Canada has banned so-called assault weapons, right? It’s something many here in the United States would like to see us do as well. The problem, even in a country without Second Amendment protections, is that there’s always going to be a downside to any measure you care to pass. It’s either so loose that anyone can get around it, or it’s so strict that it’s going to do other things you may not intend for it to do.
One Canadian gun owner shared what the law is trying to take from him, recently.
That’s quite an interesting piece. Everything matches, and it’s an IBM M1 carbine? That’s pretty rare, from my understanding, meaning that it’s a piece of history that’s rather unusual.
So, his choices are to hand it over and let the government destroy a piece of history, have it rendered inoperable, which is still destroying a piece of history in my book, or he could spend 10 years in prison.
The history buff in me is outraged that this is even a thing, to say nothing of the gun nut in me. This should never be the case. No one should have to decide between preserving a piece of history that was perfectly legal a short time ago and prison. Everything about this is wrong.
And some people would love to see us in that exact same situation.
I’ve got an SKS that my father brought back from Vietnam. It’s fully functional, but it’s a piece of family history because my father, a Navy Seabee, actually went out on patrol with a group of Marines specifically to shoot a Viet Cong sniper to get that rifle for my uncle. When my uncle passed, it came to me. That’s history.
And while there are a lot of so-called assault weapon bans that gun would survive, I’d hate to be in a position this guy is in with his M1 carbine.
This guy has never hurt a soul with that gun. I’ve never hurt anyone with my SKS. You out there have never hurt anyone with any historic firearms you might own.
Yet we’re also expected to pay for the tiny number of vile criminals who seem to think the rules shouldn’t apply to them.
While the cost to history is far from the worst thing that could happen here in the event Congress somehow passed a ban similar to Canada’s, it’s still one of the many hidden costs that anti-gunners will never address. They don’t want people thinking of the loss of history, of how the weapons that were used to fight one of the greatest evils in history were then later placed in the hands of American citizens for their own personal use, and many of these laws will take them out of those same hands, despite no threat to anyone.
History isn’t just what’s in museums. It’s what’s in our homes and our lives.
I’m sad to see any history destroyed, especially for politics, but far too few seem to grok that history should remain, for good or ill, and not covered up because it makes you feel icky.
Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.
Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here

13 Comments
This isn’t just about guns—it’s about the slippage of rights. Once they start taking historical items, what’s next?
It’s frustrating when policies don’t consider the cultural or historical value of certain items. Laws should be smart, not just strict.
The article makes a good point—loose laws leave loopholes, but strict ones can lead to absurd outcomes. Is there a middle ground?
The video mentioned in the article is eye-opening. It’s terrible to think a collector could face prison just for owning a rare firearm.
The article raises valid concerns about unintended consequences of strict gun laws. History should be respected, not erased.
I wonder how many ordinary Canadians realize the impact of this ban on collectors and history buffs. Not all guns are ‘assault weapons.’
This is a tough situation for gun owners who value historical firearms. It’s a balance between public safety and preserving heritage.
Governments often act like history starts the day their policies take effect. That’s a dangerous mindset for any society.
I’m no gun enthusiast, but taking away historical weapons seems excessive. What’s the point of destroying a piece of history?
The IBM M1 Carbine is a piece of history. Destroying it for the sake of a gun ban feels like a step too far.
Every time governments impose strict bans, it shows how hard it is to control something without unintended fallout. Will this really stop crime?
I can’t imagine having to choose between jail and surrendering a family heirloom. This ban is overreaching.
Canada’s ban seems extreme, especially when so many other countries manage gun ownership without such drastic measures. Is this really necessary?