Tracing the Trajectory of Ugur Yildiz’s Smuggled Weapons

April 15, 2006, Ugur Yildiz smuggled at least 237 handguns into Canada using the Ambassador Bridge which links Detroit Michigan to Windsor Ontario.  Police have traced approximately three dozen of these illegal firearms leaving over 200 unaccounted for and presumably in the hands of street thugs and criminals.

(click on picture for larger image; it will open in a new window)

At least one death has already been attributed to these guns and with such a large number unaccounted for,  more are expected.

I don’t know about you, but the thought of over 200 illegal guns out there in the hands of violent criminals makes me a bit nervous.  And thats over 200 guns from just one smuggler!  Use your imagination for a minute and think about how many thousands of other illegal guns are out there in the hands of bad guys!  Yet we are still forced to rely on the Police to protect us from them.  We are still not allowed to prepare ourselves for what very well could be a deadly encounter with a thug carrying one of these smuggled guns!

Until our government realizes that guns on the belt and in the purses of law-abiding citizens is an asset, not a liability, to the peace and security of our society, we remain at the mercy of violent criminals who buy their guns out of the car trunks of smugglers such as Yildiz.

The Police simply cannot prevent all unauthorized entry of illegal guns into Canada and they certainly cannot be everywhere at once protecting innocent civilians from the criminals who obtain and use these guns against us.  We need to stand together now and fight these unreasonable laws that disarm law-abiding Canadian citizens.

Check out casd.ca for more information.

Authorization To Carry

The topic of ATC (Authorization To Carry) permits has recently begun to rise in popularity among legal firearm owners here in Canada.  Contrary to the popular belief of many Canadians, gun owners and non-gun owners alike, there is in fact a permit available to the general public allowing them to carry a concealed firearm for the purpose of self-defense.

The reason you don’t see this happening in Canada is that the government has given the authority to issue these permits at the discretion of the Provincial CFOs. (Chief Firearms Officer)  So, not only does the criteria need to be met, the CFO must also feel that it is in your best interest to have such a permit.  Suffice it to say, the CFOs have gotten together and agreed to not issue these permits if at all possible.

Recently, an FOI (Freedom Of Information) request was issued to the Government of Ontario to request the number of ATCs that have been issued in that province.  With a population just shy of 13 million people, and grand total of 13 ATCs have been issued.  You can probably bet that these people are not ordinary Joe Blow citizens whose lives are in danger, rather these are more than likely high ranking government officials who have enough influence to determine the career path of the CFO to which the application was presented.

Lets look at the three general criteria that have been put in place:

-the life of the applicant must be in imminent danger

-police protection is not sufficient in the circumstances

-the individual has successfully completed training in firearms proficiency

Well right away there is a problem.  What exactly does in mean to be in “imminent danger”?  By definition, “imminent” means “ready to take place”.  So must we then wait until we are being chased down a dark alley by a group of thugs intent on beating us to death before we submit our application?  I offer this thought; we are all in constant imminent danger as we will never know when we are about to be attacked until it is too late.  The CFO does not see it this way however and will use this as his first excuse not to issue the permit.

Lets move on to the second requirement: police protection is not sufficient.  Well that’s an understatement in itself.  There is no possible way that the police can protect us at all times.  The government would have you believe that they can and, more importantly, that they do, but the reality is that they cannot and they certainly do not.

Take a home invasion as an example.  A crack-head thug has broken into your home just after you have gone to bed.  You call 911 as soon as you hear the front door splinter.  Now, what I’d like you to do, is go to your front door and pretend that you are the thug.  (extra points for screaming like a lunatic and scaring your cat into a fuzzball)  Time yourself as you run up the stairs, or down the hall or to where it is that your bedroom is located, pretend to bust down the door and then pretend to stab the stuffing out of your pillow.  The pillow in this case is actually you seeing as you probably can’t play both roles without some sort of clone.  Your wife or roommate would also make a good stand in, but they might move out if you don’t give them advance warning. 

So, how did you do?  I’m guessing you accomplished this in less than a minute.  Now imagine calling 911.  You relay what is happening to the operator, they call the local police for you and they dispatch a car.  How long do you figure that it going to take?  Probably a lot longer than a minute.  Of course, with this scenario, you are at home and hopefully you have fairly quick access to some sort of improvised weapon, better yet a firearm (that is legally stored of course) that you can use to defend your life and the lives of your family.  Just imagine that you are walking back to your car with your significant other in the middle of the almost deserted movie theatre parking long after the sun has set.  You are approached by three or four scary looking guys who are intent on a little action.  What do you do then?  Well, since you live in Canada, all you can do is call 911 on your cell and hope for the best.  Chances are though, you’ll end up as a chalk outline and the headline in the next day’s paper.

The last criteria seems to be the easiest to comply with: successfully complete training in firearms proficiency.  Actually, this is easier said than done.  As far as I can tell, with the exception of armoured car services, no one offers this sort of training in Canada and there isn’t really even an outline that is to be followed.

So, what can you as a concerned citizen do about this?  Well for starters, you can join the Canadian Association for Self Defense at casd.ca.  You can write your Member of Parliament to convey your displeasure in the fact that the CFOs have the authority to issue these permits at their discretion.  You can get your friends and family involved and spread the word that we are no longer going to let the government decide who or what is more valuable.  As it stands right now, your money is more valuable than your life.  Why else do Armoured guards get to carry guns?  Let’s band together and tell our government to get their priorities straight.

Lock ‘N’ Load – What? Gun owners are people too? Huh.

Documentary loaded for bore; comedy team has terrible aim

Ready… aim… snooze: Josh T. Ryan does his best to make Lock ‘N’ Load entertaining, but he’s fighting a losing battle.

————————————–

By: Brad Oswald / Watching TV

21/10/2009 1:00 AM

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/entertainment/TV/documentary-loaded-for-bore-comedy-team-has-terrible-aim-65138167.html

Guns. Ammunition. Americans.

One might think — especially up hereabouts, where our more benign attitude toward firearms makes us believe we’re more evolved than our southern neighbours — that these three elements are all that’s required to create big, wild, out-of-control gun-toting craziness.

If the new reality series Lock ‘N Load is any indication, that might not be the case. The six-part documentary project, produced for U.S. cable’s Showtime network (and premiering in Canada tonight at midnight on Movie Central), offers viewers an inside look at American gun culture through the eyes of the staff and customers at a suburban-Denver gun shop called The Shootist.

The series’ description suggests we’ll be offered a fascinating look at a perhaps-troubling aspect of U.S. society. The truth is that Lock ‘N Load doesn’t deliver much of anything at all.

Obviously inspired by hidden-camera-reality shows like HBO’s intensely cheeky Taxicab Confessions, the producers of this new unscripted offering set up a handful of cameras in The Shootist’s showroom and downstairs firing range, conscripted salesman Josh T. Ryan to act as host/inquisitor, and then just waited for the real, gun-lovin’ folks to walk through the front door.

Unfortunately, what Lock ‘N Load reveals is that shopping for armaments is a rather ordinary American pastime carried out, mostly, by very ordinarily uninteresting people. Ryan does his level best to turn each sales opportunity into a fascinating, funny conversation, but almost everyone he encounters has very little to say.

Sure, there are occasional oddballs, like a church minister who makes regular visits to the firing range (“I love shooting… I think there’s a biblical principle that’s very sound — the notion of defending your family, your possession, your own life”), or the alarmingly uptight collector who turns up to collect his (legally) modified assault rifle (“I bought it because I love shooting guns; I love blowing s–t up”), or the numerous people for whom gun shopping is a family — toddlers and all — affair.

Mostly, it’s just ordinary folks looking to make a fairly commonplace purchase. Canucks hoping to find ammunition for their more-civilized-than-thou argument will be disappointed.

Lock ‘N Load fires blanks.

Canadian Gun Laws are Confusing – Part 2

The Ruger Mini-14, a very common hunting rifle found all over North America, is classified in Canada as a Non-Restricted firearm.  Chambered for .223 Remington ammunition, its versatility is profound.  From competition target shooting to pest control to deer hunting, this rifle has it all.

As with anything that gets produced in such large numbers, options and aftermarket accessories soon became available for the Mini-14 to allow each person to modify it to his or her own personal tastes.  A couple of examples:

(no, that’s not a “silencer”, but an adjustable weight that allows the shooter to tune the harmonics of the barrel to allow for superior accuracy)

All three of the above rifles have the exact same fit and function, only the form has changed.  You’ll notice that the bottom two have extended magazines, but don’t worry, they both conform to Canada’s laws and have been modified to only allow 5 rounds of ammunition to be held.  (I’ll talk about this silly law some other time.)

So you should be able to see from this, that a rifle’s looks or appearance shouldn’t have any bearing on how it is classified. In fact, this rifle, the AR-180B:

…is downright scary looking, but because it also conforms to the same set of rules that classifies the Mini-14 as a Non-Restricted firearm, it too can be used to hunt or target shoot with.

Now this is the confusing part.  The AR-15:

…an almost twin brother to the AR-180B, which also conforms to the same set of rules as the rifles mentioned above, is a Restricted firearm in Canada.  What’s that you say?  Does it shoot more powerful ammo? Nope.  Does it have the capability of shooting full-auto? Nope, not the ones we have in Canada anyway.  Is it in anyway different to the other rifles in fit or function? Nope.  So why is it Restricted? I have no idea.

All three rifles are semi-automatic and use the same ammunition; yet one of them, for reasons that I cannot begin to comprehend, is deemed to be too “dangerous” to be used anywhere except a certified range by properly licensed individuals.

Does that make any sense to you?

Me either.

Canadian Gun Laws are Confusing

Take the following for example, bearing in mind that none of these rifles are full-automatic; they are semi-automatic only:

This firearm in Canada is prohibited:

Semi-auto AK-47

this firearm is restricted:

VZ-58 Sporter

and this firearm is non-restricted:

CZ-858

Make any sense to you?

Me either.

(Special thanks to esquif from CGN for the idea)

Click here for more info on what non-restricted, restricted and prohibited classifications mean.

A Brief Overview of Canadian Gun Laws

Here is a brief description of the current Gun Control laws that we have here in Canada:

Firearm Classifications:

Non-restricted firearms are those that you would expect to see if you were out hunting.  They include  any firearms that are not already classified as restricted or prohibited, and have an overall length of 26 inches or more and have a barrel length of 18 inches or more.  There are a few exceptions to the barrel length rule, but I’ll get into that later.

Restricted firearms include those that have overall lengths less than 26 inches and barrels less than 18 inches.  So no handgun, for example, could ever be classified as non-restricted as it is too short.  Certain military styled firearms that meet the requirements for non-restricted are also classified as restricted by name.  Popular examples are the AR-15 and the G-36.

Prohibited firearms include all fully automatic firearms, any handgun that has a barrel length of less than 4.2 inches, any handgun that is designed to shoot .25 or .32 calibre ammunition, and certain military styled rifles that have been prohibited by name.  Popular examples include the AK-47 and the MP-5.

So what do the classifications mean?

You may hunt with, target shoot with and transport any non-restricted firearm anywhere that it is legal to do so.  Technically, you can carry a non-restricted rifle with you where ever you go, so long as you only load it where it is legal to discharge it.  So it would need to be unloaded if you were in your car, in town or anywhere else that you are generally not allowed to shoot a gun.  Obviously, it is not a good idea to carry a rifle while going for a stroll downtown as you will attract a lot of unwanted attention from the police, but it is legal to do so.

Restricted firearms, on the other hand, may not be used for hunting and may only be used at, and transported to and from, an approved range.  On top of that, you also need an ATT (Authorization To Transport) from the local Firearms Office to do so.

Prohibited firearms are all the guns that government wants to get rid of.  They decided that it would be too costly to confiscate them all, so they decided that the people who already owned them could keep them, but when they died, the guns would have to be turned in and destroyed.  You can still get an ATT for prohibited handguns to take them to the range for target shooting, but not for prohibited rifles.

Barrel length exceptions

As I mentioned earlier, there are a few exceptions to the barrel length laws:

- semi-automatic centre-fire rifles and shotguns must have a barrel length of more than 18.5 inches to remain non-restricted (does not apply to semi-automatic rimfire rifles)

- non-restricted, non-semi-automatic,  rifles and shotguns (along with semi-automatic rimfire rifles) may have barrel lengths of less than 18 inches (providing the overall length remains more than 26 inches) as long as the barrel was manufactured that way from the factory

Magazine limits

All semi-automatic centre-fire rifle magazines are limited to 5 rounds of ammunition.  All handgun magazines are limited to 10 rounds of ammunition.  Because the law is worded so that it is the magazine that is being controlled, it has allowed AR-15 owners (and owners of other firearms that use the popular AR-15 magazine) the ability to use 10 round pistol magazines in their rifles.  This is because there is a pistol variant of the AR-15 and the magazine designed for the pistol variant will also work in the rifle.  There are no limits set for any rimfire rifle magazines.

Storage

Non-Restricted firearms must be unloaded, trigger locked or locked in a sturdy container.  Ammunition must be stored separately or locked up in the same container as the firearm.

Restricted and Prohibited firearms must be unloaded, trigger locked and locked in a sturdy container.  Trigger locks are not required if the firearm is stored in an approved safe.  Ammunition must be stored separately or locked up in the same container as the firearm.

Transportation

To transport non-restricted firearms, they must be unloaded.  That’s it.  You do have to be aware of Provincial hunting laws however, as they usually require that the firearm be cased when you are not permitted to hunt.  If the firearm is left unattended in the vehicle, the firearm must be locked in the trunk.  If the vehicle does not have a trunk, the vehicle must be locked and the firearm must be out of sight.

Restricted and Prohibited firearms must be unloaded, trigger locked and locked in a sturdy container.  The bolt must also be removed from automatic firearms if able.  If the firearm is left unattended in the vehicle, the firearm must be locked in the trunk.  If the vehicle does not have a trunk, the vehicle must be locked and the firearm must be out of sight.

So that, in a nutshell, is a quick look at Gun Control in Canada.  The actual laws are obviously quite a bit more wordy and complicated, but this will give you a running start on understanding what we are up against.  You’ll notice (especially if you’re American) that there is no mention of Concealed Carry.  Canada does have an Authorization To Carry permit (ATC), but unless your job requires you to carry a firearm to protect money (armoured vehicle services) or you work in a remote area where you are considered to be food by the local predators, there’s literally a one in a million chance that you can get one.  A good site to learn more about Concealed Carry in Canada and what we can do to make it easier to obtain such a permit is casd.ca.

Accuracy of the Media

I could ask for a show of hands for how many people think the news media is 100% accurate. Would anybody raise their hands? 90%? 80%? Should I go to 50% accurate? Let me give you an example of the news media on this issue that may give you a perspective you don’t otherwise have.

The #2 athletic pursuit in America based upon sales are the shooting sports. They just outdistanced golf. Golf used to be number two, now golf is number three. Shooting sports edged it out. You’ve heard about Tiger Woods. You’ve heard about the PGA and The Masters. You’ve heard of 19th hole drunkenness. You’ve heard all about golf. Golf is big. You’ve heard nothing about the shooting sports. Nothing. You don’t even know what they are I’ll bet half of you.

Out where I am, we just had an expo at the Ben Avery Range, which is one of the biggest ranges in the country, 1600 acres. It’s always so busy you have to wait to be able to use it. 26000 people in one weekend came out and enjoyed themselves. Had ice cream, ate food, bought hot dogs. Smith And Wesson had booths so you could try out their new firearms. For a few dollars you could rent all sorts of different guns. Cowboy action, practical pistol, high powered rifle. Soccer moms were watching their 9-year-olds use a bolt action 22 under careful supervision. There was gunfire the entire time for two days. Nobody was shot. Nobody fainted. No crimes were committed. Nobody was harmed.

This is the side of the firearm equation you don’t see. You get this distorted view that guns are only associated with crime, and that’s all guns do. I don’t blame you for being angry at it, but this side of the issue counts as well.

“Guns Save Lives”

- Alan Korwin, Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, April 9, 2008

Letter to the NB CFO

Attn: Ron Clark, NB Chief Firearms Officer

Dear sir,

I am writing to express my concern over the apparent policy of your office to refuse to issue Authorization to Carry permits to private individuals for the protection of life. Contrary to popular belief, it is legal and there is a permit for carrying a concealed firearm in Canada for the protection of life. The government has simply decided not to issue them.

Why is it that the government has seen fit to provide us with equipment to protect ourselves, our loved ones and our property against such threats as fires, vehicle crashes, sporting related injuries and many other accidents that may happen at anytime during our lives, yet withholds from us the ability to prepare ourselves from the most heinous of events – a criminal attack?

Every Canadian – strike that; every person – on this planet has the right to life. Even the UN cannot rescind this right of the people. And by-and-large, the government has seen fit to educate us and prepare us to meet the challenges of living in an imperfect world. We are offered the ability to acquire such equipment as fire extinguishers, 72-hour emergency kits, helmets, etc. Vehicles are mandatorily equipped with seat belts, airbags, and crumple zones… and while we retain the right to defend ourselves against attack by whatever means we have at our disposal, we are not allowed to prepare for such an event. Instead, we are told to rely on the police to protect us.

With that logic in mind, why are we allowed to obtain and use fire-extinguishers? We have a fire department to protect us, right? And why can a person buy kits for, and be trained in, first-aid? We have ambulances, paramedics and doctors to care for us, right?

The answer of course is because these professionals take time to respond to emergency calls. They cannot be everywhere at once and so we must rely on ourselves to protect our lives and the lives of our loved ones until the professionals arrive.

So why can’t we carry a gun to protect our lives? Is it better that my wife is raped and beaten by a man twice her size because she is not afforded the ability to carry a weapon that would take the advantage of his size and strength away from him? Is it better that my teenage nephew is beaten to death in his own home, by a gang of thugs who simply don’t like him, because his father cannot arm himself for such an event? How about a young university student walking back to her residence in a dark alley? Is it better that she dies too?

I know that these events don’t happen very often in this relatively safe country that we live in, but they do happen. Guns, in the hands of decent citizens, save innocent lives; they don’t take them. Criminals will always have guns, they will always kill, they will always rape and they will always endanger the lives of those around them, no matter what laws are passed. So why not give the opportunity to the general public to protect itself against these criminals?

I look forward to hearing what you have to say on this matter.

Gateway to Tyranny

The following ought to be required reading for every North American:

“New research into Adolf Hitler’s use of firearms registration lists to confiscate guns and the execution of their owners teaches a forceful lesson — one that reveals why the American people and Congress have rejected registering honest firearm owners.  It would be instructive at this time to recall why the American citizenry and Congress have historically opposed the registration of firearms.  The reason is plain.  Registration makes it easy for a tyrannical government to confiscate firearms and to make prey of its subjects.  Denying this historical fact is no more justified than denying that the Holocaust occurred or that the Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people.”

http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id14.html

Authorization to Transport

An ATT (Authorization to Transport) is a page printed off at a Provincial CFO (Chief Firearms Office) and mailed to any owner of a Restricted or Prohibited firearm that requests one.  Its purpose is to grant permission to the owner to transport his or her firearms to the range.  The thing is, the only place you’re allowed to shoot Restricted or Prohibited firearms is at a range.  Why do we need a piece of paper allowing us to do the only thing that we’re allowed to do with these particular firearms?

The gun control advocates would have you believe that your streets are safer because of these pieces of paper.  They claim that they (the ATTs) prevent firearm owners from taking their Restricted or Prohibited firearms anywhere else other than the range.  This is absolutely true… if you’re a law abiding citizen.

Criminals, on the other hand, generally are not considered law abiding citizens.  They do not buy their Restricted or Prohibited firearms from a licenced dealer, but rather the trunk of a car in some dark alley.  They do not register their firearms and they certainly do not apply for ATTs to transport them to and from the range.

So what exactly are these ATTs doing to help protect the public?  That’s right, you guessed it, nothing.  It is nothing more than a wasteful display of bureaucracy in an attempt to make the government appear to be serving some useful purpose in the protection of its citizens.

A Private Member’s Bill was recently introduced in Ottawa called C301.  It was a revision to the Firearms Law to repeal the wasteful Long Gun Registry and do away with the useless ATTs; as well as a few other things.  It was shot down primarily because the Government still foolishly believes that ATTs still serve some useful purpose.

I’m sorry, but issuing a piece of paper that allows a legal firearms owner to do the only thing he or she was allowed to do in the first place, is not a useful purpose.