The Year of the magazine, RCMP Info sheet

So after all the posturing is done, regardless of the out come, law abiding gun owners will continue being law abiding, criminals will keep on being criminals. My only question has to do with criminal element, how many statistically remove pins to achieve full magazines, do they really get charged with that offence? Do they just get charged with using a weapon in the commission?

Foot note, Mr Wolverine

The Year of the magazine.... sound like a bad Chinese dinner!
 
26. How many people in Canada legally own firearms?

According to the United Nations, Canada ranks third among the developed
western coutries (behind the US and Norway) in civilian ownership of
firearms.[40] A 1992 survey sponsored by the UN reported that 26% of
Canadians, over 7,000,000 people, own firearms.[41] A 1991 Justice
Department telephone survey indicated there were an average of 2.67
firearms in one of every four Canadian Households, with 71% having
access to a rifle, 64% to a shotgun, and 12% to a handgun. They
calculated that there are over six million legally owned firearms in
Canada. Other authorities insist that this estimate is much too low and
that there are at least 20,000,000 rifles and shotguns in Canada; as
many, per capita, as in the United States. [1]

Past government surveys of much larger populations showed there were at
least 15,000,000 legal firearms back in the 1970s.[39] The government's
own estimate in Dec. 1976, published as part of its gun control
campaign, was 6,000,000 owners with 18,000,000 firearms. During
hearings on the Campbell bill, officials from the office of the Minister
of Justice testified that the long-term average net annual importation
of firearms into Canada (imports minus exports) was 190,000 per year.
Therefore, adding 190,000 per year to the 18,000,000 of 1976, we get a
total of 21,610,000 by Dec 1993. Subtract 610,000 plus one firearm for
every firearm manufactured in Canada during those 17 years as an
allowance for firearms destroyed, dismantled or worn out--and you are
back at 21,000,000 firearms with 7,000,000 owners. [38]

There were 1,221,179 registered restricted firearms in the RCMP FRAS
records in Dec 1993. The unrestricted firearm to "restricted" firearm
ratio is at least 20:1. Conservatively, that means 24,423,580
unrestricted plus 1,221,179 restricted. Allowing for errors in the
RCMP's registration system, we strike off 221,179 registered firearms as
non-existent, which reduces the total to 21,000,000 firearms with
7,000,000 owners. [38]

Restricted firearm ownership increased from 861,571 in Dec 1984 to
1,221,179 in Dec 93, an increase of (1,221,179 - 861,571) divided by
861,571 = 41.74 per cent in 9 years. Those figures are solid, because
they are taken from the Annual Report of the Commissioner of the RCMP.
The NFA estimates that the 1976 figure for total firearms owned,
18,000,000, increased to 21,000,000 by 1993. That represents a "total
firearms" increase of only 16.67 per cent in 17 years, which is again
quite conservative. [38]

None of the above estimates include any figures for illegally imported
firearms, which are known to have increased sharply each time
restrictive, costly, and/or vague legislation has made legal ownership
more complicated, more expensive, and/or more risky. [38]

[39]For a more detailed analysis, try one of these URLs:
[84]http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Gimbarzevsky/number.gun
[85]http://yoda.sscl.uwo.ca/~eric/cfa/Gimbarzevsky/number.gun
[86]ftp://teapot.usask.ca/pub/cdn-firearms/Gimbarzevsky/

[1] David B. Kopel, "The Samurai, The Mountie, and The Cowboy:
Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of other Democracies",
(Prometheus Books, 1992), p.136
[38] David A. Tomlinson, _How Many Firearms and Owners are
There in Canada?_, leaflet, 1994
[40] Understanding Crime: Experiences of Crime and Crime Control,
(United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute,
Pulications No. 49, Aug., 1993), p.292
[41] Ibid, p.481



Read more: http://stason.org/TULARC/society/gu...anada-legally-own-firearms.html#ixzz4FkhYGGR7
Not sure how accurate this is, I have heard 7 million owners/ 21 million firearms! Hard to nail down an accurate #!!
 
bobdbldr said:
26. How many people in Canada legally own firearms?

According to the United Nations, Canada ranks third among the developed
western coutries (behind the US and Norway) in civilian ownership of
firearms.[40] A 1992 survey sponsored by the UN reported that 26% of
Canadians, over 7,000,000 people, own firearms.[41] A 1991 Justice
Department telephone survey indicated there were an average of 2.67
firearms in one of every four Canadian Households, with 71% having
access to a rifle, 64% to a shotgun, and 12% to a handgun. They
calculated that there are over six million legally owned firearms in
Canada. Other authorities insist that this estimate is much too low and
that there are at least 20,000,000 rifles and shotguns in Canada; as
many, per capita, as in the United States. [1]

Past government surveys of much larger populations showed there were at
least 15,000,000 legal firearms back in the 1970s.[39] The government's
own estimate in Dec. 1976, published as part of its gun control
campaign, was 6,000,000 owners with 18,000,000 firearms. During
hearings on the Campbell bill, officials from the office of the Minister
of Justice testified that the long-term average net annual importation
of firearms into Canada (imports minus exports) was 190,000 per year.
Therefore, adding 190,000 per year to the 18,000,000 of 1976, we get a
total of 21,610,000 by Dec 1993. Subtract 610,000 plus one firearm for
every firearm manufactured in Canada during those 17 years as an
allowance for firearms destroyed, dismantled or worn out--and you are
back at 21,000,000 firearms with 7,000,000 owners. [38]

There were 1,221,179 registered restricted firearms in the RCMP FRAS
records in Dec 1993. The unrestricted firearm to "restricted" firearm
ratio is at least 20:1. Conservatively, that means 24,423,580
unrestricted plus 1,221,179 restricted. Allowing for errors in the
RCMP's registration system, we strike off 221,179 registered firearms as
non-existent, which reduces the total to 21,000,000 firearms with
7,000,000 owners. [38]

Restricted firearm ownership increased from 861,571 in Dec 1984 to
1,221,179 in Dec 93, an increase of (1,221,179 - 861,571) divided by
861,571 = 41.74 per cent in 9 years. Those figures are solid, because
they are taken from the Annual Report of the Commissioner of the RCMP.
The NFA estimates that the 1976 figure for total firearms owned,
18,000,000, increased to 21,000,000 by 1993. That represents a "total
firearms" increase of only 16.67 per cent in 17 years, which is again
quite conservative. [38]

None of the above estimates include any figures for illegally imported
firearms, which are known to have increased sharply each time
restrictive, costly, and/or vague legislation has made legal ownership
more complicated, more expensive, and/or more risky. [38]

[39]For a more detailed analysis, try one of these URLs:
[84]http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Gimbarzevsky/number.gun
[85]http://yoda.sscl.uwo.ca/~eric/cfa/Gimbarzevsky/number.gun
[86]ftp://teapot.usask.ca/pub/cdn-firearms/Gimbarzevsky/

[1] David B. Kopel, "The Samurai, The Mountie, and The Cowboy:
Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of other Democracies",
(Prometheus Books, 1992), p.136
[38] David A. Tomlinson, _How Many Firearms and Owners are
There in Canada?_, leaflet, 1994
[40] Understanding Crime: Experiences of Crime and Crime Control,
(United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute,
Pulications No. 49, Aug., 1993), p.292
[41] Ibid, p.481



Read more: http://stason.org/TULARC/society/gu...anada-legally-own-firearms.html#ixzz4FkhYGGR7
Not sure how accurate this is, I have heard 7 million owners/ 21 million firearms! Hard to nail down an accurate #!!
Click to expand...

I had a hard time with the wall of stats. Do however remember that theree was a quote by Tony Bernardo(CSSA) that there are import documents for 27 million firearms in Canada. Dont know if that accounts for any manufactured here. However, at the highest, the LGR accounted for about 9 million.......so Lieberal math...carry the 9.....divide the 27......ya 90% compliance.

Quality firearms have a lifespan of well over 100 years if protected from their only known enemies.....Rust, Lieberals, and the RCMP. This has been a hinterland who's who.
 
How would this affect restricted Ar15 .22lr rifles that use the black dog magazines? I want to buy such a rifle, but not if those 25-rounders also get pinned to 10.
 
10/22 mags can fit the Ruger Charger. Apparently 300 or so of those have been sold in Canada. Regardless, the BC mags were patented in 1977, the Charger in 200. I think it's clear the BC mags were "initially designed and manufactured" for the 10/22.
 
Thanks. So wouldn't the wise thing be to offer to buy up every charger at twice the normal market value and dispose of them. If only some show up then they obviously aren't "commonly available"
 
Bad Lieutenant said:
Bravo sir, now that's how you write a letter. Mature, respectful and civil. Thank you for setting a such a great example for others.
Click to expand...

Thank you sir, I wrote those words in a slow-burn of passion, and re-worked them until I felt it spoke using calm and reasoned language.

In a past life I wore green and after that spent a miserable 4 years in the federal government as a permanent employee. I resigned. Learned way too much that I can't speak of under law.

I have since worked for them in various capacities as a contractor for much too long, and know them intimately from the inside, by working with their own employees. I am pleased to say I no longer work for them in any direct capacity, as I now work for a private company that manufactures and sells things, a much more honest activity I can feel good about.

Sun Tzu said in the Art of War: Know your enemy.

Our enemy, clearly the government and its appendages in this situation, wishes to paint us as nuts who cannot be trusted to manage our own property and lives and need to be especially policed vis-à-vis the gang-bangers criminal thugs who do not hold a PAL much less an RPAL, but cannot so easily be counted and inventoried as us licensed law-abiding folk who go through all the hoops and checks/balances.

This serves as a 'quick win' for them, even though it's a meaningless gesture in combating crime, an expression I have heard way too often in the meeting rooms of the federal government. They know the public has a short memory and loves sensation. When something sensational comes up people will forget about detailed stuff, and move onto the shiny thing.

The timing of this move is very strategic, at the beginning of the parliamentary recess. People will quickly forget about this if it hits the news unless we make lots of noise. The squeaky wheel always gets the grease, government does not want unhappy people spreading that unhappiness to others. Communications staff have the highest turnaround and stress in government, in my experience. That's because they have to do all the lying. If we keep the pressure on them, they will eventually concede and act.

I wanted my words to hold truth as self-evident, so that if for some reason by crafting and sending them I had a knock at my door and ended up in cuffs, I could stand proudly behind that letter in any court of law before a jury of my peers, my family, and my children.

I hope I've inspired others to do the same and in great numbers! Many others in this great forum have also impressed me with their written responses and inquiries to our officials. Let's keep it up!

The emperor has no clothes! : )

For others writing in: Please be respectful, we need to come across as the reasoned logical folks that we can be, since this government trumpets itself as making evidence-based decisions.

After waiting the time allotted and not receiving a response, you should follow that up with further contact by telephone to their offices and ask why they still have not responded to your official correspondence. If you have a few bucks, try sending the letters by registered mail, requiring signature.

Strength in numbers!

PS: Emails mean nothing to them, they get so many they have to build massive systems to archive all that stuff as per law dictates but they don't have time to sift through it all. Snail mail and live telephone calls will get their attention more. Calling them out on social media might start something that goes viral and grows faster than they can lie about, as their communications processes are very slow and require much top-down approval. A federal government tweet is a 12-step approval process!
 
VinnyQC said:
The mere notion that every calibre is equal in anything is ridiculous. This is what can lead to the most ridiculous gun laws, for example a restriction to 5 rounds of any calibre in any magazine.

If you want to argue that every calibre is the same, you're not gonna end up with unrestricted magazine capacity, you're gonna end up with very limited capacity on everything. I guarantee it.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that every caliber is the same. I'm arguing that you should have a good long think about saying things like, "From a public safey point of view, no one will ever convince me that 5 rounds of .50BMG and 5 rounds of 20gauge shotty pose the same public safety concern."

To put it a bit more bluntly, from a public safety point of view as you say, please list the calibers that are not a concern. Cause that is where statements like yours lead.

I see that you just got your firearms licence recently so I will forgive you for doing the same thing that anti's are famous for - judging a book by its cover, a bullet by its size, a rifle by its colour, or a gun owner by what he or she might do. If you are going to state that 50bmg poses a greater public safety risk then you are going to have to back that up with some facts. Just based on the sheer numbers of 20ga shotguns across Canada versus the relatively small number of 50bmgs, I'd be willing to bet that there are more injuries/deaths caused by the 20 gauges so which one do you think is really the greater public safety concern?
 
notsorichguy said:
That is not correct. Crimes have in fact been committed in Canada with 10/22 rifles.

There was a shooting here in SK 8-10 years ago.

The person walked into a rival gangs bar and opened fire with a cut down 10/22. Expended 4 magazines of ammo and fled. Iirc he used Butler Creek 25 rnd magazines. 2 people were killed and 8 were injured. The person in question is currently serving time for the crime.

I also recall an incident in Taber AB that involved a 10/22. I do not recall the particulars of the incident.

Saying that "no crimes ever" is not accurate. Using such statements makes us all look bad.
Click to expand...

You are not understanding the actual legal issue here.

This isn't about the 10/22 RIFLE, the law is very very clear that magazine capacity for 22 lr RIFLES is UNLIMITED

They are using the existence of the Charger pistol to try to prohibit the magazine

Have any crimes been committed by people using magazines over 10 round capacity on a Charger Pistol?
 
I have 2 of the 25 rounders at my house. I have cameras set up and I am waiting. Please kick my door in and put me in prison for the test of my life. We need a person to be publicly destroyed by this. I am volunteering. Please boot my door in. I will not comply so I must be imprisoned.
 
I think the important detail here is that a Ruger Charger is not "commonly available". That would be a very difficult thing to prove (since it's not commonly available)
 
Darkw said:
I think the important detail here is that a Ruger Charger is not "commonly available". That would be a very difficult thing to prove (since it's not commonly available)
Click to expand...

Nope... I think the correct answer is "It doesn't matter". The law says it does not include any cartridge magazine that "(a) was originally designed or manufactured for use in a firearm that (i) is chambered for, or designed to use, rimfire cartridges,"...

The Butler Creek mag for the 10/22 rifle was patented in 1977. The Charger pistol was patented in 2007. The Butler Creek mag was originally designed for a rifle chambered in a rimfire cartridge.

FULL STOP
 
Phat Eagle said:
Nope... I think the correct answer is "It doesn't matter". The law says it does not include any cartridge magazine that "(a) was originally designed or manufactured for use in a firearm that (i) is chambered for, or designed to use, rimfire cartridges,"...

The Butler Creek mag for the 10/22 rifle was patented in 1977. The Charger pistol was patented in 2007. The Butler Creek mag was originally designed for a rifle chambered in a rimfire cartridge.

FULL STOP
Click to expand...


^^^^^
What he said... I only see two ways to fix this crap... the RCMP can have a mag swap program / buy back program where they pay for it, give me a new 10 Ruger mag for a 25+ round mag. or CLASS ACTION and we see them in court..
 
notsorichguy said:
That is not correct. Crimes have in fact been committed in Canada with 10/22 rifles.

There was a shooting here in SK 8-10 years ago.

The person walked into a rival gangs bar and opened fire with a cut down 10/22. Expended 4 magazines of ammo and fled. Iirc he used Butler Creek 25 rnd magazines. 2 people were killed and 8 were injured. The person in question is currently serving time for the crime.

I also recall an incident in Taber AB that involved a 10/22. I do not recall the particulars of the incident.

Saying that "no crimes ever" is not accurate. Using such statements makes us all look bad.
Click to expand...

Also, using hood on hood violence is hardly a great example of a crime that truly scares the good law abiding citizens of this country.
Secretly a lot of people are thinking good riddance but will not say so in public. Violent criminals being "victimized" by other violent criminals, will not shock the general public into any kind of action. And Thank God for that.
If you don't believe that, remember the Somali drug dealers that came to a bad end in Fort Mac?? You think anyone is really investigating that mess?
The second Taber example is very vague too.........so!

Your debating skills are found wanting IMO.
 
Last edited:
Josh6499 said:
What am I missing?
Click to expand...

The RCMP's position is that you're missing :

3(1)(b), same link

(b) that is capable of containing more than 10 cartridges of the type for which the magazine was originally designed and that is designed or manufactured for use in a semi-automatic handgun that is commonly available in Canada.​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom