Bill C-71 contains no mention of the words “gang” or “organized” crime anywhere
ontheedge said:I read in one of the regulations that members of the CAF are not allowed to sign petitions. Anyone in the know about this??
ontheedge said:I read in one of the regulations that members of the CAF are not allowed to sign petitions. Anyone in the know about this??
Fishbone Jones said:
Jarnhamar said:Or are Canadian firearm owners going to be out $8'692'500'000?
Lumber said:I think a more workable and therefore more likely solution would be to first, make all current guns prohibited, and remove the right to pass along your existing weapons to family members. In the short term, no one gets there guns taken away, but in the long term, your children will have to surrender your guns to the police for destruction once you die.
Why, indeed.Lumber said:First, we need to tackle the really important question, which is why do you use apostrophes in your numbers instead of commas? Seriously, just curios.
Second, if there is any compensation, I would hazard a guess that it would be a set amount, like $100 per gun, regardless of how much you paid for. But that's just a guess.
I think a more workable and therefore more likely solution would be to first, make all current guns prohibited, and remove the right to pass along your existing weapons to family members. In the short term, no one gets there guns taken away, but in the long term, your children will have to surrender your guns to the police for destruction once you die.
Lumber said:I think a more workable and therefore more likely solution would be to first, make all current guns prohibited, and remove the right to pass along your existing weapons to family members. In the short term, no one gets there guns taken away, but in the long term, your children will have to surrender your guns to the police for destruction once you die.
Furniture said:The flaw I see with this idea is a pretty serious one. Your proposed plan would instantly make all firearms legally worthless, but would create the opportunity for a massive illegal market. The government doesn't know how many, or what type of non-restricted firearms people own. The vast majority of people wouldn't do it, but there are those that would be so offended by the government devaluing their property that they would look to recuperate the lost value somehow. If people decided to start selling their non-restricted firearms under the table to friends, and friends of friends the likelihood that firearms would start ending up in criminal/less than desirable hands greatly increases.
Journeyman said:Why, indeed.
Lumber said:Hey it's not MY proposed plan, it's the plan of the hypothetical future government that exists in my head...
Anyways, as with making your own guns in shop class, I highly HIGHLY doubt that law abiding gun owners (the ones getting the shaft) would risk being caught involved with ILLEGAL WEAPONS TRAFFICKING, no matter how mad they are.