Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 05-24-2019, 09:58 AM   #2001
Ark2
Franchise Player
 
Ark2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Personally, I don't know if I have a big problem with a handgun ban, I'm that weird right winger that doesn't see the benefits of them in peoples houses, they just seem like an accident waiting to happen, or a theft that hasn't occurred yet.


I have a massive problem with the Liberal's proceeding the way they are with it. Frankly there's no chance of a ban not passing in the HOC. This directive if its issued is about sniffling debate and trying to keep the public oblivious to it.
I think law abiding handgun owners are not a problem in this country at all, and it is pretty cynical politics for the Liberals to ram through a ban that would target such citizens. I recently went through the steps to get my restricted firearms license with the intent to purchase a handgun. If this ridiculous government passes a law banning them, obviously I will comply and not own one. What I don't understand is what this actually accomplishes, outside of having to waste an estimated $100 million in a buy-back program. Criminals are not going to hand in their guns, and I resent being made to feel like I am someone that contributes to gun violence.
Ark2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:00 AM   #2002
Locke
ness Monster
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shazam View Post
This is what she says now, but if she ever takes power, and then people explain to her with the use of hand puppets just how much money the O&G sector brings in. Then her tune will change.

Also she doesn't understand that metallurgical coal will be used until the fall of civilization.
Read that tweet. This woman is an idiot.

"We do not support a single barrel of production!!!"

Hey, Theresa, can I come have dinner at your house? Is it warm? How will you cook?

I want someone like Vivian Krause to tell her to STFU.
__________________
- "Somebody may beat me, but they're going to have to bleed to do it."
- Steve Prefontaine
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
Locke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:01 AM   #2003
DownhillGoat
Franchise Player
 
DownhillGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll View Post
The Liberals have most likely written off the votes of gun owners based on either their past actions or their current ones around C-71 and the potential OIC.
Oh I get that. But on the flip side they likely are already banking the anti-gun crowd votes prior to any gun "legislation".

So the way I see it is they don't gain/lose any traction on the wings, but for people who don't overly care either way they see it as a "hey, why are we spending this $130 million for?"

If you're writing off either side of the bell curve, why piss off the middle too?
DownhillGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:02 AM   #2004
The Fonz
Our Jessica Fletcher
 
The Fonz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Exp:
Default

Handgun ban?

That's a solid wedge issue the Liberals just manufactured (if this happens) heading into this election. Well played.
The Fonz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:03 AM   #2005
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Court decision on the BC Permiting system for Transmountain comes out in a couple of hours.


If the Court sides with BC, then Transmountain will be effectively delayed forever, the Federal Government will lose a bunch of Constitutional powers, and the appeal to the supreme court will probably ensure that we miss any kind of construction for a couple of years.


If the other side, wins, BC will appeal to the supreme court and probably take court action to stop construction until the Supreme Court hears the case probably next year.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...tion-1.5147454


Quote:
B.C.'s Court of Appeal will decide Friday whether the province can change its environmental laws in a way that could effectively kill the controversial Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.
The province's top court was asked to weigh in on proposed amendments to B.C.'s Environmental Management Act forcing anyone wanting to transport increased quantities of "heavy oil" to seek provincial permission.

Quote:
The court has been asked to consider three basic questions:
  • Does B.C. have the authority to enact the proposed amendments?
  • Would those rules apply to "heavy oil" from another province?
  • Would existing federal legislation trump the provincial rules in any event?

Quote:
Regardless of what the appeal court decides, the ultimate decision on the law is likely to rest with the Supreme Court of Canada.
__________________
Just when you think you have the answers, I change the questions
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:10 AM   #2006
burn_this_city
Franchise Player
 
burn_this_city's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Handgun ban won't work with porous borders.
burn_this_city is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:11 AM   #2007
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by burn_this_city View Post
Handgun ban won't work with porous borders.
Build a wall!!
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:12 AM   #2008
llwhiteoutll
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DownhillGoat View Post
Oh I get that. But on the flip side they likely are already banking the anti-gun crowd votes prior to any gun "legislation".

So the way I see it is they don't gain/lose any traction on the wings, but for people who don't overly care either way they see it as a "hey, why are we spending this $130 million for?"

If you're writing off either side of the bell curve, why piss off the middle too?
Simple, there won't be a massive buy back to piss off the middle vote with spending. There are 880,000 restricted firearms in Canada that would most likely be subject to an OIC. This doesn't count the non-restricted firearms that could get caught up in the verbiage of whatever they choose to define as an "assault style weapon". There is no way a buy back would only cost $130mm, you'd be into the billions. Even if you just buy back ARs, you're probably already at that $130mm figure.
llwhiteoutll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:17 AM   #2009
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Court decision on the BC Permiting system for Transmountain comes out in a couple of hours.


If the Court sides with BC, then Transmountain will be effectively delayed forever, the Federal Government will lose a bunch of Constitutional powers, and the appeal to the supreme court will probably ensure that we miss any kind of construction for a couple of years.


If the other side, wins, BC will appeal to the supreme court and probably take court action to stop construction until the Supreme Court hears the case probably next year.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...tion-1.5147454

Broken country is broken.
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:27 AM   #2010
IliketoPuck
Franchise Player
 
IliketoPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99 View Post
Broken country is broken.
If BC can limit the amount of a "hazardous" product travelling through their province, surely Alberta can then limit the amount of "hazardous" products from Alberta that move into B.C.?

If this goes in B.C.'s favor, the immediate reaction for Kenney should be to stop all shipments in the TM pipeline.
__________________
Pylon on the Edmonton Oilers:

"I am actually more excited for the Oilers game tomorrow than the Flames game. I am praying for multiple jersey tosses. The Oilers are my new favourite team for all the wrong reasons. I hate them so much I love them."
IliketoPuck is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:27 AM   #2011
Ark2
Franchise Player
 
Ark2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll View Post
Simple, there won't be a massive buy back to piss off the middle vote with spending. There are 880,000 restricted firearms in Canada that would most likely be subject to an OIC. This doesn't count the non-restricted firearms that could get caught up in the verbiage of whatever they choose to define as an "assault style weapon". There is no way a buy back would only cost $130mm, you'd be into the billions. Even if you just buy back ARs, you're probably already at that $130mm figure.
Do you think they would just confiscate firearms instead without offering compensation? Is the government even allowed to do that?
Ark2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:28 AM   #2012
Makarov
#1 Goaltender
 
Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Moscow
Exp:
Default

Lastly, isn't all of this hysterical outrage regarding hand gun prohibition a tad premature? As far as I can tell, this is all based on a rather coy remark by Bill Blair that an OIC (presumably enacting regulations) to ban handguns wasn't being ruled out.
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
Makarov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:33 AM   #2013
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov View Post
Lastly, isn't all of this hysterical outrage regarding hand gun prohibition a tad premature? As far as I can tell, this is all based on a rather coy remark by Bill Blair that an OIC (presumably enacting regulations) to ban handguns wasn't being ruled out.
Started a couple weeks ago with this

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2019/0...an_a_23723860/
__________________
Quote:
Tkachuk is more like Marchand than the other guys though. He's really ****ing good. He's just a total butthole.
Unknown Kings fan
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-24-2019, 10:41 AM   #2014
Shazam
Franchise Player
 
Shazam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Memento Mori
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99 View Post
Broken country is broken.
I'll say it once, I'll say it again.

Alberta needs to form the Alberta Revenue Agency. Alberta collects all taxes, and then Trudeau can come and get the money.

In the meantime, the value of Canadian debt will plummet. Let's see if Morneau understands how bonds work. Probably not.
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
Shazam is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Shazam For This Useful Post:
Old 05-24-2019, 10:44 AM   #2015
llwhiteoutll
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ark2 View Post
Do you think they would just confiscate firearms instead without offering compensation? Is the government even allowed to do that?
I doubt they would outright confiscate them, but the government could mandate their surrender without compensation. It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

The more likely scenario is the one I described earlier. Move all the affected guns to the prohibited list, then simply not issue ATTs for their use. Your options as an owner at that point are limited to either giving them up or keeping them in a safe until you die. The only thing that would hamper this method is the right to appeal the revocation of a registration. So a few hundred thousand revocations would need to be issued and then a certain percentage stayed once an appeal is filed, good luck getting the courts to settle 100,000 cases quickly.

Last edited by llwhiteoutll; 05-24-2019 at 10:49 AM.
llwhiteoutll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:48 AM   #2016
Makarov
#1 Goaltender
 
Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Moscow
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shazam View Post
I'll say it once, I'll say it again.

Alberta needs to form the Alberta Revenue Agency. Alberta collects all taxes, and then Trudeau can come and get the money.

In the meantime, the value of Canadian debt will plummet. Let's see if Morneau understands how bonds work. Probably not.
The federal government said "no" to Quebec when Quebec proposed this (and Quebec already collects its own provincial income taxes). Not sure why the feds would say "yes" to Alberta.

Although it sounds like a Conservative government might be more supportive (although its much easier to express support for such an idea from opposition).
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
Makarov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 10:52 AM   #2017
Shazam
Franchise Player
 
Shazam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Memento Mori
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov View Post
The federal government said "no" to Quebec when Quebec proposed this (and Quebec already collects its own provincial income taxes). Not sure why the feds would say "yes" to Alberta.

Although it sounds like a Conservative government might be more supportive (although its much easier to express support for such an idea from opposition).
The federal gov't could've said "no" to all the #### that BC's doing to stop the pipeline, but here we are.

The feds didn't actually say no to Quebec, they've just begged them not to do it. Constitutionally there's really nothing stopping any province from collecting federal taxes since the wording is so loose.

They've moved the bar, Alberta should take advantage.
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
Shazam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 11:06 AM   #2018
Makarov
#1 Goaltender
 
Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Moscow
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shazam View Post
The federal gov't could've said "no" to all the #### that BC's doing to stop the pipeline, but here we are.

The feds didn't actually say no to Quebec, they've just begged them not to do it. Constitutionally there's really nothing stopping any province from collecting federal taxes since the wording is so loose.

They've moved the bar, Alberta should take advantage.
What would be Alberta's authority to collect federal tax from me? What could Alberta possibly do to enforce my non-payment of federal income tax (seeing as it lacks any constitutional or legislative authority to collect those taxes)? And what would prevent the federal government from taking enforcement action against me under the Income Tax act if I failed to remit my income tax (or if my employer failed to remit income tax) to the federal government, as required by law?
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
Makarov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 11:08 AM   #2019
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

I seriously have my doubts that the Federal Government would really allow provinces to collect Federal taxes and administer transfers.


Its way too big of a possibility to hold that over the head of the Federal Government.
__________________
Just when you think you have the answers, I change the questions
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 11:12 AM   #2020
Oling_Roachinen
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shazam View Post
The federal gov't could've said "no" to all the #### that BC's doing to stop the pipeline, but here we are.
No they can't. They have a right to challenge it in court and follow the judicial process. The federal government can't take that away willy-nilly.
Oling_Roachinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:35 PM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016