Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Argus

Trudeau to spend a billion dollars pleasing anti-gun nuts

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Army Guy said:

1 New news , gun advocates are planning take the this ban to court,

2 also interesting some of the guns that were banned include pump action shot, some hunting rifles,

3 and an airsoft gun "a toy" because toys are dangerous to liberals as well,

4 it really is telling on how much work went into the goat rodeo, and how much expertise or "consulting" with the experts or for that matter anyone who could tell a toy rifle from a real one....or a pump action shot gun from an AR-15, not to mention those bolt action hunting rifles...Bill Blair was an RCMP officer and should have been familiar with some of the different fire arms, like shotguns, hunting rifles,  or atleast a toy gun.... who proof reads all this crap they put out....my guess is no one.

 

1 This is a normal course of law-making in Canada: Legislation can be challenged in a court that rules on its constitutionality. If legislation survives the challenge, it makes it stronger. 

2 What the banned 'hunting' guns have in common is that regardless of legal functioning, they are dressed up to look like something illegal - military assault rifles - which they are not, as you yourself pointed out earlier. Thanks for that clarification, btw. Don't lose sight of it, as it is significant and it will be significant in the court challenge. The banned ones are, in a sense, replica guns. I'll just remind people that any criminal using a replica or toy gun in committing (eg) a robbery can be charged, convicted and sentenced for 'armed' robbery. It's addressed according to what it is perceived as by victims, and its resulting control of their actions, not whether or not it can actually kill. In that context, I can understand why police, in particular, would want to get these pimped up replica assault rifles off the street, so they can tell what they are really dealing with. 

They are nothing more than trendy fashion items for the small-weenies of the far-right hate groups to intimidate people with, imo. Do any real hunters actually need, or use these penis-extender fakes? I think not. 

This is an example of who values and uses such replica assault rifles: Hate groups.

  https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-tuesday-edition-1.5253191/how-an-undercover-reporter-exposed-an-alleged-neo-nazi-in-the-canadian-military-1.5253800

At the same meeting, he was, you know, using homophobic and racist epithets. He openly mulled over the possibility of, like, sabotaging a rail line and things. So, you know, this was clearly an individual with ... a potential propensity for violence.
Patrik [Mathews], in that first meeting, you know, said ... he wanted to engage in paramilitary training. He didn't use those terms, but that's what it was. And that's consistent with what The Base is up to right now across North America. They're hosting paramilitary training events called Hate Camps.
They're really influenced by this very obscure neo-Nazi from the United States named James Mason who kind of pioneered this bizarre blend of, like, the world views of Adolf Hitler and Charles Manson. They idolize serial killers and mass murderers.

I actually look forward to this court challenge of the new gun ban, REALLY interested to see how the hate groups try to defend their 'rights', and how the court responds to that aspect of this case. 

3 There is a significant study out of Toronto that looked at firearms injuries and deaths in children and youth. Airsoft guns were included because they are frequently the cause of injuries, damage to eyes, teeth, soft tissues, etc., some permanently disabling. That may be the rationale for the ban.   

4 It's clear to me that the Liberals consulted with a variety of  relevant lobby groups and their 'experts', including law enforcement and medical researchers as well as the gun rights lobbiers. We will likely see all of these relevant experts testify in court, and we can then evaluate the info for ourselves, and/or leave it up to the legal expertise of the judge, as we choose. 

Most Canadians do not want to interfere with the rights and capabilities of people to hunt for food, nor to legitimately defend themselves/their families. That isn't the purpose of these bans. 

I think clarifying reasons publicly through the court challenge will make that clearer to people, and I welcome that process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, cougar said:

Actually they should ban some computer games and moderate most of our crime movies too.    It all starts with education of kids.  You miss that and you end up in a blood thirsty world.

Swedish and Swiss kids are playing the same video games Americans are. And watching the same movies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2020 at 7:36 PM, dialamah said:

This may well be true, and it applies to other issues as well.   Nonetheless, Canadians as a whole support this legislation, including almost half of current gun owners.  Dismissing the majority of Canadians as "anti-gun nuts" just because you disagree with the legislation is extreme partisanship in action.

It would behoove you to post a link that supports your comments because I do believe you are blowing smoke out your butt.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2020 at 10:02 PM, ProudConservative said:

I'm not in favor of banning military style assault weapons. I'm in favor very strong background checks. The government should have the right to take firearms away from anyone who has mental health issues, just as long as the majority of Canadians still have access to firearms, so there can be a deterrent against tyranny.

Proper background checks, should be able to reduce gun violence by 90%

If a husband beats up his wife, he loses his firearm

If a guy threatens to kill people online, he loses his firearm

If a guy commits assault, he loses his firearm

Responsible citizens, who use common sense and logic.... shouldn't have their guns taken away.

Agree in full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2020 at 9:10 AM, Argus said:

You don't know one single t hing about gun sports. And yes, some of them do indeed require you to shoot lots of bullets easily and quickly.

If their primary purpose is killing people they're doing a piss-poor job of it as virtually none of them are or have been used for that purpose in Canada.

It's also interesting your whole argument is based on "I don't approve of this so it should be banned and I don't care what that costs" as opposed to "This will save many lives." or something similar.

There are some folks who are simply opposed to something because it is the PC thing to do, Argus.  In this person's case that seems to be the guiding rule - not facts, not proof - just PC feelings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2020 at 3:03 PM, Argus said:

Maybe because not everyone is peaceful and the police can be a long way away?

Well, I don't know about rams and elk, but bears definitely do. So do wolves. And like them, we're predators.

Actually all male animals fight for the right to breed and some die doing so.  Bears will also eat the young of others - Old Split Lip in Banff just killed his second cub this year.  So much for animals not fighting and killing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2020 at 4:17 PM, dialamah said:

Why not?  Isn't it a problem in this country and even more so in the States that people aren't "allowed" to disagree?  Isn't that a major sticking point for many on the right,  who claim that the left demands everyone agree with them?  Isn't it better to have a civil discussion, present our thoughts, agree to disagree and move on?

Nothing wrong at all with disagreeing on a subject as long as one is willing to backup their thoughts, comments with facts and proof to support their claims - if they don't they leave themselves open to just criticism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, AngusThermopyle said:

Get real. It's been known for a long time that reserves that straddle the border are major smuggling routes. Your self righteous sarcasm and outrage are completely misplaced in this case.

Right you are, Angus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jacee said:

1 This is a normal course of law-making in Canada: Legislation can be challenged in a court that rules on its constitutionality. If legislation survives the challenge, it makes it stronger. 

2 What the banned 'hunting' guns have in common is that regardless of legal functioning, they are dressed up to look like something illegal - military assault rifles - which they are not, as you yourself pointed out earlier. Thanks for that clarification, btw. Don't lose sight of it, as it is significant and it will be significant in the court challenge. The banned ones are, in a sense, replica guns. I'll just remind people that any criminal using a replica or toy gun in committing (eg) a robbery can be charged, convicted and sentenced for 'armed' robbery. It's addressed according to what it is perceived as by victims, and its resulting control of their actions, not whether or not it can actually kill. In that context, I can understand why police, in particular, would want to get these pimped up replica assault rifles off the street, so they can tell what they are really dealing with. 

They are nothing more than trendy fashion items for the small-weenies of the far-right hate groups to intimidate people with, imo. Do any real hunters actually need, or use these penis-extender fakes? I think not. 

This is an example of who values and uses such replica assault rifles: Hate groups.

  https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-tuesday-edition-1.5253191/how-an-undercover-reporter-exposed-an-alleged-neo-nazi-in-the-canadian-military-1.5253800

At the same meeting, he was, you know, using homophobic and racist epithets. He openly mulled over the possibility of, like, sabotaging a rail line and things. So, you know, this was clearly an individual with ... a potential propensity for violence.
Patrik [Mathews], in that first meeting, you know, said ... he wanted to engage in paramilitary training. He didn't use those terms, but that's what it was. And that's consistent with what The Base is up to right now across North America. They're hosting paramilitary training events called Hate Camps.
They're really influenced by this very obscure neo-Nazi from the United States named James Mason who kind of pioneered this bizarre blend of, like, the world views of Adolf Hitler and Charles Manson. They idolize serial killers and mass murderers.

 

 

I actually look forward to this court challenge of the new gun ban, REALLY interested to see how the hate groups try to defend their 'rights', and how the court responds to that aspect of this case. 

 

3 There is a significant study out of Toronto that looked at firearms injuries and deaths in children and youth. Airsoft guns were included because they are frequently the cause of injuries, damage to eyes, teeth, soft tissues, etc., some permanently disabling. That may be the rationale for the ban.   

4 It's clear to me that the Liberals consulted with a variety of  relevant lobby groups and their 'experts', including law enforcement and medical researchers as well as the gun rights lobbiers. We will likely see all of these relevant experts testify in court, and we can then evaluate the info for ourselves, and/or leave it up to the legal expertise of the judge, as we choose. 

Most Canadians do not want to interfere with the rights and capabilities of people to hunt for food, nor to legitimately defend themselves/their families. That isn't the purpose of these bans. 

I think clarifying reasons publicly through the court challenge will make that clearer to people, and I welcome that process. 

https://firearmrights.ca/en/we-are-going-to-court/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2020 at 4:17 PM, dialamah said:

Why not?  Isn't it a problem in this country and even more so in the States that people aren't "allowed" to disagree?  Isn't that a major sticking point for many on the right,  who claim that the left demands everyone agree with them?  Isn't it better to have a civil discussion, present our thoughts, agree to disagree and move on?

Tell that to the anti free speech liberals and democrats who do not believe in freedom of speech unless it is their version of freedom of speech. The right has never put restrictions on freedom of speech as far as I know. But it is the liberals and democrats that are always trying to take away our rights to our freedom of speech and assembly and making more anti gun laws. The liberals and democrats are always out there trying to divide and conquer by always trying to start up and then try and get one group fighting against another group. 

Hundreds of billions of our tax dollars are blown every year on totally useless gun laws, but yet the commie liberals seem to want to create more anti gun laws and then be able to waste more billions on stupid gun laws. Liberalism and it's stupid ideology will never go away until the buffoons out there stop voting for liberals, socialists and communists who have and never will be able to offer we the people anything but more taxes, more government and less freedom.

One would swear that most Canadians love their big government and high taxes. If it were possible to just get 50% of the people to start to think for themselves, rather than let our politicians or the lying media do their thinking for them, and start to use more logic and common sense and intelligence rather than with bleeding heart emotionalism and foolish talk this country could be one of the wealthiest and greatest countries on earth. But more gun laws is never going to make this country great. All it will do is to keep this country perpetually always in debt. Our tax dollars being blown on stupid gun laws is one of the reasons why Canada has become such an ass of a country. Just saying. Works for me. ;)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idiot Prime Minister was in such a rush he banned coffee.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, cougar said:

Next year I will be 50.

As I stated earlier, convincing an Army Guy will be difficult, but keep in mind I have served too.    I have shot AK-47's and thrown grenades and witnessed unimaginable stupidity while being at it.   Nothing ever changes in this field.

You and the others don't get it at all, and I don't think you ever will, This about banning something arbitrarily, without thinking the problem through, nor having the facts behind them to convince all Canadians it is being done because it will make our country significantly safer when it will not accomplish any of that... Nothing the Liberal government has said , and nothing that the left has been said here on this forum has been based on facts and stats... And when I have repeatedly given sources and stats that back up my side of this debate they are ignored... Most Canadians are making this decision to support this action because they don't know all the facts and for some reason they REFUSE to either look at them when they are presented, or just state they represent the alt right, and hate mongers as someone put it and I can't have that....

I don't support this because I'm just an army guy, I own fire arms all bolt action rifles and one shot gun, because I hunt, and enjoy spending some time at the range.......I don't need any other firearms at the moment....nor do I see me needing to have one of these firearms in the future....That being said there are people who do own these firearms and enjoy using them in a hobby, or sport shooting That are already heavily regulated by law...... and you and others have basically said tough shit, I don't like those firearms, and i want them gone for no other reason than I don't like them I cant tell you why.........why would I support something that makes no sense and will not accomplish the goals that the liberal government has laid out....plus  takes what ever pleasure away from another group that you did not even know existed.....And out of the blue our government has decided to ban them , and in doing so it uses false propaganda, and out right lies to gain the support of the people....As an other liberal has already said after to many drinks, if you shout it loud enough and often enough the people will believe you....in other words Canadians are to stupid or lazy to do some research, and are happy to be belt feed lies and garbage and believe it like it was true....

If they can do this without having any evidence to support their actions what makes you think they can not do this with any other item or practice... 

I'm only guessing but I assume you have moved out of moms basement judging by your age, but one should never assume.......I also assume you served in the Chinese or ex Warsaw pact military, or perhaps some African nation. These firearms that you claimed to have used are not the same firearms that any military uses as any ex military person could tell you....The ones that are banned where designed to be used by civilians, they operate very differently, and are not made to kill the most amount of people in a short time...And all the items required to make them a military grade rifle are illegal here in Canada, punishable by a prison term, huge fine, fire arms taken away for life and no longer able to use or own firearms again....the risk of getting caught is huge, and is just not worth it... 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On April 30, 2020 at 9:30 AM, Argus said:

So the Trudeau government is set to ban a bunch of macho-looking rifles in Canada, even though they really don't do anything a lot of other rifles do...  The cost will be $250 billion up front and another $150 million a year for for years. But we all know it will be a lot higher. It always is.

As an Ashkenazim Jew, it's too bad you lack viable intel for why you all should be very happy about this decision by Trudeau.

It is done, solely, to protect Canada's Ashkenazim interests from disgruntled Caucasian homegrown terrorists, who do not appreciate the Canadian Globalists "Z-world" aspirations.

Edited by Tdot
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jacee said:

2 What the banned 'hunting' guns have in common is that regardless of legal functioning, they are dressed up to look like something illegal - military assault rifles - which they are not, as you yourself pointed out earlier. Thanks for that clarification, btw. Don't lose sight of it, as it is significant and it will be significant in the court challenge.

 

 

The hunting rifles mention in the 65 page document about the ban are bolt action rifles, they do not share any of the characteristics as an assault rifles, the looks are different , the actions are different, everything is different , be like comparing a pick up with a car....

Just for the record firearms are not classified by looks, and looks alone although it seems the way the liberals are banning them, and within Canadians firearm laws some look alikes are banned and a lot of them are not,  there is NO consistency on why some are banned and many are not.... So that theory is a moot point....  

Quote

The banned ones are, in a sense, replica guns. I'll just remind people that any criminal using a replica or toy gun in committing (eg) a robbery can be charged, convicted and sentenced for 'armed' robbery. It's addressed according to what it is perceived as by victims, and its resulting control of their actions, not whether or not it can actually kill. In that context, I can understand why police, in particular, would want to get these pimped up replica assault rifles off the street, so they can tell what they are really dealing with. 

This tidbit does not have any bearing on the topic, replica guns are non firing display models, and they themselves are not illegal you can get a replica gun on almost any firearm available around the globe....they are meant for display or teaching purposes only... and yes you can be arrested for a replica gun, a BB gun, a pellet gun, wooden gun or a water gun if you attempted to use it for a crime....any crime... and like the stats have already suggested well over 90 % of these crimes like the one you suggested are done with illegal fire arms...not ones that are legally purchased by law abiding citizens….

The banned fire arms have nothing to do with that at all, or there would be thousands of these look a likes on the list.... 

Quote

They are nothing more than trendy fashion items for the small-weenies of the far-right hate groups to intimidate people with, imo. Do any real hunters actually need, or use these penis-extender fakes? I think not. 

Why must these fire arm owners be slammed into a category, be like me saying all guys with penis enlargements are slu**y studs , ....these people who own these wpns come from across the political spectrum, liberals, conservatives, NDP, i'd say green but they are to consumed about hating everything....but hey you can't make a point with pulling out the old right wingnut category....fire arms are used for many things, sport shooting, hobbies, hunting, work, protection , they are a tool that can be used many ways....besides if you actually knew anything about firearms , you'd already know most of those firearms on the banned list you can't hunt with....it's illegal already, i'll say it again it is illegal to hunt with a restricted long gun...they are for going to an RCMP approved Range only, you need a pass to transport them to and from the range "no stopping" or you face charges... so much for the hunters dick extension theory....

Quote

3 There is a significant study out of Toronto that looked at firearms injuries and deaths in children and youth. Airsoft guns were included because they are frequently the cause of injuries, damage to eyes, teeth, soft tissues, etc., some permanently disabling. That may be the rationale for the ban.   

See this is just more bullshit, we are talking about deaths do to firearms and your bringing up air soft guns must be a leftist thing.......because they cause injuries to eyes, teeth, soft tissues etc....but yet playing hockey you can the same injuries or more, do we put on war paint dance around the camp fire naked shouting ban hockey you could get hurt, come on...whats next ban clogging with wooden shoes due to splinters.......one of the very reasons they went to air soft was it was safer than other fire arms such as pellet, and bb guns....as they fire a ceramic ball at a much lower velocity.... 

 

Quote

4 It's clear to me that the Liberals consulted with a variety of  relevant lobby groups and their 'experts', including law enforcement and medical researchers as well as the gun rights lobbiers. We will likely see all of these relevant experts testify in court, and we can then evaluate the info for ourselves, and/or leave it up to the legal expertise of the judge, as we choose. 

How so , have you read any of the 65 pages of written material on the ban, do you know anything about the current gun laws, then how would you know that they consulted anyone, because Justin or blair told you on the media, same guys that brought you the SNC scandall or the ethic commissionaires report, or how about firing of the Justice minister...Ya those guys are trust worthy....if experts had been used I think the list would have been shorter, and would not include anti tank missiles and launchers , because everyone has them except the army....airsoft rifles, shot guns ,bolt action rifles lets not forget landmines.....all would have been vetted out, also the liberals would not have to use the tear provoking speeches like , these guns are responsible for domestic violence....and should be banned, according to the vice PM, they are designed to kill the most people as fast as possible, they were actually designed for the civilian population with government approval....not to mention they can only have a 5 round magazine....And for some reason I don't think this is going to make it to court, I think the cons will be taking power and all of this non sense will be for nothing....thats the day liberals across the country heads explode...it's going to be a good day wear your rain gear it's going to get messy... 

Quote

Most Canadians do not want to interfere with the rights and capabilities of people to hunt for food, nor to legitimately defend themselves/their families. That isn't the purpose of these bans. 

more bullshit, we have already established that there has only been 29 deaths due to legally owned fire arms....in the last 30 years, less than 1 homicide a year....and 0 by the AR-15 family of firearms....but because they are not effected they don't give a rats ass, if it keeps us safer or not....what they have said loud and clear to all those that use fire arms in a sport, or at the range, or as a hobby....we don't care we don't like you, Martha get the signs out we got a new cause to march to...you make me feel unsafe, and yet they have been around for dozens of years 

You do know that Canadian law is much different than US law, to defend you family you can only use proportionate response, you can not kill or harm an attacker with a fire arm if they are not armed with a gun atleast not with out receiving some criminal  charges for your Police dept....hence why they say sometimes it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6...

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Argus said:

Swedish and Swiss kids are playing the same video games Americans are. And watching the same movies.

maybe it's lost in the translation....can you imagine the Swedish cook off of the Muppets doing the guys off call of duty....now that would be funney

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Army Guy said:

....... there are people who do own these firearms and enjoy using them in a hobby, or sport shooting

They can adapt to the situation.  One can have the same fun firing a pellet gun.   But they are left with all high power hunting weapons, just not those that will shoot many rounds in a short time.  I see absolutely no problem.

As a fisherman I can object bait bans, gear bans, barbless hooks,  closed seasons and what not, but at the end I am happy with what I have and I can have the same fun and catch the same number of fish on a barbless fly.  I care not what the new regulations will throw at me for as long as I can still enjoy the outdoors.

Edited by cougar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Army Guy said:

1 ....besides if you actually knew anything about firearms , you'd already know most of those firearms on the banned list you can't hunt with....it's illegal already, i'll say it again it is illegal to hunt with a restricted long gun...they are for going to an RCMP approved Range only, you need a pass to transport them to and from the range "no stopping" or you face charges...

2 so much for the hunters dick

1 So they're unnecessary anyway, and now banned. All good.

2 I was not talking about hunters. They are not the concern here. (You need to read more carefully, as you've interpreted this all wrong, perhaps intentionally to stir the pot?) NOBODY is trying to take away necessary hunting guns. 

However, there is concern about the increasing propensity for terrorism among the far-right delusional gun nuts, Nazi wannabes who want to incite 'race wars'. We don't need them running around with wannabe assault rifle lookalikes. 

 I doubt the lame-leaders Conservatives will be taking power and walking this law back any time soon. They've isolated themselves out of relevance, into a corner consisting of far right goons with pimped up guns, religious bigots and those with their heads stuck in the oil sands. They can't represent Canadians, can't conduct the necessary business of the country, and have little relevance at the national level anymore, imo. 

It looks like the courts will decide what guns can be banned and why, and it will be interesting to see the  the rationale ... but it won't be soon. 

Edited by jacee
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2020 at 5:27 PM, AngusThermopyle said:

Get real. It's been known for a long time that reserves that straddle the border are major smuggling routes. Your self righteous sarcasm and outrage are completely misplaced in this case.

Bullshit. Provide the well known evidence.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2020 at 4:00 PM, Shady said:

Idiot Prime Minister was in such a rush he banned coffee.

Does anyone not check into these things before they go and ban things?  That's shameful really.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, New World Disorder said:

Does anyone not check into these things before they go and ban things?  That's shameful really.

Good question, but apparently not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, cougar said:

They can adapt to the situation.  One can have the same fun firing a pellet gun.   But they are left with all high power hunting weapons, just not those that will shoot many rounds in a short time.  I see absolutely no problem.

As a fisherman I can object bait bans, gear bans, barbless hooks,  closed seasons and what not, but at the end I am happy with what I have and I can have the same fun and catch the same number of fish on a barbless fly.  I care not what the new regulations will throw at me for as long as I can still enjoy the outdoors.

OK sure, your not going to be convinced by anything anyone says.... As a fire arms owner you do know ALL long barreled fire arms are restricted to 5 rds magazine capacity.....your posts are very telling , you don't know much about fire arms, nor what they banned, or the fire arms policy or laws....

The guy that invested 14,000 for just one AR-15 all kitted out is probably not going to be as relaxed as yo are about the ban, thats not counting what he has invested in ammo, other misc gear, not to mention range fees or memberships... because that was what the law dictated him to do....so he could enjoy a day at the range...or doing a the various sport shooting events

 

 

Edited by Army Guy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jacee said:

1 So they're unnecessary anyway, and now banned. All good.

2 I was not talking about hunters. They are not the concern here. (You need to read more carefully, as you've interpreted this all wrong, perhaps intentionally to stir the pot?) NOBODY is trying to take away necessary hunting guns. 

However, there is concern about the increasing propensity for terrorism among the far-right delusional gun nuts, Nazi wannabes who want to incite 'race wars'. We don't need them running around with wannabe assault rifle lookalikes. 

 I doubt the lame-leaders Conservatives will be taking power and walking this law back any time soon. They've isolated themselves out of relevance, into a corner consisting of far right goons with pimped up guns, religious bigots and those with their heads stuck in the oil sands. They can't represent Canadians, can't conduct the necessary business of the country, and have little relevance at the national level anymore, imo. 

It looks like the courts will decide what guns can be banned and why, and it will be interesting to see the  the rationale ... but it won't be soon. 

There is no point in debating this with you , as you don't know anything about the topic, nor do you want to... either way this ban is going to be killed in the courts or with a change of government....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

 either way this ban is going to be killed in the courts or with a change of government....

 

Want to bet? 

I can guarantee you that this ban is here, to stay, because it protects Canadians from future radicalized homegrown terrorists like the NV guy. Yes, the radicalized folks who are becoming increasingly disgruntled with Liberal Dem's "anti-West" Movement which Canada and the USA have been fertilized/impregnated with.

Edited by Tdot

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...