Trudeau promises more gun control and goes on the attack against Scheer
- Thread starter IronNoggin
- Start date
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
C-21 has received Royal Assent, and what that means for you
C-21 received Royal Assent a couple weeks ago, just before Christmas. This is a video breaking down the big changes PAL holders are likely to experience as well as to correct a lot of the misinformation which is out there on this topic.Coming into Force: This bill has received Royal Assent but it has NOT yet come into force (as of Jan 4th, 2024). Coming into force is still TBA with the exception of three provisions for new/modified criminal offences which come into force 30 days after December 15th. These three offences are for altering a cartridge magazine, possession/distribution of computer data pertaining to a firearm, and unlawful manufacturing of a firearm.
See the full text of the bill here:
Acronyms:
OIC: Order In Council
This is effectively a unilateral change to a law without the need for the legislative process.
CFP: Canadian Firearms Program
This is the Federal firearms licensing body of the Canadian Government
CFO: Chief Firearms Officer
This is the Provincial firearms licensing body of their respective provincial Governments
CFAC: Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee
This is a reconstituted Federally appointed committee whose job it will be to submit recommendations to the governor in council regarding actions of future firearms bans. This committee was brought back after significant political pressure was put on the Liberal Government as a result of unilateral unfairness towards firearms owners inherent with the OIC process. To combat this, the federal government decided to bring back their "impartial" and "non-partisan" committee in order to make these decisions for them. This "non-partisan" group consists of, but not limited to, members of the gun control lobby, women's advocacy groups, law enforcement, indigenous communities leaders and are hand picked by Trudeau or the sitting liberal Public Safety Minister. I did not use this term in the video, but this group will be behind most/all of the future OIC's coming to Canada for the rest of the liberal government's reign.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Bill C-21 will hardly bother gun-toting criminals
The year 2023 proved to be a contentious year for gun control in Canada. After much acrimony in both the House of Commons and the Senate, Bill C-21 was finally passed unamended, and received Royal Assent shortly before Christmas.Whether or not this is to be considered a good thing depends on where one sits in the Canadian gun control debate.
C-21 ushered in a huge, sweeping net of laws and regulations. For the proponents of gun control in Canada — Polysesouvient, Doctors for Protection Against Guns and the Coalition for Gun Control — C-21 is largely satisfactory, as well it should be as in its essence. It is a shopping list of their sundry gun control demands of the Trudeau government.
Nevertheless, they have not been shy in stating that it does not mark the end of their demands. On the other side of the issue, groups such as the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights, the National Firearms Association and various provincial hunting/sportsmen’s organizations have been steadfast in their opposition to C-21. They claim it will do very little in terms of combatting crime committed with firearms while further hobbling the firearms/hunting industry in Canada and burdening legal gun owners with yet more pointless layers of red tape and bureaucracy.
Bill exploits voter ignorance
Gun control in Canada is one of those strange policy realms in which people can be considered as knowledgeable or pretty much in the dark. C-21 was crafted by people who should be knowledgeable to appeal to those in the latter group. As such, it has several elements that exploit any lack of knowledge of Canada’s gun control regime. For instance, so called “red” and “yellow flag laws”.
Another central plank of Trudeau’s gun control policy is the Order-in-Council (OIC) of May 2020 in which some 1,500 types of semi-automatic long guns were declared to be prohibited firearms. It was at that time Trudeau stated, “You don’t need an AR-15 to take down a deer” — except when the government says so. Fast forward to December 2023 and Sidney Island off the BC coast, where it seems you do need an AR-15 to take down a deer. Not only AR-15s, but Americans with AR-15s, 30-round magazines, suppressors and helicopters to shoot 84 deer at a cost of $10, 000 per deer.
The Trudeau government found it necessary to use semi-automatic rifles with 30-round magazines for small deer in coastal BC, but at the same time it wants to tell an elderly Inuit hunter out on the ice with his family that his old lever action rifle, chambered in a cartridge adequate for deer and caribou but unsuited to emergency use on polar bears, save for its magazine capacity, must handicap himself further and endanger their lives by having that magazine capacity reduced from seven or eight cartridges to five.
And all for the sake of satisfying gun control advocates in downtown Montreal. For despite Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc’s assurances that First Nations people such as this hypothetical Inuit hunter were adequately consulted and happy with his government’s gun control regime, including C21, what became evident during the various hearings was that this was, in fact, not the case.
All in all, C-21 provides very little substance in the way of preventing crimes with firearms. It is overly bureaucratic and restrictive towards those who willingly follow the rules of Canada’s already stringent firearms law regime, while doing very little to deter those who flout those same rules to commit crimes.
In the end, C-21 is simply a sop to those who know little about Canadian gun laws, designed for the appearance of a government getting tough on thugs with guns, while it merely turns the screws ever tighter on those who have always played by the rules.
The Soapbox: Bill C-21 will hardly bother gun-toting criminals
Sudburian George Fritz weighs in on the effort to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but says the federal Liberals’ gun control bill is going to punish legal gun owners instead
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
And once again NO interest nor responses to date.
Round three on this one.
Watch for the impending extension coming soon...
Round three on this one.
Watch for the impending extension coming soon...
Feds begin search for vendors to operate firearm confiscation program
OTTAWA – The federal government has begun searching for vendors interested in managing their impending firearms confiscation program just weeks after the Trudeau Liberals’ gun legislation became law and nearly four years after their contentious ban on so-called “assault weapons.”
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
New gun controls will only stifle legal gun owners
At the same time, Bill C-21 hardly bothers the criminal elementLast year proved to be a contentious year for gun control in Canada. After much acrimony in both the Commons and the Senate, Bill C-21 was finally passed unamended, and received Royal Assent shortly before Christmas. Whether this is to be considered a good thing depends on where one sits in the Canadian gun control debate.
C-21 ushered in a huge, sweeping net of laws and regulations. For the proponents of gun control in Canada; Polysesouvient, Doctors for Protection Against Guns and The Coalition for Gun Control, C-21 is largely satisfactory, as well it should be as in its essence. It is a shopping list of their sundry gun control demands of the Trudeau government. Nevertheless, they have not been shy in stating that it does not mark the end of their demands.
On the other side of the issue, groups such as the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights, the National Firearms Association and provincial hunting/sportsmen’s organizations have been steadfast in their opposition to C-21. They claim it will do very little in terms of combatting crime committed with firearms while further hobbling the firearms/hunting industry in Canada and burdening legal gun owners with yet more pointless layers of red tape and bureaucracy.
Making gun owners criminals
C-21 is similarly problematic when it comes to popular semi-automatic firearms; but only if you are a legal gun owner who has meticulously obeyed the law.
Despite Minister Dominic LeBlanc’s assurances that First Nations people, such as this hypothetical Inuit hunter, were adequately consulted and happy with his government’s gun control regime, including C-21, what became evident during the various hearings was that this was, in fact, not the case.
All in all, C-21 provides very little substance in the way of preventing crimes with firearms. It is overly bureaucratic and restrictive towards those who willingly follow the rules of Canada’s already stringent firearms law regime while doing very little to deter those who flout those same rules to commit crimes.
Article content
In short, there is nothing in C-21 that would have prevented people like the Nova Scotia mass killer from being able to carry out his rampage, despite what the Trudeau Liberals and their supporters would have one believe. The firearms used in that tragedy were all illegally obtained. Nothing in C-21 would prevent the same thing from happening again. In fact, all the laws needed to prevent that tragedy from occurring are already in place. What was needed to prevent it was the enforcement of existing laws, not the creation of additional laws to make obtaining illegal firearms and murder with those illegal firearms doubly illegal.
In the end, C-21 is simply a sop to those who know little about Canadian gun laws. It’s designed for the appearance of the government getting tough on thugs with guns while it merely turns the screws ever tighter on those who have always played by the rules.
Sudbury column: New gun controls will only stifle legal gun owners
At the same time, Bill C-21 hardly bothers the criminal element.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
CSAAA: The Impact of Handgun & Sporting Rifle Prohibitions
In Canada, the hunting and firearm industry, along with the hunting and sport shooting community, have long been intertwined, driving not only economic growth but also cultural heritage. However, recent prohibitions of handguns and sporting rifles threaten to destabilize this longstanding tradition, with significant repercussions for businesses, sport shooters and hunters alike.
According to data from the CSAAA Business Survey conducted in November 2018, a staggering percentage of firearms business owners express grave concerns about the potential prohibition of handguns and semi-automatic rifles or shotguns. The survey indicates that 42% of firearms business owners believe a handgun ban would have a “devastating” effect on their operations, while 28% anticipate a “very negative” impact. Similarly, 52% of sporting arms businesses foresee a “devastating” effect from a ban on semi-automatic rifles or shotguns, with 30% expecting a “very negative” outcome.
These concerns are not unfounded. Already, businesses in the sector are experiencing closures and significant reductions in operations. The ripple effects will are being felt across the entire industry. Member-driven ranges, vital not only for sport shooters but also for law enforcement training, are at risk of closure, depriving law enforcement officers of essential practice, and communities of essential resources.
It’s obvious that the focus should be on addressing criminal activity rather than implementing sweeping bans that only affect law-abiding citizens and legitimate businesses. Prohibitions driven by political agendas often fail to address the root causes of crime while inflicting substantial economic damage.
The consequences of such prohibitions extend beyond the firearm industry. With the elimination of handgun sales and restrictions on modern sporting rifles, the availability of essential equipment and ammunition will diminish. Import costs, availability for the Canadian market and this scarcity will inevitably drive-up prices, making it more challenging for hunters to access the tools they need for their activities. This includes Indigenous hunters and sustenance hunters.
Canadian hunting and firearm business owners are resilient, but they face an uncertain future. Navigating through these challenges requires a balanced approach that acknowledges both the concerns for public safety and the preservation of lawful activities and businesses. Collaborative efforts between policymakers, law enforcement, industry stakeholders, and community members are essential to finding effective solutions that address societal concerns without unduly burdening lawful gun owners and businesses.
The prohibitions on handguns and sporting rifles threatens not only the viability of businesses but also the cherished traditions of hunting, conservation, and sport shooting in Canada.
Instead of punitive measures, policymakers should focus on evidence-based strategies to combat crime while preserving the rights and livelihoods of law-abiding citizens and the industries that support them. We look forward to working with the next government to help rectify the harmful decisions made by the current government
In Canada, the hunting and firearm industry, along with the hunting and sport shooting community, have long been intertwined, driving not only economic growth but also cultural heritage. However, recent prohibitions of handguns and sporting rifles threaten to destabilize this longstanding tradition, with significant repercussions for businesses, sport shooters and hunters alike.
According to data from the CSAAA Business Survey conducted in November 2018, a staggering percentage of firearms business owners express grave concerns about the potential prohibition of handguns and semi-automatic rifles or shotguns. The survey indicates that 42% of firearms business owners believe a handgun ban would have a “devastating” effect on their operations, while 28% anticipate a “very negative” impact. Similarly, 52% of sporting arms businesses foresee a “devastating” effect from a ban on semi-automatic rifles or shotguns, with 30% expecting a “very negative” outcome.
These concerns are not unfounded. Already, businesses in the sector are experiencing closures and significant reductions in operations. The ripple effects will are being felt across the entire industry. Member-driven ranges, vital not only for sport shooters but also for law enforcement training, are at risk of closure, depriving law enforcement officers of essential practice, and communities of essential resources.
It’s obvious that the focus should be on addressing criminal activity rather than implementing sweeping bans that only affect law-abiding citizens and legitimate businesses. Prohibitions driven by political agendas often fail to address the root causes of crime while inflicting substantial economic damage.
The consequences of such prohibitions extend beyond the firearm industry. With the elimination of handgun sales and restrictions on modern sporting rifles, the availability of essential equipment and ammunition will diminish. Import costs, availability for the Canadian market and this scarcity will inevitably drive-up prices, making it more challenging for hunters to access the tools they need for their activities. This includes Indigenous hunters and sustenance hunters.
Canadian hunting and firearm business owners are resilient, but they face an uncertain future. Navigating through these challenges requires a balanced approach that acknowledges both the concerns for public safety and the preservation of lawful activities and businesses. Collaborative efforts between policymakers, law enforcement, industry stakeholders, and community members are essential to finding effective solutions that address societal concerns without unduly burdening lawful gun owners and businesses.
The prohibitions on handguns and sporting rifles threatens not only the viability of businesses but also the cherished traditions of hunting, conservation, and sport shooting in Canada.
Instead of punitive measures, policymakers should focus on evidence-based strategies to combat crime while preserving the rights and livelihoods of law-abiding citizens and the industries that support them. We look forward to working with the next government to help rectify the harmful decisions made by the current government
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
From the NFA Facebook, Instagram:
BREAKING NEWS: ONTARIO OPTS OUT
Only hours ago, during a lobby meeting with the solicitor general of Ontario, the honourable Michael Kerzner assured our in-house lobbyist that, should the Liberal/NDP scheme for a ' firearms buyback' come to fruition (in reality, the confiscation of legal property with little to no compensation), the Doug Ford provincial government would be unwilling to divert provincial resources to the effort. This would be a major roadblock in the Liberal/NDP Coalition's ideologically driven initiative against legal, law-abiding firearms owners.
Thank you, Ontario!
BREAKING NEWS: ONTARIO OPTS OUT
Only hours ago, during a lobby meeting with the solicitor general of Ontario, the honourable Michael Kerzner assured our in-house lobbyist that, should the Liberal/NDP scheme for a ' firearms buyback' come to fruition (in reality, the confiscation of legal property with little to no compensation), the Doug Ford provincial government would be unwilling to divert provincial resources to the effort. This would be a major roadblock in the Liberal/NDP Coalition's ideologically driven initiative against legal, law-abiding firearms owners.
Thank you, Ontario!
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Bryan Allen
Well-Known Member
cut the ad-- get on with it !
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Now a PAL License is mandatory to acquire magazines!
Can't make this stuff up!
Authorization to transfer a cartridge magazine to individuals (subsection 25(1) of the Firearms Act)
An individual may transfer cartridge magazine that is not deemed prohibited only if the transferee possesses a valid firearms licence.
Magazines may not be acquired during the licence "extension period" (subsection 64(1.2) of the Firearms Act)
Following the expiration of a firearms licence, a licence holder may not acquire cartridge magazines during the extension period (six months) and may only acquire cartridge magazines once the licence is renewed.
Can't make this stuff up!
Authorization to transfer a cartridge magazine to individuals (subsection 25(1) of the Firearms Act)
An individual may transfer cartridge magazine that is not deemed prohibited only if the transferee possesses a valid firearms licence.
Magazines may not be acquired during the licence "extension period" (subsection 64(1.2) of the Firearms Act)
Following the expiration of a firearms licence, a licence holder may not acquire cartridge magazines during the extension period (six months) and may only acquire cartridge magazines once the licence is renewed.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
The most fulsome & comprehensive overview of what C 21 does legislatively
Legislative Summary of Bill C-21: An Act to Amend Certain Acts and to Make Certain Consequential Amendments (Firearms)
Contents
1 Background
1.1 Canadian Firearms Framework
1.2 Regulations
2 Description and Analysis
2.1 Criminal Code (Clauses 1 to 14.2)
2.1.1 Prohibited Firearms (Clauses 1(1), 1(2), 1(6) and 14.2)
2.1.2 Replica Firearms (Clause 1(4))
2.1.3 Firearm Parts (Clause 1(5))
2.1.4 Offence: Possessing or Distributing Computer Data (Clause 1.4)
2.1.5 Offence: Altering Cartridge Magazine (Clauses 2 and 3)
2.1.6 Interception of Private Communications (Clause 13)
2.1.7 Emergency Prohibition Orders (Clauses 4 and 6)
2.1.8 Emergency Limitations on Access Orders (Clauses 10 and 11)
2.1.9 Public Officers (Clause 12)
2.1.10 Maximum Penalties (Clause 14)
2.2 Firearms Act (Clauses 15 to 48)
2.2.1 Cartridge Magazines
2.2.2 Revocation of Licence in the Event of a Protection Order or Domestic Violence (Clauses 15, 16, 36, 38(1) and 41 and 45)
2.2.3 Temporary Storage of Firearms When Dealing with a Mental Illness or Similar Issue (Clause 18)
2.2.4 Handguns
2.2.4.1 Registration Certificate and Transportation of Handguns from a Port of Entry (Clauses 17, 19 and 43)
2.2.5 Transfer of Handguns (Clauses 21 to 23 and 25)
2.2.6 Importation of Ammunition, Firearm Parts and Cartridge Magazines (Clause 26)
2.2.7 Licences, Authorizations to Carry and Authorizations to Transport (Clauses 27 to 29, 32, 33 and 35)
2.2.7.1 Lawful Profession or Occupation
2.2.7.2 Protection of Life
2.2.8 Suspension of Licence (Clauses 34 and 35)
2.2.9 Reference to Provincial Court Judge (referral) (Clause 37)
2.2.10 Disclosure of Information (Clause 39)
2.2.11 Report to the Federal Minister (Clause 42)
2.2.12 Advertising (Clause 44)
2.3 Nuclear Safety and Control Act (Clauses 49 to 51)
2.3.1 High-Security Sites and Nuclear Security Officers (Clauses 49 and 50)
2.3.2 Regulations (Clause 51)
2.4 Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Clauses 52 to 63)
2.4.1 Transborder Criminality (Clauses 52, 53 and 55 to 57)
2.5 Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Legislative Summary of Bill C-21: An Act to Amend Certain Acts and to Make Certain Consequential Amendments (Firearms)
Contents
1 Background
1.1 Canadian Firearms Framework
1.2 Regulations
2 Description and Analysis
2.1 Criminal Code (Clauses 1 to 14.2)
2.1.1 Prohibited Firearms (Clauses 1(1), 1(2), 1(6) and 14.2)
2.1.2 Replica Firearms (Clause 1(4))
2.1.3 Firearm Parts (Clause 1(5))
2.1.4 Offence: Possessing or Distributing Computer Data (Clause 1.4)
2.1.5 Offence: Altering Cartridge Magazine (Clauses 2 and 3)
2.1.6 Interception of Private Communications (Clause 13)
2.1.7 Emergency Prohibition Orders (Clauses 4 and 6)
2.1.8 Emergency Limitations on Access Orders (Clauses 10 and 11)
2.1.9 Public Officers (Clause 12)
2.1.10 Maximum Penalties (Clause 14)
2.2 Firearms Act (Clauses 15 to 48)
2.2.1 Cartridge Magazines
2.2.2 Revocation of Licence in the Event of a Protection Order or Domestic Violence (Clauses 15, 16, 36, 38(1) and 41 and 45)
2.2.3 Temporary Storage of Firearms When Dealing with a Mental Illness or Similar Issue (Clause 18)
2.2.4 Handguns
2.2.4.1 Registration Certificate and Transportation of Handguns from a Port of Entry (Clauses 17, 19 and 43)
2.2.5 Transfer of Handguns (Clauses 21 to 23 and 25)
2.2.6 Importation of Ammunition, Firearm Parts and Cartridge Magazines (Clause 26)
2.2.7 Licences, Authorizations to Carry and Authorizations to Transport (Clauses 27 to 29, 32, 33 and 35)
2.2.7.1 Lawful Profession or Occupation
2.2.7.2 Protection of Life
2.2.8 Suspension of Licence (Clauses 34 and 35)
2.2.9 Reference to Provincial Court Judge (referral) (Clause 37)
2.2.10 Disclosure of Information (Clause 39)
2.2.11 Report to the Federal Minister (Clause 42)
2.2.12 Advertising (Clause 44)
2.3 Nuclear Safety and Control Act (Clauses 49 to 51)
2.3.1 High-Security Sites and Nuclear Security Officers (Clauses 49 and 50)
2.3.2 Regulations (Clause 51)
2.4 Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Clauses 52 to 63)
2.4.1 Transborder Criminality (Clauses 52, 53 and 55 to 57)
2.5 Rights of Indigenous Peoples
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Government Outlines Bill C-21 Coming Into Force
OverviewThe bill to expand criminalizations of firearm owners was passed into law when the king (via his representative, the governor general) gave Royal Assent on 15 December 2023.
Some prohibitions took effect immediately.
Some kicked in after 30 days.
Several will come into force through cabinet decrees known as “orders in council” (OiC).
Max Watson, a spokesperson for the Ottawa-based Department of Public Safety, replied by e-mail to TheGunBlog.ca today in response to our questions sent March 14.
Government Outlines Bill C-21 Coming Into Force
Q1. When does the clause prohibiting the transfer of cartridge magazines to non-PAL holders come into force?
A1. Clause 21.1 of former Bill C-21 came into force on Royal Assent, December 15, 2023.
Q2. Could you indicate the text in Bill C-21 that says when the clause comes into force? (Does everything come into force at Royal Assent, unless specified otherwise?)
A2. Some provisions of former Bill C-21 came into force upon Royal Assent, others 30 days following Royal Assent and some will come into force on a day fixed by Order in Council.
The former Bill includes clauses that contain their own coming into force provision.
Clause 73 of the former Bill also includes some, but not all of the provisions that will come into force on a day fixed by Order in Council (OIC).
Where the Act is silent on the coming into force of a particular provision, it came into force on Royal Assent.
Q3. Would you have a guidebook or cheatsheet to help with requests like this?
A3. Below is an overview of the measures in the former Bill C-21 that are not yet in force and that will come into force on a date fixed by Order in Council:
Criminal Code
Definition of “firearm part” (i.e., barrel for a firearm, slide for a handgun) and its addition to the firearms regime in theCriminal Code
Firearms Act
Prevent individuals subject to a protection order or who have been convicted of an offence in the commission of which violence was used, threatened or attempted against their intimate partner or any member of the family from holding a licence
Expanded licence revocation authorities:
Automatically revoke a licence for individuals who are subject to a protection order
Require the revocation of a licence for individuals who may have engaged in an act of domestic violence or stalking
Establish conditional licence regime to allow for sustenance hunting in the case of licence revocations related to domestic violence or protection order
Establish “yellow flag” licence suspension regime:
Allow a CFO to temporarily suspend a firearms licence (up to 30 days) if they suspect an individual is no longer eligible to hold the licence
Require a firearms licence to acquire firearm parts (i.e., barrel for a firearm, slide for a handgun)
Require a firearms licence to import ammunition, cartridge magazines, and firearms parts
Centralize approval of Authorizations to Carry (ATC) for personal protection with the Commissioner of Firearms
Below is an overview of the measures in the former Bill C-21 that came into force on Royal Assent or 30 days later:
Criminal Code
Add a prospective technical definition to the definition of “prohibited firearm”
Create new “red flag” regime
Allow any person to make an application for an emergency prohibition order, with anonymity protections
Allow any person to apply for an emergency limitations on access order
Increase maximum penalties for weapons smuggling/trafficking from 10 to 14 years
Make it an offence to alter a cartridge magazine to exceed legal limits
Add additional firearms offences to the list of offences eligible for wiretapping
Provide security personnel of certain federal entities with public officer status
Repeal Governor in Council (GiC) ability to downgrade firearms classification (also in Firearms Act)
Add new offences for possession and distribution of computer data
Add “unlawfully manufactured firearm” to the definition of “prohibited firearm”
Firearms Act
Require firearm surrender pending legal challenge of licence revocation
Authorize the disclosure of firearms licence information to law enforcement to support trafficking investigations (e.g., straw purchasing), with information on disclosures published in Annual Report by the Commissioner of Firearms
Require a firearms licence to acquire (transfer) cartridge magazines
To allow a licenced individual to address a mental illness or similar issue, authorize the transport a restricted or prohibited firearm to another licenced individual or business
Make it an offence to depict promote violence against a person in firearms marketing
Automatically expire registration certificates subsequent to a change in a firearm’s classification
Restrict all handgun transfers and imports for individuals except for individuals with an Authorization to Carry and individuals training, coaching or competing in a handgun discipline on the programme of the International Olympic or Paralympic Committees
Q4. Could you summarize/list the government’s plans related to firearm policy? (e.g., What was announced, how it comes into force, timing, current status, …)
A4. The Government of Canada is working to implement the provisions of former Bill C-21 in a timely manner, while allowing time for consultations, operational readiness and advance notice to Canadians.
More information for each measure will be provided in due course.
—Source: Department of Public Safety, Response to TheGunBlog.ca, 19 March 2024
Government Outlines Bill C-21 Coming Into Force | TheGunBlog.ca
TheGunBlog.ca — The Canadian government responds to our questions about the coming into force of Bill C-21, the Liberal Party’s newest legislative attack against gun users.
thegunblog.ca
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Ottawa has already spent $42M on a Liberal gun 'buyback' that still doesn't exist
Launched in 2020 and now lagging years behind schedule, Canada's efforts to reform firearms policy have borne little fruitOTTAWA — Four years after the Trudeau Liberals announced sweeping changes to Canada’s gun laws, the government has so far spent $42 million on a federal firearms confiscation program that doesn’t yet exist.
In a response to an order paper question filed by Sen. Don Plett in September, Public Safety Canada revealed that $41,904,556 has been spent so far on the government’s “firearms buyback program,” and that 60 department employees are working on the project.
In a response to an order paper question filed by Sen. Don Plett in September, Public Safety Canada revealed that $41,904,556 has been spent so far on the government’s “firearms buyback program,” and that 60 department employees are working on the project.
“This is a boondoggle, and it hasn’t even begun,” Plett said Friday during the Senate question period, directing his question at government representative Sen. Marc Gold.
“How can your government have spent $42 million on this, when not a single firearm has been bought back?”
The documents also reveal that IBM has been awarded a $2.27-million contract to develop, design and implement the program.
That figure is nearly double what that contract was worth when Public Safety Canada announced the firm’s involvement in the program in 2020.
In the documents, the RCMP say it is managing a team of 15 full-time employees devoted to the gun grab.
As well, Service Canada has assigned two employees to the program, and a response from Public Services and Procurement Canada said it has devoted “the equivalent of 5.825 full-time employees” to the project.
Last April, the federal government commenced the first phase of the program by entering into a $700,000 agreement with the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association to confiscate so-called “assault rifles” from retailers.
That program is expected to start later this year.
Work on phase two, which involves confiscating legally purchased firearms from their licensed owners, began earlier this year.
The government issued an invitation to qualify earlier this year, seeking vendors interested in collecting and destroying the over 1,500 gun models summarily banned by the federal government under the May 1, 2020 order-in-council.
That order-in-council instantly reclassified around 1,500 popular firearm models to prohibited status, including so-called “military-style” or “assault” firearms.
Initially meant to happen by April 2022, amnesty for licensed owners was extended until Oct. 23, 2023, and again until 2025.
The government estimates that between 10,000 and 15,000 newly prohibited firearms are in the hands of Canadian businesses, and anywhere between 125,000 to 200,000 are owned by licensed individuals.
“These estimates could vary as the number of affected non-restricted firearms is unknown,” the invitation remarked.
As many crime guns are committed with prohibited firearms smuggled into Canada from the United States — and therefore unlawful for Canadian licence-holders to own — critics say the government is preoccupying itself with an expensive program whose impact on Canada’s crime epidemic will be negligible.
National Post contacted Public Safety Canada for comment but has yet to receive a response.
Firearms policy researcher Tim Thurley said that with such an unprecedented program, there’s no question it will be expensive.
“Consider, for example, the logistics of confiscating firearms in rural and remote areas, where some of these firearms — such as the Ruger Mini-14 — were widely used by hunters, farmers and recreational or competitive sport shooters,” he said.
“Expect the costs to climb significantly further as the business and personal stages of the program are implemented and as more firearms are prohibited.”
He said he expects the cost to stretch into the billions.
Simon Fraser University Professor Gary Mauser said that nearly $42 million is a lot of money to spend for what he said amounts to “grandstanding” by the federal government.
“Ottawa is not having much success with their efforts on this file,” he said.
“Ontario has refused to co-operate with future confiscations. Saskatchewan has asked to join the appeal. Requests for co-operating organizations have fallen flat.”
The fact that the now-banned guns sat safely with their owners without incident for the past four years suggests the 2020 bans — enacted after the 2020 mass shooting in Nova Scotia — were introduced for reasons other than just public safety, Mauser said.
Last October, National Post learned Quebec-based anti-gun group PolySeSouvient was so angry that mandatory confiscation wasn’t part of the government’s gun control scheme it disinvited Prime Minister Justin Trudeau from future commemorations of the 1989 École Polytechnique shooting.
The government added a confiscation program later that year.
Questions are still swirling around Parliament Hill over how much the confiscation will ultimately cost taxpayers.
Government documents obtained by National Post say costs could reach as high as $2 billion, far greater than election promises suggesting the program would only cost between $400 million and $600 million.
Tracey Wilson, spokesperson for the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights (CFFR), told National Post that skyrocketing costs so far don’t bode well for the program’s future.
“Not only has not a single firearm been confiscated, the program itself doesn’t even exist — not even for willing retailers anxious to off-load unsellable inventory,” she said.
“The whole premise of the 2020 gun ban was that these firearms, previously approved for sporting and hunting purposes by the RCMP lab, were simply too dangerous to own. Yet four years later, they are all exactly where they’ve been for decades, if not generations — in the gun safes of licensed, RCMP-vetted gun owners.”
Ottawa has already spent $42M on a Liberal gun 'buyback' that still doesn't exist
Launched in 2020 and now lagging years behind schedule, Canada's efforts to reform firearms policy have borne little fruit
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
10.67 In February 2001, the Department told the Government it had wanted to focus on the minority of firearms owners that posed a high risk while minimizing the impact on the overwhelming majority of law-abiding owners.
However, the Department concluded that this did not happen. Rather, it stated that the Program’s focus had changed from high risk firearms owners to excessive regulation and enforcement of controls over all owners and their firearms.
The Department concluded that, as a result, the Program had become overly complex and very costly to deliver, and that it had become
difficult for owners to comply with the Program.
10.68 The Department said the excessive regulation had occurred because some of its Program partners believed that
• the use of firearms is in itself a “questionable activity” that required
strong controls, and
• there should be a zero-tolerance attitude toward non-compliance with
the Firearms Act.
publications.gc.ca
However, the Department concluded that this did not happen. Rather, it stated that the Program’s focus had changed from high risk firearms owners to excessive regulation and enforcement of controls over all owners and their firearms.
The Department concluded that, as a result, the Program had become overly complex and very costly to deliver, and that it had become
difficult for owners to comply with the Program.
10.68 The Department said the excessive regulation had occurred because some of its Program partners believed that
• the use of firearms is in itself a “questionable activity” that required
strong controls, and
• there should be a zero-tolerance attitude toward non-compliance with
the Firearms Act.
Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
'The costs have ballooned': Liberal government failed to anticipate difficulty of gun 'buyback,' association says
'The way the regulation was drafted, it was rushed through as an order-in-council and done in such a poor manner, it'll cause issues for the buyback down the road'OTTAWA — The organization tasked with helping retailers navigate the Trudeau Liberals’ mandatory gun “buyback” says the government has bitten off far more than it can chew and is now discovering the difficulty with the sheer volume of items it may have to expropriate.
Wes Winkel, president of the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association (CSAAA), said the government apparently didn’t anticipate that its ban on “assault-style” firearms involved a massive number of parts and accessories that could be captured by the buyback’s planned expropriation, which will require gun owners and retailers holding inventory of those items to be compensated.
The amnesty on banned guns is set to expire at the end of October 2025, presuming a buyback regime is in place by then to provide owners and retailers compensation for their seized weapons. But Winkel expects the process is turning out to be much more complicated and much more expensive than the federal government anticipated.
Internal government documents obtained last year through an access-to-information request showed the cost of the program, which the Liberals had promised would be between $400 million and $600 million, had ballooned to $2 billion.
Last month, National Post reported that the government had spent $42 million on setting up the buyback already, even though it still doesn’t exist.
“The costs have ballooned on the administration side,” Winkel said. “They’ve used up so much budget already, and they still haven’t bought anything.”
'The costs have ballooned': Liberal government failed to anticipate difficulty of gun 'buyback,' association says
"The way the regulation was drafted ... it'll cause issues for the buyback down the road," the president of one gun association says.
