TWO TASKS:
1. Please qualitatively describe: "Fair Compensation."
2. Please quantify this numeric with Exchange Rate of Canadian Dollars vs. $USD
Back Story:
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Friday banned 1,500 models of military-style assault weapons in Canada.
Canadians are no longer allowed to buy, sell, use, transport or import those types of weapons, Trudeau said. Owners of those guns will have a two-year amnesty period to surrender the weapons, and Parliament will pass legislation to provide them with “fair compensation,”
The transcript from his speech does not contain the word "surrender". I'm also pasting this quote from Canadian TV:
"However, the changes won’t outlaw these weapons completely in Canada, as the government will be offering current owners of these guns the ability to grandfather in their ownerships, allowing them to still possess these guns under specific terms. Owners will also have the ability to be compensated through a buyback program, though the details of both options have yet to be outlined."
Just trying to keep the conversation to documented facts, so please don't flame me.
You can own them but you can’t transport or use them according to what I saw. Who needs a Constitution, you’re a democracy right? Police said the recent mass shooter in Nova Scotia used a handgun and long gun but they won’t release info on what kind of long gun. You could trade Trudeau for Rahm Emanuel and wouldn’t know the difference! “Never let a crisis go to waste.” Since when does “military grade” mean semi auto only? Canada is a fantastic country full of wonderful people. Unfortunately it is also full of idiot liberals who don’t know the difference between the criminally insane and a law-abiding citizen.
For those of you preparing to tell me that we don’t need an AR-15, George III said we didn’t need the ultra-modern Pennsylvania Long Assault Rifle back in 1775.
I am sad to report that we have alot of the same kind of idiots in the good ol’ U. S. of A.
The Australian "buyback" was “fair compensation”. They used current book values that were more than fair and they included upgrades.
But you still lost your guns.
...But you still lost your guns.[/quote wrote:
No such thing as "fair compensation" when this is the end result. What price do you place on your freedom?
The problem with the idea of "fair compensation" is that value is subjective. What might be worth $100 to the government is worth $1,000 to me. My first rifle from back when I was a lad is probably worth $300 on the open market; I wouldn't let it go for 10x that. What they mean by "fair" is "what we are willing to give you" (or rather, "what you are going to get for it").
Thinking out loud...... Did this just violate the NAFTA replacement law??? ....... I THOUGHT you couldn't pass a law that denied the importation and sale of products legal for sale and distribution in tbe neighboring countries...... Canada has now imposed an importation ban to a class of firearms....... I thougbt tbe law prevented that
What this does mean is that many of the approx 80,000 AR15 type rifles in Canada will be candidates for export to the United States. The Canadian government seems to be encouraging this idea, since it's named "export" as one of the ways owners can get rid of their ARs. Canadian ARs have never been hunted or used (legally) anywhere except the range, so they're probably in good condition, and many are of high quality, eg those made by Colt Canada. Maybe one of the US surplus importers will start picking them up. I don't know whether this point may be of any interest to US members of this forum but (as a Canadian) thought I'd mention it. I don't own an AR myself.
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” -Samuel Adams
I'm not too happy with the situation either.
Trudeau said the guy in nova Scotia was in possession of one of the new prohibs. My guess not only did he take the constables pistol but also her patrol carbine.
For those who dont know a patrol carbine is what the press call an ar-15 in the posession of police officers. In the hands of a civilian it's called an assault rifle. See we have two types of ar-15's in canada, patrol carbines and assault rifles.
Our glorious leader also states that there is no place for these types of rifles in canada as their only purpose is to kill as many people as quickly as possible. Yet we equip law enforcement with them? How can they be benevolent in the hands of law enforcement but unfit for use by civilians?
They are often described as "high power" as well. Once again the media loves shock terms and calling the 223 a bunny bopper, or squirrel popper may lead the sheep astray.
I'm not really sure how this will come to an end. It doesn't begin to address the problem of violent thoughts turned to action. Sadly, Covid-19 has claimed a couple of magnitudes more lives without the slightest hint of firearms. There was (as with most countries) a severe lack of fore-thought when it came to preparation for biological encounters. I suspect that no one else has yet (of those who replied on the forum) read the list of banned "assault weapons". Doesn't 1500 makes and models seem a bit high to anyone else? Any weapon which can throw a projectile with 10,000 Joules (on up) of muzzle energy is included. That means .50 cal single shot rifles also (as well as repeaters). Included are mortars up to 180 mm. I don't think these have been used recently in any mass shootings in North America, apart from the fact that a trained crew is needed to operate them. What about recoil-less rifles? As well, the SKS doesn't seem to have been mentioned at all. Maybe too many politicians have been familiarized with weapons at the movies. Maybe the Liberal Party wants to create the appearance of effectiveness by doing something. They have tried to wipe out handgun shooting as a sport for years (so far, without complete success). The buy-back would probably be modeled after the Australian version, but that likely will not reduce the level of violent crime.
Canadian media has not published how many died from gunshot wounds and how many died in the fire (since it has not been verified yet), so I'm guessing that information must wait for an official release. I hope the situation reverses quickly. According to a report from an ex-neighbour, the RCMP was notified quite some time ago that Wortman had weapons illegally in his possession, and had already demonstrated domestic violence. Somebody clearly dropped the ball om this one. Masquerading as a policeman in a car (a complete look-alike), and wearing an RCMP uniform only made the situation worse. All the signs were there, but the authorities failed to act in time.
