- 6,293
- Canada
Can someone help clarify the noise I’m seeing made over the Section 35 exemptions? Section 35 of Canada’s firearms laws has to do with people who hunt to sustain themselves.
From my understanding, this applies most to some native communities.
https://aptnnews.ca/2020/05/01/indi...ottawas-assault-weapons-ban-under-section-35/
What I’m not understanding is whether the exclusion under Section 35 applies only during the 2 year amnesty period (where people can still legally own these weapons, but cannot use them), or if the exclusion is indefinite (or, “until a suitable replacement can be acquired,” whatever that means).
The other aspect that of this that doesn’t quite sit right, is it has been reported that the Nova Scotia killer did not have a gun license, and bought most of his weapons in the US.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...5b524c-8bc4-11ea-80df-d24b35a568ae_story.html
I’m not a gun owner, so don’t really have a dog in this fight, but while what happened in Nova Scotia was a terrible tragedy, this legislation feels like a knee jerk reaction
From my understanding, this applies most to some native communities.
https://aptnnews.ca/2020/05/01/indi...ottawas-assault-weapons-ban-under-section-35/
What I’m not understanding is whether the exclusion under Section 35 applies only during the 2 year amnesty period (where people can still legally own these weapons, but cannot use them), or if the exclusion is indefinite (or, “until a suitable replacement can be acquired,” whatever that means).
The other aspect that of this that doesn’t quite sit right, is it has been reported that the Nova Scotia killer did not have a gun license, and bought most of his weapons in the US.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...5b524c-8bc4-11ea-80df-d24b35a568ae_story.html
I’m not a gun owner, so don’t really have a dog in this fight, but while what happened in Nova Scotia was a terrible tragedy, this legislation feels like a knee jerk reaction