Canada's questionable act
Is gun control the answer to Canada's illegal firearms use?
First of all I would like to point out I do believe in Firearms safety and in the Licensing of firearms Owners, Screening of applicants to prevent criminals and those with violent backgrounds from obtaining legal firearms!
Over the years I have seen many variations to the firearms act. Many of the amendments are just useless and unjust in today's society.
I have heard the comment “guns kill people” I will agree yes if the person behind it chooses to do so. I have not seen or heard of a firearm loading itself pointing it at someone and firing without a person behind it!
I would like to point out firearms control in Canada has it's roots starting in the 1890's, then the registration of handguns starting in the 1930's.
In 1947, the offence of “constructive murder” was added to the Criminal Code for offences resulting in death, when the offender carried a firearm. This offence was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada in a 1987 case called R. v. Vaillancourt.
The registration of machine guns in the 1951.
In 1969 Machine guns became prohibited Bill C-150.
Bill C-150 was passed primarily by fear the FLQ might attempt to obtain machine guns, strange, the FLQ rarely used guns they prefered Bombs!
Oh ya, we're talking about a government led by Pierre E Trudeau, a man who ran from conscription (draft)during World War 2 and in 1969 had to declare the war measures act and send the military to take care of a small group of Terrorists because they had an uprising in Montreal called the October Crises, Trudeau's fears of being next on the FLQ's kidnapping agenda and overreacting were portrayed by the media as heroic!
In 1977 Bill C-51 the beginning of the current style of gun laws were introduced requiring a permit called a firearms acquisition certificate which involved a criminal check.
In 1991, Bill C-17 tightened up restrictions and established controls on any firearms that had a military or paramilitary appearance. Legislation also made changes to the FAC system. FAC applicants were now required to pass a firearms safety course, pass a more thorough background check, and wait a minimum of 28 days after applying for an FAC before being issued one.
In 1995, Bill C-68 introduced new, stricter, gun control legislation. The current legislation prohibits 32 and 25 calibre handguns as well as handguns with barrels under 4.14" and provides harsher penalties for crimes involving firearm use, licences to possess and acquire firearms, and registration of all firearms, including shotguns and rifles. This legislation was upheld by the Supreme Court in Reference re Firearms Act (2000). The FAC system was replaced with Possession Only Licences (POLs)(no new POL's after January 1, 2001) and Possession and Acquisition Licences (PALs). Referring to Bill C-68, John Dixon, a former advisor to Deputy Minister of Justice John C. Tait, stated that the Firearms Act was not public safety policy, but rather an election ploy by the Liberal Party of Canada intended to help defeat Prime Minister Kim Campbell.
Mass shootings in public places are a relatively new problem, other then the ST Valentine's Day Massacre in the late 20's or early 30's between two rival gangs. In Canadian history there was the May 8th1984 shootings at the Quebec National Assembly by Denis Lortie headline CBC News “A Canadian soldier goes on a shooting spree at the Quebec National Assembly” and the 1989 shooting at Montreal's École Polytechnique by Marc Lapine and the the Valery Fabrikant shooting spree at Concordia University in 1992 then there was Dawson College incident 2006 shooters name Kimveer Gill
“All that seems to be on the minds of many in the media and at the offices of gun control extremists is figuring out how to exploit this horrible tragedy to erode and eventually destroy the right, and the means, of self-defense,”
North Americans possess the strength of heart and the courage to protect their fellow human beings from being harmed, That is not the view that anti-gun lobbyists hold.
“In the aftermath [of the tragedy] they seek to capitalize on the situation in order to further their agenda, of the disarmament of the people, They seek to make it a law, that the good people of the world are not even able to do anything in the face of evil.
“These tragedies should never happen, but they do when people are denied the means to fight back,” If we learn anything from this, it is the value of owning a firearm and self-defense.”
The Quebec Legislature incident gun control wouldn't have stopped it was committed with a Canadian forces firearm by a member of the military, In the Marc Lapine incident the firearm was obtained legally as prescribed under the gun control act! Registration of the rifle and safe storage wouldn't have stopped him from using this gun. Valery Fabrikant shootings at Concordia in 1992 were done with legally obtained registered firearms. The Dawson Collage shootings in 2006 Kimveer Gill did in fact have a restricted-class PAL and his weapons were registered.
I have not been able to confirm the registration or legality of ownership of any of the shooters listed above.
Now Take note! These mass shootings took place after firearms control was in effect! There is no evidence of this type of behaviour in Canada prior to the Firearms Control Act!
It is interesting to point out all these mass shootings took place in Montreal Quebec, I have not seen evidence of similar situations in other Provinces!
Marc Lapine was a 25 year old who appeared to have an undocumented psychiatric disorder who became a criminal the minute he started shooting, his actions were the basis to organizations lobbying for stiffer gun controls.
If Marc Lapine had used a car to kill at a crowded bus stop then raced it into another group of people. Would we have passed legislation banning certain cars and restricting the purchase of cars?
Marc Lapine planned this shooting, he was an intelligent person who would have had no problem in building an improvised explosive device or mixing gun powder from chemicals found in grocery stores and drug stores or even using the geological survey to find the necessary mineral deposits.
Firearms are used to feed our families! They are used in regional and international competitions and in some areas to protect our family! Many are viewed as art and in collections
We have been fighting crime since the birth of Canada, Our children and grandchildren will be fighting crime long after we are gone! Illegal use of a firearm is a crime! Preformed by a criminal!
Oh yes this is Canada! Where criminal activities are punished by different laws for the same offence depending on your age or if a firearm is involved.
Is there not a section in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution that states you can not discriminate based on age? I see we have a young offenders act I haven't found a mid age offender act or an old age offender act?
I guess we give kids an incentive to break the law and get a mild punishment and their criminal record cleared so they can become respected productive members of society after they rape or murder someone.
Oh yaa next time you rob a mac's milk use a knife you will only get half the sentence compare to using a gun or toy gun!
It is unfortunate we live in a society where there are victims of crime and where people have witnessed crime. It is more unfortunate and dangerous that Law Makers have given into the demands of a few vocal groups and passed laws that effect law abiding citizens under the presumption that they might perform a criminal act.
Legal gun owners are a threat by existing that must be destroyed by any means possible and their rights are unimportant, but the thugs who attack us on the street whom the gun owners wish to be armed against are simply a problem we have to put up with.
The media and gun control advocates portray Canada as a Country riddled with gun violence!
If you try and get a carry permit for self defense or apply for a acquisition licenses based on defense your turned down because we are not violent here!
most people are seething cauldrons of potential violence who cannot be trusted with a gun, but most people are so decent that there is no need to carry a weapon for defense.
It is also unfortunate that the monies spent to enforce laws that interfere with the ownership and pleasurable use of property by law abiding citizens could have been used to fight crime and to help prevent the illegal importation of firearms
I guess it's kind of funny how we have prohibited firearms regulation and that a replica firearm is banned, that is one that looks like a real gun but cannot be made to fire! But we can buy a deactivated firearm that has been made inoperable by welding or removing parts. There is no registration or licenses required! But these ex-firearms are Legal! It is an offence to alter the deactivation of these firearms whether it be a pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun or machine gun! but it can be done!
In my lectures I have stated a gun is a gun it doesn't matter what calibre, barrel length whether it be a handgun rifle shotgun or semi-automatic or full automatic. A gun is a tool and like any other tool it can be used for good or bad or it can be viewed as a piece of art in a collection!
We have passed laws based on the potential criminal activity by a law abiding citizen! If we applied the same logic to devices other then guns there would be an outrage.
Using the same criteria for determining whether a person should own a gun or be in possession of a firearm under the firearms act or by the judgement of the firearms officer, should the Police or Military be allowed to carry or have access to a weapon? After all they are in high stress situations and have one of the highest rates or separation and divorce and many suffer from post traumatic stress disorders, there are constantly complaints of excessive force used by officers.
Most Crimes, attempted suicides and domestic disputes occur at times when the parties involved are impaired, should we attempt to put the same restrictions on the purchase and storage of alcohol as we do on firearms to to lower the crime rate and in the interest of public safety?
After all you might get drunk and hurt or kill someone
Gun Control is like prohibition, if a person wants something they will get it. It doesn't matter if it's legal or not, many commodities have become lucrative to those who wish to sell them, drugs, alcohol, prostitution, children, firearms and cigarettes.
There is no registry of offenders who are prohibited from owning firearms or a requirement that they keep the government advised of their place of residence
Interesting isn't it, the people who are most likely to endanger life or commit a firearms offence are not kept track of.
the Government has argued that handguns are already tightly regulated and only available to licensed target shooters, collectors and those requiring them for the protection of life.
Strange how they included “for the protection of life” when they state protection or defence is not grounds to own a firearm.
Statistics show that firearms control haven't done much for public safety
A "safe gun" will help stop criminal misuse of firearms just like "safe sex" works so well to stop rape.
In reviewing areas of firearm violence indicated by Statistics Canada I was able to compile the following.
Suicide between 1979 and 1998 approximately 26% of attempted suicides involved firearms, during that period gun control was in effect in Canada. I will agree that attempts by males involving firearms dropped from 41% to 26% therefore firearms control is working? Unfortunately we don't hear much about the increase in attempts by suffocation/hanging which rose from 24% to 40%. The pattern among women was similar with a rise in suffocation/hanging from 19% to 34%.
Contrary to the firearms safety information that claims if they do not have access to firearms they would be less likely to use other methods, this is not reflected by the proportional increase stated above.
Violent crime rates in Canada increased significantly between 1983 and1993, due largely to changes in the criminal code that clarified assault charges. The number of assault 1 charges (an assault not involving a weapon or causing serious physical injury) increased 85% and the number of sexual assault 1 (an assault with only minor physical injuries or no injuries to the victim) charges increased by 250%. Other violent crimes either declined or remained stable. Violent crime has decreased since 1993.
Could it be that better Policing Policy and more crime prevention in the Community might just be working?
Furthermore, in recent years, the gap in violent crime rates between the United States and Canada has narrowed due to a precipitous drop in the violent crime rate in the U.S. For example, while the aggravated assault rate declined for most of 1990s in the U.S. and was 324 per 100,000 in 2000, the aggravated assault rate in Canada remained relatively steady throughout and was 143 per 100,000 in 2000. In other areas, the U.S. had a faster decline. For instance, whereas the murder rate in Canada declined by 36% between 1991 and 2004, the U.S. murder rate declined by 44%. Surprisingly, both Saskatoon and Regina consistently have Violent Crime rates that would place them among the 10 most violent cities in the US, and often individually exceed larger US centres in terms of Total numbers for Aggravated Assaults and Robbery.
The homicide rate in Canada peaked in 1975 at 3.03 per 100,000 and has dropped since then; it reached lower peaks in 1985 (2.72) and 1991 (2.69). It reached a post 1970 low of 1.73 in 2003. The average murder rate between 1970 and 1976 was 2.52, between 1977 and 1983 it was 2.67, between 1984 and 1990 it was 2.41, between 1991 and 1997 it was 2.23 and between 1998 to 2004 it was 1.82. The attempted homicide rate has fallen at a faster rate than the homicide rate.
By comparison, the homicide rate in the U.S. reached 10.1 per 100,000 in 1974, peaked in 1980 at 10.7 and reached a lower peak in 1991 (10.5). The average murder rate between 1970 and 1976 was 9.4, between 1977 and 1983 it was 9.6, between 1984 and 1990 it was 9, between 1991 and 1997 it was 9.2 and between 1998 and 2004 it was 6.3. In 2004 the murder rate in the U.S. dipped below 6 per 100,000, for the first time since 1966, and as of 2009 stood at 5.0 per 100,000
The Murder rate in Canada declining prior to the implementation of the 1977 Gun Control Regulations? How can that be? And Wow and a Country with limited or no Gun Control The “Gun Crazed Americans” dropped even more then we did? I guess we took the balance away and the criminals feel safer trying to kill us!
Spousal murder rates have fallen significantly as well. For females in a relationship the rate of homicide fell from 1.65 per 100,000 in 1974 to 0.71 per 100,000 in 2004 while for males in a relationship the rate dropped from 0.44 per 100,000 in 1974 to 0.14 per 100,000 in 2004.
Spousal homicides committed with firearms dropped by 77% for women between 1974 and 2000 and by 80% for men during the same time period. Increased awareness, reporting and publication of domestic violence incidents, as well as police campaigns to crack down on domestic violence, have been the primary factors on the reduction of domestic violence homicides.
You notice the year 1974 prior to our gun control act, when we could buy a firearm at Sears or Canadian Tire without a permit, that Spousal murder and abuse started to decline.
Homicide what is the percentage by people in legal possession of a firearm compared to illegal possession?
Shootings generally account for around 30% of murders in Canada, with stabbings generally equal or lower before 1995, when stabbings outnumbered shootings. From 1995 to 2007, stabbings have outnumbered shootings in six years (1995, 1998, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2007) with shootings outnumbering stabbings in the remaining seven (1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2006).
We are all born law abiding citizens unfortunately there will always be a percentage that will become a criminal sometime in their life!
Accidental firearm deaths stood at 0.1 per 100,000 in 2000
Prohibiting any firearm , it is safe to predict, will have no effect on criminal behavior, which will lead to cries for still more stringent gun control.
"Assault Weapons" no Different from Many Hunting Guns
The primary fact is that a true "assault weapon" is a military firearm which can be fired either "automatically" (many shots per trigger pull) or "semi-automatically" (one shot per trigger pull). In other words, a true assault weapon is a machine gun which is already regulated by federal law.
The firearms that are covered by the so-called "assault weapons" laws are semi-automatic rifles. Some of these firearms are made to look like a military-style weapon but are mechanically indistinguishable from the traditional-looking deer rifle
The rate of violent crime preformed by youth has been rising as the number of gangs have increased, firearms control will not alter this illegal behaviour. There are a number of influencing factors, social-economic, family, excitement and acceptance and exposure to violence creating what they consider a normal behaviour.
Other influencing factors could include the “young offenders act” which limits punishment based on age? Is this not unconstitutional and in violation of the Canadian Bill of Rights? Is it not a form of age discrimination?
The prohibiting of assault rifles and many short barrel small calibre handguns will not deter crime, many of the firearms prohibited hold high historic value and are desirable collector pieces not to mention 25 and 32 calibre ammunition was hard to find and many of these guns were designed for
black powder which ammunition hasn't been loaded for in over 50 years.
Contrary to the beliefs of many Politicians many hunters used the military style assault rifle for hunting! And many collectors had them as well.
Fully automatic weapons became prohibited in 1969 due in part to the civil unrest in Quebec, the FLQ and caused by fear, a fear that is still reflected by large numbers of Quebec population a fear of loosing their heritage and beliefs “their way of life”
Interesting Quebec again!
Could growing up in that culture watching families changing roles and the “us against them violence” or the continued struggling of the children trying to fit into the English and French cultures tearing families apart, have formed the foundation to the violence that spawned the action groups for gun control?
Elimination of the Long gun registry.
Using the funding from the registry to promote firearms safety, crime prevention programs. Putting more officers on the streets to fight organized crime and gangs. Prior to the Canadian version of the St Valentines Day Massacre.
Removing the prohibited status from firearms and replica firearms. Including automatic weapons. We have adapted to the fact we are now processed by the RCMP and found fit to own a firearm, we have to register all firearms. I see no cause for prohibition based on class or calibre of the firearm.
Removal of the “Young Offenders Act”
Public funding making firearms safety courses and exams available to all Canadians not just those who can afford it!
Removal of the processing fee on applications for firearms licenses
Implementation of Federally funded programs for awareness and treatment for domestic violence, suicide and crime prevention.
Formation of a exclusive Federal Police gang and organized crime unit.
Increasing the size of our Coast Guard, Military, Police departments and Customs forming a joint task force to secure Canada's perimeter and airspace. This must include the searching of “Every” Vehicle, Vessel, piece of luggage and parcel entering Canada. This will be the beginning of illegal firearms and substance control in Canada.
The cost of implementing number 9 would be beyond astronomical and we don't have the population even if we place every man woman and child to accomplish this. If Canadians truly want Crime and firearms Control we must take aim at the criminals, the smugglers, the drug dealers, labs and the people who build firearms and bombs in their homes and at school one piece at a time, from materials bought at your local hardware or metal shop.