Ruger 10-22

Post by **Killerbunny** » Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:30 pm

Phew breathing sigh of relief here!

Dominion Link · Post by **Dominion Link** » Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:52 pm

thegawd wrote:QR_BBPOST thanks for clarifying that Dean. I just read the rcmp website in regards to the 10-22 mag. I agree if it fits the rifle it should fit the handgun but I truly dont know that for a fact, I have no desire to own any handguns. what im confused about is if this law hasnt been changed since 2013 why is this coming up now?

Like Ross said- it's our new government. They are loaded with anti firearms, hunting, trapping fanatics. Trudeau flat out said during the election campaign that he was going to repeal most of the legislation in the Common Sense Firearms Amendments, including giving the decisions regarding firearms classifications over to the RCMP. Because all firearms legislation falls under the criminal code, the government has essentially handed over the right to bring forward legal restrictions to the RCMP. The people who are there to enforce laws made by our elected government now get to make the laws surrounding firearms classifications. I've been in this fight for decades now, and it was refreshing to see the anti's like Mark Holland, Wendy Cukier, Heidi Rathgen etc, leave the scene for a few years. Now they are back with a vengeance, with a sympathetic government to appease them.

Dominion Link · Post by **Dominion Link** » Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:52 pm

Since the new government has been elected there have been at least 3 issues relating to firearms, or the use of animals, brought forward. Bill C246 was thankfully defeated earlier this month. It was an animal rights bill written by a vegetarian lawyer/ Toronto Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith. It had a number of quite reasonable goals, but then you get to the part about "killing, or allowing an animal to be killed, in a brutal manner regardless of whether the animal dies immediately or not (paraphrasing)". C246, Part V.1, Offences against animals, Killing or harming animals, 182.1 (1), (b). The language was sufficiently ambiguous that it could have led to court challenges for pretty much anything to do with hunting, fishing, or raising livestock for consumption. No doubt in my mind that lawyer Erskine-Smith was very deliberate in the wording of his bill, and knew full well would it could lead to.

Currently Bill S223 (An Act to amend the Firearms Act and the Criminal Code and to make consequential changes to other a Acts), is sitting in limbo as Liberal Senator Celine Hervieux-Payette who brought it forward retired shortly after doing so. Normally an orphaned Bill has to be adopted and carried forward in a very short time frame, but the government has decided to allow this Bill to sit in limbo while they put together a strategy to move it along. S223 is a doozy, and would put numerous restrictions on licenced firearms owners. In fact S223 is pretty much entirely directed at licenced firearms owners, but continually references criminal events as the need to crack down on the privileges of law abiding folks. This is a really bad bill for legal gun owners.

And we have this 10-22 magazine issue that, if enforced, would see literally thousands of law abiding firearms owners facing criminal charges.

All this in less than a year and no doubt there is more to come. And Ralph Goodale has made it perfectly clear that, unlike his predecessor, he will not be backing licenced firearms owners.