I forget where, but in the past I've lined safes with visqueen and buried them, trick is only put like 5 weapons in and about 2k rounds of ammo with desiccant. Laws pass, they're popular for a hot minute domestic, then it moves to enforcing at the docks/borders, and you profit.
I'm actually all for gun laws passing. I can make a rifle, handgun, or submachinegun out of a block of metal using a CNC router and lathe. If something legal is made illegal and the demand is high with supply being easy, we enter an era like prohibition where law takes a backseat to the black market.
At my skill level about all I'd be able to produce would be cetmi rifles, 1911 handguns, coilguns, and ruger 10/22s though. If electric cars make a breakthrough, all discharge electronics do, which includes coilguns, and current "gun" paradigm is pointless. Currently you can already kill a man with a coilgun with no shells, no ballistics, and just the sound of impact being loudest. Downside is they're heavy as hell, and have a slow charge time. If discharge time and weight were reduced, who would bother with propellants? Ammo is expensive, rods of iron are not.
If it becomes illegal I will turn it in, otherwise no.
Sounds kinda irrelevant. Assault style weapons? What does that mean? Does it mean if the weapons are black with pistol grips? Does it mean anyone with malicious intent and mental health problems can not get their hands on a firearm?
Sounds like the Canadian government needs a political distraction and to be seen to be doing something important and using the recent school shooting in America is a perfect excuse.
The more I see of Justin trudeau the more he seems like a dictator and he seems to have little to no respect for the Canadian people. He seems more like the Kardashians than a leader, like to be a celebrity dressing up for photo opportunities and making grand pandering speeches.
Sounds like they are moving towards the one world government which they can't do if everyone has guns to defend their rights. Every dictator has required confiscation of weapons. So once they do that you are just along for the ride and will have no rights.
Opinion
40Opinion
u Can you provide a definition for "military assault type weapons?"
Neither. This is EXACTLY what the 2nd Amendment guards against. If a government wants to take away my weapons it means they plan to do things they know would get them shot. Do not be fooled by gun-control nutcases. The government has no interest in the safety of citizens. If they did then police forces would have the resources to have an officer on every street to stop a crime in seconds. Taking weapons away is about power and the ability to maintain power.
Look at Syria. They had very strict gun laws and the citizens had no defense against the government and the international community stood by and did nothing.
In the U. S., shootings happen at schools because the psychos KNOW those places ban guns and therefore are defenseless. Even in Texas guns are not allowed in schools. In EVERY setting where a mass shooting happened, it happened where the gunmen expected little armed resistance.
Also, an AR-15 is not a "military assault type weapon". Military assault weapons are fully automatic, not semi-automatic. Fully auto weapons are already banned in the U. S. except for military and some law enforcement. Despite that ban, criminals have them because THEY ARE CRIMINALS WHO COULD CARE LESS ABOUT THE LAW.
Every weapon I own is legal in my state and every state surrounding it. If the federal government tries to come for them, they will see what these weapons were meant for. I would not be alone. If this happened, my state is one of the ones who would resist the federal government for fear of their overreach.
The odds of this even happening in the U. S. is slim. Congress does not have the votes to change the Constitution and if Doofus-n-Chief tries to executive order his way into further gun control the courts would stop him in the end.
F*ck no! Canadians just went through the trucker convoy and had that mangina piece of sh*t Trudeau show them all just how little he cares for the people. And NOW, they expect to outlaw guns in Canada? Piss off! I'm not even Canadian and I feel pissed off for them!
The US is not as weak and soft as Canada, so good luck trying that in America. Oh wait, they already did and we got Second Amendment Sanctuary states guaranteeing the government would have to declare war on the people before they strip them of their guns.
Assume nothing! That's definitely NOT about to happen in the US. Unlike Canada, the US has a Constitutional Ammendment in place that cannot be easily absolved with an Executive Order or a simple Congressional vote. That pesky 2nd Ammendment is there to protect the others - specifically against this type of government aggression on our freedom. The Judiciary has made it abundantly crystal over a multitude of cases, that gun ownership is a Constitutionally protected right.
As for handing over ANY guns... sure, they can have them - one bullet at a time. With nearly 430 MILLION guns owned by US citizens, good luck even attempting to get any of them.
... from my dead cold fingers...
If I had one there is no way I'd turn it in. If it ever happened in the US I'd be surprised if the compliance was high. It would just turn millions of law abiding people into criminals.
In Australia, people turned in their guns. I don't know what's happening in Canada. But I know in the US, compliance would be low.
I really wonder what the anti-gunners think will be the results of these gun bans they want. Do they REALLY think that 50 million people will go "OK, here's all my guns"? The entire combined military of the entire world couldn't take them away. What makes people think a few cops can do it?
There is a legal difference between "assault weapon" and "assault rifle" and further difference in the "military" category in Canada.
In the US there is a difference between assault weapon and rifle but not in the military category.
The differences are mainly in magazine sizes and fire functionality.
To date, no citizen has been able to prove their requirement to own military grade weapons for any legal purpose. Hence why the government can reclassify as required.
Let's give our guns to the same government that:
1) Left billions of dollars of weapons and military equipment in the heart of Afghanistan for the terrorist cells to keep
2) Has the combined murder count of civilians than all mass shooters combined
3) Is most likely orchestrating these shootings in order to push these anti-gun ownership agendas to disarm the populace (rich and connected don't want a populace that can threaten their absolution)
So in conclusion, no I would never give up my firearms to the fascist government.
Nobody in the US owns 'military assault type weapons' as those are select fire, and are illegal to own as a private citizen unless they own a company that makes firearms or a film props company as they are licensed by the Government.
AR15's and their clones are semi automatic only (one trigger pull - one shot) this makes them no more effective than a lever action or bolt action rifle with the only exception that the operator doesn't have to do a physical action to load each round.
The owners of these semi automatic rifles will never 'surrender' them to illegal seizures.
If I had one sure! I do not though, I believe precision marksmanship is a fun skill. My rifles are for that and that only. My handguns are for wild animal threats. I hope to never in my life point a firearm at a human
I own two and No I personally wouldn't. It is obvious that given the Texas Rangers and Police allowing an execution situation that Two Unarmed Civilian Teachers had more common sense and courage trying to protect their children than the dozens of Police Officers who showed up on scene showing nothing but COWARDICE for over an hour allowing essentially 19 Children and two Heroic Teachers to essentially be executed. Until border patrol Swat team arrived over an hour later. The city, State and local Police should all be sued exponentially because they were all Cowards!
Except in New York and big cities, I doubt that law would be enforce very long in the USA. Juries have the right to judge both the facts and the law. Therefore, in locations where most people have and believe in the right to have guns the juries wouldn't convict. I believe that happened with prohibition. Juries wouldn't convict. The government must of hated that so the law was changed.
"assault type weapon" :D ridiculous. i mean i'm anti gun ownership. but even to me, this distinction is fucked up dumb. you pull the trigger, it goes blam and someone dies. why does it matter if that can happen 5 times in short succession or 20? for me every death is horrible and should be avoided at all cost.
Well its obvious they have a future plan for us and its not good. Why are 425 ethnic gangs who have illegal guns left alone they are the ones doing all the crime and mass shootings. Its not a hunter carrying that out.
Not going to happen. If it did, i'd keep my weapons and never go to jail. :-)
As a Canadian - these new laws are absolute BS and this government cannot get voted out quickly enough.
None of my weapons are “assault weapons” so no, I won’t be turning anything in, and most people I know, including law enforcement and military won’t be either.
Lol, so many Americans think this is new news.
We've banned military assault weapons for years. The buyback program is far from new.
Is this fucking real? Canadia is doing this, as in "you have a certain gun, you must relinquish it"? FUCK NO. I don't care what fucking gun it is I own, blood will spill. If I die while it happens, that's how it goes.
s It’s not going to happen here. We’re far past the point of containment anyway.
Bold assumption that anyone is going to comply. Trudeau passed that over 2 years ago and still can’t figure out how to enforce it
Most Helpful Opinions