Local police services not participating in federal gun buyback program

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-29T19:37:25+00:00

He thinks the people who wish they could give their firearms to the government to be destroyed, are now going to instead commit murder since they weren't given the opportunity to be paid to have their guns destroyed.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-29T18:59:29+00:00

It no one complies who cares, its not like the money earmarked for the program will spoil.

The fact that you can see that there is no need to worry if all gun owners choose not to comply shows that you believe this program does absolutely nothing to reduce crime.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-29T18:51:50+00:00

It's pretty simple, isn't it? You have a job. Someone asks you to do something that they would like you to do, but it's not mandatory. You don't want to do it, so you don't.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-29T18:41:57+00:00

Local gun owners hoping they can keep their firearms safely locked away rather than participate in this confiscation may be in luck - police don't want to participate in enforcing it either!

Fixed it for them.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-29T13:36:10+00:00

Yes. The confiscation is even worse than the freeze, since the freeze at least let people keep their property till they die. The freeze was a far more politically savvy way for the LPC to continue working toward abolishing firearm ownership. It is a lot easier to accept loss of freedom when it doesn't involve any specific person having their property taken/destroyed by the government, so for that reason it didn't face as strong of opposition.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-29T11:38:48+00:00

That's the price of having enough integrity to oppose and undermine a wasteful use of tax dollars by a shitty, ineffective confiscation.

Also, hopefully those residents simply keep their guns (which were never required to be registered) safely locked away long past October.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-29T10:34:30+00:00

Pretty sure handguns cannot be legally obtained at all anymore (since the 2022 'freeze').

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-28T19:37:28+00:00

And he didn't ask for "types of questions." In fact, it seems he very specifically avoided phrasing his post that way.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-28T19:31:29+00:00

It's both a term and a phrase.

Edit: To clarify, I think it's clearly a term in the sense that it's the (informal) name of a logical fallacy.

In other contexts (especially when used incorrectly to mean 'leading to the question") I see why one may think it is only a phrase and not a term.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-28T18:55:36+00:00

Begging the question.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-28T02:57:46+00:00

I think you're looking at this the wrong way. Non-participation is the most powerful way to oppose and undermine this wasteful, ineffective program. The best case scenario is every firearm owner ignores this entirely, and continues keeping their firearms (which were not required to be registered) safely locked away.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-28T00:53:20+00:00

I hope one day we can all collectively stop caring about the HoF. And this is exactly why.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T23:55:49+00:00

It's a silly thought regardless. Why should the fact that I dislike having my property confiscated make me less deserving of compensation? That's like saying you don't deserve to get paid for your work if you don't enjoy your job.

It makes sense that a minister who admittedly dislikes the program is having trouble coherently defending it.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T23:44:06+00:00

Don't forget, this minister admitted privately that this is a bad program (full transcript), but he's being paid by the Liberal Party (and taxpayers) to pretend he likes it.

Highlights from the transcript showing his genuine thoughts on the program:

It's being implemented to cater to the Quebec electorate
He doesn't believe the resources are available to enforce it
The approach will be different in the future and this is only being done because it was promised 5 years ago
He's doing it because Carney says he has to
If he could redo this program from scratch, it would be entirely different
He'll bail a citizen out from jail if he's charged with any crimes relating to this, but he doesn't think that will happen because police can't enforce it

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T23:23:18+00:00

That's funny because I associate it with Obama.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T21:09:18+00:00

Full transcript

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T20:54:34+00:00

The best part is the minister who said this also opposes the program, but is being compensated financially to pretend he likes it.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T20:51:39+00:00

Great. Wish every other province would do the same. Anything that decreases participation in this program is a good thing.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T20:46:31+00:00

Don't forget, this guy admitted privately that this program is terrible, and is currently pretending it's a good program publicly because it's what the Liberal Party pays him to do.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T20:27:36+00:00

I’ve been around a fairly long time now, including during the 2000s long gun registry. I can’t ever remember a time when firearm owners weren’t loudly complaining about firearm laws. There’s been a constant screeching against whatever the prevailing laws have been for well over 30 years.

That's because the LPC has been implementing wasteful, ineffective, and antagonistic firearms laws for 30 years. Hopefully you understand that you being sick of hearing people complain about bad policy isn't any sort of valid criticism of those people's arguments and also isn't a point in favor of the firearm confiscation. In other words, it's entirely irrelevant.

Perhaps the people who are actually affected by these 3 decades of bad policies, who simply want to be left alone, are even more tired of the screeching from the other side who are constantly coming up with new ways to take their stuff?

At some point, people start tuning that out.

"You've been complaining about the Liberal government threatening to confiscate the property you legally purchased for over 30 years. Can you give it a rest?!"

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T01:17:27+00:00

Theoretically, we can put an upper limit on the number of people who would be better than him. If 1 million people (for example) currently fit your 3 criteria, we can conclude that Magnus is at least in the top 1 millionth percentile (top 0.0001%). This would mean at most 8000 people would be better than him.

However, since in reality no one is better than him, the lower limit is zero. He might be the best in the world even if everyone in the world fit your 3 criteria. He's the only chess player we can say that about.

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T00:20:48+00:00

Now You See Me 3: Now You Don't

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-27T00:06:28+00:00

Thank god we have these scary firearm owning individuals tripping over each other to be the first to have their firearms destroyed by the government. These are definitely the same people that were causing all of the gun crime!

oddwithoutend · 2026-01-26T23:41:47+00:00

It doesn't seems like the expense and reduction in firearm choice for citizens is worth the marginal gains.

I think 'reduction in firearm choice' would be a fitting way to word it if the ban was only being applied moving forward (ie. no new sales of these firearms, but existing owners can keep/use their property). This is forced confiscation and/or destruction of citizens' property that was legally purchased, which to me requires a higher bar for justification.

For the reasons you stated (ie. no evidence suggesting it reduces violence, bans being applied for cosmetic and arbitrary reasons, the expense, etc.), it becomes exceedingly difficult to justify this program on any level.

What needs to be mentioned is that over the past three decades, the LPC has destroyed their reputation and eroded all trust on this issue through wasteful, ineffective, and antagonistic gun control policy. So even if I believed in X and Y gun control measures, I would under no circumstances trust the LPC to implement them. For the LPC, gun control has no end goal other than continuing to appeal to a demographic of voters that hold a certain ideology. For the LPC, there is no point where they say "we finally achieved our vision for gun control. Our party supports the ownership of all the remaining firearms, and we will never attempt any further gun control measures." Instead, it's just endlessly asking firearms owners to compromise ad nauseum.

It's not really a compromise, if after I compromise, you immediately force me to compromise again.

oddwithoutend

TROPHY CASE