Former Liberal senator not set on gun bill: C71 news

[Scarheart]

Same here ... Hoping Jaffer will be more open minded to make an informed decision.

I just hope my gut feel will not be true. There is this thing at the back of my head that keeps saying "The Liberals will still have a good chance of winning on Oct" ..... Damn I just hope I'm wrong.

If you follow the news very closely you can see that even though the left are the ones always screaming for recounts etc. whenever an investigation gets done it's usually the left that are the ones cheating in various ways. Then the leftist media quickly goes onto something else hoping you won't notice. But any method of cheating becomes unavoidably apparent if you do too much of it. So basically we have to win by enough votes to counter any electoral shenanigans. IMO

[BCreserveMP]

If you follow the news very closely you can see that even though the left are the ones always screaming for recounts etc. whenever an investigation gets done it's usually the left that are the ones cheating in various ways. Then the leftist media quickly goes onto something else hoping you won't notice. But any method of cheating becomes unavoidably apparent if you do too much of it. So basically we have to win by enough votes to counter any electoral shenanigans. IMO

well you can thank Maxime for that not happening this time.

[nowarningshot]

Isnt it taking a long time in committee. Seems some bills move quickly.

Its almost as if , the liberals know how bad it is, want it to die.

Either to cobble on some bans, or to propose much more draconian legislation if they win the election.

[Ebola]

Won't matter if the Senate sends the bill back with amendments in our favour anyways. The house would just regect the propsed changes, then send it back to the senate, where the senate after complaining will just ratify the bill anyways. The Senate does not have the balls to take on the house and say no. This is why the senate is a total waste.

[Frontier Firearms]

Letter writing is not in vain.

[K98STER]

Its not good enough just to come on board and read about it. Let us all join CCFR and NFA.

Forgive my ignorance but what are these two organization you mention. If they help support our gun rights through unified efforts, I want to be a part.

[rangebob]

CCFR	https://firearmrights.ca/en/home/
CSSA	https://cssa-cila.org/
NFA	https://nfa.ca/

[scout_289]

Forgive my ignorance but what are these two organization you mention. If they help support our gun rights through unified efforts, I want to be a part.

Dig deep and join only organization(s) that reflect your values with a business plan and a track record of accomplishing the goals that are important to you.

At the end of this exercise I will leave it to you to decide if their efforts are "unified".

If you decide that they are not working cooperatively then you may want to consider if there is a benefit to our community if you support three entities with differing approaches to representing us.

[BCreserveMP]

Letter writing is not in vain.

Indeed. I encourage everyone to write to her. be courteous and non-threatening. Don't focus on our "rights" because that's a non-starter. Instead focus on the poor structure and the pointlessness of C-71 itself. She may remain a proponent of gun control while still being enlightened to the major flaws within the bill's wording.

Note: the government style guide recommends letters to Senators be addressed "Dear Senator (last name)" and closing with "Yours sincerely".

My letter to the Senator (with certain parts removed for privacy's sake):

Dear Senator Jaffer,

My name is (BCReserveMP). I am a resident of Victoria BC, a first-generation immigrant, and a member of the Canadian Forces where I serve at Her Majesty's pleasure as a Military Police patrolman...

...I am a gun owner. I do not hunt, however. My interest in shooting comes as a result of maintaining my skill-set for my job, and from an affinity for competitive target shooting. I, along with every gun owner I know, practice storage, transport, and handling safety which exceeds even the requirements of the Firearms Act. We take the privilege - and the responsibility - of gun ownership very seriously.

I understand you have received many letters from Canadians critical of Bill C-71. I will not bore you with the same points hundreds of others have no doubt already expressed.

However, having attended crime scenes in the course of my duties, and having interactions with individuals prohibited from firearms possession due to criminal activity and/or orders related to the Mental Health Act, I believe I can offer a unique perspective on the shortcomings of the bill.

We know the current Firearms Act - coupled with the authority of the CFO - works. The incidence of lawfully-owned firearms used in crimes is low. The incidence of firearms used in acts of self-harm by owners is also low. The vast majority of acts of violence involving firearms in this country occurs with firearms unlawfully obtained, and very often using those smuggled in from a neighbouring nation we don't need to identify. I know this. You know this. We all know this to be true.

Despite not even addressing gangs, or failings in border security, C-71 was originally tabled as a solution to gun violence in our cities. When that argument fell apart, the reason behind the bill was reworked until the bill was ostensibly about reducing acts of self-harm. Statistically-speaking this argument also falls-apart. Contrary to the claims of our ill-informed Prime Minister and to the Right Honourable Mr. Goodale, in light of over 20 million firearms (including well over a million so-called "assault weapons") lawfully-owned by private citizens, our relatively low gun violence statistics are something for which we should be proud, not ashamed. They reflect our national personae as respectful, rational, and law-abiding.

Canadian gun owners are statistically the most law-abiding and monitored segment of the population, and every one of us has, in the course of obtaining our PALs, agreed to submit to extensive but reasonable background checks. Those of us who have taken the extra steps necessary to obtain the "restricted" and/or "prohibited" endorsements on our PALs are subject to daily checks on CPIC. The system is already thorough, and statistics on violence involving firearms reflects this. And, because we are generally speaking a respectful and lawful bunch, gun owners are content to submit to a somewhat invasive process in order to keep Canada relatively free from gun violence. We have done enough. C-71 is too much.

C-71 fails to address the root causes of firearm violence. I am in favour of sensible and effective gun-control which will make our society safer. Bill C-71 is neither sensible nor effective. Its only effect will be to further inconvenience the law abiding. The criminal element and the mentally-ill will continue to circumvent the law, as they have since the dawn of time.

It should also be considered that the bill will negatively impact a multi-million dollar segment of the Canadian manufacturing and retail sales industries.

The spurious argument about so-called "assault weapons" fails to acknowledge that these firearms are the least likely - by a wide margin - to be used in crime. In fact, despite over 50,000 AR-15 variants lawfully-owned by Canadians, not one has been used in a criminal act. Not one lawfully-owned AR-15. The only one we know of which has was smuggled from another country, and used by a gang member already prohibited from firearm ownership. Prohibiting these firearms will have absolutely no effect on public safety.

My biggest concern, however, is that C-71 contains language of a de facto registry, but does not contain any language regarding the security of that registry's data. Any seller of firearms will be required to maintain a database of those transactions, including the buyers' address. It does not take a genius to conclude that these databases will become very valuable commodities for the criminal element. Anyone taking the time to steal a ledger, hard-drive, or hack data from a gun store will have a shopping list of who owns what guns in any community. These gun owners will have an increased likelihood of being targeted by criminals intent on stealing guns. It removes the traditionally discreet nature of gun ownership in favour of basically advertising it to those who would exploit it. As it is right now, the only people who know I own guns - even those who have been inside my home - are those whom I want to know I own guns.

I believe C-71 should not pass without addressing the security flaws fails to address by not defining the nature of retaining these databases. I understand your background in public safety and the protection of women will have bearing on your opinion, but it should be noted that the vast majority of individuals on the receiving end of gun violence are men. Specifically young men. Even more specifically, young men involved in criminal activity to some degree. Gun violence should not be dragged into gender-based political discussion.

Senator Jaffer, I offer my testimony in-person if you wish. I understand you are on the fence regarding the bill, and I believe the bill must not pass as it is written. It is too flawed and does not offer any solutions to gun violence. Please continue to be critical of this bill while you consider your options.

Yours sincerely,

[handofzeus]

...