r/canadaguns • u/AutoModerator • Jun 13 '22

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.

34 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

527 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-2

u/April_Ethereal Jun 13 '22

Too much of a coward to say it eh?

5

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Have you tried reading what I've been replying to other people are or you going to say stupid shit?

-4

u/April_Ethereal Jun 13 '22

I read all of your replies in this thread before making my first comment. And I've read all the new ones since, before making the next. What I want is for you to be direct rather than talking around it with vagaries.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Direct about what? I've been direct. This community needs to shift the narrative from sports shooting to self defence and property rights because the former is an obsolete argument. Is that not clear to you?

I've been saying this since I made a Reddit account.

-10

u/April_Ethereal Jun 13 '22

Self-defence as a primary purpose for firearms ownership in this country has absolutely terrible optics, and will not be seen as reasonable by most people whether you want to admit that or not. It's worse than the "nothing" you believe advocacy from a sporting standpoint provides as it actively harms public perceptions by feeding into opposition scaremongering.

If you pursue that as a serious narrative you're playing right into Poly and the LPC's hands; you'll be standing in for the straw man they've created that all the firearms they're banning aren't owned for sporting or hunting purposes.

Please stop doing free opposition research.

8

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Anyways, 50 more years of sports shooting. Who's with me?

-6

u/April_Ethereal Jun 14 '22

Ignore reality at your own peril; just don't expect others to join you quietly.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '22

This "reality" is that a debate older than most of us on this subreddit has run its course. Time to change

-5

u/April_Ethereal Jun 14 '22

Change to what, the even older and more obsolete narrative of "firearms ownership primarily for self defence"? The same position that people took in the 1990s in the face of the current firearms act? The narrative position that failed then with a far more receptive population than we have now?

6

u/drain-angel BC Jun 14 '22 edited Jun 14 '22

far more receptive population than we have now?

C-17 [FAC Background Checks & Storage Laws] & C-68 [PALs & 12.(X) provisions & the FA] + the prohibitions under Chretien was literally done under the context of the Polytechnique shooting. The US had the AWB under Clinton in '94 & the late 80s saw the Brady Law (NICS Handgun Check) & the US ban on Full Autos. The gun control movement was in full swing then.

A poll from the 90s also shows a 70% favour in terms of banning handguns, vs. a StatsCan survey from 2019 with only 27-33% in favor (do not own handguns/guns).

We have seen very anti-gun jurisdictions such as Coastal California (LA County & Bay Area) significantly relax the barrier required for CCW following a deterioration of the public safety situation (which we are seeing here now).

Harper's expansion of self-defence laws (which drug us from dogshit to subpar) was barely challenged and has opened the door to multiple high-profile cases where we have seen acquittals in cases where firearms were involved - yet seemingly 10 years later no one is going to touch the law.

If anything, the public is far more receptive now to the idea of having self-defence on the table (and firearms too). Personally, I don't really see how (firearms) carry is going to work out but I can 100% see the path to at least a home-defence law regarding firearms and stuff like bear spray being worked into stuff for outside the home passing without much political pushback, and on top of that the enshrinement of property rights (which is an even more easier sell).

1

u/April_Ethereal Jun 14 '22

a deterioration of the public safety situation (which we are seeing here now).

Where are you getting this from?

Regardless, I don't think there's a political or public appetite in re-visiting self-defence laws or property rights (with or without advocacy from firearms owners). My concern is that adopting that as a focus will backfire.

I'll give you that the legality of non-lethal stuff like various sprays (which are currently illegal to carry for the purpose of protection from people) could change if there's a particularly motivating and public incident.

3

u/drain-angel BC Jun 14 '22

Where are you getting this from?

Violent crime/Public Safety? https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/210727/cg-a001-eng.htm (On the rise since Trudeau became PM)

CA CCW? There's a CA map of CCW counties that date back to 2004. If you look at the 2009 map vs the 2022 map you can easily see the difference.

A rash of armed carjackings in the GTA, Downtown Vancouver having multiple incidents of people being chased with needles, and women being followed by broad daylight (which provoked a conversation about knife and pepper spray carry) are just recent headlines to boot.

The thing is also that there is recent political precedent that supports this besides Harper's expansion getting little pushback - last year Alberta's Justice Minister asked Ottawa to revise the criminal code to permit pepper spray for carry (and it got shut down) and as far as I can see from what little discussion it seems to have bipartisan support.

Of course, this still doesn't explicitly pertain to firearms and as I've said I personally don't know how it'll work (for carrying firearms outside), but if we can easily see home defence (and less-lethal carry) be legally protected instead of the current situation ($$$$ in court only to be acquitted), I'd personally see that as a win for the firearms community.

As for property rights, a poll comissioned by the Canadian Constituion Federation has seen 92% support for amendments in support of property rights. I have severe doubts that either of these angles (home defence & property rights) have political pushback - I can see where the concern is when we're talking about open carry or CCW but that's just my personal opinion.

-1

u/April_Ethereal Jun 14 '22

I don't doubt that there's "little opposition" for some changes with respect to property rights or even minor self-defence stuff, I do doubt that it's a meaningful motivator for people to change government / vote differently.

With respect to the violence stuff the statscan graph is what I'm talking about. Here's another one from the same statscan article that showcases a wider time period: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/210727/cg-a002-eng.htm We're not experiencing a breakdown in public safety / crime wave, nor are we generally (beyond a few percentage points / outliers) less safe than any point in recent history (especially compared to the 80s-00s). Media coverage of particularly egregious events like carjackings just increases people's awareness, but generally don't contribute to or represent a meaningful overall trend.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '22

We've been OICd left and right despite the positive reception, so it's not working.

It's literally only you so far who is so against what I'm saying. Other users agree but have different opinions on how to go about progressing the argument I'm advocating. Give it a rest. No one cares.

1

u/April_Ethereal Jun 14 '22

I care about the continued use and ownership of my firearms (including my AR, and handguns). As such I'm going to continue to criticize positions that I think are counter productive, and advocate for the ones I think do have the potential for positive change. Clearly we disagree on your position, but I'll be damned if that's going to stop me from being vocal about that disagreement.

5

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '22

You're a shining pillar of the community. I'm glad you're taking a stand to such a backwards thinking, ridiculous point of view that should have no place on the public sphere. Assault weapons don't belong in civilian hands btw

0

u/April_Ethereal Jun 14 '22

Be an aggressive asshole all you want; it won't dissuade me. See you next politics thread.

5

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '22

None of what I said was aggressive. If you think sarcasm is aggressive that explains why you think my rhetoric is so toxic. You don't have any teeth. The mere thought of changing the popular narrative within the gun community is enough to make you shiver, clearly. I hope I don't see you because you seem to have a hard on for me

E: people clearly like what I'm saying seeing as they have their own opinions on how to approach this problem. Even if you do pop up, you're going to get drowned out again

2

u/throwa37 Jun 14 '22

I care about the continued use and ownership of my firearms (including my AR, and handguns).

Lol, you lost those already.

As such I'm going to continue to criticize positions that I think are counter productive

Counter productive? You lost. Your way not only doesn't work, it's completely failed you - your AR is slated for confiscation and you can't buy handguns.

You literally have nothing to lose.

→ More replies (0)