Dimitri wrote:

MacD wrote: I am all for dropping the registry but I have NP with the licensing and mandatory safety training. Requiring a safety course is not new, just about every province had ans till has it as a requirement before you could get a hunting license. Many ranges require it before you can use their facilities. Licensing means a background check which will keep at least some people, who shouldn't be allowed, from legally obtaining firearms or ammunition. I do not think anyone is talking about getting rid of the licensing of the owners, just the waste of the registry itself. Dimitri

You're absolutly right Dim. The main change that is going to happen is the dismanteling of the long gun registry. The handgun law and regs may get a wee tweeking but that is just my sneaking suspession (sp?) I don't agree that they should distroy all of the information that was collected nor do I think that the FRT (Firearms Reference Table) should be destroyed. The FRT is the BEST source for firearm information in the world bar none.
I hope that the committee thinks the whole thing through and uses common sense in their recommendations to parliment. ITD

Germany, when Hitler took office was glad that all guns were registered and that the lists were kept up-to-date. It made it easy to confiscate all the firearms in the hands of the people.

I don't like lists, bumper stickers or labels - they all mean something to somebody and none of it fits me or my definition.

I should have expressed myself better Paul, I think that the portion of the Firearms Act that has who owns what should be destroyed but keep the descriptions and the data base (FRT) of all of the different types up to date. It is such a valuable resource that to destroy it would be like burning the mono lisa. That being said, I don't care much for the government keeping lists although I do believe that in Canada and in the US that there should be a national identity card like in most countries of europe. I am only concerned about criminals not law abiding citizens.

I gotta say, any form of registration or "mandatory" training bothers me. A quick look at history shows that it never turns out well for the citizens.

Pumpkinslinger wrote:

I gotta say, any form of registration or "mandatory" training bothers me. A quick look at history shows that it never turns out well for the citizens.

I agree Pumkin, the govt already has enough info on us. I was reading up on the Wisconsin ccw law which goes into effect this month and requires a 4 hour training program to get your ccw permit. Just another way to get info.

inthedark wrote:

The main change that is going to happen is the dismanteling of the long gun registry.

Yes, but that is not the main challenge, getting ride of the Order in Councils that were passed without parliamentary approval must also be done.

Otherwise, just like American Executive orders, its a bypassing of the democratic process, hence why it needs to be thrown out too.

inthedark wrote:

The handgun law and regs may get a wee tweeking but that is just my sneaking suspession (sp?)

1934 is the year we got our handgun regulations (IIRC), and they are not changing anytime soon.

inthedark wrote:

I don't agree that they should distroy all of the information that was collected nor do I think that the FRT (Firearms Reference Table) should be destroyed. The FRT is the BEST source for firearm information in the world bar none.

FRT tables are the ones that the RCMP use to dictate what is a Restricted, Non-Restricted, Prohibited firearm etc, it will not be destroyed as they are what the government uses to classify firearms beyond the actual data in the law, only all the user registrations that were collected will be removed which is a different system.

All the user data must be destroyed, no need to keep it if there is no registration of non-restricted firearms. And will only help cause problems in the future.

Dimitri

Please elaborate on this FRT stuff. I'm looking online and can't understand exactly what it is, or what the purpose is.

The FRT, Firearm Reference Table, is just a database of all the gun makes that have been tested at one point or the other by the RCMP, and sub variants.

So there is like 20,000 records of different gun models, such as AR-15's being all one group, M700's being another, etc, generic models.

Then there is something like 80,000 or so sub variants that deviate from the original model, such as a AR-15 with with a 6" pistol configuration verses a 20" 5.56mm NATO variant.

In itself its just a database of firearm types that are out there, and it is just used to rapidly classify firearms based on manufacturer, model, barrel length, and caliber basically.

Allows police officers in Canada (And the US which uses the Canadian Database for firearm classification now), to quickly tell what firearm they are holding in their hands. Because the average cop, and evidence tech can't tell the difference between a AR-15 and a AK-47 unless the database tells them they are different.

However the gun law that is on the table just gets rid of firearm registration, ie, the registration of specific guns to their owners, not the reference tables which are just like opening a Gun's Blue book.

Dimitri

National ID cards?????
so all the legal people are cataloged and only the criminals can hide?
I don't want my idiotic government to know where I am when I am away from home.

Hey Punkin,

I have uploaded a couple of pages of a FRT search for a Remington model 788 rifle. It is under the uploaded photos 45 and 46 of 103 Firearms-firearms FRT Sample. It is a pain in the a$$ getting these to upload on this old computer so that is why I haven't included all the pages for the sample querie I made. The information and photographs are provided from various sources including manufacturers and police/public officer verifiers such as myself from our measurement etc. Contrary to popular belief not all the firearms listed are in the possession of or necessarily ever been in the possession of the RCMP. There are litterally thousands of firearms that have been made that are of small commercial or independant manufacture that have no photographs and only have descriptors of the device/firearm within the FRT. The FRT is the best and most complete database for firearms/stored energy devices/machineguns/artillary devices in the world, bar none. The FRT has images, descriptors iof make, model, manufacturer, level, type, action, country of manufacture, serial numbering, leagal classification in Canada, the Firearm Reference number that identifies the firearm as to calibre, number of shots, barrel length, legal classification/leagal authority, level (i.e. non-commercial customization or manufacturer specifications, Cross- reference, AKA, year of manufacture dates and importer, just to name a few of the perimeters that may be searched. As an example of some of the interesting querks of the FRT database, I have a friend who is retired and a member of my church who has two revolvers of unknown manufacture/origin and both have proof marks of an unknown company/person. As far as I can determine from my inquiries, they appear to be consistent with being manufacturing techniques of the turn of the last century, but I am not a forensic tool examiner or a metalurgist (sp?) so I am only going on experience and a somewhat limited educated guess. I suspect that they were both made in Canada or the US.

PaulS wrote:

National ID cards????? so all the legal people are cataloged and only the criminals can hide? I don't want my idiotic government to know where I am when I am away from home.

Well most people pay taxes and expect to recieve social security when they hit retirement age and want to suckle at the government teat for medical assistance. You paid your taxes, you got a social security number. All I am aying is that people do not have to carry any identification on their person in Canada AND only US citizens have that right to NOT carry identification on their person. As far as being catelogued that is a moot point because it is already done. Most people have drivers' licenses, credit cards etc so it really isn't an inconvience just makes living simplier in my humble opinion. I'm not meaning to make offence to anyone. Firearms licencing here in Canada made registering a firearm and the legal purchase of gunpowder/ammunition far simplier and really is not a great inconvience. It is a check and balance to keep the nut jobs from getting things that they really can't safely handle.

Inthedark, I think the excerpts below help to make the point that people are going to kill people with guns even if there are tough gun laws and registration, if gun control and registration keeps “the nut jobs from getting things that they really can't safely handle” as you say, and they cannot get guns then cars or trucks will work, or knives, or anthrax, or fertilizer doused with kerosene.

An interesting point is that the same liberals who want to take your guns away are the ones who have promoted laws to let the nut jobs wander the streets and who let criminals out of prison early. No, the bottom line is not about them wanting to protect innocent folks it is about them controlling you and keeping the government safe. After all “The White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, let the cat out of the bag when he said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste — and what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you didn’t think you could do before.”

I think pauls’s point is that our respective governments have far too much knowledge about us, and our lives. One has to wonder why they need all this data. As far as I am concerned all they need to know is that I pay my taxes, anything else is them trying to control and manage us. Every time our governments take a little tiny tiny speck of our God given freedom it gives them the power to take much more.

Gun Control and Mass Murders
Multiple-victim shootings are, fortunately, very rare, but when they occur in the U.S. they skew the public's perceptions about gun control. It wasn’t supposed to happen in England, with its very strict gun-control laws. And yet last week, Derrick Bird shot twelve people to death and wounded eleven others in the northwestern county of Cumbria. A headline in the London Times read: “Toughest laws in the world could not stop Cumbria tragedy.” But surely this was an aberration. Because America has the most guns, multiple-victim public shootings are an American thing, right? No, not at all. Contrary to public perception, Western Europe, most of whose countries have much tougher gun laws than the United States, has experienced many of the worst multiple-victim public shootings. Particularly telling, all the multiple-victim public shootings in Western Europe have occurred in places where civilians are not permitted to carry guns.

Humberto de la Torre (25) 21-year-old Humberto torched the Dorothy Mae Apartment Hotel in downtown Los Angeles in 1982 after a dispute with his uncle who managed the building. The blaze killed 25 residents and got Humberto a 625-year sentence.

Martin Bryant (35) On Sunday April, 28, 1996 Martin, a 28-year-old wanna-be surfer with a history of mental problems went on a rampage through the historical town of Port Arthur in the southeastern corner of Tasmania. Packing his car with weapons and a surfboard, Martin headed to the ruins of Port Arthur's famous prison. Outside the Broken Arrow Cafe he muttered, "There's a lot of WASP's around today, there's not many Japs here, are there?" Then he entered the cafe, pulled out two expensive semi-automatic rifles from his tennis bag, and methodically shot at everyone inside.

Thomas Hamilton (17) An avid gun collector and disgraced scoutmaster, Hamilton was known as "Mr. Creepy" by the boys in Dunblane, Scotland, a village 40 miles from Edinburg. Disliked by all his

The issue, as I see it is not whether it is "convenient" or right or wrong to require a small give and take with a government. The issue, as I see it, is that governments make small changes over long periods of time that greatly increase the control they have over their population.

Look at the evolution of England's gun control. It was a series of steps that eventually took guns out of the hands of the general population and continue to get stricter as time passes. Giving ANY authority to a government (or a tool they can use to gain that authority) is a road that quickly becomes a slippery slope to one of two things; absolute control or revolution (which provides a reason for absolute control).

I do not trust my freedoms to my government; They have proven over time that what is in their best interest is what is most important to them and in most cases the people's welfare is at the bottom of their list.

I will resist governments involvement into all areas of my life as long as I live. I will instruct others to watch their government to ensure that personal rights are not infringed and that their freedoms are not removed. These are the messages that our founding fathers gave to us - which most ignore for reasons of feeling safe or for a more "convenient" life.

Government exist to serve the people not to control them. Once they no longer do that they should be abolished and replaced with a government that has more restrictions in place to better control the governors.

Definitely.

Let me clarify something, our "PAL" licensing, ie, "Possession and Acquisition License", is nothing above what the average American's already do to get their CCW.

It consists simply of:

• Testing on Firearm Safety and the Laws
• Practical Handling of Firearms Test
• A Criminal/securities background check.
• A Reference Check (ie friends/spouse vouching for you)
• Plus a check to see if anyone in the household should not be allowed access to firearms (ie criminal checks on people who live at the same address)

Other then the Criminal/securities check you only go through it once, and its free to renew thanks to the Conservatives when they were still a minority government.

So you get a fancy FEDERAL ID card instead of a Provincial ID (ie Drivers License or Health Card) that cannot be legally refused by anyone, and its a good way to show off your a gun nut to people and can get the conversation going when you meet a fellow, but stranger to you, gun nut somewhere.

Plus, it certifies you as a upstanding member of society. So I've personally pulled it out and said "Do you have one of these? Cause if not, the government doesn't trust you". Whenever I get into a argument with a anti-gun or anti-hunting/fishing person who thinks they are holier then thou.

IIRC, so far no one with a PAL has ever been denied a security clearance at least from reports of gun owners on Canadian gun sites that have went to get them. As the requirements for the PAL is the same as getting a "reliability status", ie, given clearance to see lower level security documents etc, only thing that is missing to get the Confidential/Secret clearances is listing any foreign employment you might have done and being honest about your educational background.

Dimitri