They sure didn’t waste any time, must be really banking on these by-elections to get their majority on April 13th.

Looks like no more going in the woods for the SKS.

The CCFR suggested people write to their Premiere to speak out against the gun grab and to encourage them to do what Manitoba has done.

CCFR has templates for email or snail mail letter. I thought a snail mail letter may be taken more seriously by the Premiere’s office since letters take more effort than an email.

But the template letter they posted follows the typical written letter format. ie your name and address listed at the top of the page.

As soon as I saw that, it made me not want to write a letter for fear that anyone who speaks against the gun grab and puts their name and address to it, can be used to create an unofficial registry.

Does anyone else have similar concerns? I feel slightly paranoid about this but then again, how can one not be paranoid when you look at the way the govt has treated its citizens.

I’m considering sending a letter but not including my address and possibly using a pseudonym. There’s a chance they won’t take it seriously without name and address but that’s beyond my control. All I can do is write a letter or not.

Interested in others’ opinions.

Anybody notice that since the incident in Montreal, Sks prices on gun post have dropped by a few hundred bucks?

Seems to be a panic selling spree going on.

This 1000%

^{Picture is just for attention. It's a bubba gun I found for sale on CGN. I've been trying to buy it, but the owner takes 10 business days to respond.}

It's payday for me, which means I'm once again looking over my household expenses. I like to keep close tabs on how we're doing on a bi-weekly basis. One thing I noticed, that I hadn't considered, is that I'm spending significantly less than I used to. This fiscal responsibility has been a trend since 2020... Not that my household is complaining, we're surpassing all of our investment goals. But it begs the question- who is complaining?

I know I am an exceptionally small drop in a much grander bucket, but my reduced spending on hobby shooting has resulted in a reduced overall economic throughput from my dollars. By no longer frequenting my LGS, I have reduced my input into the local and broader economy. Those dollars I am not spending, are then not being repeatedly taxed on each transaction that each new owner of those dollars make. Those dollars are not being used to pay rent or buy groceries by anyone. Instead, those dollars are now sitting in global investments that don't directly benefit Canada.

A consumer economy requires consumption. When the means of consumption are limited due to political rhetoric, such as the OIC, it doesn't mean consumers move on to new consumption habits. At least, not all of them. I see myself as one of those people that did not move on, as I explained above. Instead, I spend more time on other hobbies that I am already invested in that have very low long-term operating costs. Vague, I know; however, I didn't want this to be a conversation about hobbies.

All of this rambling makes me ask the question- Who is being hurt by this and how severe is the impact?

I can't be the only one who's stopped spending so much. I am Interested to hear what you all think on this.

This is going to be a really quick one, but in the original post I had made a month ago detailing the experience withdrawing from the ASFCP, many people had asked me to issue an update:

In particular, around the fact that during this withdrawal process, I was told, that within 10 days, I would be receiving a call from Public Safety Canada to discuss further, and I was given a reference number to be used when contacted.

I'm sure it's going to be a surprise to absolutely nobody, but it's now been a full 30 days later....and not a single person has reached out to me.

🤷‍♂️

If they can't even handle a commitment to a simple callback, I have no idea how they are going to handle literally any other part of this entire program.

Will update again if anything else happens, but given how this has gone down, I don't have any belief whatsoever that will be the case.

It's a shame that I jumped into this hobby so late. Almost got into it back in like 2010, but my first wife kept me broke and busy. Didn't get around to it til 2024. I missed many years of relatively chill times for gun owners in Canada. My license came in literally 2 months after the last ban. My whole shopping list got banned. I basically dove in at the worst time to be a gun owner in the history of Canada. And now it constantly feels like the walls are closing in on our community. Almost every day I can count on reading some more damning news regarding our hobby. It's frustrating.

I've shot air rifles and stuff all my life, and shot .22LR with some friends growing up, so I always loved marksmanship, and the history of guns was always something I enjoyed learning about. I am allowed to shoot where I live, so I shoot 12g and .22 off the back porch all the time. I really enjoy it. Getting my license and shouldering a brand new Benelli for the first time was like; life goal accomplished. Better late than never.

And now I'm sweating my SKS and TM22 getting prohibed. I've sunk quite a bit of dough (by my standards) into getting the TM22 where I like it. Alex's Homebrew AR style top charging handle kit, magpul AFG, decent prism scope and bipod, etc.. And I'm always wondering if I'm just pissing money down the drain on something that'll ultimately be made illegal overnight by wack jobs and greasy politicians..

Since they've been hinting that the SKS is next, I haven't even bothered doing anything to mine. I had planned on decking it out how I like it, but now I just might keep it as is, until I inevitably get the news that it's a paperweight.

I feel bad for anyone that's already dealing with pieces of their collection becoming prohib last December, or their ARs and handguns a few years before that..

I regret not getting into it sooner. But some days I regret getting into it at all.. I'll never stop, until the very last firearm is confiscated. But it's a stressful life. I adopted a new obsession right before the LPC took a huge shit on it. And now almost every time I look at Canadian news I almost blow a gasket. And it's not just the bans and laws themselves (although that's the main source of all the stress), it's also the constant rollercoaster of bad news mixed with brief glints of hope.. I feel bad for all of us. Its not right what they're doing. We're vetted, law abiding citizens, and this confiscation scheme will have absolutely 0 effect on violent crime rates. Fml.

Wellp. I've written a novel.. Rant over I guess. Just had to vent. I know you likely all feel the same way. Guess that's why I felt I could rant about it here. None of my other peers would want to sit through all that. And I'm pretty sure they've all heard me ranting and raving about it before lol.. ✌🏻

Yes! we do exist! ask me anything!

Hi everyone, recently there have been multiple posts on how to obtain an handgun exemption and those that have aquired new firearms under those exemptions. The majority of those posts have been from BC or AB. I would like anyones experience in doing this in Ontario, it would be extremely helpful.

https://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/local-news/whistler-firearm-seizure-not-related-to-gangs-or-drugs-police-say-12061079

I’d imagine they are now actually trying to plan how to collect the rifles.

Let’s look at the numbers.

Apparently declarations will be reviewed till May. From May to October they need to collect 370 guns every single day without weekend or holidays to make it before the amnesty.

That’s 15 rifles collected every hour without a break.

It takes about 20 minutes to verify and secure a rifle according to TPS. This comes out to 22,333 man hours of labour or 930 days of man hours of labour.

There is 182 days before amnesty expires.

These labour hours do not include transpiration to and from said firearm.

According to the Federal police association, they haven’t even been informed what vehicles they will be using or if they’re even obtained yet.

According to Gemini Public Safety Canada needs about 250 to 400 full time trained staff for the next 6 months working on this to pull it off. These individuals will have to be located or deployed across Canada, which means food and lodging needs to be covered.

Considering they’ve already blown the budget, not sure how they will pay these people.

Public Safety Canada needs to recruit up to 400 retired or odd duty officers, provided up to 60 to 100 full time vans operating full time. Public safety Canada would have to fuel up the van when gas is expected explode this spring / summer.

I’m legitimately wondering….what is going on in their minds when thinking about this task?

Or perhaps they’ll approve Quebec only, decline everyone else and tell them pound sand say they succeeded?

What’s everyone’s thoughts?

With the state of firearms in this nation, there has sparked a debate about whether or not firearms should be a right in this country. Ultimately this has been met with some criticism, as a major model of private firearm ownership, is our neighbours to the south. Although this post is about private firearm ownership models across the world, this is not a post intended to incite debate regarding specific gun violence data in the US (handguns and suicides being the leading cause of gun related deaths in the US) and how these facts may nullify the US example being used to justify firearms being seen as a privilege. 

Rather, this post is to remind my fellow Canadian citizens, and firearms owners that there are other viable models, that can be used as a framework to adopt policy here. The 2 primary and notable examples that I am discussing are Switzerland and Czechia (formerly known as the Czech Republic). 

I feel that as Canadian citizens, all or most of us can agree to the necessity of absolute self defense rights, particularly within one’s home. Furthermore, an individual should be legally able to use any means available to them, to defend themselves from the threat posed by an intruder. This brings me to an important distinction within the Czech charter of fundamental rights and freedoms. 

(1) Everyone has the right to life. Human life is worthy of protection even before birth. 

(2) Nobody may be deprived of their life. 

(3) The death penalty is prohibited. 

(4) Deprivation of life is not inflicted in contravention of this Article if it occurs in connection with conduct which is not criminal under the law. The right to defend own life or life of another person also with arms is guaranteed under conditions set out in the law.  

The aforementioned amendments within the Czech charter, guarantee, self defence as a fundamental right and clearly extends to firearms. Considering this, Czechia has extremely low rates of gun crime, while adopting a model that allows for self defense and private firearm ownership. I believe it is important to ask ourselves, why can’t a similar model be adopted here? Often times, the US is used as an example by the anti-gun community to dissuade potential amendments to the Canadian constitution, given the risks. Although understandable, given what is portrayed by the media, the ultimate point is, Canada does not have to adopt a similar culture and set of laws, as proven, safe, and reliable, alternatives exist, while allowing private firearm ownership as well as self defense. 

A secondary example, of well regulated firearms legislation, is Switzerland. 

“The right to acquire, keep and bear arms is guaranteed within boundaries of this law.” 

Switzerland sees extremely low rates of gun crime per capita, even though there is a prideful, and protected firearms culture. Firearms are sown into the fabric, of their society. They are viewed as a tool used for sport and hunting, and not weapons of violence. The civic sense within Switzerland regarding firearms is extremely prevalent amongst the citizens. 

Regardless of where you may land on the spectrum regarding firearms rights/privileges, it would be ignorant to simply say, firearms are dangerous and a model which allows safe usage of a variety of firearms is impossible. There will always be those who disagree with private firearm ownership, such as Natalie Provost, but I feel as Canadians, most of us are sensible people who can acknowledge the significant history of firearms in this country and the amendments needed with regards to self defense. The aforementioned amendments are especially critical in today's society where violent crime and violent home invasions are on the rise. Another significant concept which must not be ignored is firearms culture. Within the 2 examples that were previously discussed, firearms ownership rights are accompanied by responsibilities. These responsibilities are those that are owed to your neighbour, your friends, your family, and yourself, regarding safe usage of firearms and this is particularly what has led to such a prosperous and safe firearm culture.

When I completed my Possessions and Acquisition course, I recall my instructor stating that many canadian citizens are ignorant on the topic of firearms (thinking firearms are illegal, not understanding legislation, etc.), however he also said that it is important to not discuss your firearm ownership in a public sphere for safety reasons. Although this is understandable, I feel that this exact reasoning has led to the demise of firearms culture within Canada and ignorance that so many of our fellow citizens have. This same ignorance can lead people to believe rifles like the GSG-16 should be banned, because they appear a particular way, without accounting for their functionality, and the same can be applied to rifles such as the AR-15. As responsible firearms owners, it is our job to spread our message as to dispel ignorance regarding the culture of firearms in our country. Otherwise, I fear that our fellow neighbours, friends, and family may continue to believe rifles like the GSG-16 or AR-15 should be banned when they are shown on the news because of the stereotypes associated with black rifles. As with any constitutional amendments, a shared firearms culture is equally as important to the flourishing of safe, private firearm ownership within our country and is in large part the reason why models such as those seen in Czechia and Switzerland exist.

Anytime a government attempts to disarm the population, you must ask yourselves why? When considering historical examples, disarmament of the population can often lead to dire consequences. Prominent examples include the Armenian genocide, nazi Germany, and the Bosnian Genocide in which populations were disarmed prior to committed atrocities. Other notable examples include Venezuelan disarmament which allowed for mass overreach and humans rights abuses. The state is ill equipped to take care of the citizen, rather that is a responsibility best left to the citizens themselves.

TLDR:

1. People often use the US firearms laws to dismiss private ownership of firearms within Canada, but other alternatives exist such as Czechia and Switzerland where self defense and private firearms ownership is constitutionally recognized.

2. In both countries, a strong civic sense and responsibility is associated with the right to firearms ownership.

3. Its our job as firearms owners to dispel ignorance regarding "black and scary" rifles amongst our fellow canadian citizens and to introduce them to firearms.

4. A safe and responsible firearms culture is equally as important to constitutional amendments when it comes to a successful firearms culture.

From the beginning, the "ASFCP" has included two ominous footnotes alluding to how they're going to violate gun owners that declare their property.

- "Compensation is not guaranteed"

And, should you reside in AB or SK

- "Individuals who live in Alberta or Saskatchewan should consult their provincial government for laws or regulations put in place that may impede or limit their participation in the program."

Now, we know there is a licensing scheme for potential private collection agents in the Alberta legislation. I have not looked into SK.

Should you contact the AB CFO, you will learn the Federal government has not applied for any confiscation agent licensing.

So, the very obvious indication here is that they intend to wash their hands of responsibility in these two provinces and leave any owners who declared property to face the end of the amnesty with no option but to deactivate or surrender their property.

Absolutely shameful how this program has been handled.

Just curious how many of you have upped your reloading/ammo/firearm supplies in the past year or so because of the current government. Personally they have "made" me get more than ever. Thoughts of a ammo cap limit and more restrictions. Im not saying people should do this im just curious and this post in no way is suggesting anything. So no hate please 😌

Wtf

Was this Colt’s reward for participating in the gun confiscation program?

$307,000,000 rifle contract.

Who's going? Hopefully some folks from the GTA can make it too.

https://facebook.com/events/s/waterloo-region-rally-against-/1716662482697284/

We all got the email from the RCMP yesterday threating us to register our firearms but I think a lot of people here misdirected their anger to the horse police instead of the Minister of Public Safety (i.e. the Chipmunk) responsible for Public Safety Canada who initiated the Confiscation scheme.

The message yesterday was coming from RCMP's boss, i.e. Public Safety Canada. The RCMP (who administer the Canadian Firearms Program after the CFC was merged into the RCMP in 2008) is literally just the messenger here.

RCMP's own incompetence is a separate issue but in the email, they even distanced themselves from this nonsense by stating:

The Canadian Firearms Program facilitated the delivery of this notification on behalf of Public Safety Canada and has not shared or disclosed any licence holder names, addresses or personal information with Public Safety Canada. Please ensure that your email is up-to-date with the Canadian Firearms Program to receive direct ASFCP updates. Alternatively, updates will be available on the ASFCP website.

RCMP is an agency of the Government of Canada act under the direction/mandate given by the Minister of Public Safety. Hate on the horse police all you want, but the anger should be directed toward the politicians who is ultimately making the call here. I felt the recent comments here are disproportionally directed toward the RCMP, distracting from the real issue being the idiotic policies pushed by the government.

Before anyone says "finally we can defend our homes", you already can. Let me save you the rabbit hole.

1. The burden of proof is already on the Crown.

The accused never has to prove self-defence was reasonable. The Crown must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. This is basic criminal law, confirmed by the Supreme Court.

> Source: R v Cinous, 2002 SCC 29

2. There is no duty to retreat from your home. None.

The Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled multiple times that a jury isn't even allowed to consider whether you could have retreated from your own home. We already have a de facto castle doctrine, it just doesn't have a catchy name.

> Source: R v Forde, 2011 ONCA 592

3. Our law is already MORE permissive than U.S. Stand Your Ground.

McGill law professor Noah Weisbord, who literally wrote the academic papers on this, says Canadian law lets you "claim defensive force more easily than in the U.S." The Harper Conservatives already reformed this in 2013 (Bill C-26).

> Source: Weisbord, McGill Law Journal

4. The Collingwood case they keep citing? The law WORKED.

Cameron Gardiner shot two armed masked home invaders and the charges were dropped, under the existing law. The real problem was prosecutorial overreach and a messy situation (drug-dealing from the house, evidence removed before police arrived). A "presumption of reasonableness" in the statute wouldn't have prevented his arrest anyway. Only a prosecution immunity provision would do that — and that's not in this bill.

> Source: CBC News

TL;DR

The proposed change is legally redundant. The Crown already has to disprove reasonableness, that's not changing. What Cobena's bill won't do is stop homeowners from being arrested and charged while under investigation. Only a US-style prosecution immunity provision would do that, and nobody's proposing that.

You're being sold a solution to a problem that Harper already solved in 2013.

> Full DOJ legal breakdown: justice.gc.ca

Bill C-21 and the OIC has been a significant topic in the house of commons. Regardless of which side of the aisle you stand, the conversations about guns are often polarized and emotionally charged. Misunderstandings on both sides can lead to mistrust, oversimplified stereotypes, and policies that fail to reflect the complexity of the issue. Encouraging dialogue rooted in respect, education, and shared values can help create a more informed and constructive public conversation.

Please watch the attached video and consider what Professor Yamane has to say. If we can bridge the gap between the most polarized on the firearms spectrum, I believe we can make better policy to benefit Canada.