Originally Posted by
PPCLIGullyPlatoon
It's a start. I like the idea of being able to transport without an ATT, but the rest seems a little "fluffy" for my liking:
1) "Mandatory safety courses for first-time gun owners:" This is already being done, so nothing has changed there, [I]unless[I] someone is proposing additional safety courses??
2) "Gun owners convicted of domestic assault-related crimes would also be at greater risk of losing their guns, as judges would be given more discretion to remove guns in the case of certain offences:" Currently, in almost every case where a firearm owner is before the Courts for "domestic matters," the Crown Attorney is asking for a prohibition order, whether it's conviction or discharge. Another "touted" change which is already being done.
3) "The RCMP previously reclassified the Swiss Arm Classic Green rifle as "prohibited," which essentially banned it:" In my books, the RCMP SHOULD NOT have the authority to arbitrarily and unilaterally reclassify any firearm --- it is my assertion the RCMP should focus on enforcement of laws and not creation of them. If the RCMP feels a particular weapon should be reclassified, then the matter should be presented and debated like any other legislation. Regardless of firearm, whatever the legal conditions are at the time the owner acquires that firearm should remain unchanged regardless of legislative change (ie "grandfathering"). Just a thought; no owner should have to be concerned about an uncompensated loss of their right to ownership because some future authority changes the status of the legality ---- I guess what I am saying is, if the "authorities" say such-and-such a firearm is now deemed "illegal," then that "authority" should compensate the owner fairly.