Team CSSA E-News - July 19, 2016

CSSA Life Member, Dennis Young, acknowledged MASTER of the Access to Information Program (ATIP), learned something interesting on June 7, 2016 – knowledge that ought to shock and frighten every single licensed gun owner in Canada. 

Dennis asked a series of questions to find out what information is held by the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC). The information Dennis received back – what little of it there was – shines a light on who the RCMP perceives to be the priority for their attention.

You, dear CSSA members, won't like the answer.

First, here is Dennis Young's Access to Information Request:

“...a time and date acceptable to both our offices, please provide a snapshot from CPIC showing the following data:

the number of convicted violent offenders who have completely served their sentences;
the number of persons prohibited from owning firearms by the courts;
the number of persons released on bail, parole and conditional release;
the number of persons with restraining/protection orders against them;
the number of persons with an outstanding criminal arrest warrant;
the number of persons who have had their firearms licence revoked;
the number of firearms licence holders currently being investigated as a result of the Continuous Eligibility Program; and
for each group of persons in items (1) to (5), please show the number of persons that currently hold a valid firearms licence.”

It's fantastic that Dennis would even think to ask these questions in an ATIP request, but it's the RCMP’s responses that are fascinating, or more to the point, frightening.

You would expect police would know the answers to questions 1 through 5, wouldn't you? It's a valid police function to know how many violent offenders they're dealing with who meet these criteria. Or so one would think. Then again, we want to believe police agencies are far more interested in actual criminals than they are in the likes of lawful gun owners.

But that's where we would be wrong. Horribly wrong.

Here's the response from the RCMP:

“Based on the information provided, a search for records was conducted in the CPIC system. Unfortunately, we were unable to locate records which respond to your request. Please take note, that the CPI Centre is unable to provide answers to the questions asked as the CPIC system is not used for statistical purposes.”

They don't know the answer to a single one of those questions. Not one. That would be bad enough, but the answer Dennis Young received next makes it even worse.

On June 10, 2016, Dennis received this in an email:

“The information requested by the requester is not all contained in CPIC. It may reside in other databases or records held by other federal departments and agencies, as well as with provincial and municipal governments and agencies.”

That's it. The information is “not all contained in CPIC”. Dennis then asked which pieces of information ARE contained in CPIC. Here's the response he received to that question:

From: Manon Fortin [ mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: June 13, 2016 1:31 PM
To: Dennis < [email protected] >
Subject: RE: RCMP ATIP Response - CPIC Stats - A-2016-02501

Dear Mr. YOUNG,

As we are mandated by law under the Accountability Act (duty to assist) we have received word from one of our branches that some information can be provided without going through the formal ATIP procedures. Please see the statement below from one of our OPI:

"With respect to question (6), there were 2,347 firearms licences revoked in 2015. This information is available in the 2015 Commissioner of Firearms report, available on the Royal Canadian Mounted Police website at

With respect to question (7), please note that, in Canada, after a firearms licence is approved, continuous eligibility screening is conducted over the term of the licence. Accordingly, all current holders of firearms licences are recorded in the Canadian Firearms Information System (CFIS). CFIS automatically checks with the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) every day to determine whether a licence holder has been the subject of an incident report in CPIC. If a licensed individual is the subject of a police report related to a section 5 event, as per the Firearms Act, a report will be automatically sent to the Chief Firearms Officer of the applicant’s jurisdiction for review and investigation.

The Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) does not have information related to questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8 of this request because these items fall outside the CFP's mandate.

Not only is the information Dennis sought “not all contained in CPIC”, the ONLY people the RCMP track continuously through CPIC are law-abiding, licensed Canadian firearm owners.

Seriously? Wow.

The RCMP, as part of the continuous screening program of law-abiding firearm owners, tracks and monitors every single licensed Canadian every single day to see if they've broken the law in some manner.

Translation: While every single law-abiding Canadian firearm licence holder is constantly under investigation, the RCMP CANNOT tell us:

  • how many convicted violent offenders have completely served their sentences
  • how many people are prohibited from owning firearms by the courts
  • how many people are released on bail, parole and/or conditional release
  • how many people have restraining/protection orders against them, or
  • how many people have outstanding arrest warrants.

All they can tell us is that every single law-abiding licensed Canadian firearm owner is constantly under investigation.

Does that sound as dysfunctional to you as it does to us?
Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership |Ammoland | July 14, 2016

USA –  -(  The principles behind the gun control movement can’t survive even the most basic scrutiny, so the Controllers must constantly fall back on that oldest debating strategy: lies.

The lies they favor vary from year to year, sometimes old lies are recycled, sometimes new ones are created and tested to see how well they survive in the wild.

Here’s my list of the current top ten.  See if you agree and feel free to add more.

1. We need to have a national conversation on guns.

This statement is an attempt to obscure the fact that Americans have been debating and passing gun laws since the beginning of the republic.   The Controllers think you have a short memory, slept through American History class and only use the internet to watch silly animal videos.

2. The good guy with a gun is a myth,  especially in regard to mass shootings.

It may seem that way for two reasons.  First, the media deliberately downplays or ignores cases where citizens defend themselves with a gun; it doesn’t fit their anti-gun narrative.  Second, when a mass murder is apparently prevented by a good guy with a gun, there is no way to prove what would have happened otherwise, so the media considers it a non-event.

3. Because of an act passed by Congress, gun Manufacturers can’t be sued.

Actually, they can if they sell a defective product and for many other reasons, just like other companies.  The law only says they can’t be sued for criminal misuse of their product by another party.  The law was passed after the Controllers openly announced their goal to drive gun manufacturers out of business with lawsuits.

4. Assault weapons are incredibly powerful guns that spray bullets.

As knowledgeable gun owners keep trying to explain, the rifles that the Controllers call “assault weapons” are not machine guns and the ammunition they use is much less powerful than common hunting rifle ammunition.

5. Simply passing more gun control laws will reduce violence.  Simply passing more gun control laws will reduce violence.

What about all the extra cops, judges, courts and prisons you need to enforce those laws?

Most current gun laws are not enforced, because we simply don’t have the resources to do so.  Law enforcement agencies sensibly use their budget in ways that produce the greatest benefit and that rarely includes enforcement of gun laws.

Even if one believes that gun control laws can be effective, simply passing more laws without allocating massive additional resources is a waste of time.

The fact that those resources are not appropriated gives you an important clue about the devious plans of the controllers.

6. Most gun owners, even NRA members, want more gun control.

You can create polls that will prove anything you want if you get to write the questions and choose who to ask.  When one slanted poll by an anti-gun group happened to produce this result, the Controllers latched onto it and won’t let go, because it is such a useful lie.

7. We won’t take your guns, we just want sensible gun control like in England and Australia.

The problem with this self-contradictory statement is that England and Australia both perpetrated massive forced gun confiscations, aided by prior gun registration.  And of course there have been a number of examples of confiscation in the United States as well.

8. All we want is a sensible compromise.

All right then, a compromise means that both sides give up something, so what are you willing to give up?  If you are just taking things from the other side, it isn’t a compromise, it’s extortion.  The Controllers are playing the old “what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is negotiable” game.

9. You can buy a machine gun at a gun show without a background check.

This blatant falsehood has been popping up for years in the strangest places.  The most famous example is a 2011 Al Qaeda recruiting video, which has been quoted by many anti-gun politicians and media outlets.  If it sounds good, why not use it?  That’s how the controllers roll.

10. In 1997, Congress enacted a ban on all gun violence research.

Au contraire! The amendment in question simply said that the CDC could not use your tax dollars to promote gun control, which is what they were shamelessly and dishonestly doing in the years leading up to 1997.  It does not prohibit honest, unbiased research by the CDC, if they ever care to do any.  It also has no effect on the billionaire-funded, junk-science studies, favored by the gun control lobby.

It’s hard to stop at only ten lies, but you get the idea.  Do you see why the two sides in the gun debate never agree on anything?

You can’t negotiate effectively when one side fabricates facts and hides their true goals.  One can only conclude that the gun control lobby is more interested in political posturing and cultural warfare than in reducing “gun violence.

—Dr. Michael S. Brown is a pragmatic Libertarian environmentalist who has been studying the gun debate for three decades and considers it a fascinating way to learn about human nature and politics.

Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, a project of the Second Amendment Foundation.

See the story:
* Airing July 23, 2016 *

Two giant black bears on opening day is how the season kicked off for Paul  Beasley and his father, Ken .

They didn't have to hunt very hard as the bears
were abundant and very active in Northern Ontario

See the trailer:

Canada in the Rough can be found on OLN, WILD TV, and CHEX. For a full schedule, visit:

By Harold Hutchison | Freehand Writer | The Daily Caller | July 14, 2016

According to many media reports, Indiana Governor Mike Pence has been chosen by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump to be his running mate. Pence served for 12 years as a member of the House of Representatives before winning the 2012 Indiana gubernatorial election.

Trump’s record on the Second Amendment includes support in 2000 for the ban on so-called “assault weapons” that Bill Clinton pushed through in 1994. This had been a weakness for Trump in the primary.

Governor Pence has been very strong on Second Amendment issues. In 2005, he voted to pass the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which halted lawsuits against firearms manufacturers. Gun-grabbers had sought to hold firearms manufacturers financially responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms, and used the threat of the lawsuits to force through policies that had been rejected by state legislatures and Congress.

Then-Representative Pence also supported efforts to roll back Washington, D.C.’s onerous laws, to pass concealed carry reciprocity, to allow veterans to register war trophies from overseas, to remove antiquated laws governing the sale of firearms, and to commend the NRA’s Eddie Eagle firearms safety program.

Giving up his Congressional seat to run for governor, Pence continued his strong pro-Second Amendment track record after winning the governorship, including signing S.B. 229 in 2014, which not only ended the risk of gun owners becoming accidental felons and prohibiting the use of tax dollars for gun buybacks. As governor of Indiana, Pence signed pro-hunting legislation as well.

In the wake of the terrorist attack on a Navy recruiting station in Chattanooga, Tennessee, Governor Pence allowed National Guard personnel to carry firearms for personal protection. Pence told Indiana lawmakers in the 2016 State of the State speech in front of the Indiana Legislature, “In the wake of the terrorist attack on a recruiting station in Chattanooga, Tennessee, I’m proud to say that Indiana was among the first states to allow our National Guard to carry firearms at all recruiting stations. Hoosiers know firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens–including our National Guard–makes our communities more safe not, less safe. Indiana will always defend the right to keep and bear arms.”

Governor Pence routinely received A and A+ ratings from the National Rifle Association’s Political Victory Fund in his campaigns. This past May, he addressed the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum during the NRA Annual Meetings in Louisville, Kentucky. He also addressed the NRA’s Celebration of American Values in 2010.

If personnel are policy, then Donald Trump has sent a very strong signal in support of the Second Amendment with the selection of Governor Pence.

See the story:

By Othmar Vohringer | Merritt Herald | July 14, 2016

It has become a common scenario to target firearm owners after a mass shooting and it is no different with the recent shooting at a gay bar in Orlando. Mainstream media and politicians fall over themselves promoting the urgency of more gun control laws, using buzz words like “gun violence,” “assault rifles,” “AR-15” and “semi-automatic weapons.” The latter three phrases are often used interchangeably to create the illusion that are all the same. This strategy works well to scare a largely ignorant population into thinking that drastic measures are needed to prevent people from getting murdered with firearms.

Of course there is no such thing as “gun violence.” Firearms are not violent, people can — and often are — violent and they use whatever means they have to commit murder or harm. If you look up the FBI statistics about murder rates by weapon type it turns out that a large number of homicides are not carried out with firearms but with an array of other weapons too. The knife, for example, ranks the highest after firearms. Next are blunt instruments (baseball bat, crowbar and such). Yet, nobody in their right mind would use the phrase “knife violence” or “baseball violence.”

The simple truth is that stricter firearm laws do not lower violence. Here in Canada we had a very strict gun control law for over ten years: the $2 billion firearms registry. When the conservative government finally abolished it there was a big outcry with fears fueled by the media that now “gun crime” would rise. Statistics show that this has not happened. The crime rate involving guns did not rise in fact it went down. Even the RCMP, in charge of gun control and enforcing the law, had to admit that not a single registered firearm, of the millions of guns on the registry or their owners, was involved in any firearm related criminal activity. England, next to Germany, has the most restrictive firearms control laws in Europe, they even banned carrying a knife, and yet the man who murdered British MP Jo Cox last month did so with a firearm and a knife. In China civilians can’t own any firearms whatsoever, even the police officers must store their firearms at the police station at the end of their shift, yet China experiences a relatively high number of violent crimes involving firearms.

If stricter laws don’t work to reduce violent crimes then what is the problem? The system is the problem! In several interviews Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, points out that the system is broken, more specifically the information exchange between law-enforcement agencies. For example, in the case of the Orlando shooting the FBI knew for the two years that Mateen was a radicalized individual and put him on a “no-fly” list. However, according to Sherriff Clake and others, the FBI did not pass that information on to other law-enforcement agencies in the country. Neglecting to pass information on made it possible that Mateen could legally purchase a firearm. The firearm store owner checked Mateen’s name — and it came up clean.

We don’t need more laws; we need to fix the broken information system, enforce the laws we have and enforce them to the fullest extent instead of making up the usual excuses for criminals. Above all, let law enforcement do their work uninterrupted by politically correct agendas. With issues like gun control I am always reminded of a line I read a few years ago “For every problem there are hundreds of people chopping away at the leaves and branches, but nobody tackles the root of the problem.”

For a better understanding let me explain the terms “assault rifle,” “semi-automatic firearms,” and “AR-15.” Knowing the difference may make you less vulnerable to the lies and myth you hear and read.

An “assault firearm” is capable of select and serial fire, meaning, by the flick of a switch it can be turned from a single shot into serial fire capability. Serial fire capability lets the shooter pull the trigger once and the weapon keeps on shooting, like a machine gun, until the trigger is let go again or the magazine is empty. There is no need to ask for a ban on assault firearms because they are already forbidden to own, sell and purchase, even in America.  However that does not stop the anti-gun lobby from suggesting that these types of firearms are legally owned by private citizens.

A “semi-automatic firearm (also called “self-loading firearm”) uses recoil or gas from the spent cartridge energy to automatically load a new cartridge into the chamber. Unlike the ‘assault rifle’ the shooter must pull the trigger each time to fire the gun. Many hunting firearms are semi-automatic, including shotguns and .22 caliber sporting rifles. The much maligned AR-15 rifle is also a semi-automatic rifle but cosmetically dressed up to look like an assault rifle, the “AR” stands for ArmaLite Rifle, not — as often deliberately described by mainstream media — for “assault rifle.”

On a closing note I suggest that people should not give too much credit to the constant spread of deliberate misinformation and outright lies about firearms and lack of firearm laws. And finally, we don’t solve problems of escalating violence by vilifying and discriminating against the millions of law-abiding firearm owners. Problems are solved by targeting the root of the problem, not by looking for scapegoats.

Othmar Vohringer lives in the Nicola Valley. He is an animal behaviourist and outdoor writer for hunting magazines in Canada and the U.S.

See the story:

By David P. Ball | Toronto Metro | July 14, 2016

Smuggling charges, hidden handguns more of a warning to gun-toting U.S. tourists, not crime-related says SFU prof.

If you feel safer from gun violence thanks to news that border agents have been catching U.S. handguns at the border recently, you’re likely mistaken.

The Canada Border Services Agency announced on Tuesday that two travellers busted with guns at the Abbotsford border crossing were convicted of smuggling, and on Monday the agency announced it had caught a woman in Prince Rupert who had hidden parts of a handgun throughout her car while driving from Alaska.

“Canadian firearms laws are clear,” CBSA said in a press release. “Anyone importing firearms and weapons into Canada must declare them and meet all licensing and registration requirements under the Firearms Act.

“Failure to declare firearms and weapons may lead to prosecution in a court of law.”

California resident Rodrick Hines, 32, was arrested on May 4 with a .40-calibre pistol and two large-capacity magazines under his car’s dash, and pleaded guilty to smuggling. Several weeks later, Washington resident Kiho Kang, 48, was caught with a 9mm restricted handgun and five large-capacity magazines in his trunk; he also pleaded guilty to smuggling.

The agency revealed that already this year, guards at the Abbotsford-Huntingdon crossing had seized 32 guns from travellers.

A third case last month saw a U.S. woman driving the Alaska highway busted for hiding a 0.380 handgun frame in her car’s engine air filter — leading guards to discovering the rest of the gun parts hidden throughout her car.

Although gun violence in the Lower Mainland has led to furor amongst residents after several fatal shootings this year — and mounting concern about rampant mass shootings south of the border — one Simon Fraser University criminology professor said the two issues are entirely unrelated and should not be confused.

 “It’s showcasing, to deter people coming north with their hobby firearms,” he told Metro. “CBSA are really demonstrating that they’re on the job.

“That’s fine, but I don’t think any of these people being rounded up and having their firearms confiscated are the kinds of people who would be involved with any organized criminal activity.”

He said in all likelihood, “these are careless Americans who are used to being able to carry firearms in their home jurisdictions,” he added, “and who simply wandered into Canada without thinking of what they’re doing … careless travelers being picked up by alert CBSA personnel.”

As for shooting incidents here in B.C., often between rival gangs, he said, and those guns are generally in Canada already but hidden away in stockpiles until needed again, Gordon said. When they are smuggled across the border, he added, it’s in large numbers — sometimes hidden inside hollowed out lumber — and not one-by-one with travellers.

“The importation illegally of firearms certainly does occur, but when it does it’s lots,” he said. “We have to have an eye for the source of the weapons.

“The Americans are barely able to control the source of the weapons in their own jurisdictions. There’s not an awful lot that can be done so long as we’re neighbouring one of the world’s largest arsenals.”

See the story:

Toll-free: 1-888-873-4339          Fax:  416-679-9910         [email protected]