OneClearVoice!!! *UPDATE*

Well at least our submissions should have also gone to both of the ppl that the conflict commissioner recommends (providing you sent it to the distribution list recommended by One Clear) so all is not lost yet.
 
Shorerider said:
I got a reply on campaign 9. And since the committee is not appointed by the governor in council they are not subject to the conflict of interest act. So basically they can lobby all they want and the conflict commissioner can’t do anything about it. Thanks Goodale
Click to expand...

Yes. I removed the ethics commissioner from the campaign on Sunday because of that. It is still being sent to the Commissioner of Lobby Canada.
 
Silly us.
Thinking that Ethics would have anything to do with the Liberal Witch Hunt for Hunters Council
 
Introducing Printable (PDF) and Editable (RTF) Letters from One Clear Voice.

Each campaign has been upgraded to include a button to download a printable PDF version of the campaign email or an RTF version (works in any word processor) you can edit before printing.

We filled their inboxes, now lets fill their offices!

http://oneclearvoice.ca
 
Last edited:
Today is also "phone call Friday!"

Phone-Call-Friday-Goodale-1.png
 
Just called that number ..." Sorry this mail box is full" good job . Will keep calling it. Hopefully Ralphy is hearing C-71 C-71 C-71 in his sleep
 
Individual Letters to SECU

The Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security accepts briefs submitted by individuals. These briefs can and often do take the form of an emailed letter. These letters are only accepted from citizens if they are individually written and not a form letter. It is fine to get ideas from other letters, but you must write this letter yourself in your own words. If you visit this page you can read the briefs that have already been submitted. This is our opportunity to point out flaws and problems in bill C-71. Your letter should be polite, concise and factual. Ask that your letter be committed to the record and nominate someone to speak as a witness (for example someone from your favourite gun rights organization). It will take a while for SECU to translate and post your brief, but there is no reason why they overwhelming majority of briefs received shouldn't be from gun owners opposing the bill. Democracy belongs to those who show up!

Email SECU at SECU@parl.gc.ca

http://oneclearvoice.ca
 
A little side project from OCV. Ever see or hear anti's saying firearm homicides went down after gun control legislation? Well we know better! In recent weeks we've been slandered by some in the MSM and alt-left media as "Canada's NRA" or simply "the gun lobby" as if we are evil and are trying to fool the public. The opposite is true. The anti's claims are false. Anyway, I got busy with the stats and a photo editor and came up with this for people to use in rebuttals or whatever on social media.

28020230478_ef852ec3b3_b.jpg


Some points for the inevitable comments:
- firearm-related homicide was falling rapidly years before Firearms Acquisition Certificates were introduced
- if someone points out the rate of reduction increased after C-68 you can point out firearms-related homicides increased after licensing and the long gun registry were introduced and it fell after the LGR was repealed :p
- note that the most recent uptick looks like it is almost exclusively linked to gangs
 
I submitted my brief to the committee today. Have you?

Here is what I wrote:

Dear Members of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security,

I am opposed to Bill C-71 due to its focus on the wrong segment of society, Canada’s licensed firearms owners. Firearm-related homicide has been on the decline in Canada since a peak in 1974. That decline continues today. However, within the category of firearm-related homicides there is a demographic that is on the rise. C-71 does not address that demographic. That demographic is gangs.

CanadaHomicideGangFirearm19962016.png


It should also be pointed out that the demographic of non-gang is still primarily composed of criminals rather than licensed firearms owners. On average, licensed firearm owners comprise less than 5% of non-gang firearm-related homicides and well under 2% of all firearm-related homicides.

Not only does C-71 clearly target the wrong demographic, there is nothing contained within the bill that would reduce the average of 4 firearm-related homicides committed by licensed firearms owners per year. Taxpayer dollars and police resources would be better spent combating gang violence and the root causes of gangs themselves.

Sincerely,
Doug McComber
Kingston, NS
 
The committee is meeting on Tuesday. Word is the rural caucus has been hit hard with complaints and are looking make some changes to C-71. Time to hit them hard!

Campaign #10 - Evidence-based Policy
Campaign 10 calls out the hypocrisy of C-71 in comparison to the Liberal Party's 2015 election promise of "evidence-based policy". It is simple, to the point, and full of evidence (references). This letter is primarily addressed to the members of the committee studying C-71.

http://oneclearvoice.ca/campaign010.html

Enjoy the long weekend!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom