• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bzzliteyr said:
Yeah, I am obviously not open carry friendly. I see people suggesting it as a great thing but then realise how many of those people don't have constant weapon handling drills that would make them safe. Combat experience wasn't the good term to use.

I'm with you on unregulated open carry. The selector can flip to R pretty easily when moving around, happened to me a couple of times just getting in and out of the guard tower at the Sper gate.

I just don't see it ever happening that way up here, we like rules and training too much in Canada. Which I think in many ways is a good thing if they are about actual safety, and not arbitrary restrictions on what classification of gun you can shoot in an area that's safe for shooting.
 
29244584_619206041750302_1278049381001461760_n.jpg
 
Bzzliteyr said:
Yeah, I am obviously not open carry friendly. I see people suggesting it as a great thing but then realise how many of those people don't have constant weapon handling drills that would make them safe. Combat experience wasn't the good term to use.

I agree with you.  I don't support open or concealed carry like they have in some US states.  Being on a few Canadian firearms websites and FB pages there are allot of people seem too eager and hot headed to be trusted with that.  Some of my fellow gun owners down right scare me with how they seem to wish for the fall of society or to find themselves in a situation to bust a cap in someone's butt.
 
Halifax Tar said:
I agree with you.  I don't support open or concealed carry like they have in some US states.  Being on a few Canadian firearms websites and FB pages there are allot of people seem too eager and hot headed to be trusted with that.  Some of my fellow gun owners down right scare me with how they seem to wish for the fall of society or to find themselves in a situation to bust a cap in someone's butt.

Absolutely. I've never been a, 'toss everyone a gun and see who's around in five years' kindda person. I'm on the fence over open/concealed.


Whatever testing is involved, a person would first have to make the decision to carry, then take and be successful with the training and testing. Whatever laws are in place, for those that do qualify for concealed in Canada (there are a few), it should be the same for everyone.

" 4 A chief firearms officer shall not issue to an individual an authorization to carry a particular restricted firearm or prohibited handgun that is needed in the circumstances described in section 2 or paragraph 3(a) unless the chief firearms officer determines that

(a) the individual has successfully completed training in firearms proficiency and the use of force that is appropriate for using the firearm in those circumstances; and

(b) the firearm is appropriate in those circumstances."

Full text: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-98-207/FullText.html

I was in Grant's Pass Oregon for a shooting competition about 25-30 years ago. My first exposure to real open carry. Seeing women open carry in sundresses, in the supermarket was certainly an eye opener. Back then, it was a definite deterrent. With about ten or fifteen of those women, in the check out lines, pissed at the world, I would not have ever thought someone would be crazy enough to try rob the place. I was never worried, or felt unsafe, it's just really weird to see for the first time. I have no idea the skill levels. I do know that I didn't see anyone acting hincky or hovering their hands over the pistol, while looking around furtively. They were just normal, everyday folk, doing everyday, ordinary things. I have no idea what the situation there looks like now, but these are their laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Oregon

 
recceguy said:
Absolutely. I've never been a, 'toss everyone a gun and see who's around in five years' kindda person. I'm on the fence over open/concealed.


Whatever testing is involved, a person would first have to make the decision to carry, then take and be successful with the training and testing. Whatever laws are in place, for those that do qualify for concealed in Canada (there are a few), it should be the same for everyone.

" 4 A chief firearms officer shall not issue to an individual an authorization to carry a particular restricted firearm or prohibited handgun that is needed in the circumstances described in section 2 or paragraph 3(a) unless the chief firearms officer determines that

(a) the individual has successfully completed training in firearms proficiency and the use of force that is appropriate for using the firearm in those circumstances; and

(b) the firearm is appropriate in those circumstances."

Full text: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-98-207/FullText.html

I was in Grant's Pass Oregon for a shooting competition about 25-30 years ago. My first exposure to real open carry. Seeing women open carry in sundresses, in the supermarket was certainly an eye opener. Back then, it was a definite deterrent. With about ten or fifteen of those women, in the check out lines, pissed at the world, I would not have ever thought someone would be crazy enough to try rob the place. I was never worried, or felt unsafe, it's just really weird to see for the first time. I have no idea the skill levels. I do know that I didn't see anyone acting hincky or hovering their hands over the pistol, while looking around furtively. They were just normal, everyday folk, doing everyday, ordinary things. I have no idea what the situation there looks like now, but these are their laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Oregon

I know its never going to happen in Canada anyways, any easier than it already is, but if it did I would hope the testing and qualification and background checking would of the highest standard and not what now constitutes PAL/RPAL coursing.
 
Para 4(a) above (highlighted) addresses that. You're looking at Federal Police qualifying standards.
 
Assuming you all saw this: it was only on CTV's main page for a few hours before being moved aside:
Feds to table gun control bill next week, will include measures to boost screening:
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/feds-to-table-gun-control-bill-next-week-will-include-measures-to-boost-screening-sources-1.3844942

"Government sources tell CTV News’ Don Martin that the bill, expected to be tabled Tuesday, will take aim at keeping firearms away from people with mental illness, and out of the hands of those with violent backgrounds.

It is also expected to force gun shop retailers to validate a gun licence before completing the purchase, and to keep the name of gun buyers on file."

"The coming legislation will also leave it to police to make the call on which currently restricted weapons should be put on the prohibition list."
 
I'm curious as to the actual number of crimes that were committed due to the changes the Tories made that are going to be repealed. My gut is telling me 0, and that it's more about campaign promises and lip service than taking an actual stab at firearm crime.

I once had a CSIS officer ask me if a good friend of mine (for whom I was acting as a reference for his security clearance) was a member of any violent groups. I asked if the CAF counted as one and he looked at me perplexed and answered "other than that". Maybe us scary military types won't be allowed to have guns because we're too "violent".
 
The Liberal platform promises included:

repealing changes made by the previous Conservative government around the transportation of restricted and prohibited weapons without a permit

Currently, our ATT is combined with the PAL. If you have a PAL, with restricted, prohibited you can take your PAL and firearm and go to a gunshop, the border, the range, etc. The ATT was a condition of the PAL. The old liebral way was to apply for a paper permit to the CFO, wait for a return call, give them the particulars and they would send you a permit with very strict, time sensitive parameters. Lot's of paper, lots of time, lots of people, lots of money and more onerous red tape for law abiding gun owners. Saying the previous government removed the requirement for the ATT or that you could transport without a permit is a bald faced lie. Plain and simple. It simply returns the liebrals to the place of their original cash grab.

requiring enhanced background checks for people seeking to buy a handgun or other restricted firearms

Not a problem, we already do that, but it'll remain to be seen how they try accomplish this, what they add to it and what recourse a person has when the RCMP get it wrong. I think they will probably be hit with Charter challenges about some privacy regs and stuff. Probably shortly after their announcements.

ensuring people who want to buy a firearm show a validated licence

There is nothing new here. This is already the law.

having firearm sellers keep records of gun inventory and sales

Again, already the law.

OK, before I have a chance to see exactly what they are doing and how, I'm going to take a stab here.

There, appears, to be not much in the way things are done, except the millions that this will cost. Simply, delinking the ATT from the PAL, accomplishes nothing except to employ lots more people, make lots more paper, cost lots more money and goes back to the previous liebral law. So far as I know, there was no real increase in improper transport. It cost nothing and accomplished the same thing. I can see two reasons for going back. The conservatives made it streamlined, zero cost and increased where we could take them. Back to the old system means spending a few days trying to contact the CFO and all the other stuff already mentioned, plus an enormous cost to the taxpayer.

They are also supposed to end the amnesty on PALs. We'll be paying for them again. More money to the government.

One bright spot. If your PAL lapses or you don't renew in time, under the original law by the liebrals, you became a criminal liable to be charged under federal criminal charges the minute the clock struck midnight on your birthday. You could be legally arrested, charged and lose your guns. The government now is going with the conservative plan of a six month extension to get things sorted without becoming a criminal because of a piece of paper. That's good. (I always renew about 7-8 months out to ensure my new paperwork (plastic) gats back to me in time.)

I expect to be surprised, I know this isn't the end and it won't be official until Goodale gets it passed. But it gives some room for discussion.

Bottom line? Enough change to keep their base somewhat happy for now, but nothing earth shattering....so far.

One thing I was hoping was that the RCMP would lose the ability to reclassify firearms. That should be an independent lab doing that and then an Order in Council,to approve the change. The RCMP has, in the past, made huge mistakes in classifications, descriptions and initiatives and is very biased in its views of civilian gun ownership, in that they don't want it or like it.

After High River and such, firearms owners will never trust the RCMP to be honest arbiters of the rules. Whether warranted or not, that is the nature of the beast.

In closing, not one single thing they are proposing will stop any criminals from using illegal guns. Nothing in all our firearms laws will do that and no amount of laws will correct it either. There is not a single deterrent to stop them. All this is on the backs of those who have daily background checks already, who have not gone crazy since the conservatives changed things and are more respectful of the law than a lot of others, simply because we don't want interaction with them over firearms.

All I see here is freer reign for the RCMP and more money to trudeau's coffers. It accomplishes nothing else......so far as I can see.


 
recceguy said:
All I see here is freer reign for the RCMP and more money to Trudeau's coffers. It accomplishes nothing else......so far as I can see.

I hope you didn't expect anything different.
 
ModlrMike said:
I hope you didn't expect anything different.

Oh, heavens no. I expected much worse, which could still be. I won't believe anything until I see it in actual use. I've always expected poison pills in liebral legislation, but how and who put this all together, make me especially skeptical.
 
whiskey601 said:
"The coming legislation will also leave it to police to make the call on which currently restricted weapons should be put on the prohibition list."

How much are we paying all those politicians?  If reported accurately, they're apparently washing their hands of their responsibility to create laws, leaving it to the police (whose role in all of this is to enforce the laws).  Which police, since a significant portion of policing in Canada comes under municipal jurisdiction?
 
Journeyman said:
How much are we paying all those politicians?  If reported accurately, they're apparently washing their hands of their responsibility to create laws, leaving it to the police (whose role in all of this is to enforce the laws).  Which police, since a significant portion of policing in Canada comes under municipal jurisdiction?

The RCMP.

We have a situation in Canada where the RCMP makes decisions about restricted firearms that has criminal code implications for owners.

In effect, Parliament has outsourced this part of the criminal code to the police. Were it any other area of law, every law society in Canada would be storming Parliament Hill in protest.

Gun owners? Meh.
 
When the conservatives came to power. the RCMP carried on with this exact same rule and POWER that the grits originally gave them under their billion dollar boondoggle.

Then quietly, without fanfare, they started prohibiting different rifles, gun owners questioned the methodology on how they came to the conclusions, that overnight, while locked up, these rifles and their owners became criminals. The RCMP ignored requests, FOI requests were ignored and the RCMP demanded people start turning them in, under penalty of law, without compensation.

Gun owners complained to the conservative government about this blatant gun grab. The Minister of Public Safety looked into it and told the RCMP to stand down. They were told they don't have the authority to do that, that those decisions rightly belong to the government and are to be done by an order in council. The RCMP went back to their office and pulled the blinds down. No more problem, things were nice and legal now.

Enter the Grits, without a single thing being said, in public, and the RCMP went right back to what they were doing illegally.

The first thing they did was ban a 100 round magazine for a .22 long rifle, to feel the waters. They did not advertise it, they did not announce it. Everyone that had one was now guilty of being in possession of a prohibited weapon overnight, without their knowledge. The designated penalty, 3 years in jail. The only place they released the info was on their website. Fortunately, gun owners have a loose cooperation system for helping each other and word got out pretty quick. To date, the grits have not disciplined the RCMP for their breech of trust, or their blatant breaking of the law.

I have no problem prohibiting something, if warranted. The RCMP has now actually been tasked by the grits to take this position. Now they get to make the law and enforce it. That alone is absolutely wrong on every level.

Enforcing the list and what is on it belongs to an independent lab whose results are submitted to the government and the government are the ones that say yeah or nay to an Order in Council to change the classification.

I will guarantee there are people out there with this magazine still, because they don't know they are now criminals. Next time they go to the range and the cops cruise it, he's sitting there plinking, with his .22 Ruger and now prohibited weapon (magazine). Arrested, all guns they own seized (this is substantial, many owners also collect and invest in collections), lawyer fees into the hundreds of thousands, dragged through court, reputation ruined, you can no longer be bonded. You are ruined, financially, mentally and socially.

However, hold the phone, the Crown wants to discuss a plea. "Tell you what son, you just leave all those guns with us, give up your PAL, take a weapon prohibition against yourself and we'll walk away and you can go home. Yes, yes it is a charge that carries a 3 year mandatory, but that's just a law that we ignore anyway."

Guess what the working stiff has to do, in order to survive.

Now Trudeau and Goodale have appointed a new Commissioner to the RCMP. If you don't think that doesn't have anything to do with us and our guns, in FJAG's parlance, "I've got a bridge I want you to look at."

I'm running all of this off the top of my head right now. I don't think I left anything out. I'll take questions because many really don't know what a gun owner has to go through or watch for, on almost a daily basis. Gun owners are scrutinized by law enforcement and government on a daily basis. No criminal in Canada shares that 'luxury'.

Look to Finland to see how the EU is bullying a non member state into the new EU laws that ban semi automatic rifles

https://finlandpolitics.org/2016/12/21/finland-succeeds-in-limiting-the-impact-of-eus-semi-automatic-firearm-ban/

The grits want us to go the same way and follow the globalist construct. Everyone knows where we're heading with these one world laws and gun confiscation. Nobody wants to do anything though, lambs to the slaughter.
 

Attachments

  • guncontrol works.jpg
    guncontrol works.jpg
    19 KB · Views: 377
recceguy said:
I'm running all of this off the top of my head right now. I don't think I left anything out. I'll take questions because many really don't know what a gun owner has to go through or watch for, on almost a daily basis. Gun owners are scrutinized by law enforcement and government on a daily basis. No criminal in Canada shares that 'luxury'.

Well said recceguy. 

My biggest fear is coming home to find my place has been robbed and my guns stolen.  They are all stored beyond what the law requires, but it seems to me that when ever we, legal gun owners, become victims we somehow end up also being the criminal.

Its also why I back the truck right next to my door when loading guns.  I do not want people to know that my house has guns, I fear it makes me a target to both the police and the criminals.
 
It's sad that bad laws have created a situation where the most law abiding citizens in the nation live in a constant state of distrust when it comes to police.
 
It's interesting that the government feels the police are experts at this stuff and yet when it comes to legalizing pot and some police were cautioning against it those police were soundly brushed off.

There just isn't enough tax revenue in legal firearms ownership to champion it.
 
The bit about open carry, if you have a ATC for predator defense, you are required to open carry it. As for training, I took my law enforcement buddy out to a IPSC training night, he said afterwards that he shot more in one night, then in 3 years on his force. He also said that the instruction he received improved his shooting quite a bit. LEO get wrapped up in the "forcewheel" stuff when talking about this issue, it does not apply to citizens. There is another set of rules for civilians to use deadly force.
 
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/news/2018/03/firearms-legislation-to-make-communities-safer.html


Here she is in all her glory.  Now I can once again wait on the phone for an hour so I can get permission to bring a gun to the gun smith.

News release

From Public Safety Canada

March 20, 2018
Ottawa, Ontario
Public Safety Canada

Crime rates generally in Canada have been on the decline for more than two decades, but offences involving firearms have become more prevalent, especially since 2013.  Many communities across the country have been facing a steady increase in gun violence over the past five years. Gun-related homicides, domestic and gender-based violence involving guns, criminal gang activity and gun thefts are all up significantly.

To keep communities safe, the Government of Canada is strengthening Canada's gun laws in a common-sense, focused and effective way.  Legislation introduced today prioritizes public safety and effective police work, while respecting law-abiding firearms owners. This government will not bring back the federal long-gun registry.

The new legislation proposes to:

    Enhance background checks on those seeking to acquire firearms - by eliminating the existing provision that focuses those checks primarily on just the five years immediately preceding a licence application.
    Enhance the utility of those background checks and the effectiveness of the existing licensing system - by requiring that whenever a non-restricted firearm is transferred, the buyer must  produce his/her firearms licence, and the vendor must verify that it is valid.
    Standardize existing best practices among commercial retailers to maintain adequate records of their inventories and sales. These records would be accessible to police officers on reasonable grounds and with judicial authorization, as appropriate.
    Ensure the impartial, professional, accurate and consistent classification of firearms as either "non-restricted" "restricted" or "prohibited" - by restoring a system in which Parliament defines the classes but entrusts experts in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to classify firearms, without political influence.
    Bolster community safety in relation to restricted and prohibited firearms (mostly handguns and assault weapons) - by requiring specific transportation authorizations to be obtained whenever restricted or prohibited guns are moved through the community, except between a residence and an approved shooting range. The rules for transporting non-restricted weapons (such as legally owned rifles and shotguns) will not change.

This legislation will complement prior steps to create a more balanced and representative Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee; to strengthen infrastructure and technology at the border to better interdict gun smuggling, to withdraw from manufacturers/importers the authority to determine in certain circumstances their own firearms classification, and support provinces, territories, municipalities, communities and law enforcement in local initiatives to combat illegal gangs and gun crime.

Quotes

    “While Canada is one of the safest countries in the world, increased gun crime has caused too much violence and taken too many lives in communities of all kinds.  It has tragically claimed innocent bystanders, children and police officers from coast to coast.  With this legislation and our other measures, we are taking concrete steps to make our country less vulnerable to the scourge of gun violence, while being fair to responsible, law-abiding firearms owners and businesses.”

    -  The Honourable Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

    “Canadians expect and deserve safe communities, free of gun violence. This proposed legislation will help keep firearms out  of the hands of criminals, and respect law-abiding gun owners. ”

    -    The Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Quick facts

    There were 2,465 criminal violations involving firearms in 2016, an increase of 30% since 2013.  (Statistics Canada, CANSIM 252-0051.) Gun homicides were up by two-thirds - from 134 in 2013 to 223 in 2016. (Statistics Canada, Homicide Survey.)

    Cases of intimate partner violence involving a firearm as reported to the police in 2016 numbered nearly 700- up by a third since 2013. (Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile 2013 and 2016)

    There are more than 500 gun-related suicides each year, often among young people. (Statistics Canada, CANSIM 102-0551)

    Incidents of breaking-and-entering for the purpose of stealing firearms rose from 516 in 2013 to 804 in 2016. (Statistics Canada, CANSIM 252-0051)

    The majority of firearms owned by Canadians are non-restricted, typically "long-guns" such a hunting rifles and shotguns.  In 2016, it is noteworthy that 31% of all firearms-related homicides- where the firearm was recovered - involved a firearm that did not require registration. (Statistics Canada, Homicide Survey)

    In November 2017, the government announced investments of $327.6 million over five years beginning in 2018-19, rising to $100 million per year thereafter, to support provincial/territorial and community-based initiatives to deal more effectively with guns-and-gangs. This includes prevention, enforcement, disruption and withdrawal.

    On March 7, 2018,  the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness hosted a national summit on gun-and-gang violence to share information and best practices across the country, and to help ensure that the new federal funding is invested to the best advantage.

    In Canada there are three types of firearms: "restricted", such as handguns, certain rifles and semi-automatics; "prohibited", such as certain handguns, fully automatic firearms, and sawed off rifles; and "non-restricted" such as ordinary hunting rifles and shotguns. The RCMP Canadian Firearms Program determines the technical classification of a firearm according to criteria in the Criminal Code. Restricted and prohibited firearms require additional safety training, must be registered and their use is limited to certain activities, such as target practice or as part of a collection.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top