Bill C-68 … gives the government such sweeping
power that they could ban any or all firearms in Canada and not even
the Supreme Court of Canada could overturn it. … Why would the
Liberals give themselves such awesome power if they didn’t intend
to use it? 1
- Garry Breitkreuz, Opposition Firearms Critic
One of the first things I would do is scrap Bill C-68.2
- Stockwell Day, Leader of the Canadian Alliance
I will use all powers afforded to me as Leader and
continue our party’s fight to repeal Bill C-68 and replace it
with a firearms control system that is cost effective and respects the
rights of Canadians to own and use firearms responsibly.3
- Stephen Harper
First and foremost, … Bill C-19 retains licensing
requirements for all gun owners.4
- The Hon. Vic Toews, CPC, Minister of Public Safety
We will not be changing the requirement for individuals
to hold a license.5
- Candice Hoeppner, CPC, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister
Stephen Harper has deceitfully used Bill C-19 in a total
betrayal of responsible gun owners.
After encouraging us to invest our “blood, toil,
tears and sweat” to evict the contemptible Liberals and elect
a “strong, majority Conservative Government”, Mr. Harper
has sacrificed us on his political alter for personal gain.
The Prime Minister now loudly proclaims that he “has
kept his promise” to gun owners.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Mr. Harper’s totally inadequate Bill C-19 merely
ends “the long gun registry”; C-19 does absolutely nothing
to eliminate licencing and the criminalization of firearms ownership.
To add insult to his betrayal Mr. Harper and his Conservative
Caucus now deny they were ever opposed to licencing.
Declaration of Canadian Rights
We are born with several rights, none less important than
the others. They are: the right to life, the right to preserve our lives,
the right to own property and the right to protect that property from
others. These rights are not limited and we may protect them from any
and all, which includes state authorities of any state, including our
This all being true then we may also not be deprived of
the ability to protect ourselves by being arbitrarily limited in what
weaponry we may employ to meet our needs. In other words, the state
cannot logically limit us to “taking a knife to a gun fight”.
And we alone can judge what force we must employ because no one else
will be there to instruct us. That is all there is to the argument.
In almost all cases of attempts by someone to deprive
us of these rights the police, if they appear at all, get to the scene
just in time to write the historical sequel. Judges get to review these
notes some months later. Only we are on the spot, only we can intervene
and only we can estimate how much force we should employ, if we even
have a choice. If all one has is a 12-gauge shotgun then that is what
will be utilized. The risk of “so called” excessive force
must be borne solely by the intruder, never by the defender. To claim
otherwise is to defy logic.
So do not ask the Prime Minister to keep his promise,
he will only argue. Tell him what he must do! Money flows from our pockets
into his, not the reverse; therefore he works for us. That’s all
there is to it.
- Willy Floyd, Westbridge, B.C.
Why Licensing Is Inherently Evil
Licensing (from the Latin “licet”, to permit)
is “lawful excuse” to contravene a law. Thus licencing is
“permission” from the Government to commit a “crime”.
Since the Federal Government may only make criminal law, this cannot
be a simple “regulatory” infraction. If the Government can
allow you to break this law, give you permission to commit a “crime”,
then the action cannot be all that bad of an act in the first place.
In a free society citizens are considered to be responsible,
until, by their own actions, they prove that they are not. Requiring
a license forces those who are responsible to prove to the Government
that they have not done anything “dangerous” to date. This
is “guilty until you prove yourself innocent” and “reverse
onus,” which are all contrary to the principles of fundamental
If the Government requires you to take some course and
pass some test in order for you to be allowed to perform some action,
it ceases to be a Right and becomes a mere privilege; you must first
ask the Government for permission.
Since the “justification” for this infringement
of your Right to own a firearm is “public safety”, in that
some other people have in the past, and may again in the future, commit
some crime with a gun, responsible citizens have had their rights stripped
based on the criminal acts of others, not because of any criminal act
performed by that particular individual. This is contrary to the principle
of fundamental justice that states that innocent persons should not
be punished for acts they did not commit.
Giving the Government the authority to require that individuals
acquire a license so a person may do a certain act also gives them the
authority to impose arbitrary standards to obtain such a license. Yet
the Government may change these standards at any time, which could include
the prohibition of certain activities as being “deemed”
by those in power as being inherently “unnecessary”.
Once a Right become a mere privilege there are many other
arbitrary loopholes that the Government can utilize in an attempt to
restrict that activity; they can raise the price for a license exorbitantly;
they can schedule required classes at times and in places that are virtually
impossible to attend; they can hold such classes once a year, if ever.
All of these arbitrary standards are based on the premise that someone
else knows better than you how to conduct your own life. They substitute
their opinion for your own.
All licensing laws are “malum prohibitum”
– bad because the Government says they are bad. Long before the
invention of gunpowder, good laws existed that governed the use of weapons
in the commission of real crimes, such as robbery, assault, threatening,
pointing, discharging at, wounding, or killing someone. These are “malum
in se” crimes – bad because they in and of themselves harm
someone else. No amount of licensing will prevent someone from committing
such a crime.
All “gun control” laws are a sop to the irrational
fears that something “might happen”. This is based on the
fallacious notion that because some people cannot be trusted to use
firearms properly then nobody should be trusted. No amount of laws can
make you “safe”, and attempts to do so are illusory and
futile. The Government cannot keep you safe.
Any infringement upon the rights of the individual that
cannot be justified to be a proven, effective, and substantial benefit
to society as a whole is fundamentally wrong.
Licensing cannot accomplish any of the claims made for
it, and licencing unjustly infringes upon the rights of responsible
citizens. As such, licencing is a bad law, and must be repealed.
- Bruce N. Mills, Hamilton, Ontario
Resetting the Bar
As Canadians celebrate 30 years living under the Charter
of Rights and Freedoms gun owners have been left out in the cold.
Throughout the life of the Charter the rights of gun owners
have been in steady decline. At the midpoint in the Charter’s
life, 1995, Canadian gun owner rights reached a new low, under the Firearms
Act and its resultant changes to the Criminal Code. Gun
owners were now criminals because of the mere ownership of that property.
Many gun owners have greeted the passage of Bill C-19, in the 30th year
of the Charter, as a signal that the flood waters are receding.
Unfortunately we have reached a high water mark that may not be exceeded
in the future. C-19, while eliminating the registration of non-restricted
firearms, has entrenched the criminalization of gun owners. C-19 has,
strangely enough, lead many gun owners to a tacit acceptance of their
criminalization in hopes that the situation will not get any worse.
But already we are beginning to see that it is unlikely to be the case.
Thomas Mulclair, the new leader of the NDP, has promised to reinstate
the registration of non-restricted firearms if the NDP forms the government.
Now that C-19 is law we can expect to see a drive to insure that those
gun owners that had not previously obtained a license to continue to
own their property will be drawn into the system under fear of continued
What happened? The Conservatives support gun owners, right? Do they
not understand the destructive nature of criminalization on gun ownership?
Are the Conservatives not aware that the status of second class citizens
criminalization entails will be given further impetus with the entrenchment
of licensing criminalization in C-19?
In the House of Commons debate of C-19 Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant
eloquently and persuasively outlined the Firearms Act’s
assaults on Charter protected rights and freedoms. On March
29, 2012 in the House of Commons, Vic Toews, the Minister of Public
Safety, said, "I can indicate our Conservative government does
not support treating law-abiding hunters, farmers and sports shooters
as criminals." An article in the Ottawa Citizen April 13/2012 reported
Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz said he would like to see firearms
laws moved from the criminal code - where they are now - into the civil
code. This would help protect firearms owners from being criminalized
for mere paperwork errors, he said, such as expired licences.
To suggest that the Conservatives are not cognizant of the dangers of
licensing criminalization would be a hard sell, yet licencing remains
entrenched in law even with the passage of C-19. Licensed gun owners
who fail to report their change of address within thirty days could
still go to jail for up to two years. The homes and businesses of licensed
gun owners are still subject to "inspections", but not convicted
criminals prohibited from owning firearms. These are but a few of the
potential traps remaining that will ensnare gun owners.
How do we react to the Conservatives obvious knowledge of the problem
coupled with their demonstrated unwillingness to correct it? Some will
argue that any government but the Conservatives will result in renewed
attacks on gun owners, but that result is inevitable at some point.
It is absolutely essential that the ownership of firearms be disconnected
from criminal sanction before that occurs. At last count over 338,000
license holders have allowed their licences to expire. This is an encouraging
trend that reflects rejection of our imposed criminal status. The Conservatives
have been the beneficiaries of vast rivers of gun owner donations. Yet
the Conservatives have only delivered the very minimum required to retain
the maximum possible support of gun owners. We need to ensure those
funds dry up if we hope to have any effect other than maintaining the
status quo. We must raise the bar to show the Conservatives we expect
more. We owe it to our kids.
- Al Muir, Stellarton, Nova Scotia
Time to Dump Mr. Harper
While Mr. Harper masquerades as our friend, he flaunts
the established Conservative Party Policy. Mr. Harper seeks to complete
the Liberals’ attempt to destroy our proud Canadian culture and
heritage of responsible firearms ownership and our Right to possess
firearms for self-protection.
As Preston Manning asked, “What should be the
fate of a bad law?”, we must ask “what should be the
fate of a bad leader?” Stephen Harper has proven to be a bad leader.
Therefore make your plans now to attend the CPC Convention
on 27 – 29 June 2013 in Calgary. Plan to attend as a “Voting
Member” of your local CPC EDA – let this be the only money
you send to the Conservatives.
Join us as we work to seek a Leadership Review and cosign
Mr. Harper to the rubbish bin.
- Joe Gingrich, Nipawin, Saskatchewan
Morning Glory Revival
The Conservatives must be brought into line. They have
failed to respond for seventeen years to the pleadings, requests and
even demands by trustworthy firearms owners. The fact that we have committed
no factual crime but have had millions of citizens turned into de facto
criminals by the passage of the Liberals’ Bill C-68 is shameful
enough, but to have the Tories compound the outrage by first promising
to correct that curse and then reversing their course is a crime against
us all. The Conservatives should be punished.
For those naysayers in our midst who cannot believe we
can succeed, may we remind them that a loose bunch of angry citizens
of B.C. fired their Premier for arrogance and had the HST plans of Stephen
Harper extinguished. This action should give heart to the weak-willed
across the country to support the Morning Glory Revival. We are attacking
Gun Control with even more enthusiasm than we fought HST. And so we
should, because the right to have ‘Armes for their Defence’
is essential to the preservation of life, liberty and lifestyle. We,
in the remnants of the British Empire enjoy all three of these “L’s”
only because our men have borne arms since day one. We will lose them
quickly if we are disarmed.
It is no infringement to use a political party to support one’s
personal wish. Indeed it is done all the time. We will recruit all several
million gun owners to vote Green at the next election. If necessary
we will take over the Green Party and cause them to once again to publicly
praise the hunter for being the true wildlife conservationists.
Before those two actions are needed it is possible that a wakeup call
will ring around the Rideau and the long overdue change of Government
policy will get rid of the Firearms Act as it stands.
In 2011 a large number of gun owners who were thinking of parking their
vote with the Greens got seduced into believing that Stephen Harper’s
government was going to keep their promise and scrap the whole Firearms
Act. The ‘long-gun registry’ has virtually nothing
to do with the licensing of gun owners. Anyone who thinks they are the
same simply does not understand the difference between issuing a permit
to a human being and registering a piece of cold iron.
But most importantly, neither has a thing to do with curtailing crime
or preventing crazy massacres. It is time we put our MPs to work –
looking for a meaningful job!
- Willy Floyd, P.O. Box 193, Westbridge, B.C. V0H 2B0
(250) 446 2242; email@example.com
1. Garry Breitkreuz, Confiscation
2. Stockwell Day
3. Stephen Harper
4. Vic Toews on Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, 26 October
5. Candice Hoeppner
6. Senator David Tkachuk
7. Rob Nicholson
8. Lynne Yelich
9. Kelly Block, HANSARD, Number 075, Tuesday, 07 February
10. Shelly Glover
11. Peter Van Loan
12. Vic Toews, House of Common Debate, Tuesday, 07 February
13. Preston Manning, House of Common Debate, 13 June 1995
14. Garry Breitkreuz’s Promise
15. Conservative Party Policy
16. Vic Toews “first time screening”
17. The Firearms Act, chapter 39, Statutes
of Canada -1995; p. 54
18. Gary Mauser, Boling Frogs
Canadian Unlicensed Firearms Owners Association
Association canadienne des propriétaires d’armes sans permis
402 Skeena Court Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7K 4H2
(306) 242-2379 (306) 230-8929