Liberals stack Firearms Committee with anti-gun radicals | GTAMotorcycle.com

Liberals stack Firearms Committee with anti-gun radicals

Roadghost

Well-known member
For those here who have a PAL or RPAL license, it's time to get ready to fight yet another gun-grab by the radical leftists in the Liberal Party. From the Canadian Shooting Sports Association:

The Trudeau government’s echo chamber on gun control insists disarming civilians will stop violent crime. That’s the problem with echo chambers – those inside the chamber hear only those opinions they already agree with – they can’t hear anything else.
That deafness only intensifies when governments appoint fellow echo chamber members to “advise” them, as with the federal Department of Public Safety’s Firearms Advisory Committee.


Ralph Goodale, in appointing members to his “new and improved” Firearms Advisory Committee, ensured the committee would tell him what Trudeau’s government wanted to hear. And what the Trudeau Liberals want to hear is their 2015 election platform of lies echoed back to them.


Only 10 of 15 seats on the committee are filled. Yet Trudeau’s Liberals refuse to allow a representative from the CSSA or any other hunting and sport shooting organization to sit at the table.


Why talk to gun experts, the people directly affected by any legislative change? For starters, they will tell you what’s wrong with the law. They’ll provide evidence of what doesn’t work.


The Liberals don't want to hear that, of course. There are no votes in creating evidence-based policy, Justin Trudeau’s stated position notwithstanding.


Andrew Lawton, in an August 11, 2017, Global News commentary, asked “Where are the gun advocates on the federal government’s firearms advisory committee?”


Given that half the members of the committee are directly connected to the intellectually bankrupt Coalition for Gun Control, it’s a valid question.


Vice-chair Nathalie Provost, spokesperson for the anti-gun group PolySeSouvient, heads the list. Tim Naumetz, writing for iPolitics.ca on October 5, 2017, explained how PolySeSouvient is taking advantage of Provost’s position to curry favour with the Minister.


“Poly Remembers, or PolySeSouvient in French, sent a 21-page brief to Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale in June that contained nine recommendations for specific action and legislative change that would curb sales of handguns and semi-automatic assault-style rifles which have spiked by nearly 50 per cent over the past six years.”


The rabidly anti-gun Nathalie Provost is joined on the Firearms Advisory Committee by:



  • Suzanne Jackson, chair of the Board at the Canadian Public Health Association (a member of Coalition for Gun Control);
  • Paul Pageau, president of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (a member of Coalition for Gun Control);
  • Paulette Senior, Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Women’s Foundation (and former head of the YWCA when it was a member of Coalition for Gun Control);
  • Clive Weighill, Past President of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (a member of Coalition for Gun Control)


Conservative MP Michelle Rempel sponsored a petition requiring every member of the Liberal’s Firearms Advisory Committee to obtain their Possession and Acquisition Licence (PAL) so they could experience firsthand how Canada’s strict firearm control system works.


Of course, the petition fell on deaf ears and was treated with the same contempt firearms owners have come to expect from the Liberal Party of Canada. Ralph Goodale’s office defended the decision, telling Andrew Lawton requiring committee members to obtain their PALs “would be too triggering for committee vice-chair Nathalie Provost, a survivor of the massacre at Montreal’s Polytechnique school, to learn about the firearms she wants to ban.”


Seriously?


That absolutely nukes the credibility, not only of the Firearms Advisory Committee, but the entire Liberal firearms control program.


When committee members refuse to learn about the very issue on which they are tasked with advising government, well, that’s the very definition of an anti-gun echo chamber, isn’t it?


Lynda Kiejko, the other vice-chair of the committee, is a dedicated competition shooter with her sights set on an Olympic medal. She is one of just two people on the Firearms Advisory Committee with experience in firearms. In a 2016 interview with TheGunBlog.ca, she said:


“If someone has the intent to do something dangerous, having a rule in place isn’t really going to stop them. It’s hard for me to say what the solution is, but it is tough when we have laws that make it harder for us to enjoy the sport that we love, and to introduce new people to it.”


We hope her lone voice brings that same common sense to the table for committee meetings. It’s the only hope Canadian gun owners have against the Liberal government’s anti-gun echo chamber.


Sources:


·https://globalnews.ca/news/3661353/commentary-where-are-the-gun-advocates-on-federal-
governments-firearms-advisory-committee/
·https://ipolitics.ca/2017/10/05/liberal-gun-promises-are-insufficient-group/
·https://thegunblog.ca/2016/07/26/qa-with-team-canada-pistol-shooter-lynda-kiejko/
 
Might be about time to upgrade my PAL to a RPAL and get a handgun before I can't.
 
If they want to save lives the money spent legislating gun control would be better used building hospitals or enforcing existing legislation.

I'm not pro gun but I'm not pro stupidity either.
 
Passing more laws against law-abiding gun owners will not stem the tide of handguns smuggled in from the United States. Very few of the crime guns in Canada come from law abiding firearm owners.
 
In Australia it seems market forces raised the price of black market handguns out of the range of your average criminal. The comedian Jeff Jeffries might have been doing an act on this but it seems pretty true to life.
 
In Australia it seems market forces raised the price of black market handguns out of the range of your average criminal. The comedian Jeff Jeffries might have been doing an act on this but it seems pretty true to life.

In Australia they don't have a 3000 mile unprotected border with the United States. We already have very restrictive handgun laws in Canada, but most crimes in this country are still done with smuggled handguns. And Oz, the holy grail of gun control that gun control advocates keep worshipping didn't see a huge drop in homicides after their gun law. Gun related yes, though not really if you follow the trend. Why should it matter what you use to kill someone? Dead is dead:

LottAustraliaHomicide.jpg
 
Last edited:
Didn't the same group have a problem putting a pro life person as chair of the Status of Women committee?
 
In Australia they don't have a 3000 mile unprotected border with the United States. We already have very restrictive handgun laws in Canada, but most crimes in this country are still done with smuggled handguns. And Oz, the holy grail of gun control that gun control advocates keep worshipping didn't see a huge drop in homicides after their gun law. Gun related yes, though not really if you follow the trend. Why should it matter what you use to kill someone? Dead is dead:

LottAustraliaHomicide.jpg

How many mass shootings did they have afterwards? Dead is dead is absolutely correct...one thing at a time and when dealing with homicides it's probably a good idea to start with things expressly designed to effectively kill other things wouldn't you say?
 
In Australia... *SNIP* didn't see a huge drop in homicides after their gun law. Gun related yes, though not really if you follow the trend. Why should it matter what you use to kill someone? Dead is dead:

So, you're saying that since non-gun murders didn't drop, and gun related murders did drop, the murder rate is still the same, and therefore the gun controls should be released? Seriously?

The graphs clearly show a lowered overall murder rate since the gun controls came in. What's the problem with that?
 
Passing more laws against law-abiding gun owners will not stem the tide of handguns smuggled in from the United States. Very few of the crime guns in Canada come from law abiding firearm owners.

Or stolen from law abiding firearms owners.
In the past 2 years, in. my immediate area, there have been at least 4 incidents of gun owners having their collections stolen from their legal 'safe' storage.
In one of those incidents, one of the handguns was used to commit a carjacking within a half hour of the theft.
And those are just the ones I caught in the local news..
Some of the tin boxes that some consider to be a "safe"... are a joke.
 
Or stolen from law abiding firearms owners.
In the past 2 years, in. my immediate area, there have been at least 4 incidents of gun owners having their collections stolen from their legal 'safe' storage.
In one of those incidents, one of the handguns was used to commit a carjacking within a half hour of the theft.
And those are just the ones I caught in the local news..
Some of the tin boxes that some consider to be a "safe"... are a joke.

Very few guns are from legal gun owners . You repeat the a lie enough times and it becomes the truth .

Now the blame is put on the victim of a break in . Nice !

How about criminal control ?
 
Or stolen from law abiding firearms owners.
In the past 2 years, in. my immediate area, there have been at least 4 incidents of gun owners having their collections stolen from their legal 'safe' storage.
In one of those incidents, one of the handguns was used to commit a carjacking within a half hour of the theft.
And those are just the ones I caught in the local news..
Some of the tin boxes that some consider to be a "safe"... are a joke.

There are cases where criminals have stolen automobiles and used them to kill people. Should we ban or further restrict all the law abiding citizens from possessing automobiles as well? The reality is if criminals want to commit crimes they will find the means to do it. I'm not saying we should make that easier for them but making things more difficult for law abiding gun owners is not going to stop said criminals, especially with the ease of access to black market weapons thanks to our southern neighbours.
 
So, you're saying that since non-gun murders didn't drop, and gun related murders did drop, the murder rate is still the same, and therefore the gun controls should be released? Seriously?

The graphs clearly show a lowered overall murder rate since the gun controls came in. What's the problem with that?

The graph clearly shows the trend in gun homicide was already dropping rapidly. It slowed after they passed the laws, and guns were simply replaced by other means. For example, there were no mass shootings in Australia after the law, but there was still mass murders. The trend was the same in Canada and the United States where gun related homicides have been dropping for decades, in spite of all the anti-gun hype.


For mass homicides, guns will merely be replaced with cars, or trucks or bombs, as we have seen in Europe.
 
Last edited:
Very few guns are from legal gun owners . You repeat the a lie enough times and it becomes the truth .

Now the blame is put on the victim of a break in . Nice !

How about criminal control ?

My only issue is with the crap safes.
Not blaming the victim, just pointing out that not all guns used illegally come across the border illegally.. and that some originate from legal gun owners in Canada.
It would be easy to find the articles.. all were in the Brampton guardian.
I spoke to one of the them about it.. He told they were in his house for only a few minutes right after he left for work and that he had a tin box 'safe' from CT.
Mine weighs 1700lbs... You're not getting into it with a claw hammer in a few minutes.
 
There are cases where criminals have stolen automobiles and used them to kill people. Should we ban or further restrict all the law abiding citizens from possessing automobiles as well? The reality is if criminals want to commit crimes they will find the means to do it. I'm not saying we should make that easier for them but making things more difficult for law abiding gun owners is not going to stop said criminals, especially with the ease of access to black market weapons thanks to our southern neighbours.

It's cheaper and easier to steal a pile of guns than to buy them (pick almost any house in the country and you will get a few). I don't think there should be a ban, but it isn't unreasonable to require decent secured storage for them (eg. RSC or better which is still incredibly crap, maybe TL-30 for restricted weapons?). Currently you can have a wooden box with thin plexiglass windows and cabinet locks, it is trivial to break in.

Yes, the focus should be on the bad guys, not the good guys, but sadly only the good people follow rules/laws so sometimes they get stuck with the burden of helping to protect society.

EDIT: As mentioned above, access to RSC can be obtained in less than minutes by many simple methods. Ideally guns would be in B Class or better (which is still technically only good for 5 minutes of attack), but they start getting damned expensive which may put them out of reach financially for many people. Alternatively, construct a safe room (eg block walls, triple deadbolt door), there is probably a standard by ASTM or others that could be used. This is modular, inexpensive, scalable, hard to enter etc.
 
Last edited:
All I'm going to to say is... If the liberals are willing to rob you blind when you're armed, imagine what they'll do when they take your guns away.
 
Alternatively, construct a safe room (eg block walls, triple deadbolt door), there is probably a standard by ASTM or others that could be used. This is modular, inexpensive, scalable, hard to enter etc.

My Dad was a a home builder. He built some our homes with similar features.. We had ranges inside a couple of our homes when I was growing up.
 
All I'm going to to say is... If the liberals are willing to rob you blind when you're armed, imagine what they'll do when they take your guns away.

:rolleyes: So when does the shooting start?

You think Liberal government spending and taxation policies are based in any measure whatsoever on a fear of a vanishingly small number of pro-gun radicals?
 
I am saying most, if not all dictatorships lean towards socialism & gun confiscations.
 

Back
Top Bottom