also like a pony.

9

u/InitialAd4125 Aug 04 '26

"he cuts to the public sector and public safety (re:decentralize) in general as well as the push to get provinces involved in more things means maybe he decides to hand it to the provinces. Id also like a pony."

Frankly the fact that it isn't just goes to show the absurdity of the government and it's refusal to follow it's own rules after all are firearms not property? Frankly the way Canada is set up is the worst of both worlds. The things that would benefit Canadians the most to be at the federal level aren't and the things that would work best under a provinces control aren't either.

7

u/Silver_Pollution_297 Aug 03 '26

I'd say it's nearly certain an election is called before 2029, while Trump is still in and the Libs are still polling well & unfortunately they'll probably win a bigger majority. Next real chance at a CPC government won't be till at least 2031 or 2032 & who knows what the Conservative Party will look like by then.

10

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 03 '26

I think by then the concerted psyoping against PP we’re seeing for the crime of being somewhat unapologetically conservative will have us with a leader like Doug Ford. By that point there won’t even be a point in voting 

9

u/boozefiend3000 Aug 03 '26

Yep, they’re definitely calling an election while Trumps still in office. He’s their saving grace. Realistically the best outcome for us would be Trump dying in office in the next year or two 

11

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 03 '26

I think the maga boogeyman will outlive trump in Canada for a while. Just remember, these people thought Harper was Hitler. 

2

u/boozefiend3000 Aug 03 '26

It won’t be anywhere near as potent though. I bet MAGA will devolve into infighting once Trumps dead. They’re busy fighting themselves they won’t be constantly talking shit to get left leaning dumbasses in this country worked up 

6

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 03 '26

I wish I shared your optimism 

8

u/greasygreenbastard Aug 03 '26

quiet press release on a friday to a long weekend. Refuse to elaborate. Ezpz. 

6

u/bosnanic Aug 03 '26

If I were the PM and wanted to drop this while facing as little backlash as possible, I'd probably hope the SCC rules against the previous OiC, then give an "Aw shucks, well, we tried, guys" speech to the public. Afterwards, I'd celebrate in private that I don't have to deal with this Trudeau boondoggle anymore.

12

u/Puzzleheaded-Tie35 Aug 03 '26

Unfortunately, even if this were true, he would need more than just the right solution, he would need the right solution at the right time.

There couldn't be any high-profile shootings recently, it would have to be far enough from an election that he could run damage control, it couldn't be too close to the Poly anniversary, and we would need more calm relations with the US.

If he really wants to scrap it, we'll see after the SCC decision, but my bet is there are going to be 2 plans to choose from based on the climate at the time of the decision (if the SCC scraps the bans). First would be "we tried" and he tries to distance himself from it, until he needs a wedge issue for the election. Second (if the climate is bad, like if the decision comes down in early December) the Liberals announce they will be introducing legislation to codify they bans, then drag it out enough that they can use it for the 2029 election.

If the SCC scraps the bans and he wants it to continue, then legislation will be basically immediate, whipped votes in the House of Commons, and promises/bribes/threats in the Senate.

12

u/FunkyFrunkle Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 03 '26

It all depends on what he wants to achieve.

If he’s looking to drop it and doesn’t necessarily care about preserving the gun control message or saving face, he could drop it now. There were also lots of opportunities to kibosh the whole thing under the guise of bringing the political temperature down out west. Most provinces are against it and so are a bunch of police forces.

He could admit that this whole thing is too expensive and too logistically demanding and scrap it on the grounds of pragmatism.

However, if he’s looking to preserve the gun control message for the Liberal party and not leave a sour taste in everyone’s mouth, none of those options were good.

The problem with all previous “off ramps” as people like to call them is that none of them could have been taken without more or less destroying any possibility of the government ever using gun control as a platform in the future because they basically blew their shot when they went all-in on these expansive bans. Everyone supported the long gun registry until the figures were exposed and then all of a sudden nobody supported it. It was too toxic to touch and nobody has ever mentioned the idea of a registry again.

The same thing would happen if they scrapped the confiscations on cost, logistics or provincial opposition. The idea of gun bans would be too toxic to touch for years and when you have gun control as a core platform of your party, any outcome that hurts the agenda is unacceptable. You can’t get any more “gun control” than outright bans.

The nice thing about taking an L in court is that you can blame the Trudeau government for being too hasty, you can blame the “gun lobby” for taking this to court all while preserving gun control as a political platform. So really, the best “option” they have is to hope this falls apart in court.

If the Supreme Court rules against the government but gives them a 12 month window to create legislation, they could simply choose to stall legislation until the grace period ends and they have to comply with the ruling. This is, of course, if they really are looking to wash their hands of this.

So the governments best play if they’re looking to scale this back is to let this white-knuckle ride play out and hope the court ruling cleans up the messiest part for you. However, the conclusions of the Supreme Court are out of the governments hands entirely so only time will tell what happens.

5

u/TKB-059 bc Aug 03 '26

What solutions would you offer him?

Self-defenestration?

24

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 03 '26

But to be real, I’ve seen this brain dead theory a lot more than once here sadly. 

Carney built much of his career and was a huge promoter of the net zero cult. The LPC pushed it to the detriment of every single Canadian to the point of kneecapping our own economy. Carney had no issue cutting parts of the carbon tax blatantly just to take the wind of of the CPCs sails. 

Did Canadians question why they were told they needed to pay taxes on gas to get to work and heat their homes and now all of a sudden they don’t and the LPC is “putting money back in the pockets!”? No, they simply started saying Pollievre was stupid for this somehow. 

Thinking Canadians expect logical consistency on anything is completely naive and ignorant. Carney knows this as well. There’s twenty ways he could scrap the program and get himself a bump- as a measure to defend us from the US or as a pragmatic matter of money. Or he could just quietly scrap it and no one would care. 

He’s a year and a half in and hasn’t done any of that because he’s a leftwing authoritarian and doesn’t want us owning guns. Seriously can’t believe you people are so desperate to extend him the benefit of the doubt.  

16

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 03 '26

With fellow gun owners like this, who even needs PolySeSouvien 

-9

u/-rifle-is-fine- Aug 03 '26

Would you prefer I just abandon team pro-gun?

8

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 04 '26

You already have 

8

u/I-LOVE-HENRY-RIFLES Aug 03 '26

He’s had about 10 chances to end it so far and no suffer politically and hasn’t done so. Especially when he could have used Gary as a scapegoat. Carney isn’t dumb. He’s a 4D chess playing economic master yoda

2

u/Vahuo89 Aug 05 '26

to drop the whole thing

It's a hot potato for the liberals

Just, give up. go back to how it was.

-4

u/DoYouGetSarcasm Aug 03 '26

I love Mark Carney as much or more than the next person, and i rack my brain to come up with reasons everything he does it good, but i just don't see any evidence that he has ANY sort of negative opinion about the bans and confiscations.

He's appointed provonost to a position, he's spoken about her and her anti gun stance positively. The only times I've ever seen/heard of him mentioning it was to say it's going forward, call guns a danger to Canada, and to lend support behind it. I've never heard anything bad about it from him.

Again, i want to give him be benefit of the doubt, because image how bad PP would have been and my elbows are up to the sky!, but is there any evidence to believe this?

If Mark Carney says it I'll believe it... But has he said it?

16

u/FishingandBeer35 Aug 03 '26

Username checks out… I hope