OT: Canadain Firearm Buy Back Program

[IronNoggin]

Matt Gurney: Memo to David Lametti. You didn't 'get it right' because it's impossible

After his government's sudden decision to pull its controversial rifle-banning amendments from an unrelated handgun-"freezing" bill last week, Attorney General and Justice Minister David Lametti did the media circuit on Sunday, conceding that his government screwed up.

His language was kinder than that, as you'd expect. "We didn’t quite get it right," is how he put it to Mercedes Stephenson of Global News. What his government spent weeks defending "had a little too much reach," he now grants.

Well, gosh. I guess that's what happens when you decide to ram what would amount to the most dramatic change to Canadian gun-control legislation in a generation into a largely unrelated bill inappropriately late into the legislative process, and then react to all criticism of what you're proposing by angrily accusing the critics of spreading misinformation. Hard to imagine where the Liberals might have gone wrong on this one!

Let's just call a spade a spade: most of what the Liberals have done with gun control in recent years is almost entirely for political purposes. During their first term, the majority parliament between 2015-2019, the Liberals spent years studying Canadian gun policy, and came up with Bill C-71, which changed ... not all that much. I didn't like C-71, and said so at the time, but it was a surprisingly modest series of changes. And credit where due: some of the changes were good.

But hey, then politics happened. The sunny ways days ended. Liberal fortunes waned. Scandals and baggage and awkward photos of the PM in his younger days accumulated. And suddenly, the Liberals were talking a lot about banning assault rifles. They talked about it even more after the 2019 election reduced them to a parliamentary minority, leaving them dependent on a cluster of urban and suburban ridings in Quebec and Greater Toronto where support for just about any half-coherent sounding gun-control measure is typically high. The Liberals didn't do much of anything — mostly just talk, as is their style. Then, in early 2020, there was the horrific massacre in Nova Scotia, and within days, the Liberals announced they were banning 1,500 models of assault rifle. (It was actually far fewer — closer to 20 — but the Liberals counted each different version and brand as an entirely different rifle to get to a more-impressive sounding figure. Those fierce opponents of disinformation at work again!)
...

This is what I meant when I said I had good news for the Liberals (they failed because no one could have succeeded!) and also bad and worse news for them (it's impossible and it's their fault).

This is the reality, and it's a reality that's obvious to anyone who knows the first damned thing about this file. This, sadly, does not seem to include either our attorney general and justice minister, nor our minister of public safety.

So sorry, guys, but that’s the bottom line. Reality sucks sometimes, but it always has its way in the end, and for David Lametti, Marco Mendicino, Justin Trudeau and all the others, this is the reality. They're struggling because they've promised something that is impossible, probably because they’re so twisted up in their own manoeuvring and groupthink that they didn’t realize it was impossible. It's still not clear that they fully understand what they've gotten themselves into here.

In the spirit of cooperation and civic duty, here's my honest advice to them: just quietly drop it. Seriously, guys. You probably think I'm just trying to lead you into a trap here, but honestly, that's not needed. You've fallen pretty spectacularly assbackwards into a trap of your own making on this file already — you clearly don't need any help from me on that score. So truly, fellows, here’s my take: The sooner you realize that the reason you can't make this work is because you've put yourselves in a literally impossible position, the better it's going to go for you.

https://theline.substack.com/p/matt-gurney-memo-to-david-lametti

[IronNoggin]

Liberals Scrap Bill C-21 Amendments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZR7-JAVbwk

[IronNoggin]

Odd that they entirely ignore their own study's finding...

Engagement Summary Report - Reducing Violent Crime: A Dialogue on Handguns and Assault-Style Firearms

Executive Summary

Introduction

Public Safety Canada (“Public Safety”) launched an engagement process in October 2018 to help inform policy, regulations and legislation to reduce violent crime involving firearms. Through this engagement, Public Safety sought to engage and hear from a wide range of stakeholders, which included those both in support of and opposed to limiting access to handguns and assault-style firearms. While the engagement was framed by the examination of a potential ban, the discussion explored several potential measures to reduce violent crime.

The engagement process included a series of eight in-person roundtables, an online questionnaire, a written submission process, and bilateral meetings with a range of stakeholders. Given the diversity of perspectives on this issue, this report highlights key common themes and ideas shared by participants, as well as unique and divergent views. The goal of this report is to accurately represent “what we heard” on this issue.

Overall Key Findings

There are polarized views on a potential ban and limiting access: Overall, participants were strongly polarized on the issue of banning handguns and assault-style firearms. The stakeholder views expressed in two of the engagement channels - the in-person dialogues and written submissions - provided a variety of perspectives both opposed to and in support of a ban. In contrast, most questionnaire respondents (representing a self-selected group of Canadians) were opposed to a ban.

Target crime and focus on enforcement: Many participants felt strongly that a ban would target law-abiding owners, rather than illicit firearms, and would not greatly impact crime reduction (particularly gang violence). As a result, many called for enhanced enforcement capacity for law enforcement and border services, as well as harsher punishments for firearms trafficking and gun-related crime.

Address underlying causes of firearm violence: One point of consensus among the diverse perspectives is the need to address the socioeconomic conditions that can lead to gun violence, which requires more support for community-level programs and initiatives. These factors include poverty, a lack of education or employment opportunities, lack of mental health supports and social exclusion.

Collect and share relevant data on gun crime: There is a need to improve the ongoing collection and sharing of data on gun crime, particularly in terms of sources of illicit firearms and the types of crime being committed. It was expressed that data is critical for supporting law enforcement and border agencies efforts, as well as informing policy and legislation.

Willingness for collaboration with the firearms community/industry: Many stakeholders representing various aspects of the firearms community want the opportunity to be more engaged and to collaborate with the federal government to develop solutions on this issue.

Need a multi-faceted approach: A wide range of approaches and ideas were discussed, which suggests that a multi-faceted approach is needed to address this issue – rather than implementing a ban in isolation.

Engagement Process and Key Findings by Channel

In-person sessions

Public Safety held a series of eight in-person roundtables in four cities: Vancouver (October 22, 2018), Montreal (October 25, 2018), Toronto (October 26, 2018) and Moncton (October 29, 2018). In total, 77 stakeholders participated in these sessions. Stakeholders were invited by Public Safety Canada based on their knowledge, experience, expertise and vested interest in the issue. Stakeholders represented provincial government, law enforcement, municipalities, not-for-profit associations (e.g., health, community services, youth, victims), education, wildlife/conservation, retailers, academia/research, and the firearms/sports shooting community.

The key themes emerging from an analysis of the in-person sessions were:

Mixed reactions: Some groups were more supportive or mixed in their perspectives on a potential ban/limiting access, while others were strongly opposed

Enhance frontline enforcement capacity
Collect and share relevant data
Focus on crime involving firearms and related crimes
Focus on underlying factors of gun violence
Focus on safe storage
Provide educational opportunities for children and youth
Work with retailers and the firearms community
Explore reporting requirements for healthcare systems

Written Submissions

Public Safety also called for written submissions from a wide range of stakeholders. Overall, 36 submissions were received from invited stakeholders representing a diversity of sectors and perspectives, including shooting sports, health, government (provincial, territorial and regional), women, municipalities/communities, victims, wildlife/conversation and retailers. Public Safety also received nearly 1,200 submissions from individuals with relevant experience on the issue.

The key themes from the written submissions were:

Mixed reactions to a potential ban/limiting access
Collect relevant data on crime involving firearms
Address risk factors underlying firearms violence
Focus on illicit firearms trafficking
Enhance enforcement capacity
Consult with firearms community/industry
Provide more mental health supports/screening:
Provide more education on safe and secure storage
Address impact of gun violence on women
Provide clarity in defining/classifying “assault weapon

Online questionnaire

In addition to engaging stakeholders, Public Safety developed and launched a questionnaire that was available online to all Canadians. The questionnaire was open for one month, between October 11 and November 10, 2018. During this time, 134,917 questionnaires were completed. In terms of the demographic profile of respondents, more than half were male; most came from either Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia or Alberta; and most lived in an urban setting. Additionally, nearly half owned a firearm.

The key findings from the online questionnaire were:

Majority of respondents did not support further limiting access to firearms and assault-style firearms
Focus on the illicit market, not legally-owned firearms
Target criminals, not lawful owners
Concerns with “assault weapon” term
Focus on smuggling and border security
Stricter screening processes for those acquiring firearms

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2019-rdcng-vlnt-crm-dlg/index-en.aspx

[one shot scott]

a statement from Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino “made it clear” that the decision to remove the amendments “was merely a pause in their campaign.”

Equals: getting their foot in the door and then doing whatever they please. Its not about ar's or handguns or hunting guns. Its about ALL guns. tens of thousands of legal sport shooters are getting screwed over with the handgun freeze.

[Hi5]

I hadn’t given it much thought before, but I now wonder why Trudeau and his cabal handled the amendment the way they did. It was a politically clumsy and risky thing to do.

So, were they simply being even more arrogant, or, was this just an innocent lapse in judgement?

Or is there another motivation? Is the court action challenging the Order in Council approaching a decision? Might the government be getting a suggestion that they could lose? If the Order in Council is struck down, it would be harder to get legislation passed to replace it.

Anyone hear how close a court decision might be?

[Hillcountry]

So, are semi-auto rifles (Browning BAR) illegal in Canada now?

[IronNoggin]

So, are semi-auto rifles (Browning BAR) illegal in Canada now?

Not yet...

More ignoring of study findings:

WHAT FIREARMS ARE REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONATE FOR HUNTING IN CANADA

AN EXAMINATION OF PREVIOUSLY NON-RESTRICTED FIREARMS PROHIBITED UNDER SOR/2020-96

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

It is the Government of Canada’s view that the firearms prohibited under Regulation SOR/2020-96 are
“unreasonable and disproportionate” for hunting. This report offers a comprehensive, subject-specific analysis of the use
of firearms for hunting that helps to inform whether SOR/2020-96 firearms are reasonable and proportionate.

Based on the findings of this report, many non-restricted firearms prohibited under SOR/2020-96 are reasonable and proportionate for hunting in Canada.

To truly understand what is reasonable and proportionate for hunting, there are many factors that must be considered beyond the characteristics of the firearm itself, including the cartridges used, and the situation (e.g., terrain) in which it will be used in. This report unpacks the complexities of considering what firearms are reasonable and proportionate for hunting in Canada by examining the plethora of contributing variables such as legality, conservation, military use, ethics, hunter preference, hunted species, practical use, modern designs and modularity, firearm operating
systems, non-operational firearm features, calibre, cartridge availability, and magazines.

Of these considerations, this report includes a detailed examination of the many physical features and characteristics that determine the operation and function of a firearm. Based on an examination of firearms and component features, the characteristic that most expressly defines what is reasonable for hunting is what is already illegal for hunting in Canada (automatic action, high-capacity magazines, explosive payloads).

Outside of that characteristic, the findings in this report demonstrate that labelling firearms based on appearance or overall design without comprehensive consideration of actual operation and function cannot determine what is reasonable and proportionate for hunting.

The report shows that almost all previously non-restricted shoulder arms prohibited under SOR/2020-96 and assessed in this study were used for hunting by Canadians. The use of these firearms does not appear to be a result of proximity or availability, but rather because the form, functions, and features of these firearms have a long history related to hunting and are commonly used, if not preferred by hunters.

The availability of hunting-specific cartridges in Canada for almost all calibres is another indicator of the proportionate use for hunting. Not only are key characteristics (e.g., action and calibre) of SOR/2020-96 prohibited firearms proportionate relative to other firearms used for hunting, these firearms were tested by the RCMP to ensure they cannot mate with restricted and prohibited firearms (i.e., allowing for easy adaptability to automatic capability) when the previous non-restricted classification was determined.

There are many considerations and individual conclusions drawn in this report about what is reasonable and proportionate for hunting, but can be summarized using an actual model comparison that illustrates the pitfalls and inappropriateness of oversimplifying and generalizing firearms by ‘type’.

A semi-automatic rifle chambered in 308 WIN, with a walnut or composite stock, a 22” barrel, and detachable box magazine that weighs about nine pounds could describe dozens of popular non-restricted rifles used for hunting. It is also the description of a model of the Springfield Armory M1A series that was prohibited under SOR/2020-96. The Springfield Armory M1A shares the features of other rifles used for hunting, but it also shares the design of the M14 rifle that was standard issue for the U.S. military in the 1950s and 1960s. The modern civilian M14 ‘types’ share the design and military lineage but have key functional distinctions, most notably being limited to only having a semi-automatic action instead of the ‘select fire switch’ of the U.S. military version that allowed for fully automatic fire.

The civilian Springfield Armory M1A accepts detachable box magazines, but the high-capacity 20-cartridge magazines of the military version are already illegal in Canada. The Springfield Armory M1A example illustrates that although there are clear connections to the M14 (targeted rifle for prohibition by SOR 2020/96) in design and lineage, the complete distinction in key form and function characteristics make it inappropriate to ‘type’ as a firearm that is not reasonable or proportionate for hunting in Canada.

KEY FINDINGS
​
​THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM THE FULL REPORT
​
HUNTING FIREARM – There is no such thing as a ‘hunting firearm’ type. Firearms primarily used for hunting, are also frequently used for plinking, shooting at the range, or even competition. Hunter selection of a firearm is generally determined based on: 1) being legal for hunting, 2) the calibre is appropriate for the type of hunting, 3) usability for the intended purpose, 4) performance (firearm + cartridge combined), and 5) afford-ability. Firearm type (e.g., M14) is not an appropriate criterion because it does not provide sufficient resolution to determine if a firearm is reasonable for hunting.
​
There are Twenty-Three other Findings listed. Far to lengthy to post here, but well worth a look for those interested...
​
https://www.ofah.org/insider/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Firearms_Affidavidt_Report_Public_FINAL-1.pdf

[Hillcountry]

Thank you! My concern was the availability of an Anticosti deer hunt. My primary hunting rifle is a BAR MKIi 308 semi-auto.

[janesy]

Without a doubt, the first gun I'm going to buy since I lost them all in the lake from that boating accident will be an ATRS.

[IronNoggin]

The perpetual revolving door:

Man charged in 'significant' gun seizure was under lifetime weapons ban

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/london-police-seize-nine-handguns-after-arresting-wanted-man

Accused OPP shooter was out on bail due to Indigenous identity

A man who is accused of killing an Ontario Provincial Police officer while out on bail for previous alleged violent offences had been set free from jail primarily because he is Indigenous, a transcript of his bail review hearing shows.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-accused-opp-shooter-was-out-on-bail-due-to-indigenous-identity/

Mississauga man with lifetime weapons prohibition order allegedly found with rifle

A Mississauga man with a lifetime weapons prohibition order is facing a number of charges after he was allegedly found in possession of a rifle.

Police said a Kodiak Defence WK180C rifle was seized, along with ammunition and prohibited devices containing ammunition.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/mississauga-man-with-lifetime-weapons-prohibition-order-allegedly-found-with-rifle/ar-AA17dkNt

IF we applied the laws in place prior to Justin's intrusions, Canada would be a much better place IMO. Doing what he is doing, while actually softening bail requirements and sentencing, is absolute Insanity IMO.

[Boo]

As many of the firearm advocates call it, our government is buying votes using our money for the next election using fear mongering tactics.

If you open this TheGunBlog.ca page, there are a good number of videos to inform yourself with. Some are long but most of them you need to see!
https://thegunblog.ca/tag/Videos

I urge you to join at least one advocacy organization! If you own a firearm, if you're thinking about getting into shooting sports (hunting, target shooting, action shooting etc), if you own a crossbow (yes, the Liberal government tried to serial numberize our bows) join an advocacy organization as well as donate. Don't think that you won't matter, don't think that your one vote for the Conservative party won't change anything, don't think that joining an advocacy group won't change anything, don't think that the polls don't matter, don't think that the email campaigns that send hundreds of thousands of emails to the offending MPs won't matter. Get involved!

[Boo]

BREAKING!! The CCFR's "Scrap C21" Campaign Has Launched! Details Here
https://youtu.be/HusipW4GFXE

Support the CCFR here:
Online: https://www.firearmrights.ca
By EMT: [email protected]
By mail:
Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights
P.O. Box 91572 RPO Mer Bleu
Orleans, Ontario K1W 0A6

[Boo]

I have a sinking feeling that there are some hunters who do not think that they're hunting gun is in the C21 ban. I urge you to look but you'd better be wearing diapers. I have had a Benelli Super Black Eagle for 20/25 years. It is nothing but a waterfowl gun with a 28" barrel. It is in the ban list.
Look here to see if your firearm is on the list and get involved. https://firearmrights.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/the-list.pdf

[IronNoggin]

I have a sinking feeling that there are some hunters who do not think that they're hunting gun is in the C21 ban. I urge you to look but you'd better be wearing diapers.

Good Advice Don!

On the other hand, those that think they gov isn't coming for their guns better shake their heads.
The intent in the long run is to take them all.

Reality.

[bdog]

Stay tuned Nog.... its back on again, CCFR just gave an update a few hours ago