TEAM CSSA E-NEWS | July 25, 2018
|
|
- Get ready Canada, we’re about to have another epic battle over guns
- Gun crackdown was being considered before Toronto shooting, minister says
- No, 50% of guns used in crime are not from Canada
- Toronto Police want $250 for their 'Crime Gun" Statistics
- Legal Canadian gun owners selling their weapons illegally on the rise: police
- Reducing the reward: should we name the perpetrators of mass violence?
- Liberals consulted social justice “weirdos” for Bill C-71, not firearms experts
- Goodale Reiterates 25-Round Ruger 10/22 Mags Are ‘Prohibited’
- Gun control won’t solve our violence problem
- Alberta teen's gun law petition nears 83,000 signatures as it reaches final stretch
- Gallup: Gun Control Not High on List of Problems
- Gun rights, local jobs concern Tory MP
- The Canadian Army Is Short on Machine Guns
|
|
COMMENTARY
Stop Publishing the Names of Mass Murderers
|
|
Mass murderers, mentally-ill or not, are most often motivated by a desire for notoriety, to rack up a bigger body count than their predecessors. When media outlets focus on the killer, almost to the exclusion of the victims, they promote grotesque crimes and give the killer exactly what they want: significance.
The CSSA believes media outlets must stop publishing the names of mass murderers. Stop giving these fame-seeking killers the notoriety they seek.
We were pleasantly surprised to see Global News openly address this issue shortly after news of the shooting spree broke.
“We don’t know yet who did it, only that he was a 29-year-old man. He is dead after fleeing the scene. But when police do release his name, should reporters broadcast it to the public? Will blanketing coverage with his name and his photo do more harm than good?”
That unanswered question came shortly before Global News (and every other major Canadian media outlet) identified Sunday night’s killer, opting for ratings instead of responsibility.
Their coverage, like everyone else’s, focused on the murderer, his long history of severe mental health issues and his family’s public statement of condolences. Reporting on the victims of this terrible tragedy were almost an afterthought.
Research shows publishing the names of mass murderers sparks a contagion effect. In the wake of each mass shooting, others occur shortly afterward due to the non-stop publicity given the killer.
Jennifer Johnston and Andrew Joy presented their research into this contagion effect at the 2016 American Psychological Association convention.
“If the mass media and social media enthusiasts make a pact to no longer share, reproduce or retweet the names, faces, detailed histories or long-winded statements of killers, we could see a dramatic reduction in mass shootings in one to two years. Even conservatively, if the calculations of contagion modelers are correct, we should see at least a one-third reduction in shootings if the contagion is removed,”
Johnston said.
Like all rights, the right of a free press comes with responsibilities. Where is the media’s responsibility in the wake of this latest mass shooting?
It's in the trash bin, right beside their honesty and integrity.
Where are the news stories celebrating the life of 18-year-old
Reese Fallon
, mercilessly executed in the street as she tried to run away? Or the stories about the murdered 10-year-old girl? Or any of the 13 innocent people wounded in this horrific attack?
The media prefers to sell story after story focused on the Toronto killer and, in doing so, ensures his place in the Mass Murderers' Hall of Fame.
Promoting mass murderers and glorifying their heinous crimes for money is far more important than doing what is right – relegating these cowards to the garbage bin of obscurity.
Will the media stop glorifying mass murderers and their crimes?
Not so long as it sells ad space and increases television ratings. The old media axiom of, “if it bleeds it leads,” was never truer than it is today.
Our hearts and prayers go out to the parents of the murdered 10-year-old girl, the parents of 18-year-old Reese Fallon and the 13 people wounded in this terrible attack.
We hope the press will listen to our plea and stop giving these killers the fame they seek.
Only then will these horrific killings end.
Sources:
|
|
|
Do you believe media outlets should stop publishing the names of mass murderers?
|
|
|
|
RESULTS FROM LAST WEEK'S QUESTION:
Does your gun club participate in events in your local community?
YES: 59.9%
NO: 19.2%
NOT SURE: 20.9%
|
|
GO WHEREVER YOUR HUNT TAKES YOU!
|
|
And you can take this beautiful Beretta A400 Xtreme Plus shotgun with you!
Designed to withstand the toughest waterfowl environments.
Engineered to be the softest-shooting, most reliable 3.5" waterfowl shotgun out there. The A400 Xtreme Plus features Beretta’s exclusive Steelium Plus barrels, a first for hunting shotguns providing the best patterning possible from all hunting loads, along with further felt recoil mitigation.
You could be the proud new owner of this AMAZING SHOTGUN.
All you have to do to put this beautiful shotgun in your gun safe is to make a $10 donation to the CSSA, and we will give you a free chance to win this great gun. Better yet, we will give you THREE chances with a $20 donation, TEN for $50 and a $100 donation can get you TWENTY CHANCES.
This BERETTA A400 Xtreme will find a new home August 2, 2018
.
Help us continue to defend your sport, your guns and your rights. We need all hands on deck in these trying times. Your donation helps us preserve your firearms rights. As always, your generosity is most appreciated!
Please send your donation to: Xtreme c/o CSSA (see address at the bottom of this email) or call 1-888-873-4339.
Please note: the winner must have a valid Canadian firearms license.
|
|
In Memoriam ––
CSSA Life Member, John Rytzyck
|
|
After a lengthy illness, at Hospice Niagara on May 20, 2018, at the age of 87. He is survived by his loving wife of 66 years, Lillian. Sadly missed by his daughter Tanya (Dennis), niece Patti-Gaye, and close family friend Patti, as well as his furry friends Muffy, Cinnamon, Brandy, and Peaches.
John retired from the St. Lawrence Seaway and was a long time member of Pinecrest Revolver and Gun Club, which led him to officiate at the 1976 Montreal Olympics.
|
|
IMPORTANT ––
TORONTO SUN POLL
|
Today's issue of the Toronto Sun wants to know if you agree with Toronto City Council's efforts to ban handgun sales in Toronto.
To have your say, visit
HERE
|
|
|
OPINION ––
Get ready Canada, we’re about to have another epic battle over guns
|
|
By Susan Delacourt | ipolitics.ca | July 24, 2018.
|
|
Gun control has never been one of Justin Trudeau’s favourite issues. But prime ministers don’t get to pick their controversies and like it or not, Toronto’s gun problem is fast becoming Trudeau’s gun problem.
Well, to be precise, gun control at this very moment is Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale’s problem, the only minister who was in cabinet in the early 1990s, the last time Liberals tackled tighter restrictions around firearms — with massive political consequences. If he’s having any nightmare flashbacks, Goodale is keeping those to himself for now.
Goodale told reporters Tuesday that the current Liberal government was looking into tightening up the Criminal Code provisions around handgun ownership — a process that was already under way before the tragic shooting on the Danforth in Toronto on Sunday night.
New firearms-control legislation, Bill C-71, was already introduced to Parliament earlier this year and Goodale said that Ottawa is still talking to the provinces about beefed-up laws surrounding gun storage in commercial facilities and keeping firearms out of the hands of people with mental health issues.
Those may seem like eminently sensible ideas right now, while Toronto is reeling from not just the latest tragedy but a summer of gun violence in the city. Right now, the pro-gun lobby in Canada — though not as powerful as the one in the U.S. — has been sensibly silent.
But are Liberals willing to risk reawakening that political giant? Through the years, gun control has proven to be one of the biggest fundraising draws for the federal Conservatives and one of the largest political liabilities for the Liberals.
It’s been said, perhaps mythically, that whenever Conservatives saw the coffers getting sparse, they’d churn out another letter to supporters, warning that Liberals were coming to take away people’s guns. Gun control, the story went, was so lucrative a fundraising source for the Conservatives that Stephen Harper’s government was reluctant to kill the Liberals’ long-gun registry when it got to power in 2006, wanting to keep it alive.
What is not a myth is that Jean Chrétien’s old gun registry seriously damaged Liberal prospects in rural Canada for nearly a generation. Someone, in fact, once called that very registry an abject failure.
“The long-gun registry, as it was, was a failure and I’m not going to resuscitate that,” Trudeau said at the time, even going on to talk about how guns had always been a part of his life. This was when Trudeau was trying hard to demonstrate that he was not going to follow the same path as previous Liberal prime ministers, including his father, but also Chretien.
“Yes, the RCMP guarding me had handguns and I got to play with them every now and then,” Trudeau said about his years growing up as the PM’s son. “I was raised with an appreciation and an understanding of how important in rural areas and right across the country gun ownership is as a part of the culture of Canada. I do not feel that there’s any huge contradiction between keeping our cities safe from gun violence and gangs, and allowing this important facet of Canadian identity which is having a gun.”
Nearly six years later this summer, I’m not sure we’re going to hear Prime Minister Trudeau waxing on similarly about guns. Toronto is definitely not in the mood for that conversation. In fact, I think you could fairly say that Toronto has never been more anti-gun.
It was striking to hear Mayor John Tory flatly asking in the wake of the Danforth shooting why anyone in Toronto needed a gun. Politicians in Canada, especially conservative ones, are usually more careful about whipping up the gun advocates with questions like that.
Had Tory, or any other politician mused aloud like that during the days of the gun registry controversy, that might have cost him or her a future election.
Moreover, Donolo said, Liberals had to undo all the damage the Conservatives had done to gun-control measures while Harper was in power — scrapping the registry and expanding the market and the culture around gun ownership.
Easy for a past Liberal government spokesperson to say, perhaps, but not so politically easy for the current Trudeau government to declare. Gun control has so far been very low down on the agenda.
But events in Toronto this summer are not going to permit the government to keep the firearms talk on the back burner. Currently vacationing in British Columbia, Trudeau has so far said little beyond a brief statement of sympathy and promised support for Toronto. He’s going to be expected to say more — lots more — soon.
As the government does start thinking about how to deal with Toronto’s summer of the gun, it will surely be wondering whether this will end badly — politically speaking. Will the gun-filled summer of 2018 lead to trouble for Liberals in the election a year from now?
Or, more intriguingly, have we reached a point where even the old, powerful gun lobby feels the backlash for speaking out against firearms control? Will we see more politicians, as courageous as the Toronto mayor, speaking out against gun ownership altogether?
What is clear is that guns are back in the Liberals’ political sights, even if the Prime Minister didn’t aim them there.
|
|
Gun crackdown was being considered before Toronto shooting, minister says
|
|
By the Canadian Press | July 24, 2018
|
|
Minister says Danforth suspect was not on any federal watchlists associated with national security
Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale says the federal government is prepared to consider tightening handgun laws, but warns that taking such action would be a complicated process.
Goodale says Ottawa has been looking at changes to Criminal Code handgun provisions — not based on this week's deadly shooting in Toronto, but after hearing testimony earlier this year from people affected by the January 2017 mosque shooting in Quebec City, where six people were killed.
Following Sunday's attack in Toronto's Danforth area, in which authorities say 29-year-old Faisal Hussain killed an 18-year-old woman and a 10-year-old girl and wounded 13 others, the city's mayor has renewed calls for tougher restrictions on firearms.
Goodale says the Trudeau government will look at proposals already before lawmakers to see what changes could be made.
The minister also said today that Hussain was not on any federal watchlists associated with national security.
Hussain's parents have said their son struggled with psychosis and depression and that they were devastated by his violent actions.
|
|
No, 50% of guns used in crime are not from Canada
|
|
By Brian Lilley | brianlilley.com | July 25, 2018
|
|
There is a talking point in heavy use by the Trudeau government, police forces and gun control activists. It claims that 50% of guns used in crime in Canada are stolen from law abiding Canadian gun owners.
Here is the problem, it is fake news.
What is the source of this fact that gets repeated over and over again?
Dennis Young, the veteran researcher and former Parliament Hill staffer says there is no source, well other than a highly taken out of context footnote from an RCMP document dating back to 2016.
Young obtained the document through Access to Information and posted it to his website. At the bottom of page 17 you see this nugget about guns seized in Western Canada.
|
|
So this is about a small subset of guns seized in Western Canada. Of 783 trace requests, just 229 could be traced and 50% of those traced were domestically sourced.
Lies get repeated.
Yet this canard is repeated over and over again by officials at the highest levels.
Just this year Conservative MP Larry Macguire tried to find out what information the federal government had on this claim. He asked an Order Paper question, an official request through Parliament, to find out how many guns seized by police were domestically sourced and how many were from outside the country.
“The Canadian Firearms Information System does not collect the requested information.”
Young has asked Stats Canada for information to back up this claim and
found nothing
. In fact at the guns and gangs summit where Ralph Goodale said more and more guns are domestically sourced, a Stats Can official was quoted as saying, “We don’t know the origin of firearms involved in gun crime in Canada.”
Gun control, especially after a horrific shooting, is an incredibly emotional issue but facts still matter.
The gun control lobby wants to use this event to make it harder for Canadians that want to go shooting at the range to do so even though CBC is reporting that this was an illegal gun
from the United States
.
If someone can find me an actual report, with actual statistics that is in the public domain supporting this claim about domestically sourced guns then I will post it.
Until then, our politicians and the media should stop repeating claims that aren’t backed up with solid evidence
.
|
|
Toronto Police want $250 for their 'Crime Gun" Statistics
|
|
By Dennis Young | July 19, 2018
|
|
In response to an Access to Information request made by Dennis Young for statistics on crime guns and firearms from 2000-2017, the Toronto Police Service has responded that the information it has collected will only be made available if he pays a fee of $250.
|
|
Legal Canadian gun owners selling their weapons illegally on the rise: police
|
|
By Olivia Bowden | globalnews.ca | July 24, 2018
|
|
TORONTO – The number of guns obtained legally in Canada but are then sold to people who use them for criminal purposes has surged dramatically in recent years compared to firearms smuggled from the United States,
Toronto police
say.
In recent years, they say, investigators have noticed a stark shift in where guns used to commit crimes are coming from.
Before 2012, about 75 per cent of the firearms were trafficked from the United States. By 2017, however, about half originated from domestic sources, putting an end to the idea that most of Canada’s illegal guns come from across the border, Det. Rob Di Danieli of the
guns and gangs unit said.
Legal Canadian gun owners are selling their weapons illegally, Di Danieli said, noting that police have seen more than 40 such cases in recent years.
The allure of a quick sell at a high profit margin is one reason legal owners might sell their guns. One man sold 47 guns and made over $100,000 in a five month period, the detective said.
“They go get their licence for the purpose of becoming a firearms trafficker,” Di Danieli said. “A lot of people are so ready to blame the big bad Americans, but we had our own little problem here.”
The comments come as Toronto reels from a Sunday night handgun attack on a busy east-end street that left three people, including the gunman, dead and another 13 injured. The parents of the gunman, 29-year-old Faisal Hussain, said he struggled with psychosis and depression his entire life.
Overall, understanding the source of guns used criminally has also taken on a new urgency in light of the city’s 220 shootings this year and 27 deaths as of July 9.
Mayor John Tory said domestic trafficking must be addressed in light of what he called the city’s “gun problem.”
“You’ve heard me ask the question of why anybody would need to buy 10 or 20 guns, which they can lawfully do under the present laws,” Tory said on Monday. “Why does anyone in this city need to have a gun at all?”
Two weeks ago, Tory urged measures to allow better tracking of firearms in a way that is “not unduly intrusive.”
Toronto police Chief
Mark Saunders said recently it would be helpful if information could be shared between levels of government about suspicious purchases.
Earlier this year, the federal government introduced Bill C-71 aimed at tightening controls on handguns. Under the legislation, businesses would have to maintain inventory and transfer records for non-restricted firearms, allowing police to better trace firearms, a spokesman for Public Safety Canada said in a statement.
Jooyoung Lee, an associate professor at the University of Toronto who specializes in examining gun violence, said findings from recent years show many guns used to commit crimes in Canada have originated within the country. If civilians are able to buy firearms legally, there is always the possibility they will enter an illegal market, Lee said.
“Any time you have a legal market for civilians to own concealable firearms … there is always a possibility that those kinds of firearms purchased legally can flow into the hands of people who want to use them to commit carnage,” he said.
Although it is still unknown how the man behind Sunday’s mass shooting obtained the gun, Lee added that Bill C-71 would allow for more detailed background checks that would go further back into people’s history.
“A person who has a long history of mental health issues, including psychosis and depression, should not have access to firearms,” he said of Hussain. “I think that’s something that people on the left and people on the right agree upon.”
Domenic Saverino, owner of Al Flaherty’s Outdoor Store in Toronto, said his shop is instructed to notify police if they feel uncomfortable about a gun purchase and have done so numerous times.
Saverino said the RCMP already has checks and balances in place to track suspicious purchases and implementing more measures won’t help.
|
|
Reducing the reward: should we name the perpetrators of mass violence?
|
|
By Jane Gerster | global news.ca | July 23, 2018
|
|
At least two people are dead and a dozen more injured after a
gunman opened fire
Sunday night in Toronto’s
Greektown
neighbourhood. Eyewitnesses to the attack described blood everywhere, a young woman shot and killed while trying to run away and then, shot again, while lying on the ground. Paramedics rushed a 10-year-old girl to the hospital in critical condition. She died.
We don’t know yet who did it, only that he was a 29-year-old man. He is dead after fleeing the scene. But when police do release his name, should reporters broadcast it to the public? Will blanketing coverage with his name and his photo do more harm than good?
“I think everyone agrees that law enforcement should use the perpetrator’s name when conducting investigations and even the media should be free to use that name when conducting their own investigations but does that mean the name has to be in the news coverage?” University of Alabama criminology professor Adam Lankford said.
“Does everyone in Canada and around the world who is following this shooting have that need to know?”
Lankford is the co-author of “Don’t Name Them, Don’t Show Them, But Report Everything Else,” a 2017 study recommending against naming the perpetrators of mass shootings in an effort to deter possible copycats. Lankford is also one of nearly 150 researchers, academics and law enforcement professionals who signed their names to
an open letter to reporters
last October asking them to “stop giving fame-seeking mass shooters the personal attention they want.”
That letter posits that the perpetrator’s name and face “are among the least newsworthy details about them.” By sharing that information, the letter goes on, the media could be incentivizing “future fame-seekers,” helping create celebrity killers, and encouraging competition among perpetrators of mass violence to “maximize victim fatalities.”
It’s a familiar debate – to name or not to name – that emerges after almost every mass shooting, most of which occur in the United States. While some TV anchors like CNN’s Anderson Cooper refuse to name the perpetrators, most still do.
In an article for Poynter, media ethicist Kelly McBride laid out
why they should
. With a name you get context, she says. You allow people to come forward and voice past concerns that could be relevant, you make it possible to search their past records to see where they got access to their weapons, what past crimes they may have committed.
Names allow the public to identify trends, McBride wrote, chief among them: crimes of mass violence are most often the work of young, white men. It can also prevent suspects from being wrongly named, as was the case in the Sandy Hook shooting when journalists told the public Ryan Lanza was the shooter when it was actually his brother Adam Lanza.
“Naming an individual sets the record straight,” she wrote.
Reporters should name perpetrators, said Andrew Seaman, ethics chair for the Society of Professional Journalists, via email.
How to best cover mass shootings is a topic of ongoing debate for the society, he said, but ultimately the goal is responsible and truthful coverage.
“That has to include naming and showing the person who is suspected of perpetrating such a terrible crime,” Seaman said. “Otherwise, people begin to speculate and dangerous rumours begin to spread.”
But media already hold back certain information from the public, Lankford said. They often withhold offensive language or the names of people who have been the victims of sexual assault.
“To me, that shows that we already determine in many cases that if something’s offensive or something would violate someone’s privacy that we’re not going to blast it all over the media,” he said.
“This is the same kind of thing … why would we print it if it could potentially lead to more attacks in the future?”
Recognizing that most media still publish perpetrators’ names, Lankford said its important for outlets to decide how and when to share the name, to say, “look, if the people want the name of the perpetrator they can find it on our website, but we’re not going to give this person celebrity treatment.”
The key is to be cautious, said Pete Blair, executive director of the ALERRT Center at Texas State University. The ALERRT Center developed a
“Don’t Name Them”
campaign specifically because of the risk of wall-to-wall coverage creating celebrities, he said.
“We encourage media outlets to focus as much as possible on the community, the heroes, the victims where it’s appropriate, what people can do to protect themselves, signs of when someone is heading down this pathway to try to prevent,” Blair said.
It isn’t about hiding the information but reducing the risk of fetishization, he went on, reducing the likelihood that some future attacker will commit mass violence and then point to the Columbine High School shooters as their motivation.
“We know there will be some coverage and that the name will get out,” Blair said. “If we can limit it to make it not be wall-to-wall, you’re now famous, everybody knows your life history, your manifesto gets published, your glamour shots you sent the media get published, all those things, then you’ve reduced the reward that that person is seeking.”
Then, he said, you hope that “that doesn’t look as attractive to someone else.”
Ron Waksman, vice-president of news content for Global News and Corus Radio, said the aim is to use the names of perpetrators “sparingly and responsibly, without glamourizing or sensationalizing what they’ve done, so as not to re-traumatize the victims.”
Still, he said, it’s important to provide viewers with as much information as possible.
“The name of a perpetrator can lead to important questions and answers related to motive, which everyone wants to understand in the immediate aftermath. The perpetrator’s name also typically raises issues related to mental health, acquiring weapons and gun laws,” Waksman said.
“However, it’s also important to balance our pursuit of the facts with humanizing stories about who the victims were in life, how they lived and contributed to their communities.”
|
|
Liberals consulted social justice “weirdos” for Bill C-71, not firearms experts
|
|
By Sheila Gunn Reid | therebel.media | July 22, 2018
|
|
Watch as Tony explains who was, and who
wasn’t
,
consulted by the Liberals
before they drafted this bill that, in the end, targets legal gun owners as opposed to going after gangs.
|
|
|
Goodale Reiterates 25-Round Ruger 10/22 Mags Are ‘Prohibited’
|
|
By thegunblog.ca | July 20, 2018
|
|
TheGunBlog.ca — Canadian Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale reiterated the federal police’s controversial opinion that Ruger 10/22 cartridge magazines for more than 10 rounds are “Prohibited,” while stopping short of saying their owners could face prison.
Goodale made the comment May 24 in answer to Petition No. 421-02388, according to the
response
filed July 18 with the House of Commons and obtained by TheGunBlog.ca. The question of the petition isn’t included. A copy of the response is below.
The Ruger 10/22 in .22 LR is one of the bestselling rifles in Canada, popular with plinkers, hunters and competitors of all ages for the past half-century. The U.S. manufacturer also made a pistol that used 10/22 cartridge boxes.
Canadians own about 1.2 million 10/22 mags able to contain more than 10 rounds,
CBC News
reported in April, citing an estimate by the Canadian Shooting Sports Association. The most common are 25-round versions, and 110-round drum mags also exist.
Controversy
over the mags erupted in July 2016 after the Royal Canadian Mounted Police updated an
opinion
about them based on laws limiting the number of rounds allowed into magazines, depending on calibre.
The minister’s latest response echoes a separate July 2016
internal memo
from the RCMP, obtained by Dennis Young. That memo says owners of the magazines “could be subject to prosecution under the Criminal Code with a penalty of up to five years imprisonment.”
The minister’s latest response doesn’t repeat that line, and advises owners to contact the federal police.
With respect to 10/22 platform magazines capable of containing more than 10 cartridges, their legal status has not changed. A notification reaffirming the prohibited status of these magazines was issued by the RCMP in 2013, and a subsequent notification to the same effect was issued in May 2016.
The maximum capacity of cartridge magazines has been the same since 1993 and is currently set out in Part 4 of the Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridges, Magazines, Ammunition and Projectiles as Prohibited or Restricted (the Regulations). A magazine that has a capacity that exceeds the maximum-permitted capacity under the Regulations is a prohibited device.
Magazines designed or manufactured for use in semi-automatic handguns are limited to 10 cartridges of any calibre or type (centre-fire or rimfire) for which the magazine was-originally designed as per subsection 3(1)(b) of Part 4 of the Regulations. Any magazine that is designed or manufactured for use in a semi-automatic handgun. and exceeds 10 cartridges is a prohibited device, including rimfire calibre magazines.
Over the last 50 years, Ruger and third-party manufacturers have produced dozens of models of 10/22 platform rimfire rifles and handguns, all of which employ the same magazine port design, ammunition-feed system and magazines. This means that a Ruger 10/22 platform cartridge magazine is interchangeable and is designed and manufactured for use in all 10/22 rifle and semi-automatic handgun models:. AU 10/22 platform magazines designed for rifles and handguns-ere subject to the 10-cartridge limit under the Regulations because they have been designed or manufactured to be used in 10/22 platform semi-automatic handguns.
Businesses and individuals who believe they are in possession of a prohibited Ruger 10/22 magazine should contact the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program for more information.
Cartridge magazines, including the Ruger 10/22 platform cartridge magazine, are not included in the Firearms Reference Table.
|
|
Gun control won’t solve our violence problem
|
|
By Mark Towhey | towhey.com | July 23, 2018
|
|
In the wake of Sunday night’s mass shooting on Toronto’s popular Danforth St., politicians from the mayor to the local councillor are turning predictably to gun control rhetoric in place of any firm plan to deal with the problem. It’s what politicians do when they don’t have an answer – they ramble on about what they can do, even when it’s been proven not to work.
Twelve people were shot by a lone gunman on Danforth St. Two innocent people were killed, including a young girl, in addition to the gunman. Stronger gun control wouldn’t have saved any of them.
Addressing City Council Monday morning, Toronto mayor John Tory questioned why anyone in the city “needs a gun.” NDP councillors are reverting to form and questioning why there are guns in the city.
There are two types of guns in Toronto: legal firearms and crime guns. Legal firearms are owned by law-abiding firearms owners and pose no threat to anyone. Crime guns exist in the city because there are criminals in the city.
More laws restricting gun-ownership are not the answer. Because, people who obey gun-control laws are not the problem. Criminals are.
Two million adults are licensed to purchase and possess firearms in Canada.
Toronto’s violent crime problem is caused by gangs. Not guns.
Want to join them? It’s not easy and it’s not quick.
To own a gun legally in Canada, you must have a Possession and Acquisition License or PAL.
To qualify for a PAL, you must take a rigorous 8-hour hands-on training course and pass both written and practical tests that ensure you understand the laws about gun ownership in Canada and safe handling, storage and transportation practices for an unrestricted firearm such as a hunting or target-shooting rifle or basic shotgun.
If you want to own a restricted firearm such as a handgun, you must take a second 8-hour course and pass additional written and practical tests for those types of firearms, for which there are different regulations.
Your current and/or former “conjugal partner” must also sign off on your application – you can’t own a gun without your spouse (or ex-partner) agreeing to it. You must disclose if you’ve had any mental illness or ever been fired from your job. The police will confirm all of this.
You must then pass a rigorous police background check before a license will be issued. And, you must continue to avoid run-ins with the law. Once licensed, you will be required to pass a criminal background check every day you hold a PAL. That’s right: every day. Holding a gun license in Canada is de facto proof you’re not a criminal.
Now that you’re licensed, want to legally buy a handgun in Canada?
All handguns in Canada are restricted firearms, meaning they are all registered to their owners
– and always have been
.
First, you must find a gun shop – which is very hard to do in Toronto. You must present your PAL just to handle (often even just to see) the handguns available for sale. When you’ve chosen the one you want, you pay for it and leave it at the store. The store then sends an application to the RCMP, asking to transfer ownership of the gun from them to you. That may take up to three weeks. If the RCMP approves the transfer, you are notified to pick up the gun from the shop.
When you pick up the handgun, and any time you transport the gun outside your home, it must be unloaded and separate from ammunition. It must have a trigger lock or cable lock that renders it inoperable. It must be inside a locked container. And, it must be out of reach and hidden from view in your vehicle.
When you get home, you must secure the gun in an approved, locked container behind a locked door. Most legal firearms in Canada are protected behind four or five (or more) different locks, from front door lock to trigger lock.
Want to shoot your handgun?
You’ll need ammunition. You must have a PAL in order to purchase bullets – meaning you’ve undergone a criminal background check that day.
You can only shoot handguns at registered/approved ranges and shooting clubs, so you have to find one and join it. Then, you can transport your gun to and from the range, locked as indicated above, on the most direct and practical route.
You can’t just drive around with a gun in your car – you must be going to or coming from a range, store or repair shop and your home. At no time, can you legally carry a loaded handgun on your person outside the range or your home. Not one law-abiding Canadian gun owner carries a gun in her pocket or handbag on the street.
Almost no Canadians are allowed to carry concealed firearms unless they are police or military. A small group of uniformed security guards, such as those guarding shipments of cash, are allowed to carry handguns in holsters for self-protection.
People who obey gun laws aren’t going to break the “no murder” law
Millions of Canadians who legally own and use firearms for hunting or sport-shooting follow all of these laws every day. Making it harder for them to enjoy their sport isn’t going to make anyone safer.
After all, if you’re going to use a gun to commit murder – you are unlikely to obey the laws about gun licensing. That’s why changing Canada’s gun laws has never prevented a murder.
Canada’s proposed new gun control law – Bill C-71 requires lawful gun owners to apply for a paper permit from police to transport their gun from home to a repair shop. I find it unlikely this new regulation will save any lives. How many murderers, terrorists and gang bangers will follow this law? And, if they did… how would it prevent a crime?
If you’re a criminal, it’s easier
Of course, if you’re a criminal, it’s far easier to get a gun. You join a gang and get one from your boss. Or, you buy one on the street from another criminal. Most of these guns have been smuggled across the border from the USA. According to what justice statistics are available, very few legally-owned and lawfully-stored firearms are stolen and used in crimes. It’s too easy to smuggle cheaper, deadlier guns in from the USA.
What can government do to reduce gun crime?
- Go to war with gangs. The vast majority of gun violence in Canada is gang-related. Police know who the gangs are. They know who belongs to the gangs. They know where they live and where they operate. It is a criminal offence in Canada to belong to a criminal organization – punishable by five years in prison. Arrest gang members everywhere.
- Invest in prosecution. Provincial and federal governments need to get serious about gangs – dedicate resources to criminal intelligence targeting gangs, to anti-gang enforcement task forces. Hire additional prosecutors and judges specifically for gang offences.
- Evict gangsters. Toronto’s social housing complexes are riddled with gangs. People there live in fear. The Toronto Community Housing Corporation must work fearlessly with the City of Toronto, the police and the government of Ontario to evict known gang members and their associates from social housing. Gangs must not find safe harbour there. If laws need to change, then change those laws – it would make a difference that changing gun laws would not.
- Strengthen our Borders. The federal government needs to pour more resources into border security. Most guns used in crimes come from the USA. Stop them there. Better intelligence, better surveillance, better detection is required. Target anyone associated with a gang for detailed inspection at the border. Invest in technology that can scan vehicles for guns.
|
|
You have until Thursday, July 26, at 10:55 a.m. to sign ––
Alberta teen's gun law petition nears 83,000 signatures as it reaches final stretch
|
|
By Zach Laing | calgaryherald.com | July 22, 2018
|
|
A southern Alberta teenager’s desire to quash proposed changes to federal firearms legislation has become the second-most-signed e-petition to the government in Canadian history.
Ryan Slingerland, 15,
launched an e-petition opposing Bill C-71
— an act that aims to amend certain acts and regulations relating to firearms — at the end of March, and as of Saturday it had garnered some 83,000 signatures of support.
The proposed amendments to the Canadian Firearms Act and Criminal Code would require gun retailers to keep records of firearms inventory and sales for at least 20 years, and would require the purchaser of a hunting rifle or shotgun to present a firearms licence, while the seller would have to ensure its validity.
The bill would also expand the scope of background checks on those who want to acquire a gun.
Slingerland’s petition states the proposed act, currently in first reading, “does nothing to tackle firearms violence, but rather adds further red tape on law-abiding firearms owners.”
It adds the legislation brings back “useless and ineffective long-gun registry” and “doesn’t provide the resources to frontline police forces to tackle true sources of firearms violence: gangs and organized criminal enterprises.”
“It’s been slow. It’s getting a couple (signatures) every day, but it’s amazing to see a bunch of Canadians come together and rally behind this petition,” said Slingerland, from Coalhurst, a town of about 2,600 about 15 kilometres northwest of Lethbridge.
His hope is for the government to scrap the bill and instead devote greater resources to policing across Canada.
Slingerland said he has experience hunting with his dad and has seen the steps required to purchase a gun and get a licence.
“It’s about divvying up money … so (police forces) can have more people on the ground, having more presence that will hinder shooters from committing violence,” he said.
“We saw in Toronto how they increased police presence there … that will stop a shooter from committing firearm violence.”
The signatures of support have come from every province and territory, with over 80 votes coming from other countries and Slingerland said the support has been tremendous.
“It’s really cool to see how the whole firearms community comes together and tries to show the Liberal government that there is no point in this bill and it will be ineffective,” said Slingerland.
Lethbridge MP Rachael Harder, who sponsored the petition, said it speaks volumes about Slingerland and those who supported his petition.
“It’s amazing to watch a 15-year-old man from Coalhurst take an interest in legislation and the whole process of having his voice heard and other Canadian voices heard by creating petition is incredible,” Harder said.
When the House of Commons returns for the fall session, Harder will present the petition to the House.
The
petition
is open for signatures until Thursday.
|
|
Gallup: Gun Control Not High on List of Problems
|
|
By NRAHQ | ammoland.com | July 22, 2018
|
|
Fairfax, VA –
-(Ammoland.com)-
Gallup’s July survey
found that the number of Americans who cited guns or gun control as the most important problem facing America had returned to levels similar to before the shooting in Parkland, Fla. This month, just two percent of Americans say guns and gun control are the most important problem. It was only a few short months ago that a
record number
of Americans cited guns as the most important problem (April, 13%).
Guns aren’t mentioned at all in the Gallup article on the July survey – not even in the section about “Americans’ Views of the Top Problem Facing the U.S.”
Perhaps even more tellingly, it was not one of the top five most important problems cited by Democrats. You’ll only find the data on guns/gun control if
download the full trend file
and turn to the last page. After Parkland, we were told that “[t]he gun control movement has
reached a tipping point
” and that “[t]his time it’s different.”
But the real difference might simply have been the intensity with which the agenda-driven media pursued the issue when they believed there was an opportunity to generate momentum behind it.
The fortunate truth is that Parkland-type incidents remain extremely rare. And as time passes, details emerge that refute the false idea that gun control could stop the few that actually do occur. In the case of Parkland, these included details on the missteps of local law enforcement and the FBI and missed opportunities for early intervention and even for response at the scene.
However many Americans see guns and a perceived lack of gun control as problem facing the country, few consider it the
most important.
Economic issues, immigration, government, healthcare, and the political environment all rate higher, as well they should.
The rarity of such events makes the ones that do occur seem that much more awful. It is understandable the nation becomes riveted for a time. But knee jerk reactions promote neither safety nor good policy. And to their credit, Americans increasingly understand this as cooler heads prevail.
|
|
Kevin Beasley is hunting with 'Sandy Lake Lodge', in central Newfoundland, as the moose rut starts to heat up.
Kevin scours 'The Rock' in search of a mature bull and has some great up-close encounters.
FIND THE CITR SCHEDULE
HERE
|
|
BULL MOOSE IN THE BOGS
Airing July 29, 2018
|
|
Gun rights, local jobs concern Tory MP
|
|
By Julia Lloyd | thesudburystar.com | July 19, 2018
|
|
John Brassard, MP of the new electoral district of Barrie-Innisfil, made the third stop of his Northern tour in Sudbury on Wednesday to talk about preserving local jobs and protecting gun owner rights.
“The main focus of this tour across Northern Ontario is to hear from Canadians about how the federal government can defend local jobs,” said the MP, who serves as deputy whip in the Tory cabinet. “As well, gun ownership is a big topic in Northern Ontario and I want to talk with locals about Bill C-71.”
The proposed legislation, introduced by the governing Liberals in March, would tighten Canada's firearms law through changes to background checks and new record-keeping obligations for gun sellers.
The bill, unpopular among many Conservatives, is now back in the House of Commons for second reading.
Cheryl Gallant, the Tory MP for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, called C-71 “an act to harass law-abiding firearm owners with more and more paperwork.”
Brassard said his main issue with the legislation is that it fails to address the issue of illegal guns and gang violence.
“What is happening is that the legislation is affecting law-abiding citizens," he said.
Brassard said he has consulted with Toronto's police chief and the biggest issue right now is gun violence in the inner city -- not responsible gun owners in Northern Ontario.
“Gang members aren’t going out of their way to register their guns," he said, adding "some gang members are leasing guns now. So why does the legislation make it more difficult for responsible gun owners when it was supposed to address the issues of guns and gangs?”
Brassard said Bill C-71 is another way to inconvenience law-abiding gun owners.
See the rest of the story
HERE
|
|
The Canadian Army Is Short on Machine Guns
|
|
By Michael Peck | Nationalinterest.com | July 21, 2018
|
|
Ottawa, we have a problem.
The Canadian army is suffering from a shortage of machine guns, according to Canadian media.
The news comes as President Trump presses America’s NATO allies—including Canada—to ramp defense spending.
The machine gun furor erupted when the
Ottawa Citizen
reported that Canada was considering donating weapons to Ukraine, including
C6 machine guns
. This triggered “a number of angry emails from Canadian Forces personnel,” according to the newspaper. “They stated the weapons should be instead provided to the Canadian Forces since units are experiencing a shortage of C6s.”
The Canadian military responded that there isn't an actual shortage, but rather a temporary maintenance issue. “There is no C6 shortage in terms of meeting operational commitments, nor supporting key collective and individual training,” Department of National Defense spokesman Dan Le Bouthillier told Canadian media. “There is a fleet serviceability concern with the C6, that is being managed closely, but that does require reduced unit holdings in some instances in order to meet priority need.”
“At this time, we are managing the distribution of the C6 machine gun very carefully as these weapons undergo refurbishment,” Le Bouthillier added. “We have maximized the availability of these weapons in the field force and training establishments, while maintaining minimal depot stocks in storage to prepare for unforeseen short-notice requirements.” In 2017, the Canadian military awarded a
$32 million contract
to Colt Canada for 1,148 C6A1 FLEX machine guns.
Canada probably has enough machine guns, says Elinor Sloane, a former Canadian Forces officer and now a professor of international relations at Carleton University, Ottawa. However, aircraft and ships are a different matter.
Indeed, Ottawa is now grappling with how to replace its aging 1980s fleet of CF-18 fighters, the Canadian version of the F/A-18. Though an original partner in the Joint Strike Fighter program, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government canceled in 2015 a plan to buy sixty-five F-35s, and then in 2017 walked away from a deal to buy eighteen F/A-18 E/F
Super Hornets
. The latest plan is to buy twenty-five used F-18s from
Australia
as a stopgap while Canada conducts a competition to buy eighty-eight
new fighters
. Europe’s Typhoon and Sweden’s Gripen are among the contenders, as well as the F-35 and Super Hornet.
But
trade disputes
between Canada and the United States could throw the F-35 and Super Hornet out of the race. All of which is likely to inflame the Trump administration, who has accused the NATO countries of being “freeloaders” while America pays to maintain the strongest military in the alliance. While Trump has called for NATO members to spend 4 percent of their GDP on on defense, many have yet to fulfill previous pledges to spend 2 percent (Trump claims the United States spends 4.2 percent to GDP, though others say 3.5 percent
is more accurate
).
Canada's defense budget has been growing at a little over 1 percent of GDP, and scheduled to rise to 1.4 percent by 2024. Ironically, while Trudeau leads the Liberal Party, which traditionally has favored a military oriented toward peacekeeping, his government is reorienting toward a more muscular defense policy reminiscent of the Cold War.
“He [Trudeau] was told that the peacekeeping he thought existed no longer exists,” Sloane says. Now, Canada is
buying armed drones
, beefing up its special operations troops and delving into cyberwarfare. It is also devoting more effort toward defending Canadian interests in the Arctic—a region where multiple nations have claims, including Russia. The Canadian Navy is buying six new patrol ships designed to operate in Arctic waters.
|
|
Looking for upcoming gun shows and matches?
Visit our
WEBSITE
|
|
HOW CAN GUN OWNERS PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM UNFAIR CHARGES? ... WITH FIREARM LEGAL DEFENCE INSURANCE.
We pay legal fees, court costs and time off work to attend court; up to $150,000 per occurrence (recently increased 50% for no additional cost!) and $500,000 total per policy year. Plus get unlimited legal advice through our toll-free Legal Advice Helpline.
What price for peace of mind?
The price is just $95 per year and
CSSA members are eligible for a $10 discount – click on “Buy Now” and enter the following exclusive club code to access your savings: CSSA001.
You are not required to disclose any information about firearms in your possession.
Firearm Legal Defence
insurance covers:
- Defence from prosecution should you be charged with an offence arising out of the use, storage, display, transportation or handling of a firearm;
- cases where a firearm is used in self defence, the defence of a person under your protection or the defence of your property;
- appealing an event where a licensing, regulatory or judicial authority refuses to renew, suspends, revokes, cancels or alters the terms of your firearms license. Note that this provision does not apply to new license applications.
It will pay for:
- The cost of retaining a lawyer or other appointed representative, including court fees, experts’ fees, police reports and medical reports;
- costs awarded by the court to opponents in civil cases if the insured person has been ordered to pay them, or pays them with the agreement of the insurance company;
- lost salary or wages for the time the insured is off work to attend court or any other hearing at the request of the appointed representative, up to a maximum of $500 per day, and $10,000 in total.
NOTE - FirearmLegalDefence is not a CSSA product but is highly recommended by the association and is used by our staff and directors. - Tony B.
|
|
CSSA Home and Auto Insurance
|
|
Team CSSA has partnered with our long-time broker, ThinkInsure Ltd., to offer you Group Automobile and Homeowners insurance through Novex.
You can save 12% off your automobile insurance premiums and 10% off your property insurance premiums.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
