doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com sad situation for Canadians

Accurate or slanted, the polls line up with my notion when I joined the board: the shooting sports will be unrecognizable in my lifetime, before I die. I'm closing in on 89. There'll be lots of loopholes and false starts, grandfathering, buybacks or not, the antis now have what they wanted all along: a strengthened regulatory regimen to bolt-action rifles, pumps, SA and SxS shotguns. If we're lucky.

King, you underestimate the voraciousness of the anti's appetite. They want no firearms in the hands of anyone but government agents. Every regulation is but a way station to that destination.

The behavior of our current government suggests a mind set that would just as soon dispense with the niceties of democracy.

The thing that has scared me the most about the Covid19 pandemic is how enthusiastically my fellow citizens embrace fascist totalitarianism.

I�m sure your brothers in the shooting sports appreciate your efforts.

Best,
Ted

_____________________________________________
You really should start thinking about what kind of world you are leaving
for Keith Richards.

This is a serious question. I'm trying to understand under what law the Virginia governor by decree can shut down businesses across the state. No one, not lawyers, constitutionalists, can cite where in the Virginia constitution he gets that right, not even having to have it passed in the legislature.

Similarly, I don't understand how in the Canadian Parliamentary system, the Prime Minister can come out and announce willy nilly a major infringement on the people's liberty without even having to put it to a debate and vote in the parliament. In France under the 5th Republic, basically the people elected a "king" for 5 years, which explains how Macron gets away with such centralized high-handedness. The French were so traumatized by the 4th Republic that they created this system. But Canada is a true Parliamentary democracy.

Can one of the Canadians explain under what section of Canadian laws that the Prime Minister devolves unto himself such awesome powers? This is a civics question, not an attempt to stir up rants. I'm truly curious. And am just as curious how this happened in New Zealand as well.

The off topic pissing contests that you have expressed displeasure with, nearly always involve democrats infringing on rights. If it doesn�t have to do with rights, then it�ll involve emotion, selective law enforcement, regulation, legislating from the bench, but I think you already knew that?

I wouldn�t over worry about Canadian liberties, when they don�t have the right in the first place. Some political appointee named Blair is technically the one that has the power. Either that, or some nonsense or another about the will of the Canadian people.

Gene, it's a complicated question you ask but I'll try to answer it in a simple way.

We have a parliamentary democracy, in theory. 100 years ago we broke with British tradition, in order to be more "democratic" (be careful what you wish for) and began to have the broad party membership elect the party leader, rather than the leader being selected by the Members of Parliament, from among those same Members of Parliament.

In the British system, the moment the Prime Minister gets too big for his britches, or puts the party at risk of losing the next election (and all those MP's lose their jobs), the party can depose the Prime Minister and elect a new one. It is an ad hoc, developed over centuries, check on the power of the PM. Remember Margaret Thatcher? As soon as she overstayed her welcome, she was gone. As was her successor John Major when he hung around too long and put electoral success at risk.

In Canada, because the leader (and therefore the PM if the party won the election) is selected occasionally by a mass vote among paid up party members, a number of things can go wrong.

First, the leader can be part of a movement that highjacks the party, simply by buying memberships that give the right to cast a vote. No vetting as who those memberships are sold to or if they are even real people.

Second, the leader signs the nomination papers of every candidate that intends to stand for election. No signature, no job. So unquestioned loyalty becomes the order of the day, if you want to keep or get your job as an MP.

Third, with a now compliant group of MPs, who will vote like trained seals, the office of the Prime Minister (like your West Wing) becomes the real power. They instruct the MP's on what to say and when to say it. As Justin Trudeau's father said in the 1970's about his MP's "100 feet from Parliament, they are nobodies". And it's true. When the PMO sends a directive about jumping, they all ask "How High"?

When we elect a government with a majority in Parliament, we have elected a 4 year dictatorship. By abandoning the system of MP's electing the leader, there is no way to stop centralization of power in the PMO.

The real power in Canada today lies with a fellow named Gerald Butts. A close college friend of Justin who is his chief of staff and head of the PMO. Trudeau is dumb but telegenic and with a popular last name in some parts of the country. Butts is anything but dumb. They made a deal. Butts said "you be the figure head, I'll be the brains and we'll run the country". Butts is a radical socialist on the Green Agenda. He destroyed the Ontario economy in the 2000's as chief of staff to the Ontario premier at that time, then moved down the highway to Ottawa to screw the whole country.

Trudeau passed a bill last year, C71, that layed the groundwork for this ban. The bill created the law but did nothing in this area. This decree last week was simply a REGULATORY change to that law.

Craig, Bill Blair is not an appointee, he is an elected Member of Parliamnet and holds a senior cabinet position. But he is a talking puppet saying and doing exactly what the PM and Trudeau's chief of staff tell him to say. If he steps out of line, he is gone.

Oh yeah, and he's an ex Toronto police chief who, while chief, didn't think anyone should be able to own a gun.

Thanks cback, I knew he was elected to your parliament, but I was under the mistaken impression that j appointed him to the cabinet position. In any event, what wasn�t necessarily a political opportunity, certainly was taken. Best of luck up there, what�s next.

Craig...just to clarify things, I almost never ever comment on politics. I'm interested in the professionalism and knowledge of this board on double guns...I can get my politics at the local Irish pub - when it's open again....actually in Arlington, Virginia a pretty good source since it's hang-out for DC lawyers.

But my question was a serious one that I'm have a problem with - what are the limits of executive authority - I've yet to have it answered coherently as far a Virginia goes.

And there's a bit of personal interest. My son is leaving for Alaska in June in his pick-up truck for a 6 month sojourn in the wilds...part of his doctoral dissertation. A lot of time will be spent in a sea Kayak and in Brown Bear country. I gave him a Remington 870 Marine Magnum pump, nickel-plated, synthetic stock, to withstand the salt and had him shoot a couple of hundred slug-rounds through it. I don't trust bear-spray in a mid-latitude rain-forest. But can he now carry that shotgun in the truck driving to Alaska through Canada?

And thanks CB...that explains it a bit. So a law was passed....but it is open ended and can be amended by the PMO by fiat whenever he wishes? That's impressive. Could he say, ban certain shoes because they damage toes (and come out with a list of sandal makers)? Just hypothetical but the whole situation for us is sort of incomprehensible.

Ted, you may have missed my report here of our last year's gun club annual meeting. Members would not take a position on looming gun control. I met with a half-dozen members of another club at the county range recently, one with an assault-style rifle. Similar response. The local gun shop owner put up his hand when I mentioned it, "I don't want to talk about it." Entreaties to a national organization provided unimaginative boilerplate, voice and print.

A majority favours gun control in rural Nova Scotia and those who don't have been worn down and dispirited by unfairness of the urban-rural divide. Urban has the votes. Our provincial government recently closed its biggest kraft mill arbitrarily after a poll showed 60 per cent of the populace didn't want it. No discussion with thousands of stakeholders, not even the owners or legislators.

My shooting-sports brothers, many close friends for more than 50 years who opposed successfully the long-gun registry, appreciate my efforts. Only now they see them mostly as beating a dead horse.