Recurring Canadaguns Politics and Debate Thread

[u/AutoModerator]

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.

[u/FunkyFrunkle]

They’re trying to renew public interest because they don’t like the fact that the government has been so quiet about it. Gun control has officially taken a back seat since the start of the trade war.

They’re also starting to get squeamish now that the court date is two months away. They’re trying to push the government to get this done and ban as much as they can before the courts can potentially strike it down.

They were extremely incensed that the government decided to extend the amnesty to 90 days after the Supreme Court renders its decision which is a signal that the government is probably going to let it play out. The groups wanted them to march ahead regardless because they don’t care if the government is within its legal boundary to do it or not. The groups just want their bans while the government and taxpayers deal with the fallout because to them, the ends always justify the means.

They’re not stupid. They know that in the face of annexation threats they’re losing support for the gun ban, so they want this done now.

They’re trying to stop the program from dying a quiet death.

[u/Due-Candidate4384 → u/FunkyFrunkle]

They absolutely are stupid to not see this is already over. I don’t like papa Carney but he’s not the whipped bitch Trudeau was. This ain’t Carney’s project and there’s very little value in it for him. In fact it looks questionable banning guns while also saying we’re gonna get invaded or whatever other lies the “elbows up“ morons believe.

[u/Reasonable_Hall2346 → u/Due-Candidate4384]

I dont know. Carney could have ended this last year, instead it has been full steam ahead even after the leaked audio from Public Safety Chipmunk

[u/FunkyFrunkle → u/Reasonable_Hall2346]

The reason why he hasn’t dropped it yet makes sense if you consider that all of the “off ramps” the government supposedly had would have done irreversible political damage to gun control as a policy if they had taken them. None of those off ramps would have preserved the gun control message and would have prevented them from ever revisiting it again.

Would we care? No.

However, gun control has been a core policy for the liberals for decades. If they’re truly looking for a way out, a loss at the Supreme Court would be ideal because they wouldn’t ever have to admit that the program itself is unpopular, unworkable and too expensive. They can wash their hands while preserving the message with something along the lines of; “We tried, but ultimately we must respect the decision of the courts and operate within the boundaries clearly laid out by the law. We will tailor our approach to this issue with clearly defined boundaries”.

Considering how uncooperative the provinces are with this program, not to mention how expensive it is, I wouldn’t really be surprised if they never really tried something of this scale again. I think this is a major reason why they haven’t started the process of legislating it sooner. The issues that face this program are insurmountable and codifying it into law wouldn’t help alleviate anything, so they’re leaving it vulnerable.

Every other “off ramp” they had would have involved admitting that there are glaring issues with the program and ultimately would have made it too toxic to touch for years and years. Look at what happened to the LGR.

Make no mistake, I’m not defending Carney, but if we’re surmising what the best strategy would be to drop a problematic program while preserving value, it makes sense to go this route. They get to keep gun control somewhat intact and they don’t have to concede to conservative talking points.

The wild card here is the Supreme Court case. Everything that could happen hinges on the ruling.

[u/Beneficial-Ride-4475 → u/FunkyFrunkle]

Yeah, but that's just it isn't it? The LPC didn't want to take the off ramps to begin with, because to them, off ramps are seen as failure.

As you say, gun control is an LPC policy, and has been since the 90's. I am under no illusion about how the LPC will respond to the SC decision. If the SC upholds the status quo, the LPC will keep going ahead with this. If the SC strikes down the bans, the LPC will just push ahead with something else against gun owners.

It doesn't matter if it's fast or slow. So long as something is being done. So long as they get votes.

[u/Natural_Comparison21 → u/Beneficial-Ride-4475]

There is a pretty large correlation between them polling poorly and them pushing at the gun file. Since they aren’t polling poorly they are kind of ignoring it for now.