![[small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WGczmWu7Wwc/SdCJyy2LN1I/AAAAAAAABWE/ABYCkbJaKaQ/s1600/small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg)
The above image is a ruger mini-14 semi-automatic. Tell me, boys ‘n’ girls, does that look like something that would be required to shoot ducks and other game? I didn’t think so neither. Well, proud owners of those machines will no longer have to register them under the new Harpercon legislation, scrapping the long gun registry.
The powerful Ruger Mini-14 semi-automatic rifle used in the 1989 Montreal massacre and this summer’s Norway bloodbath.
Sniper rifles that can pierce light armour from a distance of up to 1.5 kilometres.
Or one that can drop a target two kilometres away.
Who knew that deer and ducks wore body armour?
Those guns are not for hunting game–they’re for killing people. Yep, so much for ‘tough on crime’. Where’s the logic in that? Or is this just another diabolical ploy to fill Super Toews’ new mega-prisons?
They are all weapons that will soon be declassified under the Conservatives’ bill to kill the long-gun registry and freed from binding controls that now see them listed with the RCMP-run database.
They fall under the class of “non-restricted” weapons and they are about to become unregistered.
Naturally! The gun toting rednecks are indeed celebrating. However, those delightful folks from the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation think it just doesn’t go far enough:
“Our supporters would have preferred that the government go further, and also eliminate licensing for non-restricted long-guns…
They want to eliminate licensing. No more screening. Nothing! Nada! Zilch! Hell, make ‘em easier to purchase than for an underage kid to purchase a case of beer or pack of cigarrettes.
Furthermore, the Coalition for Gun control argues that without the registry, dangerous and illegal transfers of these firearms to unlicensed and/or dangerous individuals. For those who argued the long gun registry was useless or that stupid argument that ‘criminals never register their weapons’, here’s exactly one aspect of how the long gun registry helped law enforcement. When a gun owner, who did register his weapon, say loaned or gave it to his brother, who is not necessarily as ‘law abiding’. Just one example.
And yes, the NRA is indeed here in Canada, feverishly attempting to change gun control here, by essentially, removing it. Let’s have our very own version of the American’s second amendment.
“Law abiding farmers and hunters”– Ha! I always knew it was never about them. And spare the so-called intrusiveness argument. It just doesn’t wash when we have scanners at airports which can allow any airport flunkie to gawk at you in your unmentionables, sharing all info about passengers who fly on airplanes who so much as fly over US air space, and of course, let’s remember, warrantless internet spying is coming up as part of that whole dumb on crime package. Yeah, spare us the privacy red herring!
Oh, I must ask, is that redneck, Tony Bernardo, executive director of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association related to Paul?
H/T: Pushed Left and Loving it, Scott Tribe and Queer Thoughts
Although we disagree in principle about the Long Gun Registry, I agree with you about guns like the semi-auto that accommodates clips shown above.
Lever action carbines, bolt action rifles and shotguns (as long as they are not “sawed off”)” all of which a genuine guns for hunting, ranchers and farmers, should only be regulated as to who can purchase them. Guns like the one above, handguns, and rocket launchers should be restricted and require extensive licensing and regulation for the few, like police officers, game wardens and military personel, who have any reason at all to possess them.
I also think people are over-reacting about the destruction of the existing records. The current registry is actually useless already, since the guns most likely to be used against the policeperson with access to it are already not on the list. Then by the time Spiteful Steve’s current mandate expires and we have the opportunity to choose a different government the current registry will already be totally out of date and even more useless than it already is, yet it will be more tempting for a new government to re-enact an overly expensive and mostly useless boondoggle.
The correct way to regulate guns is to totally restrict weapons designed with human targets in mind. Regulate gun owners, in the sense that use of firearms education and criminal/mental health screening are required to be permitted to purchase, own, transport and use those that have non-criminal and non-warfare uses.
The firearm depicted in your rant has a barrel length of under 18 3/4 inches making it a restricted firearm that requires an ATT to transfer from a persons residence to a registered gun range. The ATT is acquired through the RCMP, this system has been in place long before the gun registry came about.
I noticed that you also called gun owners rednecks; I have to ask is name calling really necessary? Do you find that insulting people makes your point stronger? Your language combined with seemingly how little research you did on this subject makes your points seem very weak.
Please do not get upset with this and start a mud slinging contest of insults and redneck comments. Please just consider that you may not be right in this case.
ck Reply:
November 3rd, 2011 at 9:56 PM
The likes of I meant Tony Bernardo and the NRA and the CFA, who want to do away with licensing and any form of gun control are rednecks, yes. Those who are just peachy keen with walking around city streets or town centers with a loaded gun, or those who insist on parading around a shopping mall with their AK-47, rednecks! Ever hear them talk? Sounds like something right out of “Deliverance”. They make the Dukes of Hazard seem literate. So yeah, redneck is the most appropriate name for them.
I’ve done enough research, thank you. Just not from The Fraser INstitute or the NRA.
The registry actually saved a family I knew years ago.
If we’re scrapping the long gun registry without offering any alternatives, there is a problem somewhere.
Oh, and I dare you to publicly, in front of a camera, preferably for all to see and hear, to actually tell someone who’s been wounded by a long gun or any firearm for that matter, or the loved one of someone who didn’t, that gun control is not needed.
A civilized society must have gun control.
“Powerful Ruger mini 14”……???? They got to be kidding!!!!!!!! The last thing I would classify that POS as is “powerful”……..
Most rifles rate their groups as a couple inches at 100 yards. With the mini 14, you would be lucky to hit a barn door at 100 yards. If someone is shooting a mini 14 at you, you better stand still. If you move, they might accidentally hit you……….. You don’t fire it for groups, you pattern it like a shotgun. Putting a scope on one is an exercise in stupidity.
The mini 14 is strictly a close range weapon. If you try to shoot at anything farther away than you can throw a rock, then the chances of you hitting it is pure pot luck.
It is designed for being used on the farm shooting coyotes in the hen house, or putting down a wounded animal.
It is not even classifiable as an acceptable hunting rifle, let alone a good military or sniper rifle.
ck Reply:
November 4th, 2011 at 6:45 AM
Flailing, flailing, flailing! Anders Behring Breivik and Marc Lepine both had their intended targets and used that specific gun for their mass murders.
Try to dress it up however you like, it’s still a semi-automatic meant to kill people. Again, not for hunting ducks.
Everytime one of you attempts to convince all that those guns are harmless, you all remind me of this tv ad.