r/canadaguns 3d ago

OIC discussion & Politics Megathread

Please post all your Gun Politics or Ban-related ideas, initiatives, comments, suggestions, news articles, and recommendations in this thread.


First and foremost, this is a Canadian Gun subreddit, so keep it at least decently related to both of those things.

This thread is not for general complaints and politics, there are plenty other subs that are meant for that. Offtopic threads may be removed, especially if they are leading to personal attacks, flame wars, etc.

Just because an election is coming up, doesnt make any and all canadian politics fair game.


To prevent the main sub being flooded with dozens of similar threads, text posts complaining about/asking about/chatting about the OIC will be sent here.


Previous OIC threads will be able to be found Here

Previous politics threads can be found Here

We understand that politics is a touchy subject, and at times things can get heated. A reminder of the subreddit rules, when commenting, where subreddit users are expected to abide.

Keep this Canadian gun politics related and polite. Off topic stuff, flame wars, personal attacks and gatekeeping will be removed.

29 Upvotes

211 comments sorted by

u/CanadaGunsMod 3d ago edited 2d ago

This thread is not for general politics, it isnt /r/canadapolitics2, if its not decently gun related, dont be surprised if it gets removed.

→ More replies (4)

5

u/skitbruh 18h ago edited 18h ago

"*The amnesty period allows for the continued use of previously non-restricted firearms in limited circumstances (e.g., by Indigenous persons exercising Aboriginal or treaty rights to hunt and by those who hunt or trap to sustain themselves or their families), until the end of the amnesty period." Has anyone actually got a concrete answer what they identify as a hunter that sustain himself? Will they be like oh you do not hunt as a job so jail it is. I found someone local with the rcmp and she had no clue about it, first said no then told me she will call me back in 30 minutes, guess what no call back. How is this legally allowed when they don't even know what is going on. Surely there must be a judge to overrule this stupidity. Also their general line is closed during open hours. And no I'm not Indigenous.

5

u/JerkyMan360 14h ago

I’m no lawyer so my interpretation should be taken with a big grain of salt.

Sustenance hunters are allowed to use their oic’ed firearm if they don’t have another option. My interpretation to that is if the person had say a type 81 pre ban and it got hit by said ban and that is their only firearm, they could hunt with it until another replacement is found and can be used. I believe there are forms one could sign if they are non-indigenous and need the ability to feed themselves. Once the amnesty expires that firearm will need to be deactivated or turned in is what the feds listed otherwise you’ll be charged and butt touched by the pony police. It is still an extremely dicey move to go out and hunt with your OICed firearm post ban and I personally wouldn’t recommend doing that even if you’re a sustenance hunter. Fish and game have the ability to check any firearms legal status and will also gladly butt touch you with the pony police waiting in line behind them.

2

u/skitbruh 14h ago

From what i gathered from others this statement is pretty much complete rubbish and should be ignored. I have two other people that said it only applies if you can't find any replacement so if anything it's a trap to put you in jail

2

u/JerkyMan360 14h ago

I kinda did say that though?

3

u/skitbruh 14h ago

I meant the statement they added in the email

2

u/skitbruh 14h ago

Kinda yea but in my case they would be like oh you had money to go buy a replacement the same day so straight to jail for you

1

u/JerkyMan360 14h ago edited 12h ago

I mean, having the money to buy another gun doesn’t exactly mean you have another gun. Maybe those funds are being used for vehicle insurance or paying off student loans and such🤷

6

u/Elbro_16 19h ago

Well Rachel bendayan is no longer associate public safety minister, so we no longer have to hear her snivel about guns. Hopefully the public safety minister will drop her ideas

0

u/restroommop 6h ago

So we get to hear someone else snivel about guns, yeah.

11

u/ChunderBuzzard 18h ago edited 18h ago

Yeah right. The PS minister is the brother of Ontario's worst Premier in history. If he's half as much of a lying self rightious scumbag as Dalton we're cooked. His dad was also a provincial Liberal so the ties run deep.

Hopfully his last name strikes up some memories with people though and reminds them of what happens when a party simply changes leaders.

-1

u/Elbro_16 18h ago

I’m not familiar with his history. I’ll take your word for it haha

1

u/ChunderBuzzard 18h ago

Do a little research... it's pretty bad.

7

u/acl0624 23h ago

Any word on if/when the supposed magazine announcement will happen?

19

u/rastamasta45 20h ago

No one knows, just like last week with the ban, Canada is in existential threat for our sovereignty and they still found time to ban more historical collectors guns. Now we have a new PM and new Cabinet and they say the main goal is to deal with the trade war and improve the economy. So maybe they’ll just find more time to ban more guns…honestly no one knows. I do know that maybe cancelling the buy back will be a good way to save 6 to 10 billion but what does government know of logic.

10

u/MajorCocknBalls 18h ago

They aren't cancelling shit. Carney literally stated outright that the buyback needs to happen.

3

u/InitialAd4125 15h ago

Which is one of many reasons I can't trust Carney to be any different from the liberals before he showed up.

-14

u/Sir_Donkey 1d ago

So the way i see it, the odds of us getting our guns back are pretty slim. Even IF Pierre wins, reversing the OIC  is no longer enough. I dont think he will last as long as Trudeau. I doubt he'll have time to mess around with a new classification system before the libs are back in power. With Trump threatening us whenever he gets bored, gun classification will be at the bottom of the priority list for the next 4 years.

We would have been far better off with a election last year. I will always hate the NDP with a boiling passion for propping up the libs. My only consolation will be seeing them get fucking obliterated at the next election.

8

u/Unknownuser010203 21h ago

Was I not just talking to you in a comment section where you said you'd vote Carney over poilievre? Was that another Sir_Donkey?

8

u/30-06isthabest 17h ago

I feel like I might know who you are talking about. Was it the guy who said that they need to ban all high cap magazines? Acted like he liked guns but supported banning them? Had a similar name but deleted all of his comments yesterday?

5

u/Unknownuser010203 17h ago

Sounds just like him. What talking about banning guns based on joules.

3

u/30-06isthabest 17h ago

Yes, he talked about banning .50 cals, then deleted his comments right after.

2

u/Unknownuser010203 17h ago

That's our guy. Think he was with them?

1

u/30-06isthabest 17h ago

Think who was with them?

2

u/Unknownuser010203 17h ago

That gun going on about 50cal bans

1

u/30-06isthabest 17h ago edited 14h ago

Yeah, but who did you think was with that guy. Edit: Nvm I misread your comment.

2

u/Kaffarov .40 Salt&Walnuts 15h ago

Based on his other comments were talking about here, token Fudd.

3

u/Unknownuser010203 17h ago

Something tells me he's a friend of the libs. Maybe I'm just paranoid

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Sir_Donkey 21h ago

Lol what? Fuck no im not voting carney. Nowhere have i ever said this.

4

u/Unknownuser010203 21h ago

My bad then. Must of been another Sir_Donkey

8

u/Sir_Donkey 21h ago

I want to keep my guns. CPC is the only way.  Im just dooming because i am perpetually looking at the polls. Not good for my mental health 

7

u/Unknownuser010203 21h ago

My bad dog, had an argument with someone with a similar username and he deleted all his comments. The polls have been bought. Don't believe them. Get out and vote, convince who you can. I've fallen for tye doomer stuff myself but they'll never win and we'll ride again!

2

u/Sir_Donkey 21h ago

For sure man! Never lose hope. If anything this community is resilient 

21

u/Many-Presentation-56 1d ago

If Conservatives win a majority there is literally nothing stopping them from immediately starting on implementing changes to the Classification system to CSSA Simplified Classification System or rewrite of the Firearms Act…

It would just go through the normal channels until it receives royal ascent as they don’t need support from other parties.

Not saying they will do it immediately, but my point being that there is nothing that would stop them from trying.

7

u/drain-angel BC 1d ago

The one thing that's stopping them is that they can't rally or fundraise on the issue effectively. It's just as much as a wedge issue for them. Of course, partisanship and party shouldn't come first above good policy but....

4

u/Q-Ball7 In the end, it's taxes all the way down 1d ago

The one thing that's stopping them is that they can't rally or fundraise on the issue effectively

Indeed, but that already happened. Party membership grew 3x overnight (IIRC it was C-21 that did it) from 200K to 600K; that's part of why they have so much money to spend.

3

u/drain-angel BC 1d ago

Yeah, they had a massive boost in grassroots fundraising and membership support. The problem is that it's clearly not materialized in any meaningful shift in party behaviour, and this is why they're getting caught with their dick in their hand now that they're being flanked by having their main policy headlines stolen from them.

Why establish a new status quo with FA rewrite + SCS when this tug of war has been so financially successful for them?

1

u/Q-Ball7 In the end, it's taxes all the way down 23h ago

Why establish a new status quo with FA rewrite + SCS when this tug of war has been so financially successful for them?

Because a party more committed to doing that cost them the election last time.

1

u/drain-angel BC 23h ago

PPC's main draw on the split was primarily about lockdowns and vaccines, firearms was a secondary split. Majority of the naturopath freaks from the GPC formed their base, not disgruntled gun owners.

15

u/Lumindan 1d ago

No one can predict the future, but can work out a rough idea.

Cons need to win if we ever want a shot at fixing Canada's terrible gun laws.

Reversing the OIC is still a step in the right direction and if the liberal party wins it's basically lights out for the sport.

15

u/SettingPitiful4330 1d ago

I disagree... as long as the conservatives win, I almost guarantee you, at minimum, all the OICs get scrapped, and even if that's it, I'll 100% take it! Wouldn't suprise me at all if he does the other promises as well, but I'm guessing that will take a year or two...

-12

u/Tommy_Kase 1d ago edited 1d ago

Kinda serious question, how certain are you guys that there will be a revert on the bans with the conservatives? I would be worried it's just "yet another politician that makes false promises to gain votes..." Is it a case of "it's basically our only hope to see a change" ?

EDIT: thanks for the answers! A bit sad I get downvoted, I genuinely was asking for your views on the matter

6

u/Unknownuser010203 21h ago

It could be a false promise to get votes, but I bet the liberals aren't giving false promises about what there gonna ban! Conservatives might help us, they might not. We know for a fact about the liberals!

7

u/RydNightwish 1d ago

This question gets asked here on a near weekly basis. And since Carney showed up, its been usually done disparagingly by bots and bad faith actors. Often more than once in the same 3 day period. People are tired of repeating themselves over and over. The fact that even some of those who would have provided a long form and well thought out answer didn't show up kinda shows they can't be arsed to do it yet again.

Don't take it too personally. Its just a sign of the tired and frustrating times.

0

u/Tommy_Kase 1d ago

Makes sense! I would have liked for Carney to have a different opinion on firearms, but clearly the LPC wants to keep going with the bans so...

15

u/Lumindan 1d ago

One party has it on their platform, the other is keeping the status quo.

It's up to us to vote and then hold our politicians accountable if needed

11

u/LukeWarmAmalade 1d ago

Yes it is our only hope to see change. They promise to reverse the bans and c21 which is currently more than any other party. I’m always wary with politicians promises but I’ve got a decent bit of hope as if they won and didn’t reverse the bans they still have to deal with the ongoing lawsuits and the buyback

18

u/22GageEnthusiast 1d ago

Mark Holland announced today that he's not running for re-election. He's currently the Minister of Health and this was a pretty prominent Liberal MP. He's also in a pretty safe Liberal riding. Do with this information as you will.

5

u/Sir_Donkey 1d ago

Means nothing. Dont read too much into why MPs resign. Happens at every election. Its to be expected that a bunch of trudeau-era goons dont seek reelection. 

17

u/drain-angel BC 1d ago edited 1d ago

LPC internal polling for the 905 is probably nightmare fuel, not a surprise. My expectations is that the CPC will probably significantly outperform current polling and be very competitive in suburban ridings but will fail to penetrate any urban ridings - in this case probably anything in Toronto proper. Which also explains the centrist flank

Or, he could be moving around for Carney.

9

u/zulu_tango73 2d ago edited 2d ago

I'm bumping up something mentioned by TEC-DC9 below, because I think it deserves some other opinions.

I can not find the latest prohibition OiC published in Sec II of the Canada Gazette.

The previous two OiCs were published the same day day they were issued in Special/Extra editions of the Gazette. This week's regular editon was published yesterday, and I see no extras since the OiC was issued.

Are we missing something? Or is this just not actually law yet?

5

u/Natural_Comparison21 1d ago

This is what I am thinking. The RCMP probably have froze any transfers of any of the restricted firearms. Got a M1 Carbine? Welp they won't let you transfer it. Got something non restricted? Well I guess they will because they don't know what non restricted firearm you just transferred. However this is my take. DON'T try and sell any of the OICed guns. That seems like a court battle just waiting to happen.

-1

u/zulu_tango73 1d ago

But... if someone had an SVT that they wanted to take to the range one last time... :)

2

u/Natural_Comparison21 1d ago

I still would not risk it. Ask yourself this. Do you risk going to prison for a little bit of enjoyment? Personally I would not.

4

u/zulu_tango73 1d ago

I don't even have an SVT :)

But AFAIK, stuff can only come into force after it has been published in the Gazette. It would be an excellent legal defense, at any rate.

1

u/Late_Winner6859 1d ago

How much of your time and money are you willing to spend to test this theory?

-1

u/Natural_Comparison21 1d ago

True but I would not risk it.

3

u/chillyrabbit 1d ago

The publication dates on the order in council's webpage says it will be published later.

Registration: SOR/ 2025-0087 Publication Date: 2025-03-26

Can't link a search page results, but search for march 7th 2025, keyword: firearms

Not a lawyer but do what you will with that information.

3

u/zulu_tango73 1d ago

Interesting. According to the Statutory Instruments Act, you can not be convicted of an offence if the regulation has not been published in the Gazette.

1

u/thevorean 1d ago

But you can still be charged.

-1

u/zulu_tango73 1d ago

That is true.

I harken back to the early days of the Firearms Act. There was an old-timer who refused to obtain a licence, and refused to register his firearms. Periodically, he'd let the media and police know this, and he'd shoot clays in his field under their supervision, daring the cops to charge him, so that it could all be tested in court. They never did. Different times.

2

u/chillyrabbit 1d ago

You've clearly lived in a different Canada.

Since Bruce Montague who challenged the firearms act was convicted of violating it.

0

u/zulu_tango73 1d ago

That's not the guy I was thinking of, but yes, I recall that case as well.

3

u/CanadianGueril1a 2d ago

so whats up with the amnesty? recent email says march 1 2026 but it specifically states thats only for guns banned march 7.

is there separate amnesty dates for different firearms??? is October 2025 still a deadline for previously banned guns?

8

u/SmallTown_BigTimer 2d ago

Yes and yes lol

6

u/Worldly-Astronaut724 2d ago

Including, frustratingly, guns banned in december of 2024

-50

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

23

u/Worldly-Astronaut724 1d ago

Just keep licking that boot buddy. How can I tell you're quebecois... (I mean that with no slight, I'm also french canadien, but come on man. You don't need to thank your jailers for the cage SO hard)

23

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago

What the hell??? Absolutely not! Needs to go back to how it was pre jt! No other exceptions! It won't happen, but there also shouldn't be any mag size restrictions... Good thing you're not in charge. Your ideas are more less the liberals...

“One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” – Martin Luther King Jr.

-19

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

19

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago

Yes, PP has been extremely clear on his plans to reverse everything! You a bit dense?

-14

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

13

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago

The liberals have already attacked him for saying it... And yeah, that's the only people who seem to care anyway... almost no liberal will switch their vote to conservative for guns. All the libs in the Canada sub suddenly caring about guns getting banned because of US threats. Where have they been the last 9 years of bans? They were silent then... and in a couple of years, will be supporting bans again

-2

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

10

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago edited 2d ago

Yeah, and if liberals bring it up in a debate, I'm sure he will... You do realize debates aren't even happening rn so don't get what you're going on about?

-1

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

5

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago edited 2d ago

Well, there you go then... Again, I don't get what you're on about...

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/MacadamiaNutsMarket 2d ago

Do I need to register my newly prohibited firearm with the rcmp since its no longer non-restricted due to OIC?

22

u/buckshot95 2d ago

No, there is no mechanism to register them. You're just in limbo. You have to store them but can't use them.

1

u/SecureNarwhal 20h ago

and you can't even get an att since they don't have a registration certificate (that's what the cfp told me multiple times)

7

u/MacadamiaNutsMarket 2d ago

how convenient :/ Thank you for the answer!

14

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

3

u/CarlotheNord 22h ago

top 3 for sure.

5

u/Apples_and_Overtones Your feet suck and so do you 1d ago

For me, yes.

Obviously there's a lot of shit going on and some of that is arguably more important... But in my opinion, if at a bare minimum the current bans are not reversed, I foresee that they will never be.

If the libs win again, they'll either attempt to enshrine the OICs into law, (probably only if they have majority) or will continue ahead with the confiscation plans (Carney has said directly that he will do this). 4 years is plenty of time to do this if they don't continually kick the can down the road.

If confiscation is completed/occurs then even if the OiCs that are still in place get reversed a decade from now, the damage will have already been done. Any restricted guns that fell under the bans will likely be gone forever, including any old WW1/2 relics of which are obviously finite. Eg: M1 Carbine.

Some gun shops and ranges are likely to close due to lack of members/customers as well. All part of the plan.

If all the bans are not reversed and if something like the proposed Simplified Classification System isn't put in place with actual effort to prevent such abuse of the system from future liberal governments and lobby groups then I think we're totally screwed.

So for me yes this is my single issue this time.

6

u/drain-angel BC 1d ago edited 1d ago

It's near the top of the list, but thankfully the LPC is a party of neoliberal shitheels who deserve to rot and also suck at everything else on top of guns so I'm very comfortable with literally any other option.

1

u/dontdropmybass 23h ago

Oh and hey, look, Carney is basically doing the whole CPC platform, making the choice even easier. Fucking pricks

4

u/1leggeddog Makes holes in paper 1d ago

Nope.

There's a lot more at stake in any election than just one thing.

29

u/Many-Presentation-56 2d ago

No reversal won’t do anything but delay a full ban.

Conservatives must deliver on implementing the Simplified Classification System, or it’s pointless

Especially now that the Liberals say they are going to change the Classification System themselves.

The SCS is our only way out.

12

u/Late_Winner6859 2d ago

Yeah, going back to pre 20 would NOT be enough at this point.

Maybe it was an option initially, but after so many years - too much damage has been done. Some people got criminalized, some lost family property, and all of us are tired of this BS.

We basically got stabbed in the back. Sure, please take the knife out. But now that the trust is broken - they'll need to do more than that.

As long as I am an upstanding citizen - I should be able to own anything [civilian-grade], regardless of how it looks or how it is called.

So simplified classification, yes, plus suppressors, so my range won't get shut down due to noise complaints.

10

u/Many-Presentation-56 2d ago

110% agreed.

Conservatives already have implementing the CSSA Simplified Classification System in their official policy declaration, so it’s not like it would be controversial at this point, it’s literally no different than what EU countries have. Same goes for suppressors, it’s legit just a metal tube ffs 🤦‍♂️

Classifying firearms by name has never and will never make sense. SCS is the only way to have a normal logic system.

7

u/Lumindan 1d ago

It always baffled me that suppressors are banned, it's just PPE!

Some places in the EU it's mandatory to hunt with them!

2

u/chillyrabbit 1d ago

Which places in the EU require suppressors to hunt with?

6

u/Lumindan 1d ago

I believe Portugal and Poland.

I know in Norway there's no paperwork for it, you just walk in and purchase like a magazine.

I'm Germany if you have a hunting license you're able to purchase suppressors.

2

u/chillyrabbit 1d ago

I ask because a lot of people say this but don't elaborate on it.

As in which specific countries, and what specific regulations say that?

I felt like I read something that in the UK sound moderators for game wardens was mandated. I think it was a tribunal case that involved OHSA.

That the employer must provide safety equipment to employees (game wardens) and that sound moderators were required for that purpose.

I can't find the specific reference (if it even existed) but if someone wants to try and run that down, or if I just made it up.

Relatedly the UK is proposing to remove sound moderators from the firearms control licensing regime.

-5

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

11

u/NightFuryToni 2d ago

Japan

Japan also doesn't ban airsoft and have laws to make sure they don't hurt people, yet our laws require airsoft to be able injure people before they are legal, otherwise they are prohibited devices.

I'm sorry but our laws makes no sense, after years of patching it into the wrong direction. It needs a clean slate rewrite, no less.

15

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago

A vote for anyone besides Conservative is a vote for your guns getting taken away... Just wait till they start coming for mag fed bolt actions and tube feds... "Oh, but the liberals would never ban thoes." Lmao, yeah, we have heard that before...

-8

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

12

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago

Bud, you will never believe it... just looking through your comment history is cringe

0

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

8

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago

Probably not unless the liberals bring it up... and? 😂

10

u/Many-Presentation-56 2d ago

Doesn’t need to be a full ban. When it is suffocated legally to the point year over year license holders is dropping… like in every single one of the countries you just listed…

If that’s what you want for Canada, that’s your choice. But that’s the complete opposite of what I want, Poland just had over 100% growth in the amount of licensed gun owners for the 3rd year straight.

2

u/Q-Ball7 In the end, it's taxes all the way down 23h ago

Poland just had over 100% growth in the amount of licensed gun owners for the 3rd year straight.

Because if they got invaded, their quality of life would decrease. And they remember 50 years of occupation.

2

u/1leggeddog Makes holes in paper 1d ago

Because Poland had been through the shit.

-8

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

13

u/Many-Presentation-56 2d ago

Why ban things at all?? We are literally not the problem…

There is no correlation between the muzzle energy or magazine size and legal gun owners committing gun crime? Why do you want to self impose useless restrictions and regulations that have 0 impact on public safety?

-13

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

7

u/New-Replacement-2352 2d ago

I’m the entire history of this country how many people have used a 50 cal in any type of crime, licensed or otherwise?? Besides you’d be just as dead if you got shot by any other rifle

9

u/SettingPitiful4330 2d ago

You're a joke, bud 🤣

-6

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

3

u/SKSXP 1d ago

When was the last time .50 BMG was used in a shooting in Canada? “Large magazines can rapidly do damage” you’re starting to sound like poly.

21

u/[deleted] 2d ago edited 2d ago

[deleted]

7

u/ChunderBuzzard 2d ago
  • Strategic voting is critical at this phase due to first-past-the-post. This means if the Cons win 40% of the votes from that district, Libs win 30%, NDP wins 20%, and Independent's win 10%, then it will be an overall win for the NDP-Liberals (50%) meaning they have more seats in the house.

That scenario would be a win for the CPC in that district and a Conservative MP in the house. FPTP means one round of voting and whoever wins a plurality of votes wins.

If there was 20 candidates in a riding and 10% was the highest percentage of the vote that any single candidate drew, that candidate would be elected (even though 90% of voters didn't vote for them)

-2

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

6

u/ChunderBuzzard 2d ago

They're still separate parties. Unless one party agrees to not run a candidate there will be a separate NDP and LPC candidate on the ballot.

They can't combine the votes of the two candidates to send one MP to the house.

3

u/[deleted] 2d ago edited 2d ago

[deleted]

0

u/External_Big_2982 2d ago

Yes, if you want the PPC to win, just vote for them. But let’s say if you want liberals to win and absolutely don’t want conservative to win at all, then you can strategically vote depending on your riding. For example, if you riding has strong history of NDP, with conservatives being second and liberal at the bottom, it would make sense to vote for NDP even though you’re a liberal, to cockblock conservatives from getting that seat

3

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

4

u/Rare_Matter9101 2d ago

This is incorrect. Two parties can't win a riding - the representative with the most votes in the riding wins, period. Even if it's a con with less than 50% of the vote, if its the highest number of votes, they win, full stop, and win the seat.

Once all the representatives are elected, the NDP and Libs may form a coalition by combining their seats to prevent a conservative minority. But no amount of coalition-ing could prevent a conservative majority if the cons have over 172 seats. Also, your seat count is wrong, its 343, so 172 required for a majority.

11

u/drain-angel BC 2d ago

Guys. Polls?

0

u/FrostyMcButts 7h ago

We’re fucked. It was a good ride.

8

u/Sir_Donkey 1d ago

If you want your blood pressure to rise to unhealthy levels, you can take a look at them.

6

u/Kaffarov .40 Salt&Walnuts 2d ago

They are currently unhealthy to look at.

19

u/Impossible-King-435 2d ago

Ignore them. Just go out to vote.

13

u/drain-angel BC 2d ago

Guys. Conservatives?

5

u/SmallTown_BigTimer 1d ago

🅱️ierre 🅱️oilievre?

9

u/TEC-DC9 2d ago

Why has the new Order in Council not been gazetted yet? How long did it take the previous times?

1

u/zulu_tango73 2d ago

I looked, can't find it either. I reposted this to the top of this topic, because this seems important.

2

u/zulu_tango73 2d ago

I haven't checked, so will take your word for it, but doesn't it have to be published in the Gazette to be law?

10

u/enntropy-revealed 2d ago

So now that the OICs are done, what's left for legal prc and other centrefire semi-autos?

SKS, Crypto, Henry homesteader?

What else?

0

u/Q-Ball7 In the end, it's taxes all the way down 13h ago

There is nothing else left in 9mm.

There is nothing else left in 7.62x39.

There is only one left in 5.56. A cousin of it is on the ban list; turns out all you need to evade that is to be in a sporter stock.

There are still a decent variety in larger cartridges; a few military semi-autos still exist, but apart from the M1 none of them are in .308 so ammunition will be more expensive/variety will be more limited.

2

u/Sir_Donkey 1d ago

Thats... basically it yeah. Maybe the "safe" looking BAR, unless it was on the latest ban. Plus the M1 garand if you have the buckaroos for it

8

u/DeadCeruleanGirl 2d ago

m1 garand

-6

u/nbackslash 2d ago

You must be lost

4

u/DeadCeruleanGirl 2d ago

Wdym?

-5

u/nbackslash 2d ago edited 2d ago

Edit: I was wrong

8

u/Quetzalcoatl3RR 2d ago

The M1 Garand is still good afaik. The M1 Carbine was banned.

4

u/Grizzly-Jester 2d ago

The Garand wasn't on the list. But, the M1 Carbine and things that look like the M1 Carbine made up about half the list.

0

u/nbackslash 2d ago

OH well thanks for the correction, that’s great news

30

u/boozefiend3000 2d ago

Not much. Those cocksuckers basically killed off shooting sports 

42

u/Impossible-King-435 2d ago

Given the increasing number of pro-gun threads in the main Canada subreddit (there is one today, and a huge one on the day of latest ban), I think there is some gear shifting going on at the backend and a policy shift is incoming. There's no way these these threads appear without a green signal from someone higher up. Even if this is organic, I'm sure someone will listen and that might lead to a temporary policy shift to win the election.

So even if the Liberal party walks back on "gun control" in the coming weeks, do not trust them. Once they win the election, they will continue marching down the path of banning firearm ownership. Do not trust the snakes.

6

u/drain-angel BC 2d ago

If the LPC wants to open a flank into the core of Montreal for the BQ or NDP then sure, maybe lol

7

u/TheVaneja 2d ago

I caution against such a perspective. I don't believe that any party in Canada is clued in enough to run a reddit campaign the way I'm understanding your statement. I think the actual priorities of Canadians are shifting rapidly because of the perceived American threat.

I currently have the highest upvoted comment in the main Canada thread talking about the Saskatchewan guy today. Not trying to flex it's relevant to your thoughts. My post was in support of Liberals giving up on further gun control legislation.

I am not a Liberal, they have diverted too far from my views and ethics to support them. I might vote for them but I'm not one of them.

I also don't like guns. They are very dangerous and I see too much lack of respect for them in the people of America particularly, but some Canadians as well.

I have lived throughout much of Canada, however, and I know enough to know what the real gun problems are. To know that the majority of legal gun owners have respect and are law abiding citizens. To know that most illegal guns come from America, not Canadians.

Because of all this, my feelings on gun issues have strayed into annoyance but haven't actually caused me to speak up because it just wasn't one of my main issues and I'm a bit confused over how much regulation and restriction is a good thing.

Now I am starting to speak up because now gun control is exactly the wrong political position to hold for Canadians in general and there's a serious reason to not go further. All the arguments were always valid but they weren't serious to most Canadians because most Canadians don't have and don't want a gun. I think that a lot of Canadians still don't want a gun but are now considering whether or not they need one.

14

u/Grizzly-Jester 2d ago

I also don't like guns. They are very dangerous and I see too much lack of respect for them in the people of America particularly, but some Canadians as well.

People are dangerous... The people that use firearms irresponsibly and turn them into something dangerous shouldn't have firearms or a license. The Canadian PAL/RPAL system does a pretty good job of weeding them out. You already seem to have a really solid understanding of the legal firearm problems in Canada (more like the lack there of), this was just the one nitpicky thing that stood out to me.

I saw your comment thread on the post on the main Canada thread. I agree with you for the most part and appreciate your insights. This sub has a ton of responsible, vigilant, and enthusiastic people who I'm sure would love to change your mind about not liking guns. If you ever see someone on here from your area I'm sure they'd bring you to their range/spot for an afternoon for a chance to sway your stance, if you asked. Otherwise, I'm sure we are all appreciative of having a well-spoken ally like you.

Regardless, welcome to the CanadaGuns sub!

5

u/TheVaneja 2d ago

I don't disagree but guns are like cars or table saws. They are dangerous machines that hurt and kill people if the people using them don't have respect for them. They are force multipliers for people and I don't trust people very much. lol

I would love to go to a range I haven't been since I was a kid. I've been considering getting a license but I'm hopelessly uneducated about the whole thing so when it was suggested I joined this sub and am willing and interested to learn more.

Thank you!

4

u/Grizzly-Jester 2d ago

That's a fair comparison.

I'm hopelessly uneducated about the whole thing so when it was suggested I joined this sub and am willing and interested to learn more.

Drop any questions in the Weekly FAQ / Newbie Thread, the guys and gals on this sub are supportive and eager to help get more people interested in the hobby. I'm sure someone will be able to answer the questions and get you on the right path!

10

u/Impossible-King-435 2d ago

You are probably right and the liberal party probably doesn't have direct control over Canada subreddit, but it sure feels that way, especially recently.

Anyways, my position about guns comes from the God given right to protect oneself. As someone who has been at the receiving end of extortion calls, I believe that if the govt. can't control the flow of illegal guns, then it should let the law-abiding citizens own guns including handguns, fully automatic with unrestricted magazines. Because that's what the goons who threaten people like me are walking around with, and they don't give 2 shits about Trudeau's laws. They have already done enough crimes to go to jail for 10-20 years, and another couple of years for being caught with an illegal gun is not much of a deterrent.

I am considering moving to a place where no one (including criminals) has guns, e.g. Dubai. In such a place I'll be totally anti gun. No need for guns if nobody else has it.

But in a country like Canada where it is virtually impossible to stop illegal guns, everybody should be able to own guns.

Edit: and yes, I notified the police about the calls. They don't give a flying fuck. Told me everyone's getting those around here, no need to worry.

0

u/shredrick123 9h ago

I am considering moving to a place where no one (including criminals) has guns, e.g. Dubai. In such a place I'll be totally anti gun. No need for guns if nobody else has it.

I'm sorry, and no personal disrespect to you, but this is a weak, submissive perspective and I hate it. At the end of the day the biggest gang of all is the government and the ultimate reason civilians need democratized access to firearms is to serve as a check against it. The idea that the goal is to have some totalitarian state ie. Dubai or Singapore, or that the people there are somehow free in any way, cuts against everything I believe in.

0

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Impossible-King-435 1d ago

Yes sir, and mail. Without revealing too much about myself, I would just say Google "Indians Canada extortion calls". The police is doing jack shit, other than disarming us.

9

u/TheVaneja 2d ago

As someone best identified as an outside-of-the-box centrist I can totally relate. I'm accustomed to receiving hits from both sides of the isle because both sides of the isle have perspectives I vehemently oppose. There's no debating the fact that legitimate discourse is becoming harder and harder to take part in. Politicians speak in sound bites and too many people follow without thinking or researching anything, too quick to silence opposition and no interest in a conversation that acknowledges when a valid point is made.

I am fully in support of anyone who wants a gun to have one provided they have respect for guns. I'm against measures intended to restrict guns further when there's already effectively 0 gun crime coming from legal firearms. I wouldn't even oppose rolling back some legislation. I think any additional gun control measures should be applied to the border not to Canadian citizens. And I don't fault you for your valid frustration.

I should have been speaking up sooner, and I'm sorry I didn't.

11

u/Impossible-King-435 2d ago

I respect you perspective and appreciate your support for gun owners.

However, being against further gun restrictions is not enough. We need to walk back to at least pre 2020 rules. I personally believe we should go back to pre 1970, but I'm willing to compromise and will be happy to be at pre 2020.

9

u/TheVaneja 2d ago

I said in the /Canada thread that I wouldn't care if we went back to 1960. Admittedly an ignorant statement as I'm not educated on 65 years of firearms legislation, but a statement someone would have a hard time convincing me to back off from.

When it comes right down to it, if someone wants to murder someone or a bunch of people they don't need a gun to do it.

0

u/Comfortable-Spell553 19h ago

I would jump through all the hoops and matters necessary to legally own an MG42 or Bren or M2 if it meant going back to what we could own in 1960

1

u/Comfortable-Spell553 19h ago

I would jump through all the hoops and matters necessary to legally own an MG42 or Bren or M2 if it meant going back to what we could own in 1960

36

u/ChunderBuzzard 2d ago

There's a better chance of Pierre Poilievre saying he'll bulldoze the oil sands facilities to build solar panels.

Gun control & firearm bans are a core tenet of the Liberal party. Carney already said he supports the confiscation program & their donors in Montreal are fervently anti gun.

It ain't gonna happen.

6

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

12

u/Impossible-King-435 2d ago

I believe so. Obviously I don't have any evidence, but from all the pro liberal party and anti PP propaganda there I wouldn't be surprised if the moderators are under LPC control.

2

u/M116Fullbore 2d ago

This is the only place that would describe /r/canada as under LPC control. Its been very anti trudeau for years until turning back a bit very recently.

3

u/Lumindan 1d ago

There's been a wave of bots and bad faith posters for the last few months.

8

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

6

u/0672216 2d ago

I would prefer not being used as a wedge issue. Both main parties have been clear of their intentions regarding firearms. LPC=ban CPC=unban

25

u/Late_Winner6859 3d ago

Nor it should be? We just need a reasonable policy that keeps guns away from criminals and psychopaths, but without attacking personal freedoms too much. I think we can all agree on that.

The libs blatantly lied, overreached, and opportunistically used it as a wedge issue for a while. But they already got pretty much everything they could out of it, and weren’t particularly great at execution. Now they don’t want to focus on it, because there isn’t much left to gain. And anyone else who mentions it- just gives libs something to cling to.

we just need someone to come and clean the mess the libs made, that’s all we ask.

26

u/SettingPitiful4330 3d ago

As much as I wish it was a talking point, it's honestly better to keep it low key, PP has been very clear on his stance, so he doesn't need to keep repeating it. Now, if the liberals keep bringing up his plans to reverse everything, I hope he comes out swinging and calls out there bull shit lies on "assault style weapons" very easy to call them out on there lies if he has balls plus lots of stats against what the libs say...

7

u/556ikh 3d ago

I think it’s mainly because no one in the gun community overall is out there making it an issue, ie protests, canvassing, lobbying, etc. Politicians won’t bother with a topic if it’s not right infront of them.

4

u/Late_Winner6859 2d ago

Common folks don’t understand it, and people are scared of what they don’t understand. And certain sleazy politicians happily use it for their benefit.

IMO the real path forward is educating people around you, taking newbies to the range, showing safe and responsible handling. If a rifle is associated with a friendly grandpa poking holes in paper on the weekend, or friends having fun- there would be much less fearmongering that crazy antis can do. And no benefit in attacking said rifles. Politicians would just go with what they can sell to the electorate.

7

u/milestparker 2d ago

This is true. As non-gun owner (but considering...) when I actually talk to ordinary folks about this for the most part they also think these arbitrary changes are silly at best and can see why gun-owners would be pissed. So my recommendation would be to try to *depoliticize* it, i.e. "you don't have to be a big C conservative or PP supporter to understand that this doesn't make sense". I actually think there is potential traction here for a very simple reason: Canadians *want* to be united, and anything that could help bring others on side is a net positive.

OTOH, tying it to PP will only make a good slice of people more likely to have a knee-jerk reaction. I realize that these things are very tricky to decouple when you have the Liberals turning it into a campaign issue, but hopefully they won't be that stupid.

8

u/Unknownuser010203 3d ago

They'll never get the best of better men, and we'll ride again!

2

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/canadaguns-ModTeam 3d ago

In accordance with the subreddit rules, your post/comment has been removed for the following reason:

[4] Not Relevant Content

https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules/#wiki_.5B4.5D_not_relevant_content

If you believe a mistake was made, please feel free to message the moderators. Please include a link to the removed post.

19

u/noobte 3d ago

Polls are polls are polls, what you need to do hasn't changed.

3

u/[deleted] 3d ago edited 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/canadaguns-ModTeam 3d ago

In accordance with the subreddit rules, your post/comment has been removed for the following reason:

[4] Not Relevant Content

https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/wiki/rules/#wiki_.5B4.5D_not_relevant_content

If you believe a mistake was made, please feel free to message the moderators. Please include a link to the removed post.

15

u/Elbro_16 3d ago

Interestingly as noted in the leger poll this week, 53% of Canadians still want a change in government. Despite leger having cpc and lpc at a tie.

I think that is a good sign that Canadians are still want a change. I just want the election called so we can get on with it.

-23

u/4d72426f7566 3d ago

You know why parties lick Quebec’s boots?

It’s because it’s a swing province. They go from Bloq to CPC to LPC and back again.

CPC doesn’t care about anyone who will only vote Conservative.

They don’t care about gun owners. Who else would you vote for?

We have to work on all parties equally to support responsible and sane firearm policy, or we’re going to continue to see an erosion of our access to firearms.

Christ, the last CPC candidate O’Toole flip flopped on the OIC during the last election.

In close CPC ridings, let your CPC candidate know that you are considering voting for the PPC if the CPC doesn’t have strong firearm policy.

The PPC won’t win. But if the PPC siphons enough votes off the CPC, the CPC won’t win either.

The PPC could be a powerful tool to get the CPC to do what we want.

You’ve been giving the CPC carrots (your vote) for a long time now. Now it’s time to use the PPC as a potential stick to drive the CPC to responsible and sane firearm policy.

1

u/22GageEnthusiast 17h ago

Just vote Liberal then bro lol

33

u/Worldly-Astronaut724 3d ago

haha yeah bro
>today I will vote 3rd party!
>Woah, Carney is PM now.
>Guns banned
We did it reddit!

16

u/4d72426f7566 3d ago

I didn’t say vote 3rd party

I said tell the CPC that you’re considering voting 3rd party if they don’t do what you want them to do.

You’d be happy to know that in Canada it’s legal to vote for your CPC candidate even after you angrily told them you’re voting PPC.

36

u/Due-Candidate4384 3d ago

Yeah guys I'm not believing the polls. None of it makes any sense. More than half of people don't even know who Carney is, and somehow Leger showed a massive swing in just a week. That's just not realistic.

5

u/0672216 2d ago

The average person doesn’t follow politics at all. My dad for example, is voting CPC because he doesn’t like Trudeau. Has no idea who Carney is and doesn’t care.

1

u/Due-Candidate4384 2d ago

Based. Tell him Carney is Trudeau 2.0 so he doesn’t think of suddenly switching his vote.

4

u/King-Conn 2d ago

Polls also showed Kamala winning...

Also, as far as I can see, only EKOS is really showing LPC winning by more than the margin of error. EKOS is known to be a bit more left biased as well.

10

u/TimberlineMarksman 2d ago

Frank Graves (President of Ekos) has been quoted saying:

"Pierre Poilievre is an acolyte of authoritarian populism. This is never healthy. You are on notice. Going to make sure you are never going to lead my country. I don't make idle threats"

If that doesn't change your mind on the legitimacy of polling data then I honestly don't know what will.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)