Petition
- Thread starter kevind
- Start date
- Status
Saxe Point
Well-Known Member
I could make up a chart that said the exact opposite
That chart is probably accurate and from a credible source. See this poll on banning all firearms: https://globalnews.ca/news/6893821/firearms-ban-ipsos-poll-canada/
Saxe Point
Well-Known Member
That wasn’t hard at all. Looks like that chart reflects some pretty respectable polling: http://angusreid.org/assault-weapons-ban/
SpringFever552
Well-Known Member
I could do a poll and get the exact opposite, its only half of city folks in your post, so lets poll the rural areas, want to bet the poll would be opposite and even higher #s?
I live in a city and never received a call?...hmmm wonder why?..bet its because my postal code!
Saxe Point
Well-Known Member
The chart came from an Angus Reid poll of all Canadians. The other one concerning a total firearms ban involved only city dwellers. Neither supports your point and you’re wrong if you think you can run a real poll that will give opposite results.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Any poll is only as good as the question it asks. Before I buy into any results I see posted I like to see exactly what was asked. Sometimes it’s pretty straight forward, but other times it’s pretty misleading. At any rate both the question and the answer are important to judge any accuracy. ENGO’s are a prime example of leading questions, but they’re by no means alone.
ReelSlim
Crew Member
Sooooo.....29 million voted out of 37 million in Canada??? I guess kids were allowed to vote as well. Perhaps they missed my household as well? I think I will get one of my kids to make a nice colourful pie chart up today and I’ll post it up today and say its’s a poll for something...seems reasonable these days...
pescador
Well-Known Member
As good as the question.....and......where it was done. Vancouver (whats his face), Calgary (Nenshi) and Toronto (Tory), Montreal (Plante). All mayors with anti gun agendas. What result would you expect. Don’t know about you but I get called by pollsters multiple times a year. Never had a call re a firearms poll.....ever. Take that poll to rural Canada and let’s see results.
cracked_ribs
Well-Known Member
It's probably also significant that the overwhelming majority of respondents had never owned a gun, had no familiarity with gun laws, and are unclear on exactly what "assault weapons" in this country actually even means.
IIRC the definition given involved was "rapid fire, high capacity" which are already illegal, unless you think a Remington 1100 is an assault weapon...it's equally rapid-fire to any "assault weapon" banned by this OIC, and the capacity is practically the same. The biggest difference is that a duck gun is way, way, way more powerful, and buckshot is much, much, much more lethal than the rounds commonly fired by AR-15s etc.
Of course this sloppily written OIC appears, according to three separate legal opinions, to prohibit most duck guns anyway, as the bore measurement of any 12g with removable chokes measures out a little over 20mm. Currently the claim from the government is that this is not the intent of the law, but every legal opinion so far says that regardless of the intent, there was no exception made for shotgun chokes so the order as written prohibits most of the duck guns in the country.
At any rate, I don't really base my ideas about right and wrong on what's popular; even if I was the only person in the country who was against this, I'd still be against it. But the fact that a bunch of people with no real understanding of the subject (and this is pretty clear if you dig into the numbers on Angus Reid's site) feel a certain way definitely doesn't make me feel that I should change my mind. Do we think that a sea lion cull would be supported by the vast majority of Canadians? Probably not; they would probably think it was tantamount to murder. Does that mean that we should never consider one? I imagine most people here would say a cull could well be the right idea.
Being popular and being right are basically unrelated. Using a majority opinion to get something accomplished can be a useful tactical decision, but it's got nothing to do with morality. If 80% of the people in this country decided that the only way to resolve climate change was to eliminate private cars, and force everyone to have one shared car per each ten residents, well, if you had the support of 80% of the people you could probably force me to give up my car through law. But that would only mean that your numbers gave you the ability to force me to do something; it wouldn't show that forcing me to do that thing was actually correct.
So maybe the polling numbers are accurate and maybe enough Canadians want this that they can force it on those of us that don't. I'm not sure. But let's not make the mistake of thinking that popularity is any kind of moral justification. It's a tactical advantage, not a justification.
Anyway I know this subject is not a great one to discuss here; I apologize for wading in. I try to offset the divisive topic by offering fairly calm and reasoned points. But I am deeply opposed to this government order and I think people should be at least as worried about the OIC as a method of governance as they are about the specific issue of gun ownership.
IIRC the definition given involved was "rapid fire, high capacity" which are already illegal, unless you think a Remington 1100 is an assault weapon...it's equally rapid-fire to any "assault weapon" banned by this OIC, and the capacity is practically the same. The biggest difference is that a duck gun is way, way, way more powerful, and buckshot is much, much, much more lethal than the rounds commonly fired by AR-15s etc.
Of course this sloppily written OIC appears, according to three separate legal opinions, to prohibit most duck guns anyway, as the bore measurement of any 12g with removable chokes measures out a little over 20mm. Currently the claim from the government is that this is not the intent of the law, but every legal opinion so far says that regardless of the intent, there was no exception made for shotgun chokes so the order as written prohibits most of the duck guns in the country.
At any rate, I don't really base my ideas about right and wrong on what's popular; even if I was the only person in the country who was against this, I'd still be against it. But the fact that a bunch of people with no real understanding of the subject (and this is pretty clear if you dig into the numbers on Angus Reid's site) feel a certain way definitely doesn't make me feel that I should change my mind. Do we think that a sea lion cull would be supported by the vast majority of Canadians? Probably not; they would probably think it was tantamount to murder. Does that mean that we should never consider one? I imagine most people here would say a cull could well be the right idea.
Being popular and being right are basically unrelated. Using a majority opinion to get something accomplished can be a useful tactical decision, but it's got nothing to do with morality. If 80% of the people in this country decided that the only way to resolve climate change was to eliminate private cars, and force everyone to have one shared car per each ten residents, well, if you had the support of 80% of the people you could probably force me to give up my car through law. But that would only mean that your numbers gave you the ability to force me to do something; it wouldn't show that forcing me to do that thing was actually correct.
So maybe the polling numbers are accurate and maybe enough Canadians want this that they can force it on those of us that don't. I'm not sure. But let's not make the mistake of thinking that popularity is any kind of moral justification. It's a tactical advantage, not a justification.
Anyway I know this subject is not a great one to discuss here; I apologize for wading in. I try to offset the divisive topic by offering fairly calm and reasoned points. But I am deeply opposed to this government order and I think people should be at least as worried about the OIC as a method of governance as they are about the specific issue of gun ownership.
ILHG
Crew Member
Now we are arguing about who's poll is better. Firm's up my last post about how you will NEVER change the minds of those opposed but some of you just don't get it. You just can't stay away from the fight, because, after all, if the opinion of someone else or the poll they post doesn't mesh with your narrative, then whoever they are must be full of ****. What is really sad is how this reflects the divisiveness that seems to have overtaken this country. Seems to be a whole lot more of me than we these days.
Anyway, I am not going to remove this just because there are dissenting views, but it will be gone if the useless back and forth doesn't cease.
Anyway, I am not going to remove this just because there are dissenting views, but it will be gone if the useless back and forth doesn't cease.
cracked_ribs
Well-Known Member
The CCFR, CSSA and NFA are all spooling up lawsuits - I'm hesitant to post links to fundraising stuff here but I would say that the best money right now is in donating to one or more of these organizations. It may be that within a short space of time we'll see dedicated legal bill donation avenues but to my knowledge there are no specific ones yet. But it's early and I'm only half awake still, so it's possible there's already a specific litigation fund donation site at one of the orgs and I am just not with it enough to have recognized it this morning.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
There is but one entity to thank for that. Somewhere along the way, our government decided it was it's chosen role is to RULE over The People, rather than working for them. And much of what they do in that new role creates massive divisions within our Country. Don't quite rightly know how to fix that. Sad Times...
If you are not currently a Member of the CCFR, do so now.
They have mounted the First Legal Challenge to the OIC thus far:
https://firearmrights.ca/en/we-are-going-to-court/
Cheers,
Nog
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Not allowing this to be debated in parliament is going to be the Liberals down fall on this.
cracked_ribs
Well-Known Member
That's for sure the part of this that should concern everyone, regardless of how they feel about guns.
I would equate it to an edict banning the Communist party... I hate the Communist party and everything they stand for, but I would be completely against any move to prohibit their existence, and if that was done without even passing a law and going through the checks and balances the system provides...that would be absolutely intolerable.
Bows Up
Well-Known Member
Done yesterday. Pulled the link from the Canadian forum on the Duck Hunter's refuge. It's a US site though with the number of US hunters that come into Alta and Sask for birds there's a fair amount of discussion.
Let's just say the boys down south are a little more unruly.
Let's just say the boys down south are a little more unruly.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
The NFA launches a second, parallel lawsuit against the Feds:
https://nfa.ca/2020/05/07/nfa-announces-support-court-challenge-to-liberal-gun-grab/
https://nfa.ca/2020/05/07/nfa-announces-support-court-challenge-to-liberal-gun-grab/
cracked_ribs
Well-Known Member
First shotgun officially prohibited under this order: an old Iver Johnson break action single shot.
Happened today. Bore was measured over 20mm. RCMP firearms tech confirmed on the phone with Elwood Epps, as per the CSSA.
Happened today. Bore was measured over 20mm. RCMP firearms tech confirmed on the phone with Elwood Epps, as per the CSSA.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Email from the CSSA as follows:
RCMP prohibits first 12-Gauge Shotgun with 20mm Bore Law - CBSA Memorandum backs Firearms Lawyers on Shotgun Ban
May 8, 2020
OSHAWA: On May 5, 2020, CSSA and CSAAA issued a joint news release showing Justin Trudeau and Bill Blair – either through gross ignorance or gross incompetence – banned 12-gauge and 10-gauge shotguns under the 20mm maximum bore diameter restriction in *SOR/2020-96."
Minister Blair’s denied this via social media, saying,
“Both 10 and 12 gauge shotguns are under the 20mm provision, and thus not subject to the prohibition. Our government is taking action to protect Canadians by banning assault-style weapons – not those used*for hunting.
“The truth matters,” Minister Blair said.
We agree 100%. The truth matters.
This morning, the RCMP confirmed the first 12-gauge shotgun prohibited under the new Order-in-Council.
The deadly evil weapon? An old Iver Johnson single-shot, fixed choke 12-gauge shotgun with a 2 3/4" chamber.
That's right, a standard old farm gun.
RCMP Technical Unit Supervisor, Tim Hobbs, confirmed this firearm would be classified as prohibited in a phone call with a prominent firearms dealer.
See this firearm being measured - see for yourself:
That’s why we asked for the legal opinion of one of Canada’s top firearm lawyers, Edward L Burlew LL.B.
Solomon Friedman LL.B., another respected lawyer well-versed in firearms law, agrees with Mr. Burlew’s opinion.
“Your standard 12-gauge shotgun, most people think it has a bore of 18.5 millimeters,” he told CBC Radio, “but modern shotguns are actually over-bored – they’re larger than 18.5 millimeters to allow you*to screw in attachments called chokes. It’s very common. Most modern shotguns are made that way and that they are almost all larger than 20 millimeters.”
If Minister Blair doesn’t want to listen to the opinion of two experts in Canadian firearms law, perhaps he will agree with the experts in one of the agencies he oversees.
The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) Memorandum D19-13-2, issued May 29, 2019, defines BORE as:
"The inside of the barrel of a firearm, from the throat to the*muzzle, through which the projectile travels."
By the CBSA’s definition, it may be all 12-gauge and 10-gauge shotguns – not just those with removable chokes – are now Prohibited firearms because they do not consider the forcing cone, the “throat” of the barrel, which exceeds the 20 mm maximum bore*diameter specified in SOR/2020-96.
Will Minister Blair support the CBSA opinion that meshes with two of Canada’s top legal experts in firearms law?
Or will he toss them under the bus because he can’t admit he made a huge mistake?
We demand Minister Bill Blair immediately rescind SOR/2020-96 until such time as he can figure out what he’s doing.
It’s clear he hasn’t figured out what he’s doing yet, and all Canadian hunters and sport shooters may pay the price for his incompetence.
Fixing this particular (among many) problem requires the addition of two little words: “except shotguns.” That it is so easy to fix yet Blair refuses to make the change, tells us the wording was intentional. Minister Bill Blair promised to call us the*next day to clarify the OiC. Two and a half days later... we're still waiting. More to come. - TB
RCMP prohibits first 12-Gauge Shotgun with 20mm Bore Law - CBSA Memorandum backs Firearms Lawyers on Shotgun Ban
May 8, 2020
OSHAWA: On May 5, 2020, CSSA and CSAAA issued a joint news release showing Justin Trudeau and Bill Blair – either through gross ignorance or gross incompetence – banned 12-gauge and 10-gauge shotguns under the 20mm maximum bore diameter restriction in *SOR/2020-96."
Minister Blair’s denied this via social media, saying,
“Both 10 and 12 gauge shotguns are under the 20mm provision, and thus not subject to the prohibition. Our government is taking action to protect Canadians by banning assault-style weapons – not those used*for hunting.
“The truth matters,” Minister Blair said.
We agree 100%. The truth matters.
This morning, the RCMP confirmed the first 12-gauge shotgun prohibited under the new Order-in-Council.
The deadly evil weapon? An old Iver Johnson single-shot, fixed choke 12-gauge shotgun with a 2 3/4" chamber.
That's right, a standard old farm gun.
RCMP Technical Unit Supervisor, Tim Hobbs, confirmed this firearm would be classified as prohibited in a phone call with a prominent firearms dealer.
See this firearm being measured - see for yourself:
That’s why we asked for the legal opinion of one of Canada’s top firearm lawyers, Edward L Burlew LL.B.
Solomon Friedman LL.B., another respected lawyer well-versed in firearms law, agrees with Mr. Burlew’s opinion.
“Your standard 12-gauge shotgun, most people think it has a bore of 18.5 millimeters,” he told CBC Radio, “but modern shotguns are actually over-bored – they’re larger than 18.5 millimeters to allow you*to screw in attachments called chokes. It’s very common. Most modern shotguns are made that way and that they are almost all larger than 20 millimeters.”
If Minister Blair doesn’t want to listen to the opinion of two experts in Canadian firearms law, perhaps he will agree with the experts in one of the agencies he oversees.
The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) Memorandum D19-13-2, issued May 29, 2019, defines BORE as:
"The inside of the barrel of a firearm, from the throat to the*muzzle, through which the projectile travels."
By the CBSA’s definition, it may be all 12-gauge and 10-gauge shotguns – not just those with removable chokes – are now Prohibited firearms because they do not consider the forcing cone, the “throat” of the barrel, which exceeds the 20 mm maximum bore*diameter specified in SOR/2020-96.
Will Minister Blair support the CBSA opinion that meshes with two of Canada’s top legal experts in firearms law?
Or will he toss them under the bus because he can’t admit he made a huge mistake?
We demand Minister Bill Blair immediately rescind SOR/2020-96 until such time as he can figure out what he’s doing.
It’s clear he hasn’t figured out what he’s doing yet, and all Canadian hunters and sport shooters may pay the price for his incompetence.
Fixing this particular (among many) problem requires the addition of two little words: “except shotguns.” That it is so easy to fix yet Blair refuses to make the change, tells us the wording was intentional. Minister Bill Blair promised to call us the*next day to clarify the OiC. Two and a half days later... we're still waiting. More to come. - TB
- Status
Similar threads
