U.n. Firearms marking regulations

[BlackVoid]

How much was allocated for this registry?

13 mil over 5 years specifically for firearms marking.

I guess, small department in public safety office with a database.

Humble beginnings of a 1 billion sink hole, like it was in case of LGR.

Also they have 100 mil to reduce "gender based" violence, whatever the #### that means. Prison rapes?

 

[DT741]

13 mil over 5 years specifically for firearms marking.

I guess, small department in public safety office with a database.

Humble beginnings of a 1 billion sink hole, like it was in case of LGR.

Also they have 100 mil to reduce "gender based" violence, whatever the #### that means. Prison rapes?

Because throwing money at a "problem" has been a sucess before... Wtf is gender based violence anyway ?!?! The scariest part is the fact that they actually got elected... That means people actually voted these idiots in and are OK with wasting cash we dont have on stupidities like that...

 

[Cameron SS]

13 mil over 5 years specifically for firearms marking.

I guess, small department in public safety office with a database.

Humble beginnings of a 1 billion sink hole, like it was in case of LGR.

Also they have 100 mil to reduce "gender based" violence, whatever the #### that means. Prison rapes?

And which government department is the recipient of that 13 million dollars?

Can you provide a link to the budget documents that identifies this line item?

 

[BlackVoid]

And which government department is the recipient of that 13 million dollars?

Can you provide a link to the budget documents that identifies this line item?

http://www.budget.gc.ca/2017/docs/download-telecharger/index-en.html

Download budget 2017.pdf. Page 185.

"In 2017, Canada will also join the international Arms Trade Treaty. This agreement
ensures that countries have effective systems in place to control the
international trade of weapons so that they are not used to support terrorism,
organized crime, gender-based violence or human rights abuses. Budget 2017
proposes to invest $13 million over five years to allow Canada to implement this
treaty and further strengthen its export control regime."

 

[flashburn]

Only mentions exports. So we are setting up a new department to deal with implementation of the treaty?
My concern with all this is simple. If I am stopped on the way to my range post June 1st with pre treaty toys and the LEO "inspects" my firearms and notices they lack the UN markings how do I prove they were in my possession pre June 1st 2017? I have no bill of sale/paperwork for most. Now I am open to being charged. The only record is with Canada customs? and how do I go about getting the import record as right now that appears to be the only way to prove the firearm(s) were in Canada pre June 1st. If I was to mark my guns Bubba style how do I get the self applied markings approved?

 

[Cameron SS]

Only mentions exports. So we are setting up a new department to deal with implementation of the treaty?
My concern with all this is simple. If I am stopped on the way to my range post June 1st with pre treaty toys and the LEO "inspects" my firearms and notices they lack the UN markings how do I prove they were in my possession pre June 1st 2017? I have no bill of sale/paperwork for most. Now I am open to being charged. The only record is with Canada customs? and how do I go about getting the import record as right now that appears to be the only way to prove the firearm(s) were in Canada pre June 1st. If I was to mark my guns Bubba style how do I get the self applied markings approved?

Unlikely for 2 reasons. 1st your rank and file LEO wont have a clue about the marking requirements.

2nd the regs place the onus on importers, not owners.

 

[MustangFrank]

Ok not quite out. This thread has taken a life of its own which is quite common and remained pretty darn civil which is not so common. The original concern seems to have gotten lost though. It was wether or not the markings could be applied by the manufacturer before importation. It seems to have been clearly answered by Mr. Gallant who is probably really scratching his head if he is reading this. This was the major concern in all the threads. The timeline not so much. Im confident if we also get clarification from the governing body we can stop speculating on that as well.


Good Morning <me>,
Thank you for your inquiry. I apologize for the delay in responding. To answer your question, the Firearms Marking Regulations do not preclude the ability of a Canadian distributor to have a foreign manufacturer ‘pre-mark’ a shipment of firearms with the Canadian import marks. The requirement is to ensure the firearm is marked by the period specified in the Regulations.

Thank you again for writing,

Benjamin Gallant

 

[Mr Wolverine]

Ok not quite out. This thread has taken a life of its own which is quite common and remained pretty darn civil which is not so common. The original concern seems to have gotten lost though. It was wether or not the markings could be applied by the manufacturer before importation. It seems to have been clearly answered by Mr. Gallant who is probably really scratching his head if he is reading this. This was the major concern in all the threads. The timeline not so much. Im confident if we also get clarification from the governing body we can stop speculating on that as well.


Good Morning <me>,
Thank you for your inquiry. I apologize for the delay in responding. To answer your question, the Firearms Marking Regulations do not preclude the ability of a Canadian distributor to have a foreign manufacturer ‘pre-mark’ a shipment of firearms with the Canadian import marks. The requirement is to ensure the firearm is marked by the period specified in the Regulations.

Thank you again for writing,

Benjamin Gallant

I have e-mailed Benjamin and asked him to confirm this in writing to me. Even if true this only provides slight relief.

The first goal must be to convince the Government that the make, model and serial number serve to uniquely identify a firearm. We do not need anything extra.

Finally if the Government is going ahead with this plan they need to postpone the start date until such time as they have created the infrastructure to support this plan and are able to answer all the questions that have ben asked, notably on inspections, enforcement and records.

Currently I believe that only manufactures and importers can confirm the date of importation not CBSA who I believe do not keep these records, their job is to confirm that import's match packing lists and invoices then collect the tax.

 

[CILA-1]

http://www.budget.gc.ca/2017/docs/download-telecharger/index-en.html

Download budget 2017.pdf. Page 185.

"In 2017, Canada will also join the international Arms Trade Treaty. This agreement
ensures that countries have effective systems in place to control the
international trade of weapons so that they are not used to support terrorism,
organized crime, gender-based violence or human rights abuses. Budget 2017
proposes to invest $13 million over five years to allow Canada to implement this
treaty and further strengthen its export control regime."

Gentlemen, the Arms Trade Treaty has nothing to do with UN Marking. Completely separate programs. The marking issue comes from the UN Firearms Protocol some 13 years ago.There is no money earmarked for Firearms Marking in the budget. It is also already law and has been for 12 years. We have been able to successfully delay its implementation for that time. The next deadline is June 1 and we are still trying for a stay of execution.

 

[BlackVoid]

Gentlemen, the Arms Trade Treaty has nothing to do with UN Marking. Completely separate programs. The marking issue comes from the UN Firearms Protocol some 13 years ago.There is no money earmarked for Firearms Marking in the budget. It is also already law and has been for 12 years. We have been able to successfully delay its implementation for that time. The next deadline is June 1 and we are still trying for a stay of execution.

My mistake. The question I was initially answering was about registry. I assumed it is connected to import marking, as it is supposed to contain all the information on the firearm being imported including end-users (retailers).

 

[flashburn]

Unlikely for 2 reasons. 1st your rank and file LEO wont have a clue about the marking requirements.

2nd the regs place the onus on importers, not owners.

Still feel it is a valid concern going forward. I am in possession of unmarked firearms with no clear way to prove they are pre June 1st. The way I interpret Canadian law is as the current owner onus is on me to prove compliance not the importer from 20+ years ago.

 

[Mr Wolverine]

Still feel it is a valid concern going forward. I am in possession of unmarked firearms with no clear way to prove they are pre June 1st. The way I interpret Canadian law is as the current owner onus is on me to prove compliance not the importer from 20+ years ago.

I am disturbed that you might think that under Canadian law you have to prove your innocence. I believe the opposite is true, you have to be proven guilty. In any event your point just enforces the fact that this plan has not been thought through.

No one knows yet who is going to enforce it, the RCMP have not been advised about UN markings.

 

[abb1]

I had written the PM, and I have received a response today stating that my concerns were being acknowledged and forwarded to the Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale. Although these concerns are presented to the Minister of Public Safety, I would still recommend that all correspondence goes to the PM first. When thousands of letters are forwarded, maybe this will be reconsidered. We do not want to open up another measure which will not impact or reduce gun crimes, but rather impact the taxpayer as the longarm registration has done previously. Please send those letters, it only takes five minutes to write it, and the impact could put a stop to this ridiculousness!

 

[B..]

Anyone have a good sample letter?
The easier it is the more people can write in!

 

[Zeroed-In]

Post #25 this thread.

Anyone have a good sample letter?
The easier it is the more people can write in!

Mine's being sent today x#3 (thanks TeeJay).

I gotta say though what a clusterf*#k; another example of our fine (not) government screwing things up waisting (our) time/money by not thinking this sh*t through, again...

D

 

[B..]

Post #25 this thread.



Mine's being sent today x#3 (thanks TeeJay).

I gotta say though what a clusterf*#k; another example of our fine (not) government screwing things up waisting (our) time/money by not thinking this sh*t through, again...

D

Thank you!

 

[abb1]

Anyone have a good sample letter?
The easier it is the more people can write in!

To make change in a direction, you need to provide rational which impacts economy and $. If you write that you are hillbilly Joe, and your rights to own firearms, your letter will be shredded and not even thought about any further. If you write using foul language, your letter will be shredded and this will do more harm than good. You simply want to remind the leaders the massive expense this will create to the taxpayer as this has to be federally controlled creating a huge expense, the impact this move will have on small business as this will cripple the majority of small firearm businesses which will further impact the economy of our country. We want to expand small business, not destroy it. You can also remind them the expense to the taxxpayer that the longarm registry has cost, and how this will be the same with no impact on crime reduction. Use statistics from statcan to back up your claims.

As far as sample letters are concerned, NO! Each letter should be self written so that the government is not seeing a 'form' letter. This will not do any good.

 

[bobdbldr]

First,, I do not want this and will send letters! Second,, if this comes to pass, will it cost that much more to put two letters and two numbers on the firearms?

 

[abb1]

Second,, if this comes to pass, will it cost that much more to put two letters and two numbers on the firearms?

Absolutely! this is an engraving system that is unique and requires unique machinery to create which is federally controlled. The treasury department does not print its currency using scanning technology found in printers. Most people have no idea on how this will impact us financially, and for what?! This is the primary reason why it is not adapted by most countries.
From what I have read, these machines cost upwards of six figures. The federal government has two options to implement, 1- they set up the engraving prior to export to retailers, or 2- they leave this in the hands of the retailer to expense where they have to purchase the machinery, engrave the firearms prior to sale, and it is inspected regularly. Both options are a huge expense and the second option (which is probably the way they will go) will kill small firearm dealers as they will not be able to afford the expense. Either way, this will also increase the purchasing price of the firearm significantly.
Most firearm owners are under the same understanding as yourself, 'it is only a few numbers, so what', it is not so simple, and this will affect us all greatly by virtue of financials and ownership. If businesses cant afford these machines, they cant sell firearms, if they cant sell firearms, we will not own firearms, as they cannot be imported unless an engraving process is in place. Yes, there will still be Cabela's, but the firearm prices will be so jacked as they have to have a cost recovery to pay for these machines as well as the engraving process.
Maybe I have my tinfoil hat on a little too tight, but from what I have read earlier, this is the process.

 

[manx07]

First,, I do not want this and will send letters! Second,, if this comes to pass, will it cost that much more to put two letters and two numbers on the firearms?

Why should we as consumers have to pay anything extra for a nonsensical law?