After 141 years of Confederation Canada is in need of fundamental change in how we elect our Government and how our Government functions. Our Rights are eroded daily. Making them mere illusions. Rights belong to individual people, not the Parliaments of this Country and Provinces
Saturday, November 12, 2011
An Epic Fail, Our Firearms Control Program
Bill C-68 which became our firearms control program was created out of hype and hysteria; furthermore it was an overt act of fraud when it was put through Parliament to ensure passage. It divided the Country along geographic and urban/rural lines. In short everyone took leave of their senses.
The net end result of the Firearms Control program; it is a criminal offence in Canada to possess a firearm bottom line; regardless whether you have owned them for years. Like all criminal offences in Canada the statute must provide a defence to the charge; it does so in the form of a licence; you must have a licence to possess firearms in Canada lest you face the full force of the statute. What is not commonly known though is that this defence provided must be available to the accused. Which presents an interesting proposition.
Say that I was a career criminal with a lengthy criminal record including assault. I am found in possession of a firearm; I would be undoubtedly be charged under section 91 and 92 of the criminal code of Canada. This would be the bare minimum the Crown usually uses a scatter gun approach to prosecution(pardon the pun) lay as many charges as possible in hopes of intimidating the accused into a plea bargain. Be that as it may however the main charge could be beaten and the net end result would be that section 91 and 92 become of no force or effect because they are unconstitutional (R. v. Morgentaler) provided that there was not a pre-existing court ordered prohibition for possession. I would wager that any charge where an authorization of some form that is dependant upon having a valid licence would be considered null and void. I believe it will be only a matter of time before a sharp ambitious criminal lawyer hits upon this and defends one of these thugs with this defence and wins.
I say thug only because no legitimate firearms owner would ever get a fair trial in Canada. This is why I haven't challenged the Criminal Code on this basis; though hypothetically I could obtain a black market prohibited firearm either handgun or other type of prohibited firearm like a sub machine gun and invite the authorities to arrest me. Not having the magic grandfathered status to have a licence for such I could not possibly ever have a valid licence for them; since the defence is a licence that I could not obtain the defence is "illusionary" the statute is invalid. Though I would not risk such a venture solely because the "good guys" don't play by the rules of fair play. I would find myself defending 50 charges stemming from the single offence. Given my activist activities on the internet this too would be used against me. This isn't paranoia I have been witness to such activities by our "good guys" I have also studied the case law over the past 4 years it never ends well for the challenger.
All this notwithstanding I put to you a question and an appeal to logic and reason. The cost of implementing the firearms control program has cost in excess of 2 billion dollars the true costs of the program will never be known because the Chretien Government made them Cabinet secrets; further more the cost of operating the program runs in the neighbourhood of 130 million dollars per year. It has stripped all firearms owners of their constitutional rights and safeguards simply because they complied with the program; whereas your average street thug has all his intact simply because he did not comply with the firearms program and is free to obtain whatever firearm their heart desires completely illegally and authorities would have to obtain a search warrant even to find their firearms. They can't get a search warrant for known drug houses why would they be able to get one for this? 2 million firearms owners out of 7 million complied; 7 million out of 21 million firearms were registered; this does not include criminals because criminals are not troubled by such things as obeying the Criminal Code.
So I put it to: The firearms act was intended to end all gun violence it has not. People still get shot whether the firearm is registered or the shooter has a licence or not. DEAD is DEAD this is one statistic that no one can argue with. The firearms Control Program has failed to end this; it has failed to save "one life" Therefore is it not time to scrap it and start from scratch?
Is it not time to really look at the real problems like organized gangs, rather than ordinary citizens who own firearms? Is it not time to put our tax dollars into effective community programs to eliminate criminality, rather than chasing honest people for paper crimes?
The Demise of the Firearms Registry
It's only worth one cheer! The draconian Firearms Control Program will still be in full operation the day after C-19 becomes statutory. It will still be a criminal offence for ordinary Canadians to have lawful firearms without a licence. I would like at this time to assure all advocates of gun control that WE'RE NOT DONE YET!! We will not rest until this bad statute is finished, and become a memory.
As predicted by "we" "paranoid" "gun nuts" right on cue the Coalition For Gun Control have started their campaign of fear; they have started planting the idea that with the loss of the long gun registry it will mean "high powered" "deadly accurate up to a KM" sniper rifles will be de-registered.
Among the firearms community there is a divide those of us who figured out that if you can ban one type of firearm you can ban any type of firearm, and those who think that their firearm is safe just because they are hunters and none of their guns are a problem. We call these firearms owners "Fudds" after the Warner Brothers character Elmer Fudd. To say the least it is a very derogatory term. The Fudds have long held that their firearms are not the problem that they only hunt with them so on so forth; we have been telling the Fudds "yes you're right they won't come after your deer rifle, but they will come after your high powered sniper rifle". Well as if we had been watching a "future TV" it happens CCGC releases the fear campaign "High Powered Sniper Rifles Will Be De-registered." For the non firearms owner I will explain; any hunting rifle with a scope can be called a sniper rifle. Firearms manufacturers have spent thousands if not millions of dollars in research to develop hunting rifles that are more and more accurate for hunters, police and military. What is not commonly know by someone who has never shot a firearm is that the rifle is only one part of the equation; it might be of the perfect design and precision it still requires hundreds of hours and thousands of rounds of ammunition to become a consistent marksmen. It requires carefully controlled breathing an understanding of ballistic trajectory and the effects of wind to hit a target even at a hundred yards. No one can pick up a rifle and become an instant Hawkeye; even with the high tech rifles of today.
To put it succinctly it is pure Coalition for gun control propaganda.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Such Hypocrisy!
Item- It seems one of Canada's pro firearms organizations has been conferring with SATAN. in laymen terms the NRA. About? Take a guess,,,if you guessed how to fight the gun control orgs and how to effectively lobby give yourself a cheroot..Imagine two pro firearms orgs comparing notes....Of course it has all the "we hate America " set aghast and are calling on the Ghost of Pierre T. to smite Stephan Harper...How dare they meddle in Canadian politics....
Of Course there is not mention of IANSA and the Canadian Coalition for Gun Controls long standing love affair..IANSA this org is just plain anti firearm and has been lobbying the U.N. to get everyone to sign a disarmament treaty..that is to say remove individual firearms ownership completely so that only police and military have guns...Just as an FYI they are well funded by the likes of George Soros..Another foreign National billionaire who happens to despise Capitalism, though it has been very kind to him.....but that is not his worse crime,
You see Mr Soros is/was a Jew. During WW II in order to survive he turned on his fellow Jews he turned them into the SS..worse still he feels no guilt about that...I would call him the most dangerous man on the planet..He is incredibly rich and has no conscience..
But hey instead of seeing things for what they are the lib left media will over look that. and keep howling at anyone that dare challenges their view
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Dec 6 L'Ecole Polytechnique, emotional rhetoric to a political end
I would like to take some time to speak of "EMOTION" This event generates emotions, however it was emotion that created the tragedy to begin with. Indeed Gamil Gharbi(aka Marc Lepine) was a seriously emotionally disturbed young man, with a hatred of feminists. He took this hatred to its ultimate conclusion and committed the heinous act he did. In the end he took his own life leaving no one to be culpable for the crime, no one to stand trial and be held responsible.
I believe this created a vacuum in the psyche of the nation, and nature abhors a vacuum. To replace Gharbi we turned to the only tangible thing left behind, his gun. Guns became the focus of our outrage, emotion created a storm. The rational was if there were no guns in private hands this would not happen again. If only there had been laws in place controlling firearms this would not have happened.
There is a large problem with this, emotions are irrational, emotions get people into trouble more often than not. Spur of the moment emotional responses always have dire consequence. It causes people to do things that in sober rational second thought to say things like "I wish I hadn't done that" or "I should of thought before I acted.".
In this instance in light of the events of L'Ecole Polytechnique cause the then Government of Kim Campbell to amend existing law. Only one act of these amendments made any rational sense, the requirement for safety training. The rest were mere feel good accomplish nothing regulations. Enter Wendy Cukier and the Coalitions for Gun Control. They were behind the scenes lobbying, their ideas were given fertile ground with the emerging reorganized Liberal Party under Jean Chretien.
The opportunity not being lost on him campaigned on a strong gun control platform. Using L'Ecole Polytechnique to their advantage and the public disgust in the Mulroney Governance of the Country. This was enough to cause women and feminist not to vote for and elect Canada's first woman Prime Minister.
Moving on to ethics and morality. In a nutshell is the difference between right and wrong and knowing it. In a rational objective way using reason and logic. Is it right to punish someone who has committed no crime or done no wrong? .. Is it right to push your beliefs on others? ... Is it right to continually support something that you know has not solved the problem but if you admit you are wrong you will look bad? tougher question eh? Is is right to lie in order to support this, is it right to lie to others? If you have answered "Yes" to any of those questions, it is a safe bet you slither rather than walk upright.
It is immoral to punish people that have done no wrong, it is equally immoral to blame them for something they did not do or had anything to do with. It is immoral to cast a wide disparaging opinion on a community because you disagree with their lawful past times and pursuits. It is most immoral to lie to people who have put their trust in you in order to save face.
That is pretty much what the Liberal Government of Jean Chretien and CFGC did when they enacted the Firearms Act(c-68). In fact the Liberals knew it was their 1977 law that made sure no one could stop Gharbi. They(the Liberal Party) and the CFGC continue to lie about it. You would have to be lying to say that a mere law can stop an insane act. Worse still the law they enacted guaranteed it would happen again..Another emotionally disturbed fellow did attempt to repeat L'Ecole Polytechnique.
Kimveer Gill went to Dawson College he had a licence and he had registered firearms. He then broke every regulation in the firearms act and opened fire on students there. What stopped the repeat of Polytechnique was 2 ARMED Police officers who just happen to be there. That is correct it requires a gun to stop a gunman. Dawson College is positive proof of the failure of Gun Control. I notice it is rarely mentioned..
Thursday, March 26, 2009
You Be The Judge
and the Firearms Act If you are seriously worried compare the changes proposed against the old laws and regs. It does boil down to common sense. And when you come down to it is a piece a paper an obstacle for someone committing a crime? If they were worried about that they would not be planning to break the law in the first place.
PRIVATE MEMBERS BILL
MP: Garry Breitkreuz Party: Conservative
Date: Monday, 09 February 2009
An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (registration of firearms)
This enactment amends Criminal Code and the Firearms Act to modify the conditions required to obtain a registration certificate for firearms. It also directs the Auditor General to conduct a cost-benefit analysis once every five years to determine whether existing firearms control measures have been effective at improving public safety, reducing violent crime and keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals.
Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
CRIMINAL CODE
1. (1) Subsections 91(1) and (2) of the Criminal Code are replaced by the following
Unauthorized possession of firearm
91. (1) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a firearm without being the holder of
(a) a licence under which the person may possess it; and
(b) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.
Unauthorized possession of prohibited weapon or restricted weapon
(2) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, other than a replica firearm, or any prohibited ammunition, without being the holder of a licence under which the person may possess it.
(2) Subparagraph 91(4)(b)(ii) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(ii) obtains a licence under which the person may possess it and, in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.
(3) Subsection 91(5) of the Act is repealed.
2. (1) Subsections 92(1) and (2) of the Act are replaced by the following:
92. (1) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a firearm knowing that the person is not the holder of
(a) a licence under which the person may possess it; and
(b) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.
Possession of prohibited weapon, device or ammunition knowing its possession is unauthorized
(2) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, other than a replica firearm, or any prohibited ammunition knowing that the person is not the holder of a licence under which the person may possess it.
(2) Subparagraph 92(4)(b)(ii) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(ii) obtains a licence under which the person may possess it and, in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it.
(3) Subsections 92(5) and (6) of the Act are repealed.
3. The portion of subsection 93(1) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:
Possession at unauthorized place
93. (1) Subject to subsection (3), every person commits an offence who, being the holder of an authorization or a licence under which the person may possess a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or prohibited ammunition, possesses the firearm, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device or prohibited ammunition at a place that is
4. (1) The portion of subsection 94(1) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:
Unauthorized possession in motor vehicle
94. (1) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), every person commits an offence who is an occupant of a motor vehicle in which the person knows there is a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, other than a replica firearm, or any prohibited ammunition, unless
(2) Subparagraphs 94(1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act are replaced by the following:
(i) the person or any other occupant of the motor vehicle is the holder of
(A) a licence under which the person or other occupant may possess the firearm, and
(B) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, an authorization and a registration certificate for it,
(ii) the person had reasonable grounds to believe that any other occupant of the motor vehicle was the holder of
(A) a licence under which that other occupant may possess the firearm, and
(B) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, an authorization and a registration certificate for it.
(3) Subsection 94(5) of the Act is repealed.
5. The portion of subsection 95(1) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:
Possession of prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition
95. (1) Subject to subsection (3), every person commits an offence who, in any place, possesses a loaded prohibited firearm or restricted firearm, or an unloaded prohibited firearm or restricted firearm together with readily accessible ammunition that is capable of being discharged in the firearm, without being the holder of
6. Subsections 117.03(1) and (2) of the Act are replaced by the following:
Seizure on failure to produce authorization
117.03 (1) Despite section 117.02, a peace officer who finds
(a) a person in possession of a firearm who fails, on demand, to produce, for inspection by the peace officer, an authorization or a licence under which the person may lawfully possess the firearm and, in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate for it, or
(b) a person in possession of a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any prohibited ammunition who fails, on demand, to produce, for inspection by the peace officer, an authorization or a licence under which the person may lawfully possess it,
may seize the firearm, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device or prohibited ammunition unless its possession by the person in the circumstances in which it is found is authorized by any provision of this Part, or the person is under the direct and immediate supervision of another person who may lawfully possess it.
Return of seized thing on production of authorization
(2) If a person from whom anything is seized under subsection (1) claims the thing within fourteen days after the seizure and produces for inspection by the peace officer by whom it was seized, or any other peace officer having custody of it,
(a) a licence under which the person is lawfully entitled to possess it, and
(b) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, an authorization and registration certificate for it,
the thing shall without delay be returned to that person.
FIREARMS ACT
7. Subparagraph 4(a)(i) of the Firearms Act is replaced by the following:
(i) licences for firearms and authorizations and registration certificates for prohibited firearms or restricted firearms, under which persons may possess firearms in circumstances that would otherwise constitute an offence under subsection 91(1), 92(1), 93(1) or 95(1) of the Criminal Code,
8. (1) Subsection 7(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (d)
(e) is or was in possession of a non-restricted license and possesses one or more firearms and does not require a licence to acquire other firearms
(2) Subsection 7(2) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (b)
(c) is or was in possession of a restricted license and possesses one or more firearms and does not require a licence to acquire other firearms
9. Section 12 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (6):
(6.01) A particular individual is eligible to hold a licence authorizing that particular individual to possess a handgun referred to in subsection (6.1) if that individual had applied for a registration certificate on or before December 31, 2002.
10. (1) The portion of subsection 19(1) before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:
19.(1) An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess prohibited firearms or restricted firearms shall be authorized to transport a prohibited firearm or restricted firearm between two or more places for any lawful purpose, including,
11. (2) Subsection 19(2) of the Act is repealed.
12. (1) Paragraph 23(1)(b) of the English version of the Act is replaced by the following:
(b) the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee is not authorized to acquire and possess that kind of firearm;
(2) Paragraphs 23(1)(c) to (f) of the Act are replaced by the following:
(c) in the case of a transfer to an individual, the transferor verifies the validity of the transferees Firearms Licence with the Canada Firearms Centre, and obtains a reference number for the inquiry;
(d) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, the transferor informs the Registrar of the transfer and a new registration certificate is issued in accordance with this Act; and;
(e) the prescribed conditions are met.
13. Subparagraph 33(a)(ii) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(ii) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, lends the registration certificate for it to the borrower; or
14. Paragraph 34(a) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(a) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, the transferor lends the registration certificate for it to the borrower; and
15. Paragraph 35.1(1)(b) of the Act, as enacted by section 27 of chapter 8 of the Statutes of Canada, 2003, is replaced by the following:
(b) the individual produces a licence authorizing him or her to acquire and possess that kind of firearm and, in the case of a restricted firearm, satisfies the customs officer that the individual holds a registration certificate for the firearm;
16. Subsection 36(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:
Temporary licence and registration certificate
36. (1) A declaration that is confirmed under paragraph 35(1)(b) has the same effect after the importation of the firearm as a licence authorizing the non-resident to possess only that firearm and, in the case of a restricted firearm, as a registration certificate for the firearm until
(a) the expiry of sixty days after the importation, in the case of a firearm that is neither a prohibited firearm nor a restricted firearm; or
(b) the earlier of the expiry of sixty days after the importation and the expiry of the authorization to transport, in the case of a restricted firearm.
17. Subparagraph 38(1)(a)(ii) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(ii) produces his or her licence and, in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, the registration certificate for the firearm; and
18. Paragraphs 40(1)(b) and (c) of the Act, as enacted by section 30 of chapter 8 of the Statutes of Canada, 2003, are replaced by the following:
(b) the individual produces a licence authorizing him or her to possess that kind of firearm;
(c) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, the individual satisfies the customs officer that the individual holds a registration certificate for the firearm; and
19. Section 41 of the Act, as enacted by section 31 of chapter 8 of the Statutes of Canada, 2003, is replaced by the following:
Temporary registration certificate
41. An authorization that is confirmed in accordance with paragraph 40(2)(e) has the same effect as a registration certificate for a restricted firearm until a registration certificate is issued for it.
20. Paragraph 44(a) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(a) in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, holds the registration certificate for the firearm;
21. Section 60 of the Act is replaced by the following:
Registration certificates and authorizations to export or import
60. The Registrar is responsible for issuing registration certificates for prohibited firearms and restricted firearms and assigning firearms identification numbers to them and for issuing authorizations to export and authorizations to import firearms.
22.(1) Paragraph 64(1)(a) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(a) ten years after the birthday of the holder next following the day on which it is issued, and
(2) Section 64 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (1)
Extension period
(1.01) Despite subsection (1), an individual who has not applied to renew a license by the expiration of the period for which it is expressed to be issued shall receive an automatic extension of the period for which the licence is expressed to be issued by an additional period of up to two years in order to permit the individual to apply for a renewal
Conditions of extension
(1.02) An individual who receives an extension under subsection (1.01) may not acquire any new firearms or ammunition until his or her license has been renewed.
23. Subsections 65(1) to (3) are replaced by the following:
Term of authorizations
65. (1) Subject to subsection (4), an authorization expires on the expiration of the period for which it is expressed to be issued
24. The portion of section 66 of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:
Term of registration certificates
66. A registration certificate for a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm expires when
25. Paragraph 71(1)(a) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(a) may revoke a registration certificate for a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm for any good and sufficient reason; and
26. Subsection 72(5) of the Act is replaced by the following:
Disposal of firearms — registration certificate
(5) A notice given under subsection (1) in respect of a registration certificate for a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm must specify a reasonable period during which the applicant for or holder of the registration certificate may deliver to a peace officer or a firearms officer or a chief firearms officer or otherwise lawfully dispose of the firearm to which the registration certificate relates and during which sections 91, 92 and 94 of the Criminal Code do not apply to the applicant or holder.
27. Paragraphs 83(1)(a) and (b) of the Act are replaced by the following:
(a) every licence, every registration certificate for a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm and every authorization that is issued or revoked by the Registrar;
(b) every application for a licence, a registration certificate for a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm or an authorization that is refused by the Registrar;
28. The Act is amended by adding the following after section 97:
97.1 The Auditor General shall be directed, every five years, to conduct a cost-benefit analysis on each existing firearms control measure to determine its effectiveness at improving public safety, reducing violent crime and keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals
29. Section 105 of the Act is replaced by the following:
Demand to produce firearm
105. An inspector who believes on reasonable grounds that a person possesses a firearm may, by demand made to that person, require that person, within a reasonable time after the demand is made, to produce the firearm in the manner specified by the inspector for the purpose of verifying the serial number or other identifying features of the firearm and of ensuring that, in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, the person is the holder of the registration certificate for it.
30. The portion of section 109 of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:
Punishment
109. Every person who commits an offence under section 106, 107 or 108, who contravenes subsection 29(1) or who contravenes a regulation made under paragraph 117(d), (e), (f), (g), (i), (j), (l), (m), (m.1) or (n) the contravention of which has been made an offence under paragraph 117(o)
31. Section 112 of the Act is repealed.
32. Sections 114 and 115 of the Act are replaced by the following:
Failure to deliver up revoked licence, etc.
114. Every person commits an offence who, being the holder of a licence, a registration certificate for a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm or an authorization that is revoked, does not deliver it up to a peace officer or firearms officer without delay after the revocation.
Punishment
115. Every person who commits an offence under section 113 or 114 is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
33. (1) Section 117 of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (m):
(m.1) regulating the keeping and destruction of records by businesses in relation to firearms that are neither prohibited firearms nor restricted firearms;
(2) Paragraph 117(o) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(o) creating offences consisting of contraventions of the regulations made under paragraph (d), (e), (f), (g), (i), (j), (k.1), (k.2), (l), (m), (m.1) or (n);
34. Subsection 119(3) of the Act is replaced by the following:
Exception — urgency
(3) A regulation made under paragraph 117(i), (l), (m), (m.1), (n), (o), (q), (s) or (t) may be made without being laid before either House of Parliament if the federal Minister is of the opinion that the making of the regulation is so urgent that section 118 should not be applicable in the circumstances.
COORDINATING AMENDMENTS
35. (1) In this section, the “other Act” means An Act to amend the Criminal Code (firearms) and the Firearms Act, being chapter 8 of the Statutes of Canada, 2003.
(2) On the later of the day on which section 13 of this Act comes into force and the day on which section 28 of the other Act comes into force — or, if those days are the same day, then on that day — subsection 36(1) of the Firearms Act is replaced by the following:
Temporary licence and registration certificate
36. (1) A declaration that is confirmed under paragraph 35(1)(d) has the same effect after the importation of the firearm as a licence authorizing the non-resident to possess that kind of firearm, and in the case of a restricted firearm, as a registration certificate for the firearm, for a period of
(a) in the case of a declaration where a report referred to in subparagraph 35(1)(b)(i) was produced, one year after the importation; or
(b) in the case of any other declaration, 60 days after the importation.
(3) On the later of the day on which section 14 of this Act comes into force and the day on which section 29 of the other Act comes into force — or, if those days are the same day, then on that day — paragraph 38(1)(a) of the Firearms Act is replaced by the following:
(a) holds a licence to possess that kind of firearm and, in the case of a prohibited firearm or a restricted firearm, a registration certificate and an authorization to transport the firearm; and
Friday, March 20, 2009
Another Informed Voice
Bellow is a letter to the Prime Minister written by Wendy Cukier of the Coalition for Gun Control. I have read the proposed bill c301 and have to ask did Ms Cukier even read the bill? Or is it the usual modus oporendi of the Coalition for Gun Control to make it up as they go along. To be frank and honest about the proposed bill it doesn't even come close to dismantling gun control in Canada. As usual there is a great deal of rhetoric and little real substance to the CCGC position. The proposed bill would only eliminate the registry of shotguns and rifles. It would still require one to have the proper licence and background checks.
There are some other inclusions into the bill that fall under what a normal person would regard as "Common Sense" issues. Whether you realize it or not some people have a licence for what are known as 12(x)s or prohibited firearms. They have these because the law has allowed them viz a grandfathering clause in the law. They are in lawful possession of these firearms. The previous Liberal Government pulled their special authorizations to shoot these on a licenced range. In pulling this authorization they effectively made having these firearms pointless. They did this for no other reason than they could but could not lawfully suspend their licences without just cause.
The goal of the firearms act is disarmament of the civilian population one class at a time. Bill 301 would restore what was already lawful before it would not create anything new. Another item to be streamlined was the registering of pistols, revolvers, and short barrelled long guns known as the restricted class. Instead of having a piece of paper for each it would be reduced to one piece of paper for all of them you own. Another item was the authorization to transport again each individual firearm in the restricted class has to have an ATT for each this was to be streamlined into one for all. No different than your automobile insurance you get one slip with all the cars you have insured on one pink slip.
These are only reductions in the amount of paper work that must be processed. It is premised in the fact that if you have a valid licence for the class of firearm it is logical that you are qualified to possess it and transport to the range, the gunsmith, and home. No where in the bill does it do away with the registration of the restricted or prohibited classes of firearms. Nor does the bill do away with the rigorous screening process in order to be licenced.
To have a restricted licence you must pass three levels of screening and have no criminal record. The first is local the second is cross Canada the third is with Interpol. To purchase and register a firearm in this class you must be a member in good standing of an approved gun club. So contrary to popular belief that any person can walk into Walmart or the corner gun shop and buy a gun and walk out with it. It is very strictly controlled and will remain so.
Now if you take for gospel what is being said about firearms in the Mainstream Media and the various gun control orgs you would be lead to believe that blood is running in the streets and guns need to be removed from society. However if you look at the actual numbers that statscan compiled you will actually be amazed. In all of Canada there were 594 homicides, this includes all methods. 188 shootings, 190 stabbings 116 beatings, 50 strangulations, 4 burnings/suffocations, 19 other methods, 27 not known, in 2007. 188 people shot sounds like a great deal but when you compare the total of the other categories 406 in total 188 isn't even half of the others and and is not even a third of total homicides. Putting it into perspective 406 people were murdered without guns.
I will not get into a battle of the sexes and who hurts who more. That is just childish and places a higher value of one human being over another. To me violence is violence and that is not acceptable in a civil society. It is no more acceptable than what a feminist of note suggested some years ago. That all males between the ages of 15-45 ought to be incarcerated in order to prevent violence against women. Yet these humanitarians fail to mention anything about violent women.
The one thing the statscan report makes clear about domestic homicide is the perpetrator has a long history of spousal abuse. By law they would be prohibited from owning a firearm. However it does not seem to impair their ability to kill the one they claim to love. It seems by Ms Cukier it is better they be beaten, stabbed or strangled than shot the sad fact of the statscan study is domestic violence has remained steady and unchanged 7% of all crime. Another sad fact is among suicides, her gun law hasn't changed that number either in the absence of a gun they chose another method. I really wonder where this woman's gets her sensibilities. Personally I would rather take a bullet than being beaten to death.
Friday, March 6, 2009
The Right Honourable Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON
Re : Do not dismantle gun control. Defeat Bill C-301 on April 1, 2009 Dear Sir,
The signatories to this letter are deeply concerned about Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz’s Private Member Bill C-301, which will relax controls on restricted and prohibited guns (including handguns, assault weapons and machine guns) as well as eliminate the registration of rifles and shotguns. Please ensure your party defeats this proposed legislation at second reading on April 1, 2009.
You have stated your commitment to ending violence against women, most recently in the letter many of us received on December 6th 2008. Our gun law is not only a monument to those who were killed on December 6, 1989 at l’École Polytechnique, but is recognized worldwide as an effective tool for reducing gun violence targeting women. Commitment to ending violence against women requires more than wearing a white ribbon on December 6th. As the 20th anniversary of the Montreal massacre approaches, it would be a travesty if the party you lead helps dismantle the gun law we all worked so hard to pass.
Our laws have made Canada safer.
· In 1991, more than 1400 Canadians were killed with guns. Now it is fewer than 800.
· The 2007 rate of murders with rifles and shotguns has dropped by more than 78% from 1991.
· Murders of women with guns have plummeted from 85 in 1991 to 32 in
2004 (the numbers of
murders without guns have not dropped as significantly).
· Suicide rates, particularly among youth, have also declined.
Policing, public health and victims’ organizations across Canada – including those from Polytechnique and Dawson College - support sensible gun control. On behalf of millions of women in Canada, so do we. As the Alberta Court of Appeal noted, gun control is a women’s
issue: women represent a small
percentage of Canada’s 2 million gun owners. But they account for a high percentage of the victims of gun violence.
Mandatory screening, licensing and renewal for all firearm owners as well as registration of all firearms are important measures for protecting the safety of women.
Renewable licenses reduce
the risk that individuals with a history of domestic violence will have access to firearms.
Registration ensures that the police can take preventative action. The proposed law extends the licensing period for 10 years for all gun owners (including those who own handguns and assault weapons), reducing the opportunities for review and ensuring that information is up to date. Canada’s licensing system, with spousal renewal, is essential for the safety of women.
Do not help undermine it and jeopardize our safety and the safety of our children.
Continued from page 1
Rifles and shotguns are the firearms most often used to kill women and children in domestic violence. Access to a firearm is the fifth leading predictor of female homicide in domestic violence. The proposed law also eliminates the requirement to register rifles and shotguns. The Supreme Court underscored the importance of registration as a means of enforcing the licensing provisions of the law. If a licensed owner can buy as many guns as they want without having their name associated with the guns through the registry, there is little to prevent them from giving those guns to individuals without licenses.
Information about the guns
individuals owns is essential to enforcing prohibition orders and supporting preventative action by Canada’s police agencies; they currently use the registry 9400 times per day. There are many powerful semi-automatic firearms currently classified as unrestricted firearms, including the Ruger Mini-14 used at Polytechnique. Repeatedly, inquests into the murders of women and children recommended the licensing of gun owners and registration of guns to prevent further tragedies.
There is no place for military and tactical weapons in the hands of civilians. Almost 400,000 Canadians signed a petition calling for a ban on these weapons and most countries in the world prohibit civilian possession of fully automatic and semi automatic weapons. The shooting at Dawson college taught us a bitter lesson =E
2 that the lists of prohibited
firearms have not been
updated since the law passed in 1995. We want more control on these weapons, not less. Bill
C-301 relaxes controls allowing fully automatic weapons to be taken to shooting ranges.
Canadian women continue to support overwhelmingly the licensing of gun owners and registration of all firearms. Polls have shown that while half of gun owners opposed the law, 77% of people living with a gun owner supported it. Women are rightly concerned about access to rifles and shotguns in cases of domestic violence and suicide:
· 88% of Canadian women killed with guns are killed with a shotgun or rifle, the very guns that opponents of the law say are not the cause of gun violence;
·Access to guns is the fifth highest of 18 risk factors in spousal homicides; · 50% of family homicides end in the suicide of the murderer, indicating that the key to protecting women and children is thorough screening in licensing and licence renewals for gun owners; ·When guns are used there are more likely to be multiple victims, often children; ·Although opposition to gun control is stronger where rates of gun ownership are higher (particularly in rural and western communities), women and children are particularly at risk from guns in the home in these areas.
Let us be clear: the stakes could not be higher for Canadian women.
Ending violence against women
requires more than talk. It requires action. We urge you to lead your party to reduce violence and suicide in our families and our communities, by defeating Bill C-301 on April 1.
Signatories listed on attached page.