Bill S-223

[Fundy1]

No one has sponsored this bill after Payette's retirement. Senator Cools is listed on the order paper because she was to speak in opposition to it. The bill will appear on the order paper another 12 times. No one will actually bring it up though. Then it will officially be dead. That is the process.

And Cools is truly independent, opposed C-68, and accused Wendy Cukier of lyng to the Senate.

I hope you're right because this would gut the sport shooting community.

[Model 41]

The main features of Bill S-223 are as follows:

Current firearms categories are replaced with:
Hunting firearms;
Circumscribed firearms; and Prohibited firearms.
Unlike now, “prohibited firearm” is the new “default category”. If a particular firearm is not included in one of the other two categories, it is “prohibited” by default.
To qualify as a “hunting firearm”, government approval will be required by way of Order in Council for any specific model.
“Circumscribed firearms” include current “restricted firearms”, as well as all center-fire semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, other than .22 rimfire rifles.
As a result of re-classification to “circumscribed firearms”, all semi-automatic shotguns and rifles will become illegal for hunting purposes.
Except for collection purposes, possession of “circumscribed firearms” will only be allowed at shooting clubs and registered storage facilities. The owner of such a firearm will not even be allowed to transport it himself, or keep it at home.
This bill is meant to come into effect one year after its royal sanction. In essence, firearms owners will have one year to register their semi-auto rifles and shotguns, and find a suitable storage facility (few of which currently exist) to store them, along with their handguns and other restricted/prohibited firearms.
It is quite obvious that one of the goals of this bill is to make ownership of semi-automatic firearms so onerous that people will surrender them to the police to be destroyed.

How a Bill Becomes an Act


In Canada, before a law is enacted, it begins as a bill. Bills originating in the House of Commons are known as government bills. Other types of bills include: private member bills, private senator's bills, public bills or private bills. Government bills are numbered consecutively from C-1 - C-200.

Private member bills are bills introduced in the House of Commons by a member of parliament who is not a cabinet minister. Private senator's bills are introduced in the Senate by a senator who is not a member of the ministry. Private member bills are numbered consecutively from C-201 to C-1000 if introduced in the House of Commons, and S-201 - S-1000 if introduced in the Senate. (Prior to April 2006 when the 39th Parliament opened, all bills originating in the Senate were numbered consecutively beginning at S-1).

First Reading
After a bill has been introduced into Parliament, it is received, printed, and disseminated. Bills are not debated at their first reading.

Second Reading
At the second reading, a bill is debated and the debates are recorded in Hansard. At the end of the debate, a vote is taken to determine whether the bill will proceed to the committee stage or die.

Committee Stage
Following the second reading of a bill, a legislative committee is set up to study the bill in detail. The committee recommends whether a bill should be adopted as-is, amended, or dropped.

Committees are groups of parliamentarians who study and consider legislation under consideration, departmental activities and spending, reports and other documents tabled in the House, order-in-council appointments and other "committee business". Composed of both senators and members of the House of Commons, there are several different types of committees, including: standing, legislative, special and joint, Committees of the Whole and the Liaison Committee.

The Committee of the Whole includes all members of the House of Commons and is chaired by the Deputy Speaker.
Standing Committees are typically composed of 7-11 members who are chosen from parties in proportion to party representation in the House of Commons. Standing Committees are the most important type of government committee.
Legislative Committees are set up to examine legislation following the second reading of a bill. These committees normally have seven members and include backbench members from every party. The committee recommends whether a bill should be adopted as-is, amended, or dropped. See Committees of the House of Commons Homepage, Committees: A Practical Guide or the Canadian Encyclopedia for more information.
Reports Stage
The committee reports the bill to the House, including any proposed amendments, which the House deliberates and then either accepts or rejects through a vote.

Third Reading
At the third reading of a bill, the committee reports the bill to the House with any proposed amendments. The bill is then voted upon by the House, and either "dies" or "passes the House". If it passes, the bill is printed and sent to the Senate.

Royal Assent
When a bill is given Royal Assent, it comes into force and becomes law. Bills must pass both the House of Commons and the Senate before they receive Royal Assent, which is granted by the Governor General. Once a bill comes into force, it becomes an act and is renumbered. The text of a new act is published in the Canada Gazette Part III and later in the Statutes of Canada.

References

Kehoe, I. 2007. How a government bill becomes law. Retrieved from dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Reference/queens-e.html
Stewart, J. n.d. Parliamentary Procedure. In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved from www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/

[gregb]

S.223 has been placed back in the order paper by Senator Anne Cools seconded by Senator Jaffers. This bill is going forward as it stands.

Going forward where? It's going to die in a matter of days.

[TylerM]

The lib bastards have a majority too. Even IF this doesn't make it to the 3rd round? All it's gonna take is ONE TRAGEDY.

[iamcanadianeh]

I don't have much to worry about, my handguns and restricted rifles have all self-identified as single shot bolt action 22's.



On a more realistic note, email sent to MP.

[TylerM]

I don't have much to worry about, my handguns and restricted rifles have all self-identified as single shot bolt action 22's.

Lmao!

For real though. This aims to utterly DESTROY gun ownership. This bill isn't the end game. They won't be happy until there is a TOTAL BAN on EVERYTHING. You'll need a permit to schit in your own toilet and if your turd is too big? It's an ASSAULT TURD and you'll go to jail! Plastic knives, forks and spoons ONLY. Only approved GOVERNMENT officers can have a bread knife or a chefs knife.

If you even LOOK at a government official or police officer the wrong way? It's straight to padded room for you! Off to be sedated and drugged and painfully reeducated until a whole panel of bureaucrats decide to let you out. No lawn mowers. No chainsaws. No axes. NOTHING.

[Doug_M]

Going forward where? It's going to die in a matter of days.

Not quite. It dies if no one sponsors it in 15 "sitting" days. Going by the senate calendar that'll put the death date somewhere in the end of the 1st week of June. No one is going to sponsor it though. Even Liberal senators, oh pardon me, "Senate Liberals" have written back saying they will not vote for the bill. Quite frankly, despite the Liberals gun grabbing desires, this bill stinks and they know it.

[bcbravo2zero]

The lib bastards have a majority too. Even IF this doesn't make it to the 3rd round? All it's gonna take is ONE TRAGEDY.

Indeed. I suspect that the only reason why the Liberals did not try to use the La Loche shootings to bring in new, draconian laws is that the residents of La Loche are Aboriginal.

The people I know who are fans of JT's Liberals are also BIG fans of the Australian-model of banning and grabbing semi-autos. They believe that the science re: the effectiveness of Australia's gun-ban is on their side. Of course, it is not. Anti-gun people are generally "anti-fact" as well as anti-civil-liberties.

I suspect that defending ourselves against the Australian-model will be important. We should all be armed with information about the findings of the majority of the research: little to no effect on homicides.

This is a great quote right out of wikipedia:

In 2005 the head of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn,[49] noted that the level of legal gun ownership in NSW increased in recent years, and that the 1996 legislation had little to no effect on violence. Professor Simon Chapman, former co-convenor of the Coalition for Gun Control, complained that his words "will henceforth be cited by every gun-lusting lobby group throughout the world in their perverse efforts to stall reforms that could save thousands of lives".[50] Weatherburn responded, "The fact is that the introduction of those laws did not result in any acceleration of the downward trend in gun homicide. They may have reduced the risk of mass shootings but we cannot be sure because no one has done the rigorous statistical work required to verify this possibility. It is always unpleasant to acknowledge facts that are inconsistent with your own point of view. But I thought that was what distinguished science from popular prejudice."

[NeonGreen]

there is an EXTREMELY long winded write up on the NFA facebook page, i was going to cut and paste it but i know damn well no one will read it. lets keep the fight up or we may as well kiss our guns goodbye and re name this sight "former canadian gun nutz" do not get complacent on this people.

[TylerM]

BC Bravo? I even have the video for you about the failed policy! Even some high ranking officers said it did NOTHING. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CUaSs5uHxYc

But libs will NEVER let pesky things like truth and facts get in the way. No no NO NO NO!!!!!