Remember that these are the guys who said that they were preparing to fight UN and/or Chinese troops who might invade Canada?

Now their lawyer says that they were used for hunting? Was she taking about the pipe bomb or the handguns?

I don’t see a single trigger or cable lock in that photo. Was the ammunition stored in a separate locked container?

These guys should never be allowed to own a firearm again based solely on the UN/China delusion. These types of violent collective fantasies are extremely dangerous and they absolutely should be disqualifying.

  • MapleEngineerOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    29 days ago

    Gun ownership in Canada is a privilege, not a right. That privilege can be modified at any time. Automatic firearms were made illegal. High capacity magazines were made illegal. The government responds to the will of the people and most Canadians support the banning of handguns and military style weapons.

    The guns aren’t being banned for the way they look but because of the type of people who buy them for the way that they look and the fantasies that they have about using them like the assholes who took a trailer load of military style weapons and thousands of rounds of ammunition to a “peaceful” protest because the UN and/or China were going to invade Canada.

    If you want to have fantasies of rising up against the gubment or shooting Liberals just substitute an oak stocked hunting rifle into that fantasy.

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      29 days ago

      If there is an equivalent gun with identical performance, then banning a gun because it is “assault” (which is an idiotic term anyway) is plain stupid. If you think those people you mention won’t do the same thing with a wooden stock, and all the problems of irresponsible gun owners go away, then I can’t really get through to you.

      • MapleEngineerOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        29 days ago

        …assault…

        Did I say the word, “assault”?

        … do the same thing with a wooden stock…

        And yet they don’t. That’s because responsible, non delusional gun owners don’t load a bunch of guns and thousands of rounds of ammo into a trailer and take it to a “peaceful” protest.

        If you’re buying a gun for how it makes you feel then you shouldn’t be buying a gun. I’ve owned guns continuously for 40 years. My 15 year old son just completed his CFSC with an overall score of 98 out of 100. We are gun people. I’m not anti gun by any stretch of the imagination. I’m very much anti the wrong people owning guns and people who stockpile military style weapons and thousands of rounds of ammunition are the wrong people.

        • Maalus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          Way to gatekeep gun ownership. Everyone needs to choose guns based on your criteria, let’s ban everything else, huh?

          • MapleEngineerOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            28 days ago

            82% of Canadians supported the changes to the firearms regulations. 66% currently want stronger gun control. I’m not, “gatekeeping” anything. I’m discussing the reasons for what’s going on. Labeling anyone who says anything you don’t like a, “gatekeeper” or a Fudd diminishes the value of anything you have to say.

            Why don’t you instead try to explain why you need the prohibited version of a firearm instead of the functionally identical non-restricted version?

            Or try to explain why you don’t want to use the exact same prohibited firearm if it’s coated hot pink?

            The gun lobby makes such a big deal about banning firearms based on their looks. Explain why looks are your criteria for selecting a firearm.