Article 5 of the constitution. 2/3 votes in the congress can change the constitution. They don’t have the votes yet but would do it if they could I am convinced. They haven’t had 67 votes in a while but give them time to work on the elections. I don’t think they can get 34 states to get it changed

Man, cool it. "Would if they could"- who doesn't know this?

[Note: this NRA-ILA update contains multiple hyperlinks at the linked website update. My emphasis added in bold.]

==============

Opposition Grows to Canada’s Latest Gun Grab

MONDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2022

More than two years ago, Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced an immediate ban on firearms and devices classified as “assault weapons.” Gun owners were told they could continue to possess (but not use) their property until April 30, 2022, when the amnesty expired, and were promised the government would pay “fair compensation” for their legally acquired firearms.

Shortly before the amnesty expired, Trudeau’s government extended the end date to October 30, 2023, still without disclosing the details of the confiscation and compensation program.

The government has since moved forward with sweeping new gun control measures, beginning with a “freeze” of handgun sales and transfers and next a proposed expansion of “prohibited” firearms to include semiautomatic rifles and shotguns capable of accepting an external magazine with a capacity of more than five rounds. These, unlike the 2020 gun ban, lack a definite government commitment to compensation.

Several Canadian jurisdictions continue to oppose the federal gun bans, calling them ineffective and politically motivated infringements on the rights and freedoms of responsible citizens. Citing stretched police budgets (and perhaps mindful of the fiscal horror story the Liberal Party’s failed long-gun registry turned out to be), they have placed the federal government on notice that provincial resources cannot be used to enforce the federal confiscation and “buyback.”

A recent press release by the governments of Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan described the latest federal gun grab as “criminaliz[ing] hunters, farmers and target shooters who collectively own hundreds of thousands of firearms that could soon be prohibited.” Alberta’s Minister of Justice, Tyler Shandro, pointed out that the “federal Liberals claimed that they were never going after hunters, farmers and target shooters—they lied. This is clearly part of a push to ban legal firearms ownership altogether.” Christine Tell, Saskatchewan’s Minister of Corrections, Policing and Public Safety, warned that “Saskatchewan will not stand idly by while the federal government yet again attacks law-abiding citizens instead of focusing on crime.”

True to her word, at the beginning of December Ms. Tell sponsored a bill which lists, among its objectives, the establishment of an orderly process that “protects public safety and the safety of Saskatchewan’s lawful firearms owners from the increased risk presented by the seizure, storage and possible destruction or deactivation of those firearms.”

As introduced, Bill 117, the Saskatchewan Firearms Act, imposes conditions and restrictions on the confiscation of firearms by any “seizure agent,” defined as “a person who is engaged by the Crown in right of Canada, whether as an employee, agent or otherwise” to track, seize, store or destroy certain firearms for the purposes of enforcing a specified law. The bill would prohibit a person from acting as a seizure agent without a provincially-issued license; to qualify for licensing, approved training, insurance coverage, privacy/record-keeping and other requirements in Part 4 of the bill would have to be met. Among other things, “seizure agents” would be prohibited from having any identification on their uniforms or vehicles containing the word “police,” or carrying a badge or insignia that resembles that of a municipal police service in Saskatchewan or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The minister would be empowered to investigate complaints made about seizure agents, and failures to comply with the requirements in the bill would be crimes punishable by fines of up to $20,000 (for an individual), imprisonment of up to six months, or both.


Under Section 5-3 of the bill, “if a firearm is seized from an owner pursuant to or for the purposes of enforcing a specified law, the person who conducts the seizure of the firearm must pay to the owner full compensation for the fair market value of the firearm,” as determined by a provincial commissioner. Once that amount is set, the firearm owner must be paid within 45 days. Section 5-11 directs that a “seizure agent” cannot destroy or deactivate a seized firearm without first receiving a clearance notice from the commissioner. Finally, municipalities, police services or boards of a police service must have the written approval of the minister before entering into any agreement with the federal government that includes funding to support the enforcement of a law that on or after May 2020, prescribes a firearm as restricted or prohibited.

The bill received first reading at the beginning of the month.

Individual Canadians are also making their opposition known. Brendan Hanley, a Liberal Party Member of Parliament (MP) representing Yukon, where hunting and trapping are critical for many communities, said “I’ve had more emails on this subject than on anything I’ve received over the last year and a bit,” adding Liberal MPs in rural ridings “are also upset about this and upset about the effect that this could have on their constituents. And, that they they’re hearing loud and clear from their own constituents too.” The Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, which urged interested individuals to use an online “call to action” form to contact elected representatives about the proposed law, advised that “due to the overwhelming use of the form,” the service was temporarily unavailable.

On December 3, National Hockey League (NHL) player Carey Price, the goalie for the Montreal Canadiens, likely spoke for an untold number of Canadians in a message he posted on social media. A photo shows him dressed in hunting gear, holding a firearm, with the text:

I love my family, I love my country and I care for my neighbour. I am not a criminal or a threat to society. What @justinpjtrudeau is trying to do is unjust. I support the @ccfr_ccdaf to keep my hunting tools. Thank you for listening to my opinion.

Canadians, said Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre (MP, Carleton) “do not want to ban hunters; they want to stop criminals."

In a seeming attempt to manage the backlash, federal Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino recently made a yes-no-maybe acknowledgement that affected gun owners should qualify for government compensation. “We have not yet made a final decision on that because we do not yet know what the final outcome of either the amendments or the bill is, but it is very important to me that we are seen to be fair and equitable to law-abiding gun owners.” At the same time, though, he maintained that the objective was to ban just “guns that were designed for wartime, for the battlefield…[t]hat is the judgment of this government. It is the intent of this government to focus on those guns and not hunting rifles.” (Mendicino is the same public official who, last October, when pressed by his political colleagues about the costs of implementing the 2020 confiscation law, declined to answer but stated the government intends “to be very transparent about the costing around the buyback program.”)

There was more of the same empty, muddled rhetoric from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who last week commented that his government was continuing to “move forward with strong, smart gun control” that “respects law abiding gun owners” and won’t apply to “hunting rifles or shotguns.” He pledged to “make sure we’re not capturing weapons that are primarily hunting weapons,” but the value of that commitment, already made in 2020, can be judged against the government’s actions since that time.

quote:

Originally posted by ElToro:
Article 5 of the constitution. 2/3 votes in the congress can change the constitution. They don’t have the votes yet but would do it if they could I am convinced. They haven’t had 67 votes in a while but give them time to work on the elections. I don’t think they can get 34 states to get it changed

Congress can vote to propose Constitutional amendments. Then the proposed amendments have to be ratified by 3/4 of the States. Congress cannot just act alone.

Thank God.

Doesn't matter. It's academic. By driving forward their desire to eliminate the tools that would be used to fight tyranny, they are stepping closer to eliminating themselves. They have no idea that hell they would unleash upon themselves from free men backed into a corner.

If they don’t unfuck the pistol freeze up there, then the rest is just a slowed march towards total authoritarianism. Kind of surprising they so brazenly went for the fudd shit too but castreu must be feeling emboldened after ruining some of the trucker protesters with the bank account freezes.

Well, they are going to freeze out any income from US hunters traveling to Canada to hunt, a sizable portion of the economy of some Provinces.

flashguy

quote:

BAN NOW INCLUDES HUNTING RIFLES

Remember that the next time a gun grabber here tells you they're only after the "weapons of war." Every firearm ever made was designed for or used in warfare.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:

quote:

BAN NOW INCLUDES HUNTING RIFLES

Remember that the next time a gun grabber here tells you they're only after the "weapons of war." Every firearm ever made was designed for or used in warfare.

Any gun grabber who says there is no desire to outlaw all guns is flat out lying. There are so many instances of influencers (politicians, celebrities, NGOs, etc) on record saying they want to ban them all.

As to the issue of weapon of war, that is a conveniently undefined term just like assault weapon.

My bolt action rifles are actual weapons of war. One of my revolvers is an actual weapon of war. They've seen battle (and one carries blood stains).

As with all political issues, there are those with power who have anti-American agendas but there are very many average citizens who are simply ignorant. We can try to educate the ignorant but be prepared to fight the tyrants.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:

quote:

BAN NOW INCLUDES HUNTING RIFLES

Remember that the next time a gun grabber here tells you they're only after the "weapons of war." Every firearm ever made was designed for or used in warfare.

Yup, my Rem700 is used by snipers, my 38 smith Wesson model 10 literally came from WWII (it was carried by my grandfather), my SMLE No. 4 303 was used in WWII, I’m sure the win mod 94 was used to kill Indians, my 1911 copy served in 2 WWs. My shotgun I use to defend Casa Mike is literally in the Nation Stock System…and God forbid my evil black rifles…

Any gun that is even based on a so called “weapon of war” will be fair game; and that means ALL of them.

quote:

Originally posted by ElToro:
Article 5 of the constitution. 2/3 votes in the congress can change the constitution. They don’t have the votes yet but would do it if they could I am convinced. They haven’t had 67 votes in a while but give them time to work on the elections. I don’t think they can get 34 states to get it changed

Not quite correct. If 2/3 of both Houses of Congress approve it, the proposed Amendment is sent to states, and the legislatures there vote to approve it. A copy of what they voted on is returned and it must agree "exactly" with what was originally sent -- if even one comma is out of place, the acceptance ("ratification") is not counted. Ratification by 3/4 of the states is necessary (38 states, currently). Those are very difficult conditions to fulfill.

flashguy

This Bill, HB6544 is in the Michigan Legislature at the present time. Probably will go nowhere this year but next year when the state House, the Senate and the Executive office all come under D control look out.

A bill to ban the manufacture, possession, purchase, and sale of assault weapons; to provide certain powers and duties for certain state and local officials and agencies; to provide for the promulgation of rules; and to provide penalties.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
Sec. 1. As used in this act, "assault weapon" means a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has 1 or more of the following characteristics:
(i) A pistol grip or thumbhole stock.
(ii) Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the nontrigger hand.
(iii) A folding or telescoping stock.
(iv) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel.
Sec. 2. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, beginning January 1, 2024, a person shall not manufacture, possess, purchase, or sell an assault weapon in this state.
(2) A person may continue to possess an assault weapon that the person legally possessed before the effective date of this act if both of the following apply:
(a) The person registers the assault weapon with the department of state police in compliance with rules adopted for that purpose by the department of state police.
(b) The person renews the registration of the assault weapon every 5 years.
(3) A person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years.
Sec. 3. The department of state police shall promulgate rules pursuant to the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328, to implement this act.

The above Bill is unconstitutional, and Bruen says so.

flashguy

Great, Canada making it more of a pain in the ass for Alaskans traveling through.

Feel like I should send them a bill for the Smith 329 I bought in preparation for a brown bear photography trip I was supposed to do out of Haines. To drive to Haines from Anchorage, one has to leave Alaska and drive through part of the Yukon Territory, clip off a corner of British Columbia and then re-enter Alaska. Minimum barrel length for a handgun to transport through Canada is 4.1". My Smith 629 Mountain Gun is 4.0" and the 329 I bought is 4.125" making it legal to transport.

It sounds ohh so familiar.

@ 3 minutes


https://m.youtube.com/watch?ti...su0&feature=emb_logo

@ 5 minutes


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eDI4iZmhCK8

At least it's good to know that the US isn't the only country with some idiots elected to serve in government.

Yet further proof that, in their frenzied grab for absolute totalitarian power, gun banners wont stop at semi-autos or bolt-action hunting rifles.

[Note: several hyperlinks can be found at the linked website article.]

====================

Gun designer's single-shot 'Butt Master' gag gun lands on Canada's ban list: 'How could they be so inept?'

Published December 23, 2022 4:00pm EST

By Madeline Coggins | Fox News

A Florida gun designer was shocked to discover his primitive single-shot gag gun landed on the Canadian government's list of firearms to ban in the country.

"Butt Master" designer and sole owner Mark Serbu commented on the creation's "absurd" inclusion in Canada's controversial legislation to curb gun violence Thursday on "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

"This is hilarious, it's awesome," Serbu said. "But then you look on official Canadian documentation and you see ‘Butt Master’ and it's like, how could they be so inept to do that?"

Serbu created a single "Butt Master" 23 years ago, which is still in his possession in Tampa. The one-of-a-kind firearm is listed in Bill C-21's November amendment of firearms to be banned in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's bid to combat mass shootings.

Trudeau announced a ban on handgun sales and transfers in October.

"Fewer guns mean safer communities. That’s why the Government of Canada is implementing some of the strongest gun control measures in a generation," the PM's office said.

"Obviously Trudeau's been saying, 'Oh, we're getting rid of weapons of mass death and destruction," Serbu responded. "It's like, well, here's something with one shot…"

Critics have blasted Trudeau's tightening grip on the country with both the freeze on handgun sales and his handling of the Freedom Convoy.

Montreal Canadiens goaltender Carey Price criticized Trudeau's gun control bill earlier this month on Instagram, writing, "What @justinpjtrudeau is trying to do is unjust. I support the @ccfr_ccdaf to keep my hunting tools. Thank you for listening to my opinion."

Serbu is still in shock over his "Butt Master" gaining international attention.

"It's causing quite a stink in Canada right now," he said.

@ 4 minute news interview


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KaVDr_SHtPg

Let's not forget the so-called 'long gun registration' fiasco from a few years back. Not only was it largely ignored, but it cost around a BILLION dollars to prove that it was unworkable.

Here in UK in the late 90's, when modern-ish cartridge-firing handguns were [mostly] banned here on Mainland UK, the 55,000 of us legal handgun owners handed in just 103,000 handguns.

That little drop in the ocean cost the UK government, that is to say, the UK tax-payer, over £100 Million to serve and administer. How much it might cost Canadian tax-payers, with waaaaay more firearms than that by a few quantum leaps, is, right now, incalculable.

Just a reminder that Canada has a total population of around 38 Million people, a very high proportion of whom hunt.