Jump to content

Canada Confiscating Firearms


87GT
 Share

Recommended Posts

You ever think this would happen in our country?

 

https://nfa.ca/news/swiss-arms-confiscated

 

Swiss Arms Confiscated

Date: Thursday, February 27, 2014

Swiss Arms Confiscated

 

Effective 10:00 pm eastern tonight the RCMP has reclassified the Swiss Arms Classic Green carbine from non-restricted (and restricted) to prohibited status. There are approximately 1,000 -1,800 of these firearms in the public. The government will not be offering compensation and will be demanding that the firearms, which cost between $3,000 - $4,000 be surrendered. The government is suggesting that all affected firearms owners contact the distributers from which the firearms were purchased for reimbursement.

 

The NFA encourages all affected owners to contact their federal Member of Parliament.

This is part of an ongoing agenda of the RCMP to progressively prohibit firearms in Canada.

 

Under Bill C-68, the firearms classification system was supposed to be updated regularly to prohibit firearms being introduced into the market, as well as those already in Canada.

 

The Government of Canada was supposed to assist in this with periodic new legislation and Order in Council (OIC).

 

The RCMP have been doing this unilaterally since 2006.

Access to information records show that RCMP have an aggressive firearms reclassification agenda, and that prohibitions will not stop with the Swiss Arms Series Rifles.

These rifles were approved for import by the RCMP have been sold in Canada for over a decade. Owners once held registrations for them under the now defunct long gun registry.

There has never been a crime or incident of violence committed with one of these rifles.

 

NFA condemns this RCMP assault on the rights and private property of law abiding Canadians. The RCMP has shown contempt for the rights of Canadians by their actions, and we expect the Government of Canada to take steps and introduce measures to reign in the RCMP and end the assault against the rights, property and freedoms of Canadians.

 

For more information contact:

Blair Hagen, Executive VP Communications, Blair@nfa.ca

Sheldon Clare, President, Sheldon@nfa.ca

Canada's NFA - info@nfa.ca

NFA Website: http://www.nfa.ca

 

 

http://i.imgur.com/2m1Dy9E.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Took me a while to find a news source that wasn't a direct copy or a rehashing of the NFA press release.

 

Whether owners of those guns, which cost between $3,000 to $4,000, will receive compensation is unclear. Shawn Bevins, executive vice-president of the National Firearms Association, said he spoke to a senior government official on Wednesday and was told that there would be none.

 

But Jean-Christophe de Le Rue, a spokesman for Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney, said Thursday via email that “all options are on the table” and that the minister was looking into the matter “on an urgent basis.”

 

An RCMP briefing note sent to the public safety minister last year and obtained by Postmedia News stated that if the Swiss rifles were prohibited, “affected owners may seek compensation” and that “the value of the rifle is estimated at approximately $4,000.”

 

While not committing one way or the other on the question of compensation, Blaney’s spokesman said Thursday the minister would “take appropriate action to ensure that firearms owners who acted in good faith are not penalized as a result of the actions of others.”

 

Unsurprisingly, the NFA press release is somewhat melodramatic. That said, I'm really surprised Canada doesn't have a grandfather clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A guy on my old hockey team was Canadian (i know, shocking right?). He was raised on a farm and said when he was younger the town/province they resided demanded all citizens turn in their firearms... his parents just laughed. They obviously still own their own firearms. i don't remember which province or area he was raised though. I want to say somewhere around London, Ontario.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why they would ban that particular rifle. It's prohibitively expensive, except for the most monocled of criminals.

 

This is a test case for them. Incrementally, they will ban all firearms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

umm it already has and is happening here.

 

Only in the States that have gun registration.

 

I suspect I'm "preaching to the choir," but any type of gun registry is a bad thing. I'm sure there are plenty of gun owners who may not agree, and even others that might actually think it's a good idea - it's not! There are far too many people in this Country that want to see guns banned altogether. They're first task is to locate them. What starts as an seemingly innocent registration requirement can easily turn into a confiscation scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take all the people who think a ban on guns is a good idea and put them in their own country, then introduce all the problems the real world has (minus the "bad guy" having a gun, but rather another form of weaponry) and see how quickly they change they're minds.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

umm it already has and is happening here.

 

Correct statement. Regardless if the states are doing it first, it doesn't matter. Its one step in the national confiscation direction. I expect a few more "mass shootings" in the coming years to put a few more nails in the 2nd amendment coffin. However, I do believe there will be a tipping point in which people nationally will not put up with it anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct statement. Regardless if the states are doing it first, it doesn't matter. Its one step in the national confiscation direction. I expect a few more "mass shootings" in the coming years to put a few more nails in the 2nd amendment coffin. However, I do believe there will be a tipping point in which people nationally will not put up with it anymore.

 

I thought after Newton there were more states loosening laws on firearms rather than tightening them. I am not saying vigilance shouldn't be practiced but I wish people would stop with the scare tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that every week the Democrats are proposing new bills with restrictions on firearms.

 

Here's one from this week...

http://articles.philly.com/2014-02-26/news/47674812_1_gun-magazines-magazine-capacity-prevent-gun-violence

 

Here's another from last month...

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2014/02/19/sen-markey-unveil-gun-control-legislation/VyIAD6xn1YiYQOW991KiiK/story.html

 

Some others...

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/state-legislation/2014/2/rhode-island-ocean-state-assault-on-the-second-amendment-lawmakers-in-providence-unleash-long-list-of-anti-gun-bills.aspx

 

Of course CO has new restrictions on mag capacity and people in NY and CT are royally screwed. Lot's of nice firearms being sold out of NY, though, over the last year!

 

This list goes on and on. It's hard to even keep track of all of them.

 

There are some new bills which were helpful for conceal carry, but that's all I'm aware of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...