Title: | True North Strong & Free |
Notice: | Introduction in Note 535, For Sale/Wanted in 524 |
Moderator: | POLAR::RICHARDSON |
Created: | Fri Jun 19 1987 |
Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 1040 |
Total number of notes: | 13668 |
Well, we're all aware of Allan Rock's plan to implement new gun control legislation (which I support), but when are we going to start *enforcing* these laws? Consider the following... Quoted without permission from today's Toronto Star. "Gun Sentences Rarely Used", by David Vienneau OTTAWA - The provinces have failed to prosecute a law that provides auto- matic one-year jail sentences for anyone convicted of using a gun while committing a crime, a new study reveals. Almost two-thirds of all charges laid under Section 85 of the Criminal Code are stayed, dropped, or plea- bargained away by the crown, says the December, 1994 document. A copy was obtained by The Star. "This high proportion was observed despite explicit policy in several provinces (including Ontario) requiring crown prosecuters to vigorously prosecute these cases where appropriate," the study says. The minimum penalty for anyone convicted a second time under the law is three years imprisonment, but the report says there is no evidence to show anyone has ever been charged a second time. The study was finalized only days after Justice Minister Allan Rock unveiled Ottawa's plans for a tough new gun control package. One of the centrepieces of the reforms was a commitment to amend Section 85 to increase the minimum penalty for a first offence to four years in prison. Rock wanted to convey to legitimate gun owners, who had criticized the government for not being tough enough on criminals, that Ottawa was serious about addressing their concerns. But the provinces are responsible for prosecuting Criminal Code offences and the study found that 62% of Section 85 charges are abandoned. Approximately 50% involved individuals accused of committing armed robbery, the study says. A total of 632 such charges were laid nationwide in 1991, just over a third of them in Ontario. The average sentence for anyone convicted under the law was 16 months in jail.
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
892.1 | FABBIT::J_RILEY | Legalize Freedom | Fri Jan 27 1995 05:23 | 5 | |
Sounds like you have the same problem we have here in the states, plenty of laws and no enforcement. Joe | |||||
892.2 | Need reform (non political) | KAOA00::KAOU55::MCGREGOR | Fri Jan 27 1995 11:34 | 34 | |
It's too bad Rock came into power with a hidden agenda to appease the anti's. Your right by saying that the courts aren't doing their jobs under the current legislation. It's not just gun control laws that they are lax on either. The whole judical system should be reviewed since crime rates are increasing. Check your local paper. Each week you read articals about families and friends of victims comment on how leaniant sentences are for the crimes committed. I'm not sure stiffer legislation is the answer? Registration of guns definately isn't? Banning handguns? There were already tight restrictions on handling these weapons. There are two articles that come to mind about the underground gun trade in Canada. One was an Ottawa Sun reporter who went a couple of nights to local watering holes to find if he could purchase a handgun. He had quite a few good leads and was successful. The other article was about a citizen in NY state which was un-employed but has a gun dealers permit. He sells the guns out of the country to gun-runners from Cornwall. He makes astronomical profits from this. So will tighting gun control solve this? The police departments in Ontario seem to think they can solve the problems now. They have just upgraded their weapons to semi-auto's with 15 shot clips. Now they want to use hollow point bullets. In my mind this is just a license to kill. The damage done to the human body will be immense. They should only be used by tactical squads. Why the change to hollow points? The reason given was that the solid point bullets would pass through the body of the victim and kill innocent by-standers. I'd like to see the stats on this one. I know if I was an innocent by-stander the only way I would be hit was either by a stray bullet or they were shooting at the suspects feet. Allan | |||||
892.3 | TROOA::COLLINS | You quiver with antici... | Fri Jan 27 1995 12:12 | 188 | |
892.4 | The Grits will be history, like the NDP and Tories | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Liv'er on the edge | Mon Jan 30 1995 12:18 | 13 |
IMO the latest legislation by Alan Rock will cost BIG BIG bucks, require a very large computer (Maybe DIGITAL?) to register 2 million owners of 10 million firearms, and criminals will drill off the numbers on their stolen/illegal guns anyway. Cops will be no safer in entering dwellings after full registration than they were before. And enforcement will continue to be a problem, while police are diverted from their primary duties. This new gun law package, in combination with the upcoming federal budget, spells political suicide for the Federal Liberal Party. Pat | |||||
892.5 | User Fees | KAOA00::KAOU55::MCGREGOR | Tue Jan 31 1995 10:59 | 31 | |
No. No. It won't cost tax payers a cent for the new system. The fees I heard were $100-$120 / gun to register. If you decide to sell your gun it will cost another $30+ for administration costs. If you don't register your guns it will be a criminal offence. Then instead of carring just your hunting licence now you will be required to carry a minimum of 2 other peices for pocession of a gun and registration of the equipment. When you register you will be categorized as to what type of gun owner you are. This will help you become a suspect in any gun related crimes in your neighborhood. Read in yesterday's paper where the PM will expell any MP from cabinet if they vote against the new legislation. Gee I guess the people those MP's represent don't count. Democracy? It seems the people against the new legislation is joining the Liberal party. The Liberal parties comments to this is that they don't want single issue membership. Gee, this is something the anti's have been doing for years. Does anyone know what the stats are for crime committed with guns in Canada? How many of those crimes were committed by people that own an FAC? Had they every used a gun before? My guess is that less than 10% had went through the FAC requirements and less than 20% had ever pulled a trigger before. Why is suicide figured into the crime statistics? I know committing suicide is a crime but really how many people are charged for taking thier own lives? Aunty Anti | |||||
892.6 | TROOA::SOLEY | Fall down, go boom | Wed Feb 01 1995 02:09 | 21 | |
I'm sorry to say but the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by the legal owners of said firearms against members of their families, your chances of being shot by your spouse are an order of magnitude greater than being shot by a stranger. I don't have the exact stats handy right now as I'm in the US but the difference is staggering, this is true in the US as well outside the "inner cities" of LA and DC. In either case your chance of death by drowning in 5 minutes of canoeing exceeds your chances of death by crime for your entire life. I'm not sure that the proposed new law does much to change that situation despite Mr. Rock's statements that this is one of the two thrusts of the legislation. The second thrust is cutting off the trickle of guns to the street from so called collectors. It's unfortunate that all of the legitimate sportsmen out there are going to be made to pay the price for a long history of loose practices in record keeping and safe storage by a few bad importers, dealers and collectors. I'm for more gun control, I'm still waffling over this bill, it might go too far. | |||||
892.7 | The noose is tightening. | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Liv'er on the edge | Wed Feb 01 1995 11:11 | 21 |
It has been said by many that if the general public was aware of what laws were already on the the books, and how poorly they were enforced, there is no way on earth this bill could pass, assuming we are still in a democracy (which is doubtful). I'm content to sit back and watch the Grits form their noose and slip it over their heads. For the first time in Canadian history Canada has an organized gun lobby, but is that a good thing? I'm not sure. Certainly this country will not be the same. Does anyone know if Allan Rock is related to Daniel Rock, a lawyer in Mulroneys cronies? Re Norm: I think you are referring to the US stats that refer to shooting victims knowing or living with the shooter. What those stats don't tell is they count drug related shootings where two dealers or dealer/customer knew each other. We all know what happens to customers who don't pay their bill, don't we? Pat | |||||
892.8 | Proposed Legislation (from Soapbox) | KAOA00::KAOU55::MCGREGOR | Mon Feb 13 1995 12:21 | 1206 | |
<<< BACK40::BACK40$DKA500:[NOTES$LIBRARY]SOAPBOX.NOTE;1 >>> -< Soapbox. Just Soapbox. >- ================================================================================ Note 130.383 Canadian Gun control-Americans be forewarned 383 of 383 SUBPAC::SADIN "One if by LAN, two if by C" 1199 lines 11-FEB-1995 09:49 -< proposed gun-control >- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [EDITOR'S NOTE: THIS IS A DOCUMENT ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN OTTAWA, CANADA, DESCRIBING THE PROPOSED NEW CANADIAN FIREARMS REGULATIONS. THESE REGULATIONS WILL BE DISCUSSED IN PARLIAMENT IN FEBRUARY 1995. THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ELECTRONICALLY SCANNED AND THEN EDITED TO REFLECT THE LAYOUT OF THE ORIGINAL.] ================================================================= || w || Department of Justice Canada Ministere de la Justice Canada The Government's Action Plan on Firearms Control Canada ================================================================= The Government's Action Plan on Firearms Control ================================================================= Published by authority of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Government of Canada by Communications and Consultation Department of Justice Canada Ottawa, Ontario KlA 0H8 (613) 957-4222 JUS-669E Graphic Design: Jacques Charette et Associes Ltee c Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada 1994 Printed in Canada ================================================================= TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................ 1 I BANNED FIREARMS AND FURTHER CONTROLS ................... 2 Introduction ........................................... 2 Prohibition of Certain Handguns ........................ 2 Other Handgun Controls ................................. 3 Controls on Military and Para-military Firearms ....... 4 Controls on Weapons other than Firearms ................ 5 II CRIMINAL PENALTIES & PROHIBITION MEASURES .............. 6 Introduction ........................................... 6 Use of Firearms to Commit Offences (S.85 and others) ... 6 Trafficking Offences ................................... 7 Unauthorized/Unregistered Possession ................... 8 Other Offences, Proceeds of Crime....................... 8 PROHIBITION MEASURES .................. ................ 9 Introduction ...................................... 9 Military Personnel ................................ 9 Young Offenders ................................... 9 Stalking and Drug Offences ....................... 10 "Proactive" Orders ............................... 10 Partial Prohibition for Sustenance................ 10 i ================================================================= III BORDER CONTROLS ................................... 11 Introduction ...... ............................... 11 Import/Export and Registration .................... 11 Offences and Penalties ............................ 12 IV REGISTRATION ...................................... 13 Introduction ...................................... 13 Entering the System - the Screening of Applicants . 13 The Advantages of Universal Registration........... 14 Transitional and Implementation Provisions......... 15 Identification of Firearms and Owners.............. 15 Screening and Access Requirements ................. 16 Controls on Ammunition............................. 17 Responsibility for System Operation................ 17 Police and Military Firearms ...................... 17 Local Advisory Council ............................ 18 ii ================================================================= INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to describe the legislative intentions of the Government of Canada in relation to firearms control in this country. It reflects decisions that have been made by Cabinet. It is being tabled in the House of Commons because the actual legislation is still in preparation, and will not be introduced until it is ready in February. There is a long history in Canada of regulating the safe use and ownership of firearms. As early as 1877, justices of the peace were allowed to jail people in possession of a handgun without reasonable cause. Criminal Code controls have existed since 1892 when the first nation-wide permit system for the carrying of small arms was created. The registration of handguns began in 1932. The law was amended in 1969, 1976-77 and 1991 and reflects three fundamental policies: the deterrence of the misuse of firearms, general controls on persons given access to firearms and controls placed on specific types of firearms. The decisions announced in this document have built on that history to achieve a comprehensive package of reforms. Through this package, the Government will be banning many firearms, cracking down on the criminal misuse of firearms, targeting firearms smuggling and improving public safety by promoting the safe use and ownership of firearms. Essential to these measures is a new national firearms registration system that will provide the foundation for effective border controls, enhanced criminal investigations and police work, and the enforcement of safety standards for firearms owners. The Government intends to give legal force to this program by introducing legislation in February to amend the Criminal Code, Customs Act, Customs Tariff, Export and Import Permits Act, National Defence Act, Young Offenders Act, and related statutes and regulations. Specifically, the government will proceed with: o amendments and programs for controlling the import, export and domestic transit of firearms; o amendments to the offence and sentencing provisions of the Criminal Code relating to the misuse of firearms, including mandatory minimum sentence provisions; o the prohibition of specified firearms and expansion of the authority to prohibit by Order in Council; o amendments to the Criminal Code and other statutes requiring the registration and tracking of all firearms and their owners; ================================================================= - 2 - o other necessary or consequential amendments to the Criminal Code and other statutes to simplify and clarify the legislation, and to improve cost-effectiveness at the federal, provincial and municipal levels. I BANNED FIREARMS AND FURTHER CONTROLS Introduction Firearms that are particularly dangerous and/or have no legitimate uses will be prohibited under the proposed changes. Handguns are of special concern because they are small and easy to conceal. They are also subject to regular theft and are the preferred weapon for offences such as armed robbery. Those identified for prohibition are compact, low-calibre weapons, easily concealed and often cheaply-made, and are not considered suitable for organized target-shooting. Numbers affected are about 58% of the handguns presently owned in Canada. Existing owners will be allowed to keep (but not transfer) handguns, provided that they meet the same statutory criteria as other owners. Assault pistols will be prohibited completely. Just over 1.2 million restricted weapons are presently in the hands of Canadians, about 1.15 million of them handguns. Nine hundred and fifty thousand handguns are registered to about 560,000 private individuals. Registration is limited to specific reasons, and most handguns are registered either for target-shooting (48%), or for gun collections (21%). However, only about 55,000 Canadians have carry permits to take a handgun to a shooting club for use, which suggests that a large number of handguns remain in the possession of Canadians who no longer use them for the purpose for which they were acquired and registered. Many owners have not fired their handguns within the previous year, and many of these have not done so within the previous five years. Handguns may only be registered for personal protection in the most extreme circumstances and numbers actually registered for that purpose are very small. Prohibition of certain handguns Several handguns based on submachinegun designs are being immediately prohibited by being added to the existing Prohibited Weapons List by Order in Council. Owners of these "assault pistols" are being given until January 1, 1995 to turn them in to the police, deactivate or otherwise dispose of them. Most assault pistols were prohibited in 1992 because they are particularly dangerous, but several new models have since been identified. There are not many of these firearms in Canada. ================================================================= - 3 - Small, compact, low-calibre handguns that are easily concealed and often cheaply-made, and are not considered to be suitable for organized target-shooting--sometimes described as "pocket pistols" or "Saturday-night specials"--will be prohibited by an amendment that will expand the statutory definition of "prohibited weapon" to include them. These include all .25 and .32 calibre handguns, as well as all handguns with a barrel length of 105mm (4.14") or less. Such handguns are produced primarily for use as weapons, and lack the accuracy needed for competitive target shooting. Many are produced with barrels exactly 4" long, so the minimum length has been set slightly over that figure to include them. This category of handgun is substantial. Fifty-eight per cent of all handguns currently registered in Canada fall into the categories now banned (553,000 of 1.15 million). This includes about 40,500 .25 calibre guns, about 173,500 .32 calibre guns, and about 339,500 guns with barrels 105mm or shorter. Those who have these firearms registered when this measure is passed into law will be allowed to retain them for the remainder of their lives, subject to the controls described below, but not to transfer them. Other Handgun Controls Handguns, like all restricted weapons, can only be registered for specific purposes (eg: employment, collecting or target-shooting) but, under the present system, remain registered even if no longer needed for those purposes. The new law will require registrants to re-establish their reason for having their weapons every five years, failing which they will have to transfer or dispose of them. Since unregistered or unauthorized possession is an offence, the amendments will also provide for the advance notification of registrants prior to expiry, and afford a "grace period" for the disposal of restricted firearms. Gun collecting is difficult to define and regulate. This is an issue of concern because gun collecting is the only basis permitted by law for possessing many non-sporting/military firearms, and because the difficulty in distinguishing between legitimate collectors and others leaves the category open to abuse. At present, collector status is determined by a local firearms registrar, who must indicate on each application whether the applicant is a genuine collector. To place further controls and national standardization on this practice, the determination of whether an applicant was a "genuine gun collector" within the definition will be made by a new (federal) Registrar of Firearms. He or she will act on advice and information provided by the local firearms officer to whom the application was made and according to uniform national standards. In addition, collections will be inspected at least once every five years, and will be subject to additional regulations. A firearm safety course is currently required for all Firearms Acquisition Certificate applicants. The proposed changes would add a separate course ================================================================= - 4 - program for applicants for handguns and other restricted firearms. This would reflect the additional safety concerns and legal obligations for restricted weapons. It would also allow some reduction in the content of the existing courses. Shooting clubs require provincial approval before their members can register restricted weapons for target-shooting on their premises. The proposed changes will establish regulatory requirements for the setting up and operation of shooting clubs and the activities which can be carried on there. These will include requirements for membership, record-keeping, national certification or affiliation, safety standards for constructing and operating firing-ranges, and similar matters. Obtaining provincial approval will require compliance with the regulations, and approval will be revoked where standards are not maintained. A handgun owner seeking renewal of registration for target shooting purposes will need to demonstrate active membership in an approved club. The new law will require the keeping of records that will make it possible to establish that fact. Currently, a restricted weapon may be registered by any person 18 years of age or older on the basis that it is a "relic", which is defined by regulation as a "souvenir" or "keepsake". These provisions, often used in the past to register war-trophies, will be repealed, along with the corresponding regulations. This is consistent with the overall direction of these measures which is to limit carefully the reasons for having a handgun in private possession. Those who have restricted weapons registered as relics will be allowed to keep them until the end of their lives, but no transfers or further registrations will be permitted. Controls on military and para-military firearms Most military or paramilitary rifles and shotguns were prohibited or restricted by Order in Council in 1992. Other versions may be either non-restricted or restricted by the statute itself, depending on technical characteristics (e.g. barrel length). About 50-60,000 rifles and shotguns are already registered as restricted weapons. Currently, weapons cannot be prohibited by Order in Council if they are "commonly used" for hunting or sporting purposes. In recent years, there has been a major growth in shooting competitions using military and paramilitary firearms which has meant that it has become increasingly difficult to use the present law in the way that was intended. Therefore, the law will be amended to permit the Governor in Council to prohibit weapons if it is of the opinion that they are "not reasonable" for use in hunting or for sporting purposes. ================================================================= - 5 - Once this authority is in place, additional weapons will be prohibited, including the Ruger "Mini-14" firearm -- used in the 1989 Ecole Polytechnique murders -- and the Colt AR-15 -- the "civilian" version of the U.S. Army M-16 assault rifle. Those who own these weapons will be able to keep them for life, but will not be allowed to transfer them. A number of currently restricted weapons are being declared prohibited effective January 1, 1995 through Order in Council. These include: all variants of the Kalashnikov (AK-47, AK-74) assault rifle not already prohibited as automatic weapons, the FN-FAL and its variants, as well as a number of other paramilitary and military firearms. Once again, those who own such firearms at present will be able to keep them until they die, but not to transfer them. A number of firearms that are not used for any sporting purposes will be prohibited effective January 1, 1995, with no right to keep them. These include variants of the Intratec "Tec-9" assault pistol not already prohibited, the Franchi "Spas-15" combat shotgun, the Benelli "M-1", "M-3", "B-4" and "B-4B" combat shotguns, any variants or modified versions of those firearms as well as several others. The provision which authorizes Attorneys General to designate competitions for which large capacity magazines may be used and to certify individuals who may be permitted to possess these magazines for such purposes will be repealed. Controls on weapons other than firearms The misuse of replica or imitation firearms will be addressed by including them within the present Criminal Code (s.85) offence and minimum sentencing provision, and through a ban on manufacture, import and sale. Crossbows will be dealt with by subjecting them to the same screening controls as firearms, and bringing them within the provisions for court prohibition orders. Compact or single-hand crossbows, which have no legitimate recreational applications or historical importance, will be prohibited by Order in Council effective January 1, 1995. Airguns are already "firearms" for the purposes of offence provisions, but only require licenses if above a minimum muzzle velocity (500 ft, or 152.4m per second). Concerns about injuries and property damage have been raised, but some airguns are used for legitimate shooting activities. Over the coming months, the government will consult public health groups, firearms groups and other interested parties to identify effective and appropriate methods of reducing the health and safety risk associated with airguns. ================================================================= - 6 - Flexibility to control access to other weapons, such as capsicum "tear gas' sprays, will be created by splitting the existing category of "restricted weapon" into "restricted weapon" and "restricted firearm". The first class would contain only non- firearms, for which a permit would be required, while the second, dealing with firearms, would be subject to the full registration requirements. II CRIMINAL PENALTIES & PROHIBITION MEASURES Introduction Criminal misuse of firearms will be addressed through a number of measures, including the creation of new, hard-hitting offences and penalties. Longer minimum sentences are proposed for use of firearms in the commission of specified serious offences. New offences and stiff penalties relating to trafficking and illegal possession are also proposed, as are expansions to the powers of the courts to prohibit persons from possessing firearms. Use of firearms to commit offences (Criminal Code s.85 and others) The Criminal Code will be amended to enhance the deterrence of crimes committed with firearms and other offensive weapons; expand the term "firearm" in s. 85 of the Crimit1al Code to include imitation firearms; and apply a longer unified mandatory minimum sentence where violent offences are committed using a firearm. Section 85 of the Criminal Code provides for a minimum one year sentence for using a firearm to commit an indictable offence. This sentence is to be served consecutively to the sentence for the underlying offence. Although it was intended as a strong deterrent measure to discourage the use of firearms in crime, there is evidence that s. 85 is not achieving its purpose. Recent research by the Justice Department suggests the following: o In up to 2/3 of the cases where s. 85 charges are laid, convictions do not result since the charges are either dismissed, stayed or withdrawn by the prosecutor. Reasons include evidentiary or other problems and plea negotiation. o It is difficult to prove that the weapon used was a real "firearm" (a requirement under s. 85) unless it is discharged or the accused is caught in the act and it is seized. o The most common underlying offence was armed robbery (62% of cases). ================================================================= - 7 - o Sentences tend to be at the minimum end of the 1-14 year range, averaging about 16.4 months, which is in addition to the punishment imposed for the underlying offence. o Some judges apply the "totality principle", reducing the sentence for the underlying offence because of the s.85 term. Rather than increasing the length of the term to be served under s. 85, the new law will propose a different approach. Section 85 will be retained as a general provision, and (as mentioned) expanded to include the use of an imitation firearm. New sections will be added, providing that when a person is alleged to have committed certain serious offences with a firearm, mandatory minimum sentences of four years in prison will be imposed -- in addition to a mandatory lifetime prohibition from possessing a restricted weapon, This will apply to the following 10 violent offences committed with a firearm: o attempted murder (s.239), o manslaughter (s.236), o criminal negligence causing death (s.220), o robbery (s.344), o kidnapping (s.279), o hostage-taking (s.279.1), o sexual assault with a weapon (s.272), o aggravated sexual assault (s.273), o extortion (s.346), o discharge firearm with intent to cause harm etc.(s.244). In addition to these changes to the law, more will be done to encourage police, prosecutors and the courts to use these provisions effectively. Provincial Attorneys General have already been asked to urge prosecutors to use s.85 effectively and many have developed prosecutorial guidelines to this effect. Trafficking offences (firearms and ammunition) and punishments Offences relating to illegal transfers of firearms will be reinforced and condensed into new offences to support the proposed firearm registration system. The range of offences includes large-scale criminal trafficking, possession for the purposes of trafficking and relatively minor situations where a firearm is transferred without the proper acquisition or registration documents. For this reason, there will be no minimum punishment applied to summary prosecution cases; the normal maximum penalties of 6 months or a $2,000 fine will apply. A minimum punishment of one year will apply where the offence is prosecuted on indictment. Where the person receiving the firearm does not obtain the necessary permits, a five year maximum punishment would apply with no specified minimum. ================================================================= - 8 - On a first indictable conviction for any of these offences, a court could, at its discretion, prohibit the offender from possessing any firearms for up to 10 years. On a subsequent indictable conviction, a mandatory prohibition order would be imposed prohibiting the offender from owning a restricted firearm for life and any other firearm for 10 years. Additional offences of possessing stolen or smuggled firearms will be created and made punishable by a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of one year, when proceeded with by indictment. An offence of transferring ammunition to any person under 18, except the holder of a minors' permit, will be moved from the Explosives Regulations, and the transfer or acquisition of ammunition where the purchaser does not have proof of registration under the new system will become a Criminal Code offence. The use of other identification prescribed by regulation will also be allowed until the registration system is fully implemented. Unauthorized/unregistered possession of firearms To deter illegal possession of firearms, restricted or prohibited weapons, several new offences will be created. One of these will be applicable in cases where the accused is in possession of any firearm not authorized by a permit or certificate, or where the accused is authorized, but the firearm has not been registered. This offence will apply in cases where the breach of the possession or registration requirements was, or might have been, inadvertent. It will be punishable on summary conviction by a maximum $2,000 fine and six months in jail, or on indictment by up to five years' imprisonment. A second, more serious offence will apply in the same factual circumstances, but where the accused knew that he or she did not have the necessary registration or authorization, and intentionally evaded these requirements. Where knowledge or intent was proven, the new offence will also require a minimum one year sentence on the second conviction. Finally, anyone who, without the necessary permits, carries a restricted or prohibited firearm when it is loaded, or when there is ammunition readily accessible, commits an offence punishable by a one year mandatory minimum prison term, if prosecuted on indictment. Other offences, "proceeds of crime" provisions Other specific offences proposed include failing to report losses or thefts of firearms, and making false or misleading reports in that regard. Smuggling, ================================================================= - 9 - trafficking and related conspiracy offences will also be added to the list of "enterprise crime offences" in Part X11.2 of the Criminal Code, making possible the confiscation of property, such as vehicles, as "proceeds and instruments of crime". PROHIBITION MEASURES Introduction Section 100 of the Criminal Code requires the courts to impose a minimum 10 year prohibition on the possession of firearms for those convicted of a serious offence involving the use, the threat or an attempt of violence or a s.85 offence of using a firearm to commit an indictable offence. Courts are also required to consider prohibitions up to 10 years for less serious violent offences and other firearms offences, and may prohibit even if no offence has been committed where an application is made by police and a danger to safety exists. The 1991 amendments doubled the lengths of prohibition orders and provided limited discretion not to make mandatory orders in exceptional cases. The new provisions will impose a mandatory lifetime prohibition against possession of a restricted firearm when an individual is convicted of a listed, serious, violent offence and will include the authority to impose prohibition orders in other circumstances. Military Personnel Prohibition orders apply to Criminal Code convictions, but do not extend to the National Defence Act, which uses Criminal Code offences but has its own punishment provisions. The National Defence Act and the Criminal Code would be amended to create discretionary powers for Courts Martial to prohibit offenders. In addition, military courts would have the option of prohibiting the accused except in the course of duties as a member of the Canadian Forces, in order to avoid the automatic discharge of every member who is prohibited. The Criminal Code amendment would deem military prohibitions to be Criminal Code prohibitions, so that civilian authorities could enforce the orders and continue them even if the subject leaves the Canadian Forces before the order expires. Young Offenders Prohibition orders are available to youth courts, but are discretionary instead of mandatory. The proposal would amend the Young Offenders Act to subject young offenders to the same firearms prohibitions as adults for a given offence. The general policy of the Young Offenders Act is to mitigate the punishment of young offenders for reasons of diminished capacity and prospects for rehabilitation. These policy objectives are not affected by lack of access to a firearm. Other changes would allow access to records or other information protected by the Young ================================================================= - 10 - Offenders Act where an offender later seeks to obtain a firearm, or where the Crown is seeking to seize firearms or deny access to them. "Stalking" and drug offences The 1993 "stalking" (criminal harassment) offence provides specific powers to prohibit persons released on bail from possessing a firearm, but those convicted are subject only to discretionary prohibition under s.100(2). The 1991 amendments extended prohibitions to drug smuggling and trafficking offences, but on a discretionary basis only. The expansion of narcotics-related prohibition orders was a Liberal Party "Red Book" campaign commitment. The proposed changes would extend mandatory prohibitions to those convicted or released on bail for all of these offences, except where the court finds that access to a firearm would not endanger the safety of any person (including the subject him/herself), and provides reasons why prohibition was not imposed. "Proactive" orders, co-habitants or associates. Proactive prohibition orders may now be made where there is a danger to any person, but no offence has been committed. Under this proposal, the grounds for firearm seizures and prohibitions will beexpanded to include danger arising from the reasonable likelihood that a prohibited person who resides or associates with the subject will have access to a firearm. The order will be limited to the length of the order made against the associate or co-resident, and a person subject to such an order could seek relief where the conditions under which it was made no longer applied. This would make it possible to prohibit, if necessary, an entire household from having firearms where any single resident was dangerous and prohibited from possessing a firearm. Partial prohibition for "sustenance" firearm users Prohibition orders can create exceptional hardship for a person who requires a firearm for sustenance. Limited discretion not to prohibit in such cases was added to the statute in the 1991 amendments, but the change gave the courts only an "all or nothing" power to prohibit completely, or make no order at all. The proposed amendment would create an additional option of partial prohibitions to allow limited access for use in hunting or trapping. Courts could make an order fit the specific circumstances of the accused where the accused would face exceptional hardships otherwise and public safety is not endangered. This change will allow courts to take account of traditional aboriginal lifestyles. ================================================================= - 11 - III BORDER CONTROLS Introduction Canada's relatively strict legislation and the easier availability of firearms in the United States raise concerns about smuggling, and past Parliamentary committees and the Auditor General of Canada have both recommended legislative and administrative controls. Thus, tighter border controls and inspection procedures are proposed, the costs of which will be recovered from firearms importers and exporters. Modern data-processing and telecommunications technology will be used to reduce administrative costs. The measures include the tracking of firearms under a national registration system, new offence provisions, and the forfeiture of vehicles used in smuggling, shipments containing contraband, and proceeds of smuggling and illegal trafficking. A number of measures have already been taken by Canada Customs under existing powers to increase surveillance and seize illegal imports. Import/export and the proposed registration system Existing import-export controls are based on the premise that firearms are a commodity, and subject to the same trade controls (e.g. taxes and duties) as other commodities. The proposed changes include a fundamental re-orientation of this approach, by recognizing that firearm imports also have important consequences in terms of public safety and crime-control. For every firearm that enters or leaves Canada, the person responsible will be required to have either an import/export permit for commercial use, or a Customs declaration for personal use, so that the movement of all firearms crossing the border can be tracked. The issuance procedure for commercial permits will ensure that crime-control, trade and foreign-policy interests are all considered. The permits and declarations will form the first stage in the registration of imported firearms, allowing Canada to accurately monitor the types and quantities of weapons which flow through the country. Import declarations and permits will only be issued to individuals and companies who have the necessary permits to possess the firearms while they are in Canada. The costs and scrutiny involved will discourage the use of Canada as a "touch-down" point for those using multiple transfers to mask the source of illegal shipments or to avoid foreign end-user controls. Commercial and personal imports or exports will be treated differently. For personal use firearms, the owner will obtain a Customs declaration form at the border, from any Canada Customs facility in Canada or abroad or from tourist businesses and/or hunting outfitters. The completed form will identify the owner and the firearm, and will be used to record the entry or exit of the firearm when it occurs. ================================================================= - 12 - Where a non-Canadian brings the gun into Canada, the declaration, once stamped by Customs at the border, will also serve as a temporary permit to possess the firearm for up to 60 days. Additional permits will still be required for restricted weapons. Commercial and other imports or exports will require a permit, available only to applicants who already have the appropriate Canadian business permit for the type(s) of firearm involved. No export permit will be issued unless the applicant has a permit to import the firearms into the recipient country. Shipments into Canada will be inspected to ensure that the registry information is accurate, and firearms will be tracked until they leave Canada or are registered to a private owner. The import inspection and registration process will be operated by Canada Customs officials who will ensure that accurate information is entered into the registration system as firearms enter or leave Canada. In the commercial context, they will also conduct inspections of firearms to control and deter careless or dishonest labelling or packing of shipments. The costs involved will be recovered from the importer or exporter involved, and automated pre-clearance options will allow importers to minimize costs where possible without compromising the integrity of the information. To further reduce costs and improve the quality of inspections, commercial shipments will be required to enter Canada at a limited number of inspection points where trained inspectors will be available. The Export and Import Permits Act authorizes Orders in Council barring strategic exports where the export would raise security concerns for Canada, but not where the concerns relate to the public safety of another country. The proposed amendment will create a new delegated authority to include these situations. Where a foreign government asks, and the export would create public safety problems abroad, firearm exports from Canada could be quickly stopped by Order in Council. The orders would be made on a joint submission from the Attorney General of Canada and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Offences and penalties The existing Criminal Code offence provisions in relation to smuggling and other border offences will be revised and combined. An import-export permit for commercial use, or a Customs declaration for personal use, will be required for all transactions, and any import or export without these documents will be an offence under the new provisions. The offence will carry a mandatory minimum of one year imprisonment, if prosecuted on indictment, and the same prohibition orders as apply to trafficking offences will also apply here. Possessing a smuggled or stolen firearm will also become a new offence, punishable by a minimum one-year term, where prosecuted on indictment. ================================================================= - 13 - The power to seize and forfeit conveyances or other instruments used for smuggling (e.g. vehicles, shipments) will be expanded to include trafficking. This will provide a major compliance incentive for the proposed registration system, as it will apply to conveyances used to transport unregistered firearms, and will be phased in as the system is implemented. Existing powers and increased fines and penalties will be used to ensure that importers accurately describe shipments and maintain high levels of security for weapons passing through Canada or before delivery to retailers or customers. IV REGISTRATION Introduction Essential to all of the elements of this Firearms Control Policy is an effective system for registering and tracking all firearms in Canada. Such a system already exists for 1.2 million restricted weapons, but the technology used is outmoded and inefficient, creating unnecessary difficulties for firearms owners and police. The proposed system will identify and track all firearms through retail and private transfers, imports and exports. It will also be designed to overcome problems in the existing system and reduce red tape and time delays. Fees will be set by regulation, and adjusted as necessary to achieve cost-recovery, and all fee regulations will be subject to Parliamentary (committee) review under subsection 116(2) of the Criminal Code. The proposed changes will also delegate power to make regulations governing the operation of the system. Entering the system - the screening of applicants The proposed amendments will change the present system, which licenses the acquisition of all firearms and registers only restricted weapons, to one that registers and tracks all firearms as they are imported, exported, sold at retail and transferred from one owner to another. The existing screening procedure for Firearms Acquisition Certificate applicants was enhanced in 1991, and will not be significantly changed, although some further enhancements and technical improvements are proposed. Instead, the system will be included as the screening component for the proposed registration system in respect of applicants seeking acquisition rights. Those who already have firearms will be screened as they enter the new system, but under an expedited process to reduce costs and encourage compliance. In these cases, the use of only a basic police check is sufficient, as these individuals already have firearms, and in many cases, will have been previously screened as Firearms Acquisition Certificate applicants. Firearms Acquisition Certificate owners will switch to an FPC when their FAC is renewed. ================================================================= - 14 - Applicants will be screened according to the following categories: o _first-time applicants_ who currently do not own firearms but who wish to acquire them will be required to meet the full (enhanced) screening process, including the required safety course or test; o _first-time applicants who have firearms or a Firearms Acquisition Certificate_ will only require a basic police record check, but police would have discretion to investigate further, if needed, and owners would be fully screened in future if they wish to acquire more firearms; o _applicants who have passed the Canadian Firearm Safety Course_ will not have to re-take it. The development and implementation of a Canada-wide registration system for all firearms is a major project that will involve the initial registration or re-registration of about 6-7 million existing firearms to their approximately 3 million owners. Once initial implementation is complete, the system will handle up to 500,000 transactions (import/export, acquisition, transfer, disposal, etc.) per year, as well as queries for information from police agencies. The advantages of universal registration Registration will bring a greater degree of overall firearms control, and with it a number of direct benefits: o deter and control theft, diversion and smuggling of firearms; o ensure individual and business compliance with transfer and safe storage requirements; o assistance in police investigations; o enable police in domestic violence situations to better prepare themselves where they know a firearm is present in the home; o enable police to enforce court prohibition orders by ensuring that all firearms owned by the individuals have been turned in; o license access to ammunition (further deterring illegal acquisition and smuggling); o monitor firearm traffic through Canada, assisting international small-arms controls; and ================================================================= - 15 - o gather accurate statistical information about firearm numbers and ownership patterns. Transitional and implementation provisions The development of the necessary programs will begin as soon as possible, and will be done jointly by the Department of Justice and the RCMP, in close co-operation with provincial officials and local police agencies, who will operate much of the new system. The system will be co-ordinated with other changes presently being made to the Canadian Police Information Computer (CPIC) system. Implementation of the national firearms registration system will be carried out in two overlapping phases: o phase one, the registration of owners, beginning shortly after Royal Assent, and o phase two, the registration of firearms, beginning two years after the start of phase one. To encourage existing firearm owners to come forward and register their guns, a number of compliance incentives are proposed. These will include a total or partial waiver of fees, where applications are made early, an expedited screening process where the applicant already has firearms or a Firearms Acquisition Certificate, and recognition of the existing Canadian Firearm Safety Course. Offences dealing with unregistered transfers and possession, ammunition and other matters will also take effect in stages, where necessary, during the implementation period. Identification of firearms and owners Firearms will be identified by make, model, serial number and other identifiers when they enter Canada, are manufactured here, or if already in the possession of a gun owner, when they are first registered on the system. A firearms identification number will be assigned and used to track the firearm within the system. This may be attached to the firearm or alternatively, for commercial purposes, to the shipment container in a machine-readable form. This latter option will improve accuracy and reduce the cost of tracking commercial imports and transfers, especially where quantities of firearms are transferred at once. Owners will be identified on the system, and linked to the types of firearm (if non-restricted firearms) or individual firearms (if restricted firearms) which could lawfully be possessed. For non-restricted firearms, businesses will be able to enter sales onto the system automatically, and verify that the purchaser was entitled to acquire and possess the firearm. For restricted firearms the purchaser's eligibility ================================================================= - 16 - would still have to be determined by the Registrar of Firearms, but the information and issuance, refusal or registration would be transmitted electronically, thereby reducing processing delays. Police agencies would be able to easily obtain information about firearms and owners, and to trace found or recovered firearms. Screening and Access requirements: The new program is not intended to re-invent the screening system, which was extensively changed by the 1991 amendments, but several enhancements of the system are proposed. As indicated above, the enhanced Firearms Acquisition Certificate screening process will become the screening component for first time firearms possessors entering the Canadian Firearms Registration System. Provincial officials, regulatory bodies and professional organizations will be consulted on a proposal to allow health-care practitioners to disclose patient information where there is a belief that allowing the patient access to a firearm would endanger safety (including that of the patient him/herself). Such information could be used to refuse certificates or permits, or to prohibit the patient from having firearms. The Canadian Firearm Safety Course, developed and implemented between 1991-94, will be extended to applicants for "minors' permits", which allow those between 12-18 to acquire or possess specific firearms for use in recreational applications. Minors' permits are also available for sustenance. The amendments will allow access to information protected by the Young Offenders Act, where it concerns a person who has applied for a firearm-related certificate or permit. The safety courses required to qualify for firearms acquisition will be subject to new criteria set in federal regulations to ensure national consistency. The authority to approve the courses will be extended to the Attorney General of Canada, in addition to the Attorneys General of the provinces. The creation of a separate safety course for handguns and other restricted weapons will also permit the reduction of course content for other guns. The Attorney General of Canada will have the authority to approve courses on a province-by-province basis, allowing for some flexibility, particularly to incorporate additional materials where requested by the Yukon and Northwest Territories (e.g. wilderness survival information, aboriginal languages). The administration of the full screening program is often quite different in remote and aboriginal communities and major urban centres. The legislation and existing provisions will allow as much flexibility as possible to meet differing needs. The Criminal Code already permits the appointment of local residents (who need not be police officers) as firearm officers, and further resources will be committed to ================================================================= - 17 - assisting these communities in developing and administering the program in aboriginal languages and accessible formats. Controls on Ammunition Three major changes are proposed to control access to ammunition and ammunition components. As noted above, existing offences of transferring ammunition to a minor who does not have a permit for a firearm will be shifted from the Explosives Regulations to the Criminal Code, to emphasize their significance and permit ready enforcement by provincial and local police. The age limit will be brought into line with the 1993 increase of the age for Firearms Acquisition Certificate applicants from 16 to 18. As part of the proposed registration system, a registration or possession document will be required in order to purchase ammunition. Until the system is fully implemented, however, not every legitimate firearm owner will have these documents, and during the implementation period, existing documents (Firearms Acquisition Certificate, registration certificates, minors permits etc.) will still be used, and regulations will be amended to include other forms of common identification. The authority to regulate the "storage, display, handling and transportation" of firearms under the Criminal Code will also be extended to ammunition, and the regulations will be expanded to set the same standards for storing ammunition as now apply to firearms. Responsibility for system operation Central functions of the existing system are managed by the RCMP, with local and regional matters dealt with by police agencies and the chief provincial firearms officers. The proposed changes are intended to preserve effective federal co-ordination of the system, while improving efficiency and according the provinces more influence in the setting of national policy. The authority to prescribe statutory instruments such as certificates and permits will be transferred from the RCMP Commissioner to the Attorney General. An individual will be appointed as Registrar of Firearms, to take full-time responsibility for managing the registration system. The Registrar will be appointed by the Commissioner of the RCMP. Police and military firearms Canadian Forces firearms and firearms possessed by visiting foreign forces are already tracked by the Department of National Defence and will be excluded from the system. These include regular service weapons, those in authorized military museums, and those in the hands of foreign military personnel seconded to the Canadian Forces or in Canada under the Visiting Forces Act. Police service firearms will also be tracked, but by a separate system maintained by the RCMP. This requirement, now optional, will become mandatory. Firearms temporarily in police hands (e.g. evidence firearms, seizures, surrendered guns etc.) will be ================================================================= - 18 - entered onto the registration system, to ensure that system searches are able to trace them. Those who possess firearms on behalf of the Department of National Defence or the police (e.g. suppliers, repair contractors) will be tracked by either the Department of National Defence or police system and opted out of the main registry. Local advisory council The administration of the legislation raises particular concerns in remote northern and aboriginal communities, where municipal or band council members may be more aware of community circumstances than the firearms officer, who is often a police officer from outside the community. An effort will be made to increase the use of local officials as firearm officers, who need not be police officers under the statute. Where this is not practicable, however, this proposed change would allow the Attorney General of Canada to appoint a local advisory council to function as a liaison between the firearms officer and the community. In addition, aboriginal communities will be consulted on all aspects of the program's implementation, to ensure that their aboriginal and treaty rights are respected. [END OF DOCUMENT] -- This information is presented as a service to the Internet community by the NRA/ILA. Many files are available via anonymous ftp from ftp.nra.org, via WWW at http://www.nra.org, via gopher at gopher.nra.org, and via WAIS at wais.nra.org Be sure to subscribe to the NRA mailing lists. Send the word help as the body of a message to listproc@NRA.org Information can also be obtained by connecting to the NRA-ILA GUN-TALK BBS at (703) 934-2121. | |||||
892.9 | The Meetings continue.... | POLAR::PERCY | Thu Mar 02 1995 11:06 | 18 | |
Sunday, March 5/95 Time: 12:30 - 3:00 Ian Murray MP and The Shooting Federation of Canada, in discussion Place: Richmond Legion Thursday, March 9/95 Time - To be determined (I will let you know) as soon I get the details. Phone in depate, between Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, and Mr. Ian Murray MP. Channel - Trillium Cable ? - as soon as I have the equivelant channel, I will post them. | |||||
892.10 | British police arming themselves | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Liv'er on the edge | Tue Apr 11 1995 18:45 | 74 |
FWIW BOBBIES ARMING ============== Britain's harsh gun control laws are not keeping guns out of criminals hands. As a result the country's law enforcement establishment is having second thoughts about its disarming policies of the past. According to a February 12th New York Times News Service dispatch, "the growing specter of violence and a changing criminal culture across Britain are pushing Scotland Yard and other police agencies across the country to rethink their 166-year-old policy of policing without guns. Last summer, for the first time ever, a handful of London patrol officers began wearing holstered weapons on their hips, and the number of armed response vehicles on the streets was more than doubled, from five to 12." Assaults on police officers during 1994 totaled nearly 4,000 during 1994, a 15 percent jump over 1993. Armed robberies in England and Wales have tripled during the past decade. During one recent weekend alone, "armed police units in London besieged gunmen who broke into a jeweler on Regent Street, in the heart of the capital; a supermarket manager in Manchester was murdered by robbers, who forced him to kneel and then shot him in the head; and an unarmed police officer in Wiltshire wrestled to the ground a man who was randomly firing a shotgun." Paul Condon, superintendent of London's Metropolitan Police Department, was quoted as saying that "we all value the traditional image of the British bobby," but "we have to police the real world, and the equipment and training must have some link to the real world." Source: The New American Gun Report, p.36 April 17, 1995 =================================================================== The above text comes from The BIRCH BARK BBS / 414-242-5070 (long distance callers require manual upgrade, usually within hours) =================================================================== To subscribe to FWIW simply send the following: To: listserv@earth.execpc.com Subj: (leave blank) Message: subscribe fwiw That's it! The welcome letter will tell you more! =================================================================== % ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ====== % Received: from mail1.digital.com by us4rmc.pko.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA27410; Thu, 6 Apr 95 21:49:29 -040 % Received: from earth.execpc.com by mail1.digital.com; (5.65 EXP 2/22/95 for V3.2/1.0/WV) id AA08687; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 18:38:23 -070 % Received: (from daemon@localhost) by earth.execpc.com (8.6.12/8.6.11) id TAA01189 for fwiw-outgoing; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 19:57:30 -0500 % Received: from earth (earth [204.29.202.50]) by earth.execpc.com (8.6.12/8.6.11) with SMTP id TAA01164 for <fwiw@execpc.com>; Thu, 6 Apr 1995 19:57:26 -0500 % Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 19:57:21 -0500 (CDT) % From: James Fish <jfish@execpc.com> % X-Sender: jfish@earth % To: fwiw@execpc.com % Subject: [FWIW] British using GUNS!! % Message-Id: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950406193133.21027B-100000@earth> % Mime-Version: 1.0 % Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII % Sender: owner-fwiw@earth.execpc.com % Precedence: bulk % Reply-To: owner-fwiw@earth.execpc.com | |||||
892.11 | Not published in the Citizen | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Liv'er on the edge | Wed Apr 19 1995 15:57 | 62 |
From the O/C FreeNet: Welcome Home Bill Baldwin Bill Baldwin lives in Gloucester, Ontario, part of Ottawa. In March he took a short vacation. While he was away, burglars broke into his apartment and stole his computer. They also found his carefully-stored target rifles (stored with the bolts removed to disable the guns). After looking the guns over, the burglars apparently left, leaving the guns behind - after all, what use is a 12-lb, single shot target rifle to a life of crime? Some time later the building superintendent noticed an open window, and crawled in to discover the guns laying around. He called the Gloucester police (part of the Ottawa-Carleton regional police force working under chief Brian Ford who believes no one should have a gun but he and his minions). The police arrarently forced their way into Bill's apartment and confiscated all Bill's guns, broke into locked boxes containing ammunition and a coin collection, left Bill a note and a copy of an unsigned search warrant. On Bill's return from vacation and discovery of the damage he contacted the police as requested - to be charged with three counts of "careless storage" - a charge already thrown out of one Canadian court as being to vague to be permitted. Bill Baldwin is what is usually described as a "pillar of the community". He's a quiet, gentle man, a gentleman of the old school, perhaps partly as a result of his upbringing in the gentler society of Saskatchewan. Bill has been a competitive shooter almost 20 years and has won spots on eight Canadian international shooting teams. He has represented Canada in competitions in Scotland, England, the USA. He has won more than 20 major international shooting medals while representing Canada, including gold at the 1986 Commonwealth games, the Governor-General's prize in 1984 (Canada's highest rifle award), the Queen's Prize at Bisley, England Centenary competition in 1990 (against 1,500 other competitors), and a host of other *very* prestigious shooting awards. Bill is a qualified range officer, shooting coach and safety instructor. He volunteers with junior rifle shooters at the Ottawa Civil Service recreation association and #2870 Ottawa Service Battalion Cadet shooters. He is an active member of the Shooting Federation of Canada, life member of Dominion of Canada Rifle Association and the National Capital Region Rifle Association. Bill is a man of modest means - now faced with legal costs expected to exceed $4,000 to defend himself against this persecution. He (perhaps naively), always believed the police were here to *help* law-abiding citizens rather than persecute them by way of trumped-up tyrannical charges ordered simply as a means to confiscate their legally-owned sporting guns. Welcome home Bill. Welcome home to the kind of country Allan Rock and Jean Chretien say you want to live in. BTW, a defense fund has been started to help Bill pay the costs of his defence of these charges. =================================================================== The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Edmund Burke | |||||
892.12 | Ban 'em All!!! | KAOFS::LOCKYER | Wed Aug 02 1995 14:54 | 15 | |
I'm sure the gun lovers will say "what does this have to do with owning guns" and "guns don't kill, people do", but well known sportscaster Brian Smith was shot as he was leaving CJOH TV in Ottawa last night. Apparently two shots (.22?) were fired from about 50 feet away and he was hit once in the head. Smith is in critical condition and has not regained consciousness since being hit. The bullet is assummed to still be lodged in his head - he was operated on, but only to stop the bleeding. Police believe that the shooter may have stalked Smith the previous day. As a local radio talk show host (and long time friend of Smith and a proponent of gun control) asked this AM, can anyone give a good reason for not increasing gun controls, at least for handguns in metropolitan areas? I certainly can't... Garry | |||||
892.13 | Legalize 'em all!! | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Waiting for the Sun | Wed Aug 02 1995 17:23 | 16 |
Correction, news report said it was a rifle, not a handgun. And yes, I would object to a ban on my legally owned guns. FYI Australia has recently abandoned a 13 year effort to register all guns, regardless of barrel length. Too expensive, and little value in solving crime. But we Canadians insist on following down the path where others have been, spending our precious tax money on foolish things. I'm especially interested in the motive here, and whether Brian Smith was involved in an unpaid gambling or drug debt. This does not have the flavor of a drive-by. Pat R. | |||||
892.14 | Gun control wouldn't have helped | OTOOA::KAP795::duncan | Wed Aug 02 1995 19:51 | 10 | |
I'm betting that the gun used was probably not obtained by legal means anyways. For what it's worth, all the gun control in the world would not stop a person like the one last night from getting his hands on a gun. Don't penalize 99.9999999% of us please. | |||||
892.15 | CSC32::BROOK | Wed Aug 02 1995 20:44 | 27 | ||
Yup, quite probaby stolen from a legal owner ... who didn't store his weapon safely to prevent it being stolen! In these days of consequential litigation, the original legal owner is as guilty as the person who pulled the trigger. Just like the bartender who sold the drink to the drunk driver who mowed people down. Cars owners must a) be registered, b) be tested, c) have insurance. Gun owners must be registered and ????? A car's primary purpose is to move people and things from a to b ... A gun's primary purpose is destruction ... Whether a gun is legal or illegal is immaterial, there is still a terrible inconsistency in the laws. It's harder to get a building permit than a weapon! What makes gun control ineffective is the difficulty in enforcement. A car is pretty hard to hide ... A gun is easy to hide. Which is why rifles etc are allowed in countries where handguns are not. Just because handgun controls are difficult to enforce does not mean that guns should be made legal. Stuart | |||||
892.16 | Blasting the media.. | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Waiting for the Sun | Thu Aug 03 1995 03:03 | 32 |
Stuart, we have beaten this to death. The primary purpose of a gun is self defense, that's why police carry them. The secondary purpose of a gun is as a hobby, target shooting, hunting etc. As a society, Canada has chosen to limit the use of guns as a method of self defense, that's why women like Patricia Allen die with startling regularity in this country, murdered by ex-spouses or boy friends. The police told her they could not protect her. That's why the elderly are found beaten to death in their homes and their country houses ransacked for money. 911 only works in some cases. The weak, the elderly and the crippled are the first to be victims, just as with an animal herd in the wild wich loses it's young and its sick. Patricia Allen would be alive today with a little training and a little something in her purse. I know if I were her, facing a loaded crossbow, I would not hestitate to do for myself what Canadian society could not or would not. Save my own life. She at least knew of the threat, not so lucky Brian Smith, who's only offense seems to have been his familiar face, targeted by a nut case with a grudge against the media. You cannot legislate sanity either. Pat | |||||
892.17 | a dead horse can't lay in peace ! | POLAR::PERCY | Thu Aug 03 1995 11:23 | 24 | |
The person who killed Brian Smith had a history of mental illness, according to the media reports. In applications for an Firearms Accquisition Certificate, this is one area that an applicant is checked. All persons appling for an F.A.C., must be checked for things like mental illness, history of violence, criminal activity, whether or not a divorce in pending (or something to that end). And yes, those of in the shooting sports carry a 2million dollar liability insurance. Yes Stuart, gun control like roller skate control, like bycicle control, like seat belt control, like ANY conrol, WILL ONLY control the persons using them as recreation. After all, we do live in a free country, where one is free to do what one wants, as long as that means the government can fine you for not being careful, and the criminal eliment can do they as they please. We have beat this dead horse many times, and I can see where it will continue to be beat for a long time to come. Tom | |||||
892.18 | can't say I'd blame anyone for that either... | OTOOA::MAJOR | Thu Aug 03 1995 12:05 | 6 | |
From a different perspective, one could think the purchase of guns and weapons would increase in this area after what happened to Brian Smith... Ray. | |||||
892.19 | Never saw it coming... | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Waiting for the Sun | Thu Aug 03 1995 13:32 | 9 |
There is no self defense for what happened to Brian Smith. It is *very* unsettling to think your life could be over in a millisecond because of a madman. May Brian rest in peace. The rest of us get to support the crazy person for the rest of his days. Pat | |||||
892.20 | POLAR::RICHARDSON | Prepositional Masochist | Thu Aug 03 1995 13:47 | 3 | |
We should ban the criminal element. I remember I used to have one on an old stove. Drove me mad. | |||||
892.21 | You should really think about why most people disagree. | KAOFS::D_STREET | Thu Aug 03 1995 14:12 | 28 | |
POLAR::ROBINSONP >>Patricia Allen would be alive today with a little training and >>a little something in her purse. The way you say it, it sounds like a fact. Too bad (for you) it is only your opinion. I have to laugh (in a sad way) at people who feel that ownership of a gun will protect them. Would have done no good for Brian Smith. I have this image in my head of the "guns will protect me" crowd taking a shower with their gun in a plastic bag. It can't protect you in the drawer now can it. They would carry it to the Cub Scout meeting because it can't protect you when you are at home now can it ? In a country like Canada, it is sad that there are people that paranoid. Since the stats indicate that the person who will kill you is most likely someone you know, what are the odds that very same person (spouse, friend) will use your own gun on you ? For real "protection" it would have to be a) loaded, and b) easy to get at. Both of these would be against current laws, and make it easy for that "killer you know" to take you out. As stated last time we went down this pointless path, you cannot get a gun for the purposes of "self defense". You mention it as a reason for getting a gun, again like it was a fact, and again it is only your (misinformed or intentionally misleading) opinion. Derek. | |||||
892.22 | ooops. | KAOFS::D_STREET | Thu Aug 03 1995 14:14 | 4 | |
in -.1 I meant to say the gun could not protect the Cub Scout person if IT were at home and the person were at the meeting. Derek. | |||||
892.23 | what a novel idea! | TROOA::MSCHNEIDER | Digital has it NOW ... Again! | Thu Aug 03 1995 15:20 | 7 |
Let's all get guns so we can protect ourselves from one another ... my what a wonderful idea! Police can't protect us, so the logical thing to do is of course to arm ourselves to the teeth. Carrying a "little protection" would take on a whole new meaning. Maybe drugstores should carry handguns and ammo instead of condoms. ;^) | |||||
892.24 | SUBPAC::SADIN | We the people? | Thu Aug 03 1995 16:01 | 31 | |
> Let's all get guns so we can protect ourselves from one another ... my > what a wonderful idea! Police can't protect us, so the logical thing > to do is of course to arm ourselves to the teeth. Interesting...sounds just like Switzerland ('cept they have machine guns). Also, private citizens can buy just about anything, right up to functional tanks. Hmmmmm... >Carrying a "little > protection" would take on a whole new meaning. Maybe drugstores should > carry handguns and ammo instead of condoms. Before 1938 you could buy full auto Thompson machine guns (the imfamous "Tommy Gun") for about $40 at the local hardware store. Bottom line: Gun control doesn't work, never has. England had a lower crime rate BEFORE gun control measures were in effect. Canada has always had a lower crime rate than the U.S. (care for the charts? Mr. Collins has a pretty nice collection of mortality data going back to 1960~),and the average firearm death rate for the 13~ years BEFORE Canada's strict handgun regulation was LOWER than the average of the years after (there was a peak in the mid 70's and then it leveled out). Gun control is nothing more than useless feel-good legislation done in the name of just doing SOMETHING. jim | |||||
892.25 | If not gun control, why is there less violence in Canada ?? | KAOFS::D_STREET | Thu Aug 03 1995 17:13 | 21 | |
SUBPAC::SADIN You seem to know alot about Canada, why is it you don't know we feel the gun culture in the States is crazy ? Your Swiss example is fine for the Swiss, but does it really apply to Canada ? My only conclusion is that the average Swiss person is alot less violent than the average North American. How about I point out that NYC has gun control (a recent development I think) and their murder rate is down to a 25 year low ? Looks like gun control worked there. You are preaching to a very small choir in Canada that think more guns a better. You will never convince the rest of us that the answer to violence is to provide everybody with the ability to perpetrate violence with the squeeze of a finger. Too many "dad shoots kids by mistake, man shoots student on front lawn" come out of the States to make it seem credible. Derek. (PS. please don't bring up that we need them to "protect" ourselves from the government. We mortally wounded the PCs in the last election without a shot being fired.) | |||||
892.26 | POLAR::RICHARDSON | Prepositional Masochist | Thu Aug 03 1995 17:31 | 2 | |
The answer is a steady diet of rich cheeses and lots of wine and spirits. Works for the Swiss. | |||||
892.27 | SUBPAC::SADIN | We the people? | Thu Aug 03 1995 17:38 | 58 | |
> <<< Note 892.25 by KAOFS::D_STREET >>> > -< If not gun control, why is there less violence in Canada ?? >- Canada has always been less violent. Why? Who knows? It's certainly not because of gun control. > You seem to know alot about Canada, why is it you don't know we feel > the gun culture in the States is crazy ? Do you speak for all Canadians when you say that? It seems that a gun lobby has developed in Canada so there must be at least SOME other canadians that believe in their right to own certain firearms. > How about I point out that NYC has gun control (a recent development I > think) and their murder rate is down to a 25 year low ? New York City may be down to a 25yr low for THEIR murder rate, but they're still significantly higher than other cities/towns that don't have gun control. NYC has had strict gun control laws for many many years...it is not a new development. NYC and Washington DC have led the murder rate in the U.S. for years and only recently have dropped a few slots on the chart. I believe what you will also find is that while the murder rate is down NATION WIDE (not just in NYC) the homocide rate by firearm is UP. Hmmmm...kinda washes out the "gun control works" theory eh? > You will never convince the rest of > us that the answer to violence is to provide everybody with the ability > to perpetrate violence with the squeeze of a finger. I'm not trying to convince you of that. I'm trying to convince you to leave the honest firearms owners alone and that gun control doesn't work. I could care less if you or the rest of the population decides to carry/buy a firearm. >Too many "dad > shoots kids by mistake, man shoots student on front lawn" come out of > the States to make it seem credible. Bull. You're a victim of media disinformation. In the U.S. firearms accidents are the lowest they've been since the early 1900's (thanks to firearms education). Firearms accidents have declined at a rate greater than any other form of accidental death despite the fact that firearms ownership has quadrupled. > (PS. please don't bring up that we need them to "protect" ourselves > from the government. We mortally wounded the PCs in the last election > without a shot being fired.) I believe in changing government through the ballot box not the cartridge box. cheers, jim | |||||
892.28 | Dad, what does a Grizzly Bear look like? | POLAR::ROBINSONP | Waiting for the Sun | Thu Aug 03 1995 18:02 | 12 |
Re: last few, good ones, keep it up. I'm outa here, 2 weeks camping in the bush with the wife and kids. Armed only with a cellphone, our chances are slim if some large carnivore decides he his hungry. My guns are stored safely while I'm away. Looking forward to lots of reading when I return.. Cheers, Pat | |||||
892.29 | SUBPAC::SADIN | We the people? | Thu Aug 03 1995 19:35 | 7 | |
Hey Pat, what's your cellphone #? I'll give you a ring....:) jim | |||||
892.30 | TROOA::COLLINS | Careful! That sponge has corners! | Thu Aug 03 1995 20:29 | 8 | |
To All: Most of my data can be found in BACK40::SOAPBOX, topic 130. If I get the time, I will cross-post it. jc | |||||
892.31 | Popular opinion should count for something don't you think ? | KAOFS::D_STREET | Thu Aug 03 1995 20:31 | 67 | |
SUBPAC::SADIN >>Canada has always been less violent. Why? Who knows? It's certainly not >>because of gun control. So you don't know why, but you have a firm handle on why not ? I don't think so. Less guns, either through less interest or gun control is considered to be part of the reason up here. So are social programs and better race relations. No one part is the whole answer. >>Do you speak for all Canadians when you say that? It seems that a >>gun lobby has developed in Canada so there must be at least SOME other >>canadians that believe in their right to own certain firearms. Well **all** Candians would not be true, but enough that the government is not too concerned about the backlash. I for one do not want the tiny gun lobby in Canada to set public policy. Do you know why they are up in arms ? From what I hear it is rural people who do not want to pay a fee to have a gun. A far cry from demanding the right to own a gun. I will admit there is a fringe that think it is the first step towards confiscation, but that is not the real thrust of our little gun lobby. If confiscation became an issue, I would have to side with the gun lobby. I am not a no guns for any reason person, I just don't agree with making it "easy" to get a gun. I think you should have to show your permit to buy ammunition. A small price to pay that might have saved Ian Battersby's (SP?) life. >>New York City may be down to a 25yr low for THEIR murder rate, but >>they're still significantly higher than other cities/towns that don't >>have gun control. Funny how statistics are twisted to meet an agenda isn't it ? I present one, and you try to qualify it to meet your agenda. Can we agree that murder rates are affected by more things than gun control? > You will never convince the rest of > us that the answer to violence is to provide everybody with the ability > to perpetrate violence with the squeeze of a finger. >>I'm not trying to convince you of that. I'm trying to convince you >>.... that gun control doesn't work. What is the opposite of gun control ? >>Bull. You're a victim of media disinformation. In the Funny, I don't hear **ANY** "Dad mistakenly shoots kid or confused student gets shot asking for directions" stories out of Canada. A few years ago I was in Nashvill and was watching the news. There was a big debate about being able to shoot a dog that was menacing you or your family. Pitt Bulls were eating people quite regularly back then. The debate had examples about being on a pick-nik or jogging and a dog attacks. It took me a while to figgure out why this seemed so strange to me. Then I realized that the assumption was that you would bring a gun to the family pick-nik, or with you jogging. Wether you believe it or not, the vast majority of Candians (and I'll bet even most of the "gun lobby") do not think a gun at a family pick-nik is appropriate. It's not just a different country up here, it is a different culture. We did not have a "wild west" which spawned a "guns can solve problems" culture. Our west created the image of the RCMP which "always got their man". Quite a different lesson learned would you not say? Maybe that is why we place more trust in our police to protect us. >>I believe in changing government through the ballot box not the >>cartridge box. At least we can agree on this. Derek. | |||||
892.32 | SUBPAC::SADIN | We the people? | Thu Aug 03 1995 21:48 | 132 | |
re: <<< Note 892.31 by KAOFS::D_STREET >>> > So you don't know why, but you have a firm handle on why not ? I don't > think so. Less guns, either through less interest or gun control is > considered to be part of the reason up here. But there has not always been gun-control, yet your crime rate has ALWAYS been lower than the U.S.. I don't think you can safely conclude that gun control has had ANY effect on your crime rate. I do know of a study that was done on suicides in Canada. It seems that after the draconian gun laws went into effect, people were still committing suicide at the same rate, just by different means (mostly jumping off of bridges). >I for one do not want the tiny gun lobby >in Canada to set public policy. Do you know why they are up in arms ? From >what I hear it is rural people who do not want to pay a fee to have a gun. A >far cry from demanding the right to own a gun. That's because no one is taking away their guns (yet). I bet that if your government went and told everyone to turn in all their guns, you'd have some really p.o.'d canadians! Still, them not wanting to pay a fee to own a gun is not so far fetched. I hear it'll cost $100~ to register EACH gun. What about the collecter or active target shooter who owns many firearms? I doubt someone who's taken years to build a collection could afford the cost. There is no reason for these LAW ABIDING people to have to pay such a fee! Find another way to raise the money for your registration system. >I think you should have to show >your permit to buy ammunition. A small price to pay that might have saved >Ian Battersby's (SP?) life. Guess what? We agree! Where I live (Massachusetts) you need to show a license before you can purchase ammunition. What I don't like to see is arbitrary power given to the police chief to deny licenses. There should be a set of rules to follow and that is it! No denying licenses because you don't like someones hair/religion/politics etc. As far as Ian Battersby goes, he could've been run over or stabbed instead of shot. Would you be calling for knife registration? >Funny how statistics are twisted to meet an agenda isn't it ? I present one, >and you try to qualify it to meet your agenda. Can we agree that murder rates >are affected by more things than gun control? I contend that gun control has NO affect on murder rates. >>> You will never convince the rest of >>> us that the answer to violence is to provide everybody with the ability >>> to perpetrate violence with the squeeze of a finger. >>I'm not trying to convince you of that. I'm trying to convince you >>.... that gun control doesn't work. > What is the opposite of gun control ? The opposite of gun control is not "providing everyone with the ability to perpertrate violence with the squeeze of a finger". Give it a rest man! You act like I want to go out and shove a gun in the hand of every person I can find and then you believe all these formerly law abiding people will become maniacle killers because they now possess a gun! People do not turn into deranged loonies because they possess firearms. In Florida, when they relaxed the concealed carry laws, the murder rate DROPPED 22% and only 2% of the population actually went ahead and applied for permits. Out of the 200,000+ permits issued only 17 have been revoked for crimes being committed with a firearm present (the firearm was not necessarily used in the crime, just present at the time). Hence another prime example of the fact that people who follow the law are not the ones you need to worry about! > Funny, I don't hear **ANY**"Dad mistakenly shoots kid or confused student gets >shot asking for directions"stories out of Canada. Funny, I hear there's quite a bit LESS overall crime in Canada, therefore less of a worry about being attacked. The stories you repeat are tragedies for sure, but they're no worse than "mother drowns her two kids" or "15yr old stabs friends mother to death". Accidents, murders, etc will happen no matter if firearms are available or not. >Quite a different lesson learned would you >not say? Maybe that is why we place more trust in our police to protect us. We live in two very different societies, no question. I have to wonder about the "trusting the police to protect us" part tho'. Do you have a police officer in your house, assigned to guard you? How long would it take a police officer to get to you? How about to one of your more remote neighbors? 3mins? 8mins? 15mins? more? You've got a couple of rough looking gentlemen breaking down the door to your house....will they get through before the police arrive? What will you do if they do? I'm sorry, here we don't agree. The police usually clean up afterwards, they don't usually prevent a crime from happening. You dial up your local cops and see how long it takes for them to get there. Then think about all the things that could happen to you before the police arrived. We had a case here in Massachusetts where 3 young ladies were held captive for two days in their home. They were raped and brutalized. What happened was 3 nasty guys broke into the home and attacked the girl downstairs. They guys didn't know there were two more women upstairs. The ladies upstairs called the police, explained the situation and told them to hurry. The police officer came, knocked on the door, and when no one answered, he left! The two ladies upstairs didn't want to yell to him for fear of alerting the intruders downstairs of their presence. They called the police again, but the dispatcher never bothered to send another cruiser around (she thought it was a prank call). These women went to court and sued the Boston PD for failing to help them. The supreme court found the Boston PD not guilty of negligence and ruled that police do not have a responsibility to protect the individual, only to protect society as a whole. Maybe it's different in Canada, but that's what we're faced with here. You're protection is YOUR responsibility. >We did not have a "wild west" which >spawned a "guns can solve problems" culture. I don't think we have that kind of culture at all. I grew up around firearms (they were always in the house) and I NEVER thought of using one to settle a fight or prove anything to anyone. If you think the modern Crips and Bloods of the world take any of their training from the "wild west" history of our country, you're sadly mistaken. Heck, Dodge City had a murder rate of something like 1 in 100,000...that's less than Canada at it's best! My whole point in this string is that gun-control laws don't reduce crime. They don't reduce murders, they don't reduce anything except legal firearms owners. Canada and the U.S. can't seem to stop the drugs from coming in (heroin is a major player AGAIN), what makes you think illegal guns won't start coming in once the trade gets lucrative enough? What makes you think you can stop them? Guess who has all the guns then? jim | |||||
892.33 | Enforce the laws we've got! | OTOOA::DUNCAN | Fri Aug 04 1995 12:33 | 11 | |
It would seem to me that if we could enforce the gun control legislation WE ALREADY HAVE, there would be no "gun control" discusssions. For instance, its much easier to buy a gun illegally than legally. Besides, with over 80% of crime being commited with an illegal gun, what good will it do just to throw on more laws? It's already a ridiculous amount of fees, background searches, tests, and courses just for an honest guy to get a gun. | |||||
892.34 | try a please and thank you, it really doesn't hurt | KAOFS::N_BAXTER | we'll see who rusts first... | Fri Aug 04 1995 13:03 | 10 |
>>Canada has always been less violent. Why? Who knows? It's certainly not >>because of gun control. Why? Respect for/of each other. | |||||
892.35 | SUBPAC::SADIN | We the people? | Fri Aug 04 1995 15:32 | 9 | |
> -< try a please and thank you, it really doesn't hurt >- I make sure to say please and thank you all the time. It's the way I was raised and it's the way I raise my children (respect your elders, etc). If more folks would do that, we'd all be in a happier world... jim | |||||
892.36 | The Fewer The Better.. | KAOFS::LOCKYER | Fri Aug 04 1995 20:13 | 22 | |
It's is possible that this tragedy MAY have been avoided if the proposed gun registration laws were currently in effect. ASSUMING they were and ASSUMMING the firearm was registered, the police would have had a CHANCE to remove firearms from the alleged murderer when his "problems" first became known to them several years ago. As it is, without registration, the police have no chance to remove guns... Also, Mr. Sadin, I believe you are quite incorrect re: the cost to register a gun in Canada (under the new laws). It's suppose to cost in the order of $10.00, not $100.00, and I believe that early registrations would be free or multiple registrations would be done for the same fee. And finally, the guy who alledegely killed Brian Smith was charged with assault a few years ago in Nova Scotia and then he moved to Ottawa - the Nova Scotia police decided not to persue him for a possible $300.00 fine. There feeling the heat now... Regards and "BAN 'EM ALL" Garry | |||||
892.37 | CTHU26::S_BURRIDGE | Fri Aug 04 1995 20:22 | 4 | ||
Would the N.S. police have pursued this guy to get his .22, even if they knew he had one? -Stephen | |||||
892.38 | Anything would be better than nothing! | KAOFS::LOCKYER | Fri Aug 04 1995 20:36 | 4 | |
I don't know, but I would hope that the NS police would inform the Ottawa police (police in general I guess) that there might be a problem. All those police computer systems must be good for something... | |||||
892.39 | SUBPAC::SADIN | We the people? | Wed Aug 09 1995 13:51 | 19 | |
re: .36 seems there's alot of assuming going on there. The cops wouldn't pursue this guy before for his minor offense, yet you assume they would've been right on top of him to take away his .22? BIG assumption. The "anything would be better than nothing" attitude is great. Do things that probably won't have any effect on something and then sit back and say "well, at least we did something". Yup...good attitude. Your points about the registration fees have been noted. Thanks. jim "OWN 'EM ALL" | |||||
892.40 | TROOA::COLLINS | Careful! That sponge has corners! | Wed Aug 09 1995 14:51 | 144 | |
This is some of the information I gathered during my research; and, where possible, the 1994 stats have been added in. jc Canadian Homicide Rates: FIREARM FIREARM HOM. HOMICIDE HOM. HOMICIDE YEAR RATE RATE YEAR RATE RATE ==== ==== ======== ==== ==== ======= 1974 - 2.62 - 1.24 1985 - 2.71 - 0.85 1975 - 3.02 - 1.26 1986 - 2.17 - 0.67 1976 - 2.84 - 1.10 1987 - 2.52 - 0.79 1977 - 2.99 - 1.09 1988 - 2.14 - 0.63 1978 - 2.75 - 1.04 1989 - 2.40 - 0.80 1979 - 2.60 - 0.85 1990 - 2.37 - 0.70 1980 - 2.41 - 0.79 1991 - 2.69 - 0.96 1981 - 2.60 - 0.80 1992 - 2.57 - 0.86 1982 - 2.65 - 0.99 1993 - 2.19 - 0.67 1983 - 2.68 - 0.88 1994 - 2.04 - 0.67 1984 - 2.60 - 0.89 -------------------------------------------------------------------- From `Crime Trends In Canada, 1962-1990' Juristat Service Bulletin, Vol. 12, No. 7 Violent Crime Rates In Canada: ============================== 1962 - 221 1970 - 481 1977 - 583 1984 - 715 1963 - 249 1971 - 501 1978 - 591 1985 - 751 1964 - 284 1972 - 507 1979 - 621 1986 - 808 1965 - 299 1973 - 534 1980 - 648 1987 - 856 1966 - 347 1974 - 564 1981 - 666 1988 - 898 1967 - 381 1975 - 597 1982 - 686 1989 - 947 1968 - 423 1976 - 596 1983 - 686 1990 - 1013 1969 - 453 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From `Robbery In Canada' Juristat Service Bulletin, Vol. 12, No. 10 Page 5, Gun Control Legislation: "In January, 1978, gun control legislation came into force in Canada. This legislation included the imposition of stricter controls on the issuance of registration certificates (which are necessary to acquire restricted weapons such as handguns), the creation of new criminal offences in relation to firearms use, and the provision for more severe penalties for the criminal use of firearms. Following the enactment of the legislation, there was a significant but short-lived increase in the rate of robbery with firearms. Starting in 1982 the rate of robbery with firearms started a long-term decline, whereas robbery with other offensive weapons continued its steady increase. it is difficult to be certain, but the data would suggest that there was a substitution effect: fewer robberies with firearms, more robberies with other weapons." --------------------------------------------------------------------- From `Homicide In Canada, 1993' Juristat Service Bulletin, Vol. 14, No. 15 Canadian Homicide Rates: 1961 - 1.28 1972 - 2.34 1983 - 2.68 1962 - 1.43 1973 - 2.42 1984 - 2.60 1963 - 1.32 1974 - 2.62 1985 - 2.71 1964 - 1.31 1975 - 3.02 1986 - 2.17 1965 - 1.41 1976 - 2.84 1987 - 2.52 1966 - 1.25 1977 - 2.99 1988 - 2.14 1967 - 1.66 1978 - 2.75 1989 - 2.40 1968 - 1.81 1979 - 2.60 1990 - 2.37 1969 - 1.86 1980 - 2.41 1991 - 2.69 1970 - 2.19 1981 - 2.60 1992 - 2.57 1971 - 2.15 1982 - 2.65 1993 - 2.19 1994 - 2.04 Firearms Use In Homicides: Firearms Percentage Of Year Homicides Total Homicides ==== ========= =============== 1974 283 47.2 1975 292 41.7 1976 258 38.6 1977 260 36.6 1978 250 37.8 1979 207 32.8 1980 195 32.9 1981 199 30.7 1982 248 37.2 1983 224 32.8 1984 228 34.2 1985 222 31.5 1986 175 30.8 1987 202 31.4 1988 169 29.3 1989 218 33.2 1990 196 29.7 1991 271 35.8 1992 246 33.6 1993 193 30.6 1994 196 32.9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- The following is from `Weapons And Violent Crime' Juristat Service Bulletin, Vol. 11, No. 12 Page 4: "Between 1975 and 1989, the number of firearms homicides decreased by 25%. Similarly, when examined as a proportion of total homicides, firearms homicides decreased from 42% of of all homicides in 1975 to 29% in 1988. In 1989, however (the year Marc Lepine killed 14 women), the proportion of firearms homicides rose slightly to 33% of all homicides." "The decrease in the *rate* of firearm homicides is even more noteworthy. The firearm homicide rate declined by 38%, from 1.3 per 100,000 in 1975 to 0.8 in 1989. Since the rate for non-firearms homicides has remained relatively stable during this time, the marginal drop in the total homicide rate appears to be almost entirely attributable to the drop in firearms-related incidents." --------------------------------------------------------------------- From the 1992 Mortality journal: suicides w/firearms 1,046 accidents or injury w/firearms 84 homicide w/firearms 214 ----- TOTAL 1,344 There were also 9 deaths due to `legal intervention', but no breakdown was given of the instrument causing the death. | |||||
892.41 | Are guns unusual in canada? | MINOTR::BANCROFT | Fri Aug 11 1995 15:14 | 8 | |
re: Recent "Gun Control" in New York City. I believe the "Sullivan Law" was inacted in 1925. Hardly recent. I had always assumed that like Maine, Canadians were fairly well armed. It seemed the absence of serious crime in Maine was mutual respect. It is easy to respect the rights of an armed neighbor. The evil prey on the weak. A trained firearms owning 80 year old is not easy prey, therefore not weak. | |||||
892.42 | POLAR::RICHARDSON | Firsthand Bla Bla Bla | Fri Aug 11 1995 15:24 | 1 | |
I only know of hunters and farmers having rifles or shotguns. | |||||
892.43 | CSC32::BROOK | Fri Aug 11 1995 15:58 | 32 | ||
The only reason for owning weapons for self defense is that you clearly do not trust your neighbour or anyone else for that matter. And that makes the world a sad place to live. It is ironic that many people claim to be Christian, and yet arm themselves to the teeth.... Seems that one of the cornerstones of Christianity is love and trust. Moreover, I cannot understand why anyone would want to own a device of such destruction. One of the items in the Canadian Chrater of Rights and Freedoms if I remember correctly, is a freedom from fear ... That is quite encompassing, but in my book it includes the fear that someone might pull a hand gun and start shooting. It is up to government to enact and enforce legislation that helps preserve that freedom. Now ... as I've said before, gun laws are hard to enforce, by the very nature of the beast, but clearly, the place to start is with the manufacturer, and then to ensure that users are properly trained, routinely licensed, like a car, and insured. Sure it only serves to keep legal owners legal ... but even doing that may ensure that legal owners takes steps to ensure their guns a) aren't stolen and become an illegal weapon and b) aren't used against themselves. I had a neighbour in Kanata who was into target shooting with rifles. He stored and transported rifles, their bolts and ammunition in separate locked containers. That is called gun safety and I never felt uncomfortable after learning he had guns in his house once I knew that. Stuart | |||||
892.44 | TROOA::COLLINS | Careful! That sponge has corners! | Fri Aug 11 1995 16:26 | 15 | |
.41 -< Are guns unusual in canada? >- In Ontario, there are less than a dozen permits in current issue to civilians for the purposes of self-defence. This permit allows the bearer to carry a loaded handgun, preferably concealed. Apart from these permit holders, no civilian is allowed to be in possession of a loaded handgun anywhere except a proper firing range, and cannot be in possession of a loaded rifle unless they are at a range, or in the process of (legally) hunting. Storing or transporting a loaded weapon is an offence. |