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.

About these ads

152 Responses to Authorization To Carry

    • Joyce says:

      Pro right to protect yourself, not pro CONCEALED weapon. I am pro getting a gun licence to own a handgun and properly secure it at home, while being able to use it if there was a home invasion (as my dad did) but I think concealed guns will bring us and cause us more bad than good. I find that people get more nervous when they are carrying a concealed weapon, which may very well lead to accidentally hurt someone if they misread a situation.

      • gunningforthetruth says:

        Thanks for your comment. The stats collected over the past 20 years in the US where concealed carry is quickly approaching the norm would disagree with your fears though. Millions of US citizens (many with no training at all) carry concealed firearms on a daily basis. The cries that there would be “blood in the streets” came – and went. Even those vehemently opposed to concealed carry are now grudgingly admitting that the ability of an everyday law abiding citizen to carry a concealed weapon is not the danger to the public that was once perceived. But don’t take my word for it, look it up for yourself.

        I’d be interested to hear more about the home invasion that your dad repelled.

      • Canadian says:

        not pro ccw?

        hell I like open carry too!

      • gunningforthetruth says:

        CCW laws have swept across the US in the last few decades and I think the results speak for themselves. Overall violent crime is down in every jurisdiction that CCW is allowed and improper use of a concealed weapon is far lower than anyone might expect. (according to the FBI stats that i saw, less than 0.1% of CCW holders are convicted of such a crime)

        You say that you find people are more nervous when carrying a concealed weapon. How many people have you been around that were carrying concealed? And if their weapon was actually concealed, how did you know? I’m friends with quite a few people who regularly carry concealed weapons and they are among the least nervous people I know, probably because they know that they at least have an option if ever confronted with a life threatening situation outside of the their home.

    • Canadian says:

      a quick note

      the police groups are in with the coalition for gun control, who dictate gun policy in canada either by directly writing our gun control laws (firearms act) or lobbying the mlas/ mps for gun control laws (and by gun control i mean disarming good non violent citizens with firearms licenses).

      The united nations programme of action is a guideline for how to disarm civilians and is used to write gun control such as our firearms act or south africas firearms control act. see australia and britain for others, or europe. its all the same act! the UN wants “norms” and by the UN I mean IANSA who are litterally running the Uns POA. Most Canadian governments, maybe even all of them (gives conservatives the evil eye), are on line with this POA- and it may as well have been written by Rebecca Peters. Total incrimental civilian disarmament. At the core of this plan is teaching societal norms, aka brainwashing in the mass media and “zero tollerance” policies. gun buybacks, amnesty periods, also part of this propaganda methodology, as noted in the POA. SELF DEFENSE is the number one target of this POA thus in the US media so much hate towards sand your ground or “guns” (without mention of WHO is using them, ergo the grouping of good and bad gun owners, blaming good gun owners for Newtown- note the context that “guns” are talked about too- Obama (appeal to authority) surrounded by children (appeal to fear) and families of victims (appeal to emotion)- when he says “more guns” he is implying more guns in the hands of bad guys and will cause newtown again, ergo we need to ban legal guns from good guys. illogical but it works because of the logic falicies I mentioned.

      long story short, CFOs and police groups will never let self defense be a reason to even own a gun let alone use one, so long as they are political lobby groups, so long as anti gun groups get government funding, so long as governments and the UN keep using “women andchildren” to demonize legal gun owners and disarm us in the name of “public safety” and combating “illicit” guns (ie our guns).

      it is far more complext than you think.

      • Canadian says:

        For proof of the influence of the global disarmament inititiative note that almost no country in the world lets self defense with a firearm be a legitimate reason to own a gun. This is because of the UN /. Iansa who said that self defense is not a right, rather you have a right to life and to be denied self defense weaponry to that end. IE you cant have self defense weaponry because everyone around you has the right to life, you would be endangering them. The UN considers any country that permits self defense to be in violation of human rights, so says Amnesty Inernational and the UN Human Rights Council, again, all more or less IANSA……..

        so more or less we have a bunch of governments funding NGO (non government organizations) who in turn give governments a good PR face to disarm their civilians, to attain their “monopoloy on violence”, ie to control and enslave the world. It sure looks good having “women and children” to justify it though (their reasons and stats are lies, paid for by governments) (note the Ford Foundatoin and Rockafellar Foundation, etc, are funded by governments who in turn fund Iansa, so one way or another this gun control scheme is all government’s funding and idea… it has nothing to do with human rights at all, nor public safety.)

        “gun control = control”

        period

  1. Dustin says:

    I beleave in the right to protect your self and your family with a firearm if necassary. I come from a small town in southern Ontario were I have lived for 23 years. In those 23 years, there has bean 2 home invasions and at least 24 BNE’s. Politian’s should focus on the criminals that use the guns for harm, not the every day law abiding citezen that hunt and target shoot for fun. At the end of the day politian’s don’t care about you and I, its all about votes,$money$ and power. Its our RIGHT to protect our families and our selves. I am pro gun all the way!!!

    • bob says:

      More education is needed. I like having a gun, and yes if I could legally carry a gun ( I have firearms/ hand gun training) I might on occasion, however from some of the replies I’ve read; some of these folks require a tad more of an education, maybe some spelling lessons too; at least learn to use spell checker…long before they try to protect family members with a weapon.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Your remarks of “I’ve read; some of these folks require a tad more of an education, maybe some spelling lessons too” it comes off very condescending.

        If anyone needs lessons in grammar its you!

        I have read some of the people’s comments on here, they require more education on the subject of firearms and the authorization to carry.

        I think that’s what you meant to say, but hey what do I know you seem to be the expert.

        What gives you the right to regulate others Rights?

        What you’re proposing is regulated freedoms, aka privileges and statism.

        You’re the one that requires an education, specifically on inalienable/unalienable God given rights and autonomy. Perhaps taking some time to read the Magna Carta and The Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

        I would have NO issue with anyone conceal carrying, specifically with posters on here. The fact they take the time to comment, put in the effort to jump all the hurdles of anti-gun, anti-freedom propaganda, and the red tape of RPAL/PAL they still need to be belittled by someone who doesn’t even know them.

        I respect the individuals rights as long as the do the same in return. I have read many very positive, constructive and receptive comments on here. The commentors on this web page are the last people I’d be concerned about in regards of breaking any laws, or unsafe handling of firearms.

        Licenses of any form are privileges and can be revoked, this is what we’re trying to change. We already have enough bureaucracy, and to be further demonized from gun owning hypocrites on when or how one should protect family members is regressive on all levels.

        You want to carry your gun when you feel the need to do you?

        You want to have the ability to protect loved ones with your firearm?

        You want to have the right to exercise that freedom, but everyone else requires some form of restrictions due to not being up to par to your personal policy.

        Let me guess you want to be the one who decides who’s qualified or not.

        Let the ad hominem attacks begin.

  2. asad says:

    does it look like we as canadians will ever be able to carry concealed

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      I think so… eventually. It’s gonna take a lot of leg work but it can be done. It wasn’t until 1995 that the majority of the US states allowed concealed carry. That was only 15 years ago and now all but a handful allow it. Canada can do the same but we the people need to speak up and tell our government to give us the legal right to do this. (We already have the God given right to protect our lives, but it’d be really nice to have that backed up in the law too so we don’t go to jail when we exercise it)

      • Yeah, that whole concealed carry revolution started with Florida instituting “shall issue” permits and having a corresponding decrease in crime. Apparently, a lot of states followed.

        Perhaps one way for letting the government know the collective interest in Authorization to Carry would be a mass application for it. If a million Canadians applied for ATC, even though everyone would be denied, I’d have to think the government would at least stop and notice. That form can be found here:

      • Hard Justice says:

        There are many obstacles that are preventing us from living autonomous lives, the entire world has allowed elected officials (politicians) and civil servants (police, RCMP) unlimited power.

        We the people, the tax payers who pay their salary’s have the power, but somewhere along the ugly road of oppression their duty has turned to arrogance, violence, unlawful and unaccountability for their heinous actions. We see it all the time, there are two sets of laws in society, all for us and none for them. The “do as I say, not as I do” policy of big government and police is unconstitutional and must be stopped…how? By non-compliance.

        You sign their ATC, you take their RPAL/PAL you are essentially going by their policy, their rules, their contract…you rights are null and void.

        Canada is very anti-gun, even the gun owners themselves have been conditioned by the propaganda of media, politicians and mindless, inept, anti-gun groups. I have asked many gun owners to sign the petition (which I have posted here on this web page) to have the CFO removed, and many opted out. They don’t want freedom, they lack the critical thinking skills and courage to be independent. They want to be looked after, and that is within their rights, but how about the rest of us. I don’t recall ever signing a contract to wave my rights to “security of the person” and our instinct to protect ourselves from bodily harm. Even an animal will fight back when attacked, but we’re taught the opposite, tuck tail and run or lay down and die.

        1. When we apply for ATC what we are essentially doing is asking for permission like a child toward a parent. That needs to stop…why? because they make up the policy, they can revoke or change the contract anytime they deem necessary for whatever reason. We’re seeing that now, as it stands the ATC is may issue, NOT shall issue.

        2. Police, RCMP don’t want an armed populace…why? An armed society is an awakened society, they know how much power firearms are in the hands of the law abiding, sovereign citizen’s. This is why slaves are never allowed to own guns. Throughout history dictators disarmed the populace they wish to conquer.

        THEY (police, government, judicial system) also benefit from crime.

        High crime = jobs for police, legal aid lawyers, judges…etc. No crime = NO MONEY for them. If everyone concealed carried and we had castle doctrine laws, just the news alone reverberating in the criminal world would sent a strong message. “The people are armed and won’t be victims anymore” Crime would plummet.

        .
        3. Everyone speculates if we allow conceal carry, mass shootings will occur…how? We’re not seeing them now from legal gun owners, we DO NOT need extra laws, The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is enough.

        The media spin on gun crime is bias, they never point out that the perpetrators are using ILLEGAL firearms and many of these individuals are career criminals with many convictions.

        What we need is massive non-compliance action from all gun owners. Instead of applying for an ATC, if everyone came together in agreement that they will open or conceal carry then why do we need an ATC. We have no support here, Ian Thompson was a prime example of that. Where were all the gun owners, why didn’t they come to his aid and I will be the first to admit I’m guilty of that.

        What we need are powerful gun advocacy groups like the U.S. NRA, pro gun organizations that could provide legal council for the first wave of patriots who will be martyrs through their non-compliance.

        Unfortunately, as it stands, not many people want open or conceal carry here in Canada. If we had millions of people meeting up monthly with protests, open carrying by the millions the outcome would be obvious.

        People are gonna carry with or without anyone’s approval.

        People may not like it, but its our Rights. We cannot stand aside while criminals prevail all because some anti-freedom, criminal sympathizer suffers from stockhold syndrome and lacks the common sense to life preservation.

        This would also be an opportunity to see the real intent of these so called politicians and peace officers who work for us, would they support us or treat us like criminals? I think the latter would be their reaction, and this is why WE are not free.

  3. Ron says:

    Two thumbs up !!
    Our home is also in the country.Nearest Police detachment is 57km away is across the border in BC.They will not respond to another province.So,lets go east 85 kms to the next nearest detachment.Now should we dial 911 and urgently need the RCMP,that fast code 3 drive will be more then 30mins for them.
    Like your small town, there has been many b&e’s and not to far away from us,assaults,equipment thefts and home invasions with guns.One A**hole is from our area.

    So, living in Canada and being responsible restricted gun owners(both me and the wife)has us leaving OUR guns LOCKED UP while some piece of CR*P does things to our home ,property, or worse,to a family member.
    I stick my gun in his face, I get charged!!!
    I let my 140lb dog on him, I get sued.
    What ever happened to OUR RIGHT TO PROTECT OURSELVES AND OUR HOME???

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      We let the Liberals take those rights away from us. :-( We need to grab these rights back as fast as we can or we’ll lose what little we have left.

      • Derek Dammers says:

        Don’t use generalized terms like liberals, it is part of both liberal and “conservative” politicians to take our weapons.
        I think it is important for us who believe in freedom, to not be divided by such labels.

  4. gunner1 says:

    I wonder what would happen if every firearm owner were to apply for the ATC permit ? This would show the government/CFO (sometimes i can’t tell the difference) that we want our rights to protect ourselves. Unfortunately the downside to this would be making these bastards money.

    I’m going to apply for my ATC, weather I get it or not, I’m still applying. And when I get denied, I will send out letter after letter to my MP and to the CFO, and to the chief of police.

    By the way, doesn’t someone have to get permission from the chief of police to get an ATC?

    • morgan says:

      No you dont you can get your ATC for trapping, for work (i have mine for when i am up in the north working) and hunting for the purpose of protection against large preditors…IE grizzly bears. The only restriction i have come across is what type of hand gun you can carry… i have a S&W 44mag revolver that i use, i had to take a wildlife defence course and get sertifide from a licenced instructer. the hole ordeal took about 6 months but i have mine now… if you have any questions email me and i would be glad to anser any of them.

      my email is morgankirk13@gmail.com

      i hope this helps..

      cheers

      • Hard Justice says:

        Hello Morgan,

        That’s great that you have your ATC, this is a good thing and you’re exercising your God given inalienable rights to open carry for “Security of the person” in section 7 of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It looks like that though the process was lengthy it was straight forward I assume and little to no red tape.

        I believe the issue at hand for the the ATC in most instances for the average citizen is for a city environment. While most may not have a need for a firearm for work such as in your case, others may come across other predators in a different environment…urban areas!

        Case and point:

        About a month ago a friend of mine who’s been going through some rough financial times had to go to a homeless shelter. He’s gone to the same place before and while he had other options he mentioned he didn’t want to burden anyone with his personal problems so he decided to go to the shelter for a few nights till he gets his next paycheck. He told me that he was bored one night and decided to go for a walk around 9 p.m. when he got outside a few guys were standing around and offered my friends some drugs, he said nothing and kept walking.

        He said all of a sudden he had around 10 people crowding around him, a mix of people even including a few women were going through his pockets, he was shocked and didn’t do anything. While they were walking away he grabbed one of them and punched him in the face, the guy went down. Another man came toward my friend and he got into a fight with him also, he eventually knocked him to the ground that’s when things turned for the worse as 2 more guys approached him, but these 2 had guns and they put them towards my friends head. At that point my friend thought “fuck this” and he turned and walked away. He later went into to the police station to make a report, but what good will that do…nothing!

        Now according to some politicians who are debating Bill C-26 and the asinine elected officials FAILURE to recognize the individuals right of “security of the person”, the burden of restraint is put on the shoulders of the victim.

        As one liberal bureaucrat Joyce Murray put it and I quote:

        “I want to return to Bill C-26 with my question. The member is probably well aware that on Tuesday a 30-year-old man in a Tim Horton’s restaurant in Vancouver was shot on the spot but managed to survive. It is possible that someone might have intervened to protect the person in that situation.

        One of the controversial parts of Bill C-26 is the broadening of the allowance from just protecting one’s own life to intervening to protect another person’s life. In the situation I mentioned, we can see that it would have been a positive thing if someone had disarmed and held the shooter, but there is also a concern that it could lead to vigilantism.”

        She also mentions that “Reasonable force” should be considered when confronted by an assailant. “REASONABLE FORCE!” how about “Necessary force, by any means to deter or pacify the attacker” Why are the police and judicial system looking at he victim? Why is the responsibility being hoisted on their shoulders? They’re the innocent party, their rights violated, the mental and physical scars they must now live with, where’s the reason for their suffering!

        Her concern as I’m sure other bleeding hearts are the well being of said criminals. I suppose people should just have the money in their front shirt pockets so when the crook asks for it, its more convenient for them to access it. I suppose from their perspectives women should start carrying condoms as to prevent the possibility of any STD’s that the attacker may come across from the person they are raping.

        Now while some many not have the need for a firearm on their person, you understand that its a preventative measure on your part to secure your person if such a situation may arise where you CANNOT REASON with a wild animal and need to defend your life. Some may find it not politically correct, but some biped’s walking around our urban cities are instinctively driven to violence like a wild animal and cannot be reasoned with as in the case of my friend.

        The ATC should be available to everyone without bias, “security of the person” should not be determined, by wealth class or occupation…etc These rights belong to ALL of us and those who deny us these rights are supporting criminality and unconstitutional. The responsibility of carrying a firearm will not change and let the actions of the individual be judged on a case by case basis, and not by one individual (CFO) with a bias preemptive law.

  5. gunningforthetruth says:

    I have heard that if your application for the ATC is unsuccessful, they will refund your application fee.

    Good on you for applying despite the overwhelming odds against you. Kick up some noise like a few others have done. We need more people to take up this fight if we’re ever going to win it.

    While you don’t need permission from the Chief of Police to apply, there is a form that your local Police Station will need to complete for you documenting the reason(s) why you need the permit.

    Good Luck!

  6. rich551 says:

    This article is good but we all know that violent crimes are not as common here in Canada as in the US. But on that note, if I was caught in a situation with out my ATC I would be a little upset. And tATC’s are more common in the west in BC, Yukon, NWT and Alberta. I know of 5 alone personally, so the 13 as mentioned is a bit low. These 5 ATC permits are issued for protection in the wilderness, and not for fear of a mugging. I hope to see more changes as with the states to be able to carry from province to province under the same permit. The US is in the process of doing this now for 48 states.

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      There are three different types of ATCs in Canada; job related (ie. Brinks, Police, etc), wilderness protection, and the least commonly issued personal protection. The personal protection ATC is what this article is referring to.

      As for the overall number of violent crimes in Canada being lower, you are absolutely correct. However, this is because we have one tenth of their population. Even still, if you factor in the population difference and look at our overall crime rate, Canada’s is still lower per capita then the US’s. But, if you look at the violent crimes per capita, Canada’s is much higher. If you look at rapes for example, a woman is four times more likely to be raped in Canada then they are in the US. Just something to think about.

  7. Hard Justice says:

    What makes me think is how the government has given themselves the right to decided how we use our inalienable rights to self defense. Police and politicians (which I’m sure a politician or some rich corporate shill were given the ATC) are civil servants of “The People”. Allowing them to open carry and use of restricted weapons puts them Above the common law. I live in a very violent neighborhood & have seen many assaults, some crimes were even deadly!

    We’ve had more that 3 attempted break and enters, I personally have been robbed twice and had on 2 different occasions been threatened with knives, once even on public transportation.

    As Canadians protected under the Charter of Rights & Bill of Rights which extend from the Magna Carta 1689, our rights and freedoms are inalienable so why would I even need a license for a firearm which I’m entitled to under the common law.

    In fact we don’t need licenses to “Travel” in a car under the common law. We need licenses to “Drive” (yes there is a difference)

    Looks to me all this is to keep the Grade A sheep working, paying taxes, not questioning authority, keeping criminals out on the street, thus needing cops & giving them jobs and the courts filled with more revenue.

    What needs to be done is the power put back in the the power of the tax paying, sovereign individual, remove the monarchy and have a Canadian republic.

    An online petition for sensible gun rights can and should be done. Petitions are effective and gives everyone the right to voice their displeasure on current gun statues (not laws).

    “This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future.” -Adolf Hitler, 1935

    • John says:

      Well, I have never seen this issue put in such simple, understandable language and with a great degree of thought and sense. It’s people like you that we need in our Government, rather than those who will just agree with what is current and let it go. We need change for us the people and not let those civil servants, as you so correctly stated, run our lives or should I say, ruin our lives. Go get them tiger.

  8. Terrance says:

    I absolutely believe in the inherent and inalienable right as a Canadian to bear an arm for the soul reason to protect my life and the lives of my family and all those that would warrant such protection as outlined in the definition of self defence; that would include my life being put under the threat of death or grievous harm this would also include anyone in my sphere of ability to protect, that being family, friends, and neighbours.

    When the police are not available to protect you, which they are not most of the time. You and You alone are the first line of defence; in fact you have a responsibility to protect those around you especially if you are the only one that possess the ability to stop a potential unnecessary death or grievous assault to your family or neighbours.

    It is totally ridiculous to expect Canadians any longer to continue being potential victims of criminals bent on killing, robbing and assaulting us. I say this; we are not victims anymore but rather citizens with the inalienable right to live unencumbered free from the fear of being molested by a criminal element that knows that we have no ability to protect ourselves.

    Why do the authorities Police. Brinks Guards, Forest Wardens, Fisheries Officers, Customs Agents, have the right to protect themselves, leaving us, the people helpless victims, free pickings for criminals. I write this today not for myself but rather for all those that have died at the hands of violent criminals in Canadian and there has been many over the years.

    I remember a old man in 2006, Edmonton Alberta beaten to death on a city bus by two teenagers while everyone just looked on, there hearts filled with fear and absolutely no one came to his aid.This is a crime not only commented by those two teens but also bearing equal responsibility for this is the Canadian Government withholding our inalienable right to protect ourselves from immanent death. I ask you a question, had a police officer been present at this time do you think he or she would have hesitated to use whatever force necessary to prevent this death; the answer is a resounding “yes”, because the officer would have the ability to do so. I would ask you all that read this message, stand with me and all those that have died from violent crimes in Canada with one resounding voice. No MORE No More! we are not going to let the government dictate to us our Inalienable rights that belong to us.
    We are a people with a passion that to forge our own future with the right to live unencumbered free from the constant threat of the criminal element which stalks us like a wolf stalks a sheep.

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      Heck yes! What else can I say? You nailed it!

    • Hard Justice says:

      Well said!

      Now what can be done to exercise our rights! I have suggested to others before that all gun owners we know, should be shown all the common law rights of Canada. Unfortunately even in the gun community & with most gun owners I know, there are many who are willfully ignorant & afraid of a physical confrontation with police or judicial consequence. A very bold statement would be an “open carry” day of all voluntary legal gun owners. All firearms would be carried UNLOADED to work, on public transit, while dining out, going to the movies…etc

      Of course this would send a ripple of shock throughout the country & in the process may lead to multiple arrests & possible violent confrontations from uneducated police.

      Perhaps a protest of all gun owners with their guns marching in the streets with civil rights lawyers, lawyers knowledgeable on the common law…etc could also be done. This would be most effective if the main stream media & police was alerted before hand and the common law stated to them from civil rights attorneys.

      It would definitely be an unprecedented event, but changes in history sometimes involve non-violent, extreme acts for change to come about.

      The strange part of it all is I’m not even a gun owner, I’m simply standing up for the rights of others so that they may exercise their constitutional rights for preservation of life under the Canadian Charter of Rights & Bill of Rights. Truthfully I’m too afraid of my government & all the red tape to get my gun license. I feel we are all treated worse than criminals once we become gun owners. First from out elected officials & police with their asinine unconstitutional registry’s…heck! Hitler believed in gun control & that says alot about our government. Secondly, our own friends & family’s look at us differently due to their ignorance of the common law & the brainwashing due to government & main stream media propaganda that “Guns are BAD!”

      As the quote goes:

      “The only way for evil to thrive in this world is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke

      The common laws are their to protect us. All Canadians please read parts 14 &15 of the link below.

      http://www.canfirearms.ca/Skeeter/Faq/ctg.html#RIGHTS

      • gunningforthetruth says:

        As much as I’d like to see an “open carry” day, the fact remains that it would probably do more harm than good. Good people would be arrested, injured or even killed. No sense in “jumping the gun” so to speak. I think the best way to deal with this issue is a strong grassroots movement that educates.

        Most of the issues stem from the fear of the unknown. It used to be that almost every house had a gun in it of some kind. Today, that is no longer the case and so people are no longer used to having them around. Since they are unfamiliar with them, they naturally fear them as this is what they’re told to do by the main stream media. The more people we can teach that guns are not evil, the better off we’ll be.

        I’d highly recommend that you (and everyone else) obtain your firearms licence and then use it to introduce and educate people to the truth about guns. Yes, there are a lot of hoops to jump through, but it is far from hard to do. The only way we’ll see a better attitude toward guns from the general public is if the general public is familiar with them. And the only way to do that, is one person at a time.

  9. CR says:

    very nice site here

  10. Hard Justice says:

    Are there any action taking place, petitions, civil rights attorneys involved, shooting club organizers, any rally’s?

    The topic seems to be a concern for many Canadian’s, but its mute amongst the populace. To be honest I don’t even have my PAL, there’s so much red tape and subjugation to apply for a firearm we are entitled to have under the common law & Charter of Rights & Freedoms. I feel like i’m doing something wrong, they make you feel guilty for exercising an instinctive need to preserve one’s life. Who is anyone to make that decision for anyone on whether you live or die at the hands of an assailant. Who gave anyone that RIGHT!

    The PAL for the Restricted & Non-Restricted is an invasive background check about where I work, where I used to live, who am I dating, multiple phone numbers…etc completely asinine! How will this prevent crime & what fool believes that someone who knows the common law, The Charter of Rights & Freedoms, provides his picture, address, phone number…etc will use said firearm to commit a crime, as if one can’t get an illegal firearm just as easy…if not easier. I’m sure the local drug dealer or gang member won’t ask you about your personal history to purchase a gun. The application feels more like an interrogation…an inquisition of one’s freedoms that we all have, an inalienable RIGHT granted to us under The Charter of Rights & Freedoms.

    What’s the need to ask for permission from the politicians & police. If you pass the firearms test you’ve proven responsible to own the firearm. It looks like to me they are trying to legislate morality at the cost of liberty. NOT gonna happen, especially with criminals.

    The government is us, the tax payers. We hired police & politicians through our tax dollars to uphold the common law and what do we get in return they create statues & bylaws (which is NOT the common law) to tax us & mismanage the country’s money. It is we who must petition and tell them what to do NOT the other way around.

    Are we children to ask permission from our social nanny’s on how we wish to live our lives? We don’t need anymore legislation, The Charter of Rights & Freedoms provides the fundamentals of freedoms necessary to uphold the common law. That is what we should be judged on, not through preemptive, despotic legislative measures. Guilty until proven innocent, or in the case of an ATC dead until proven the RIGHT to open carry.

    Its ridiculous, in order to qualify you must have 3 attempts of death to be certified. Something is very wrong & the FACT that 2 billion dollars was most stupidly spent should send a ripple across this sovereign nation that those statues & bylaws need to be removed, & the Charter of Rights & Freedoms & the common law should be the only law.

    I’m wondering since there’s talk of removing the registry, will all gun owners be getting a government check to reimburse them for a failed project.

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      As far as I know, not much is going on in the fight toward ATCs and you can be certain that there will be no reimbursement for any costs to gun owners resulting from the registry.

      The only way that I see ATCs becoming a reality is to keep this grassroots movement going and educate as many people as you can. Hopefully, they see the light and then start educating people themselves. We need the general public on board before the government will even consider it.

      The PAL application certainly is invasive. I highly recommend that you go through with it though as we need as many gun owners as we can get.

  11. Hard Justice says:

    I’m not an attorney, but as of yet I haven’t found any laws in The Charter of Rights & Freedoms or the Bill of Rights where it states that anyone needs a license to own or carry a firearm. When applying for a license you are giving consent to be taxed and incriminate yourself to their statues & bylaws much like owning a drivers license. In Canada you do not require a license to “travel”, you need a license to “drive” under the common law. With tricky wordplay of the laws (legalese) you can convict yourself through morality and consent.

    If anyone knows of any common laws which show any need for licensing of firearms please post them. The only illegality of using a firearm would be in a criminal manner where grievances are done to another sovereign, but if you are acting within the laws of fundamental justice in The Charter of Rights & Freedoms where is the crime if you own or carry a gun? No offense has been committed under The Charter or Bill of Rights.

    If people read parts 14 & 15 of the link provide below it states:

    “The 1689 English Bill of Rights specifically states that subjects of
    the Crown (citizens), in their capacity as individuals, as a RIGHT may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions”. The
    Bill also states that disarming citizens is contrary to the law.
    This law still applies and re-inforces the common-law right.”

    http://www.canfirearms.ca/Skeeter/Faq/ctg.html#RIGHTS

  12. Chris Charette says:

    ” If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns”. Remember that one? It’s so true. I can tell you for a fact, that I can obtain an illegal or stolen gun, far easier than a legal one. Gun laws are as effective as the ” war on drugs”. They just don’t work.
    These ridiculous laws are put in place for one reason, to ensure that the tyrants in government, as well as police, can do what they want, when they want, without a fight. Of course the police will say that the laws work, BECAUSE THEY GET TO KEEP THEIR GUNS!
    My wife, myself and my sister in law, were recently confronted, in our living room, by five cops, waiving guns in our faces and screaming to the point of terrorizing us. Why? Because some one had seen three, eight inch, pot plants on my window sill! Now, I’m forced to provide a DNA sample and banned from owning or posessing a firearm, for ten years! If anyone can explain the conection between these stipulations, and the growing of three plants, by all means, feel free to explain it to me!!!
    Since this incident, two of these, so called peace officers, have been caught breaking the law themselves, one for shooting a suspect, and the other for obstruction of justice! Of course, they received the same weapons ban as me, right? HA, HA, HA! Not even close! Neither, was even suspended!
    These are the people that are given, or actually, paid, by us, for the resposibility of upholding the law and protecting us? These are the people who have the power to take away my right to own a gun? Wow, I feel so much safer now. I’m not saying that there aren’t people out there who should not be allowed to have guns, obviously, I’ve just described two of them.
    People in this country need to get their heads out of their asses! How many rights do you have to lose, before you say, enough? Once they’ve taken away all of the guns, they have free reign to take away anything else that they choose. What do you think gun control is all about, anyway? It has nothing to do with guns, it’s about controlling YOU!
    Open your eyes, people! The hobbie or thing that you enjoy most, is quite possibly the next thing on the outlaw list.
    New police motto, To Punish and Enslave…

  13. Josh says:

    All I can say is “Wow”. I had no idea such a license existed in Canada, Or rather I never really though about it. I am a legitimate law abiding gun owner and I am happy to see that there are people bringing great information the the public like this.
    Thank you!
    I will definitely link back to this page.

    Cheers,
    Josh

    • Bill Gibbons says:

      I recently met and chatted with Danielle Smith and one of her senior officials regarding the ATC question. They were very receptive to my idea of changing the carry laws in Alberta, by a phasing in period starting with licenced investigators like myself. After a period of time. the ATCs can then be conferred to others in high risk professions, including clear guidelines on home & property defence.

      Although the Wild Rose are open to this idea, the RCMP will, of course, fight any such legislation all the way. However, most cops I have spoken to are happy to see citizens have better self-defence rights, the brass are the ones who will fight this.

      On another note, i am meeting with former Tory minister and retired homicide detective, Art Hanger, this week as we intend to work together on this.

      • gunningforthetruth says:

        That’s awesome! We gotta start somewhere and this looks like a great spot!

  14. Hard Justice says:

    So what you’re proposing is a bias ATC, so limited authorization to carry for a priveleged few. You mention better self defense rights, for whom? Why would it mainly be geared toward “licensed investigators”, and then high risk professions? geared toward “licensed investigators”, and then high risk professions?

    So in other words self defense is defined not to the general population, but to a selected few decided by few. How about the rest of the populace, how about the recognition of Sec 7 of the Charter of Rights & Freedoms where it states “Everyone has the Right to life, liberty & security of the person” no where in the charter does it mention to any restrictions by profession, race, religion, in fact there is no mention to limitation of what type of tool for defense, which could include fully automatic weapons.

    So in other words self defense is defined not to the general population, but to a selected few decided by few. How about the rest of the populace, how about the recognition of Sec 7 of the Charter of Rights & Freedoms where it states “Everyone has the Right to life, liberty & security of the person” no where in the charter does it mention to any restrictions by profession, race, religion, in fact there is no mention to limitation of what type of tool for defense, which could include fully automatic weapons.

    You mention:

    “After a period of time. the ATCs can then be conferred to others in high risk professions, including clear guidelines on home & property defence.”

    So they define the guidelines, guess what happens when you give people power over you, they abuse it! That defeats the whole pupose of ATC, they define restriction which they can eventually penalize you with fines or confiscations if those restrictions are met up to their standard. Gun registry ring a bell!

    Why should anyone need authorization to carry, we need permission first before one can defend their person or those who you are responsible for. When I was robbed at knife point before should I have told the perp “oh hold on just let me make a quick call to 9/11 to see if I have permission to defend myself from you” Thats complete non-sense seriously! You want freedom to ATC, but want to ask for permission on when and where to use it.

    I recall I spoke to someone before and they said they’d like to see more flexible open or conceal carry rights for people who are out in the woods in case a wild animal attacks them. Are they more in danger than a man or a woman in a unsafe urban area? The threat exists regardless of the attacker it still doesn’t justify ATC limitations and priveleges for some and not for everyone.

    Wouldn’t it make more sense to have one gun license for handguns and long guns and allow the owner to decide if they wish to carry or not. The only need to be convicted of a crime if a crime is ever committed, how often is that with legal gun owners? That’s why the gun registry was scrapped, it stupid, its useless. If there is an injured party or an offence, then that’s what the cops are paid for and quit well I must add. Then you must be found guilt in a court of law…due process.

    Looks to be guilty into proven innocent because even using a knife in self defense you’re convicted a criminal even if you are the victim in the eyes of the justice system.

    Preemptive crime legislation is what exists right now.

    Equal rights should be for all Canadian’s not just a selected few.

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      In a perfect world, we wouldn’t need permission to carry the tools we need to protect ourselves. Sadly, we are not in a perfect world.

      Our country does not recognize our right to prepare ourselves to repel force. This needs to change. But we can’t expect that change to happen overnight. Start off with baby steps like allowing police officers to carry while off duty. We need to continue to educate the public.

      Once the general population understands that guns in the hands of the good guys helps to keep them safe, the government will no longer be able to deny us our rights.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Our country has nothing to do with the right (choice), responsibility and interest of each individual on a case by case basis. Some will not see a need for an ATC ever so they will not see it as a an issue or a concern for themselves personally to carry a firearm, while the choice of another individual will differ.

        We need to stop looking at things nationally as an excuse to waive the right of each individual…I cannot express this strongly enough. No matter how much you or anyone tries they will never be able to experience and comprehend a woman who’s been a victim of a rape attack, or someone who’s been robbed at gun point. Every situation is a unique event so who has the jurisdiction to decide what level of degree that individual must choose to protect the security of their person.

        Look at the laws right now as they stand, in order for you or I to attain an ATC we need to have an attempt on our lives at least 3 times to qualify, what does that tell you about their ATC policy…I’ll tell you they don’t care. How do they know if I haven’t had 10 attempts at my life. Do I need to be shot or stabbed 3 times? What is considered an attempt at my life? I had people threaten me with knives in public, does this apply as an attempt at my life? They could just deny me the ATC…who’s to say they won’t.

        They don’t care, it doesn’t concern them on a personal level. Now I’d like to know what if the CFO’s wife or daughter was brutally raped, how about any of the judges in Canada or some high profile politician son was beaten and robbed, I wonder if the same rules apply to them. Most definately NOT because they all belong to the same little club and can make acceptions for their cohorts, or even simpler they can afford for the tax payers to pay for a body guard to escort them if need be, no tax payer expense is too good for them.

        The general public doesn’t need to understand my or anyone’s rights to ATC that’s my personal choice to do so.

        You mention:

        “Once the general population understands that guns in the hands of the good guys helps to keep them safe, the government will no longer be able to deny us our rights.”

        The general population will never understand your reason to open or conceal carry a firearm, some people are so perpetually ignorant they think they can reason with a rapist or a psychopathic serial killer…impossible and willfully stupid. Good guys? People are so delusional they think police will be around to save them when they are in a situation of great peril.

        I am a good guy I’m sure you’d say the same for yourself, I don’t have a problem if you open carry as long as you have a respect for the rule of law and The Charter of Rights and Freedoms & Bill of Rights and don’t tresspass on anyone elses rights.

        Governments are denying us our rights, try and apply for an ATC and then get back to us and let us know how that goes. Remember 3 attempts at your life before you qualify. They decide who lives or dies not you!

  15. gunningforthetruth says:

    Clearly we both support the idea of ATC permits. The question is, how do we best go about making it a reality. The cold hard truth is, it will be a very hard uphill battle. We need the general public on our side and more than ever, I am seeing people agreeable to the idea. Many people are looking to the USA and seeing that CCW is a good thing.

    I agree with you on everything that you’ve said and the bottom line is, we need to continue this fight on all fronts. You fight the best way you know how and I’ll fight the best way that I can.

    • Hard Justice says:

      LOL Yes we do.

      Well looks like the person to look at is Bill Gibson who commented 6 posts back. He seems to be in the best position to forward all the comments and ideas everyone has posted here on this page to Danielle Smith . I agree with you that it may be a challenging issue, but anything worth fighting for usually never comes easy. I believe that logic and the will of the people will prevail. We must be determined.

      I was thinking about that same thing about the USA and their CCW. I have alot of family in the U.S., even a cousin who’s a retired N.Y.C. police officer whom I correspond with on a daily basis. He’s puzzled as to why our elected officials and RCMP would be so adamant about keeping the public disarmed. One may look at an agenda…not to get into any conspiracy’s but one must ask why? This is merely my perspective.

      Less crime = Less need for police. Police are out of a job.

      Less crime = Less need for Judges or Lawyer they’re out of a job.

      Less Crime = No jails, prison staff are out of a job.

      Statistically the states that support open or conceal carry have shown a drop in overall crime. It makes perfect sense and I know I’m preaching to the choir, but if the majority of the public is armed a criminal will have a tough time trying to figure out who’s conceal carrying.

      I say we fight the fight together all Canadians who want to exercise their rights should have the option to carry, there’s power in numbers.

      My other question is where are the 7+ million gun owners in Canada and why aren’t they voicing their interest in this matter. Perhaps its not a issue that affects them directly.

  16. andre a.k.a progun says:

    believe me i am all for open carry in Canada, i write my mp’s also vic toews and harper. i know its an old saying but stands true today, i would rather be judged by 12 then carried by six. i am a member of several progun clubs such as the nfa the nra and others. please anyone tell me of a protest happening i will be there thanks.

    • Hard Justice says:

      We could all start an online petition, those are very effective. If we could get 10,000 signers it would definitely get the foot in the door for some change. It would be easy to get the 10,000 signatures with the millions of gun owners across Canada. I’m surprised with so many supposed pro gunners in our country people aren’t speaking up publicly. Where are all the civil rights attorneys…geez, no one gives a hoot!

      Heck! I’m not even all that knowledgeable about guns, but I believe in our rights that’s why I’m stepping up for all gun owners yet no one stands together on this topic.

      Anyone want to get this petition started with me? Let’s get some dialogue going. If we want change we need to be the one’s to make that change possible. It would be good to have someone knowledgeable about the laws or some gun advocates who know what they’re doing in on this petition.

      • andre a.k.a progun says:

        i have a petition started, but not much of a response yet so i hope this improves after this post . please get as many people you can, gun owners or not to sign. go to ( gopetition ) then in the search box type open carry Canada. my petition should be there explaining my reasoning behind it please sign it and have as many people sign it thanks and good luck to all of us.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Very good!

        Is it the petition Open Carry Canada by Andre?

        No matter, I see a few petitions and will sign them and pass it on to my other pro-gun buddies, family and friends to sign it. I’m also going send the petiton to my friends on youtube. You should make a youtube vid for your petition to get more attention. This is a step in the right direction, you’re a true patriot for doing this I salute you!

      • andre a.k.a progun says:

        yes that’s the one by andre. and thanks for passing along.i also just called the rcmp yesterday and requested an atc application form, they asked me what is was for and i told them self defense. i am pretty sure it wont be approved but i will fill one out every time the old was is rejected. if we all do this maybe they get the point maybe they don’t, but it wont be from lack of trying. most gun owners don’t get it, they figure it wont be approved so why bother. hopefully this and other peoples persistence will help others join in.
        well gotta go talk to you all later, and thanks again

      • Hard Justice says:

        O.k. brother I’ve been sending off your petition all over youtube, lets see how many sigs we can get. I’m going to get about 3 signatures today and work on another 4 from other friends.

        Good on you for requesting the ATC, strange part is I don’t even own a handgun, but I’m the unsilent minority that stand for others rights. I’ve been a victim of crime against me, my family and my home and feel the need for laws to change to benefit the law abiding citizens of Canada and make it reasonable for attaining an ATC or the right of use of handguns for defense of property or self in your own home if need be without being unlawfully prosecuted.

        I think there should be an ATC course available for the average citizens, it would teach how to safely handle a gun, on the rights or the citizens on defense of person and property, restraint training to teach the gun owner once the subject is subdued to not need to fire the weapon…etc.

        In the end the main objective may be a psychological edge for the citizen’s of Canada. If the main stream media, the police, the politicians came public with the news that there’s been a increase in ATC licenses permitted across Canada crime would go down as many criminals wouldn’t know who would be carrying or not, even if you didn’t carry, just the though of an armed populace would make the criminals think twice.

        Be well, thanks for taking the actions for a better tomorrow for all Canadians.

      • andre a.k.a progun says:

        i own sever handguns i have a restricted permit. believe me the only hard part is the red tape the actual course and test are easy, all common sense. but well worth it just having more restricted gun owners helps us fight the fight take the course grow our numbers thanks again

      • Hard Justice says:

        Very true, I’ve been wanting to get my license for sometime now. I know the fundamentals for safe firearms handling, own a few air rifles but been put off getting my license due that despotic, unconstitutional long gun registry (which is finally gone). I don’t like the idea of our elected officials treating Canadian citizen’s like criminals, its disrespectful to everyone especially those who fought in WWll to bring us our freedoms. Canada is a sovereign country with free human beings, there’s no need to enact preemptive legislation’s, but I digress.

        Anywhere I can get my PAL & RPAL for a good price in southern Ontario? Thanks

  17. andre a.k.a progun says:

    this is a message i sent to the chiefs fire arms office, also mr toews and mr harper

    who in their right mind in your office is trying to make sense of the application for an atc. how often are the police called to protect someone before a crime is committed, the answer is none. Why is that i’ll tell you because criminals do not post potential crimes on a web site or in the newspaper they commit crimes when police are not around. why are the police and government so afraid of people defending themselves. since police are called to a crime 9 times out of ten after the crime is committed then why do they carry guns, and the people being attacked before the police get there are not allowed. please try to make sense of this because i can not. no body in the government gave me a right to life therefor no one in the government can take it away. how can i prove my life to be in danger when no one is certain when a criminal will attack. if the police issue was so effective why do so many people still get mugged , raped and murdered.law abiding citizens do not become criminals just because they have fire arms. the law states that a person can defend themselves with the same force as their attacker, really, so my question is this how can i defend myself from someone with a gun when my guns are required to be locked up at home, is this deliberate. i would really love a response back with a realistic explanation.

    thank you

    • Hard Justice says:

      That’s what people don’t understand, I’m not speaking in hypothetical situations here, this is real life and happened to me personally or people I’ve known. The story’s I could tell, I’ve seen enough to know with certain people you can reason with, with others peace is attained once the subject is silenced by necessary force.

      I’ve seen the aftermath’s of stabbings, slashing’s, shootings Yes! shootings. Police want people to come forward, but what they don’t understand is one has to continue living in that neighborhood and put our selves at risk, while they do their shift and go home away from the crime scene. What would they want people to say “I saw two guys shooting guns” what help is that. The whole damn neighborhood saw the same thing. Years ago during the summer, gunfire would be heard almost every other day. Last year its was surprisingly quiet. I’ve had friends who were attacked and multiply stabbed and nearly died, he spend 1 month in the ICU, I saw the knife wounds to his neck arm and huge scar on his stomach from the surgery they did on him to stop the internal bleeding. I saw the 9 slash marks on my friends head who was my neighbor many years ago… still remember it, I was feeling the scars with my fingers. As a young teen that’s one hell of thing to see. Seen the aftermath of gang fights…I won’t even go into detail. I could go on an on.

      I’ve seen cops roll up in front of my house get out and start loading up shotguns and running to the scene of a shooting. I spoke with him briefly, one of the cops was surprised I was going over the scene to take pictures, but to me I’ve grown desensitized in regards of violence and curiosity got the best of me.

      My girlfriend told me about a time where she was being dropped off by her father many years ago, as they turned the corner she said there was a cop going into the trunk of his police cruiser loading up a shotgun, the cop was so nervous he dropped a few of the shells on the ground. My girlfriends dad turned to her and said “Do you want me to drop you off, or should we leave” My girlfriends reply was “Don’t worry this is normal around here” I was so embarrassed when she told me this.

      I’ve seen police with their lights on all night going over a crime scene in the back of my home….have pics of that also. Seen them put up yellow tape around a tree in front of my house after a knife attack. Every time I would walk by the piece of yellow tape was still on the tree months after the incident, I would look at it and it was a somber reminder of how some people could resort to such violent actions. I’ve seen cops go scanning through the grass after a shooting with their flashlights about 200 feet from my doorstep at night.

      I’ve had my friends mother told me about the story of the apartment they lived in back in the early 80’s in the neighboring building close to my house. They told me the past tenants, the father took a fireman’s axe from the hallway where the fire hoses are and hack the mother to death and the kids jumped off the 15th floor balcony and then he jumping after. Some friends who I grew up with were murdered also, but I won’t go into detail it saddens me when I think about them.

      We’ve had more that 3 attempted break and enters to our home, we’ve had in the past people steal our BBQ propane tank, vandalize our gardens, urinate on our front doors, having sex in the back alley I’ve seen the condoms on the ground, syringes on the ground also. Seen many bloody fist fights…etc. I personally have been robbed and had on 2 different occasions been threatened with knives, once even on a TTC bus. People think that camera’s are a deterrent I disagree, the only thing cameras offer is the opportunity for others to watch someone else being victimized.

      While I do agree that certain parts of the city are relatively safe, but there are elements in our society that are career criminals due to economic, psychological or substance abuse problems and in some cases its a mix of all three. These individuals DO NOT respect the rule of law, human life and the property of others. The right of the ATC should be looked at in an individual basis, not in a generalized manner for all the populace. There are some people and some neighborhoods that will NEVER experience any form of crime what so ever, and the only understanding of crime will be experienced and end with some random story published in local newspapers. Only the police knows for certain how many victims of crime there are on a daily, weekly, monthly basis and how many of those incidents result in the apprehension of the perpetrator, my guess would be zero or a number close to it.

      I have a few more stories, but one in particular is so personal I cannot mention it for respect of the family, this incident even made it on the news…that’s all I’ll say about that.

      Recently my good friend was robbed a few months back.

      I posted his story below to how he explained it to me. Its now been about 2 and half months since the incident.

      I’d like to know what the politicians and CFO thinks about this situation and how they would have personally handled it.

      “About a month ago a friend of mine who’s been going through some rough financial times had to go to a homeless shelter. He’s gone to the same place before and while he had other options he mentioned he didn’t want to burden anyone with his personal problems so he decided to go to the shelter for a few nights till he gets his next paycheck. He told me that he was bored one night and decided to go for a walk around 9 p.m. when he got outside a few guys were standing around and offered my friends some drugs, he said nothing and kept walking.

      He said all of a sudden he had around 10 people crowding around him, a mix of people even including a few women were going through his pockets, he was shocked and didn’t do anything. While they were walking away he grabbed one of them and punched him in the face, the guy went down. Another man came toward my friend and he got into a fight with him also, he eventually knocked him to the ground that’s when things turned for the worse as 2 more guys approached him, but these 2 each had guns and they pointed them towards my friends head. At that point my friend thought “fuck this” and he turned and walked away. They stole his rent money he had on him. He later went into to the police station to make a report, but what good will that do…nothing!”

      To this day nothing has been done and his money was never recovered, another victim of a failed system!

      If you want feel free to send the politicians or CFO any of my postings, I also would love to hear their response to these situations.

      LOL just as I’m typing this I’m watching the news and there was a BREAKING NEWS story of a shooting.

      Thanks for posting your letter for us to read.

      Be well

      • andre a.k.a progun says:

        this is an email i sent to harper and toews

        Comments/Commentaires : As sad as this shooting is, it only strengthens the plea for law abiding citizens to be able to carry fire arms for self defense in Canada. This was a gang related shooting once again involving innocent people. The family`s involved and other patrons must have felt extremely helpless as this was taking place. For what reason their own government does not trust them with the ability to defend them selves from criminals. This is getting old quick its time our government took action and passed a self defense law allowing individuals the right to carry a fire arm for self defense before their life is put in danger, not after the required three attempts on ones l ife before a permit to carry is even considered. Please have faith in your fellow Canadians and over ride the chiefs fire arms office poor excuse for a law. thank you Andre Desbien

        this was the poor excuse for an email i got back

        Dear Andre:

        Thank you for writing to the Prime Minister. In your e-mail, you raised an
        issue that falls within the portfolio of the Honourable Vic Toews, Minister
        of Public Safety.

        Please be assured that your comments have been carefully noted. I have taken
        the liberty of forwarding your e-mail to Minister Toews. I am certain that
        the Minister will wish to give your views every consideration.

        For more information on the Government’s initiatives, you may wish to visit
        the Prime Minister’s Web site, at http://www.pm.gc.ca.

        Once again, thank you for taking the time to write.

        M.F. Bustos
        Manager/Gestionnaire
        Executive Correspondence Services
        for the Prime Minister’s Office
        Services de la correspondance
        de la haute direction
        pour le Cabinet du Premier ministre

        this was my response to their response

        I have sent this to both Mr. Toews and Mr. Harper, that being said i am not
        looking for a general response. I am looking to from them and their words
        not someone sending generalized responses back. I want to know if they are
        going to step up to the plate like their voters have done to get them a
        majority government, and make real self defence laws like open carry in
        Canada. There are a lot of gun owners/ voters who are looking for a bit of
        respect. the chiefs fire arms office does not think much of Canadian
        citizens if they will give atc’s to protect money but not to protect
        ourselves, or our families. Mr. Harper and Mr. Toews need to take that
        responsibility out of the hands of the cfo’s and start issuing atc’s to
        anyone with a restricted permit themselves. I hope to get a real response
        back on this issue not a general one thanks for your time.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Excellent e-mails, very well worded. As more time goes by and we’re seeing all these social unrests everywhere, the Euro zone on the verge of collapse, people losing their jobs…etc we’re going to see more stories of crime happening as people get more desperate. Its no help that we’ve become a safe haven for criminals from every part of the world.

        Its evident that our elected officials have led us astray and they’re looking at cashing in our tax dollars before the socialist game of musical chairs is over before they bow out and throw us to the wolves.

        All over the world we’re seeing social cutbacks in civil workers, the “What if” scenario pops into play. When the city downsizes police what then? To think it can never happen here is asinine.

        This is a tell tale sign of sociopath behavior on the parts or politicians, how they manipulate, lie, distort the truths and try to sell us on how our city’s are safe and wanting to have more police on our streets is the answer. They fail to realize that unless we all have personal armed body guards 24/hrs day, there will be victims of crime and how economically viable or logical is that option.

        We’re all seeing what’s going on and the police & politicians don’t have the ability to prevent crime and anyone thinking that is delusional. Since it doesn’t affect them directly they don’t care, especially police since most of their waking day they have a firearm at their disposal, and might I add as we’ve seen in past they’re not liable for their irresponsible behavior & unjustified shooting of civilians.

        Yet another gang criminal was apprehended today in Toronto. The perpetrator is a career criminals with over 15 previous offenses, from illegal firearms, assault, sexual assault…etc What is wrong with our justice system? Why was this piece of trash on the streets? Is he a legal citizen? If not time to deport these pariah’s back to their native lands.

        The big puppet show the police puts on with their tactical team is good for the newpapers and to quell all the voters with deep pockets, but the fact remains that crimes do happen and will continue to happen and that denying law abiding citizens their constitutional rights of “Security of person” is not only negligent, but ignorant.

        Denying someone an ATC unitl after the fact is pointless, more like after the fact 3 times according to the current legislation. It makes about as much sense as to deny someone car insurance because they’ve never been in an accident, or not allowing citizens the right to own a fire extinguisher because they’ve never had a fire in their home.

        They just don’t get it, and until they themselves or someone they love is a victim of crime they won’t bat an eye. It won’t matter anyway they have the clout to get an ATC right away I can assure you. The tax paying slaves need to get text book 3 attempts at their lives before you’re considered.

        Strange how a criminal can carry illegal firearms and get a slap on the wrist, but if any law abiding gun owner did it they’d make a public example out of him as in the case with Mr. Ian Thompson.

        Canada a sovereign country…I THINK NOT!

  18. Hard Justice says:

    I just e-mailed Stephen Harper:

    Greetings Mr. Stephen Harper

    I first would like to thank you in advance for taking the time to read my comments and I appreciate that you’re busy and will try to make this brief.

    The reason for my e-mail is in regards of the recent surge of gang violence in the city of Toronto such as in the case of Eaton Centre shooter Christopher Husbands and most recent perpetrator involved in the Kensington Market stabby by Nicholas Dillion-Jack. Another case is with a Mr. Ian Thompson who defended his home from a fire bombing and was arrested for using his firearm to defend his person and his property. There is video evidence of this attack and still Mr. Ian Thompson who’s a licensed gun owner was arrested.

    http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/20/man-faces-jail-after-protecting-home-from-masked-attackers/#ixzz1BjAV6ZeV

    As a Canadian citizen I’m deeply concerned with what has happened to our fine city over the past 20 yrs. From my perspective I don’t know the level of awareness you have with what’s going on outside of what the media’s portrayal of urban life is, but I can assure you alot of crime goes unreported as I am one of those cases and I have a friend who is a recent victim of robbery which has been reported, but as of today no one has been apprehended.

    My concern is from a Sovereign, law abiding, citizen’s standpoint. Over the past few years I’ve had the pleasure of speaking with other very intelligent and informed like minded individuals who’s concern has brought up citizens constitutional rights and even legal debates on current legislation’s on firearms.

    One being of hot topic is one that is currently available, 100% legal and was unknown to many including myself until about 1 1/2 years ago…the ATC (Authorization to carry)

    I was elated that such a viable option was available to responsible, law abiding, reasonable Canadians abroad. That in a sovereign country the citizen still had the final say on exercising their constitutional unalienable, God given rights as in section 7 of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms states without pre-emptive legal action against them.

    Sec 7: “Everyone has the Right to life, liberty and the security of the person”

    I believe this is a wonderful set of rights for all Canadians and I would think you also agree with that?

    To allow sovereign citizen to use their discretion without pre-emptive prejudices, harassment, denial of their rights to the ATC permit…

    However this unfortunately was not the case as I investigate further. As you might not be aware this permit, although 100% legal and available for anyone to apply for it if they own a firearm, it is not permitted without the approval of the RCMP CFO approval.

    I found myself perplexed as to why any law abiding officer could negate a sovereign his God given rights and under what jurisdiction as it is a violation in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms first law.

    “Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:”

    http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html

    If no crime has been committed then why the denial of a legal right to the ATC?

    Denying someone an ATC until after the crime seem pointless as a firearm is a tool to preserve life and provides security for those who wish to exercise their rights to carry one. It makes about as much sense as to deny someone car insurance because they’ve never been in an accident, or not allowing citizens the right to own a fire extinguisher because they’ve never had a fire in their home.

    Can you see my concern considering the on going situations with crimes against our citizens. Why should our citizens be put in the line of danger when the available options are there for those wish to exercise them.

    To date the only person’s that have the option to get an ATC (Authorization to carry) currently are armor truck personnel and those working in the forestry industry in case they run into dangerous wildlife.

    It seems that the CFO doesn’t take into consideration the dangers one faces in daily life in an urban setting, ie: gangs, drug addicts, robbers, rapists…etc as we see in those case mentioned above.

    I and others would like to see a more reasonable option available to those who wish to attain their ATC. A course that trains and teaches the applicant about the laws, firearm safety, psychological stress training…etc. Many law abiding citizens that have applied for the ATC don’t find the process encouraging and they do not like be looked upon like potential vigilantes or unreasonable violent people. A firearm is a tool to preserve life and provide security of the person which is the right of the individual.

    Thank-you for your feedback

    A concerned Canadian,

    Jaime Luis Hernandez

    • andre a.k.a progun says:

      the atc application is $100.00 non refundable dollars, hows that for a deterrent. its funny the cfo’s are willing to deter your rights but they cant deter criminals. i love how we as citizens must face everyday criminal issues unarmed,but the police show up after the fact with guns. the problem is we have to find a different way to address the government. they don’t need to be educated, they all ready know the law and how it affects us and criminals. we need to find a way to force their hands on this issue. the fact that we send letters and emails to them proves two things. 1. we are obviously still pretty level headed people by not reacting violently in protest. 2. i believe they feel that we are going to be content with those same letters and emails, so they don’t feel the need to change the law. that being said we need to find a way to set up a massive membership rally in Ottawa to get their attention. i live in Windsor and i will go in a heart beat if we can find a way to set this up. so send letters to your local clubs and anyone you know that will go ( firearms owners or not ). anyone hearing a way to set this up please email me. in the mean time educate people you know, let them know how guns are no more dangerous than a car or anything else. it is the individual alone responsible for a crime not the tool they use. how many times has some one died from a drunk driver, countless, and after each time did you ever hear or read an article to ban cars no. its no different than guns, i own handguns and rifles and have for about 16 years now. the process to obtain a restricted fire arm is a long one . along with proper education and safety course (which by the way i personally agree with ) you also must pass an extensive back round check. all that’s fine but then trust us with the ability to make good decisions. thanks for your time guys and i hope to keep hearing from more people her

      • Hard Justice says:

        That’s the issue Andre…apathy!

        I heard different numbers that we have over 8 million gun owners, others say 3 million but look at the fact that approximately 12 people signed your petition speaks volumes, NOBODY CARES! People only concern themselves after the fact and that’s just to vent their frustration and its usually at others to shoulder their responsibility. Are they right where they place their anger towards the police and politicians…yes in part, because the powers that be as you mentioned know the actual numbers of crime, but won’t do anything. It all comes down to what the people want.

        In regards of your 2 points I’d like to comment.

        1. I totally understand you’re point, but with “reacting violently in protest” at that point we are reaching extremes and while I do partially agree this will get attention, its not the type we want. I believe in cause and effect and the way we approach a situation will lead to an equal outcome. We get violent they have the clout and excuse to drop the hammer on us just look at the G20 in Toronto and the Protests in Montebello Quebec. We don’t need or want people getting hurt and cops crack heads first and ask questions later. In the end in the eyes of the mindless public it will make us all look irrational and gun crazy and all our efforts will go out the window. We want the public to know we are on the side of justice, honor, honesty and law abiding. The paid media is untrustworthy and will use any chance they get to spin the event in any matter that they want even negatively and we all know how sensationalistic the media is. Drama sells a story!

        2. This is where numbers game comes into play. If we had for example 5 million gun owners, forget picket signs I’d say we design cardboard cutouts of rifles in bright yellow with “Tools of Freedom” or “ATC 4 you and me”, “Buy a gun save a life” this is just an example or something along the lines written right across it in big bold black text marching along side each other in a happy, calm, civil, educated, respectful manner. I’d like to see our police officers, military, war veterans and as you mentioned even non-gun owners marching with us. We could reach and teach all Canadian’s that guns aren’t bad and remove the stigma of guns owner being the type of Hollywood vigilante types like Dirty Harry or Paul Kersey in the Death Wish movies. Millions of gun owners with the same objective, which is pretty basic “to exercise the right of using firearms to defend one’s life and property.”

        Something can be done, but the fact remains so far its is just you and I and a handful of Canadians who are getting involved. People want change, but aren’t willing to make the effort. I’ve spoke with many friends and family and while some agree their idle with their efforts. Another factor is people feel guilt and remorse for the criminal which is strange, but I can understand. I explain to them “Look, its good that you care, but criminals don’t and its unfortunate and selfish on their part to put you in that situation where you may need to defend yourself even with deadly force, but there’s few options. Its almost impossible to reason with the unreasonable. Guns provide the non-verbal option to dissuade those who won’t listen to reason”

        Thanks for being the change you wish to see in the world Andre. Too bad there weren’t more of us around.

      • andre a.k.a progun says:

        hard justice i agree but you miss read my post . my 1st point was that we are still pretty level headed by not reacting violently in protest

      • Hard Justice says:

        Yes I understand, I don’t think its the way our culture behaves which is good. We Canadians are level headed, but too complaisant when it comes to getting involved with relevant issues

        Here’s a news article I came across today, looks like the anti-gunners just won’t give up on attacking legal gun owners.

        It just floors me how as soon as a crime is committed by an obvious criminal they make a connection with legal gun owners and the media puppets go on a tirade aswell and push this propaganda. What’s even more shocking is how disrespectful and completely asinine this councillor is to all gun owners by making this statement. In short he’s saying that ALL gun owners are potentially sociopaths who will eventually go on shooting rampages, so there needs to be new restrictions on ammunition to prevent a widespread citywide massacre across the city.

        I had to comment on this…my user name is Taketheredpill.

        “City Councillor Adam Vaughan (Ward 20, Trinity-Spadina) is exploring a ban on the sale of ammunition within city limits. By pushing for changes in City-controlled zoning bylaws, Vaughan will aim to make owning a gun extremely difficult, if not outright illegal, by outlawing the sale of ammunition or by enacting prohibitively strict controls on how gun owners store their weapons. Somewhere, Charlton Heston is rolling over in his grave, gun still firmly grasped in his cold, dead hands.”

        http://torontoist.com/2012/06/newsstand-june-13-2012/

      • andre a.k.a progun says:

        well all i can say is that narrow minded people like Adam Vaughan with their knee jerk reactions are the ones who are truly sociopaths. their type of thinking will get a lot more innocent people killed by way of not being able to protect themselves.

        if his theory is true with almost 10 million guns in Canada and a population of 34.8 million people Canada should be extinct in a few short years.

        tell me that is not a scary thought, that a public figure can use something as tragic as the shootings that take place in Canada to gain popularity and sway voters. if im not mistaken and im not history has proven itself,i believe country’s in the past that pulled this no gun bullshit either saw crime rates go up because criminals know only criminals and police have guns, or the leaders of the country slaughtered their own people in record numbers. thats not for me i waould like to be a part of history but not like that.

        there is a book im reading called more guns less crime by john lott mind you his book is based on the u.s but the theory is the same. and in all states that banned fire arms to the public crime increased, but in the same states after the law was changed and people were again allowed to carry the crime rates went down. what the government don’t realize is by banning guns, they think guns will be off the street but it is not guns we want off the street its the repeat offenders using them we want off the street.

        but i think if the court system did its job properly the government would make less money. when some one commits a crime with a gun be it a robbery or rape or murder what is their punishment, i will tell you they get free room and board, they get their meals for free they get better health care than most, and the ones incarcerated for a long time also get money in prison from, from who you ask, the Canadian tax payer with punishments like that its no wonder we have so many repeat offenders.

        well thanks again for the info and hope to hear from more people here

  19. upset says:

    For those hoping to apply for an ATC under the current rules, I’ve been researching what BC considers “training in firearms proficiency.” It is at least 3 courses, costing over $1000. And that is definitely non-refundable.

  20. denlaugal says:

    I work in a high risk business to armed (with a gun) robbery. Even been held up at gun point (well documented). I have taken the the $1000. Armoured Car Guard course and I fully expect to be held up again at gun point at least one more time before I retire. I have applied for an ATC, I have receieved NO answer from Firearms Officer regarding my application…..Hopefully I survive. In Canada we can not be “prepared” to protect ourselves and that’s the law.

    • Hard Justice says:

      Unbelievable that any human being should be subjected to this type of criminality. While Mr. CFO sits in his cushy job where he sits with his firearm and he gets to exercise his rights, the rest of us (subjects) have NO rights and need to ask permission to live free and exercise our rights of “Security of the person”.

      denlaugal my suggestion would be to go to your nearest military/army supply store and buy yourself some bear spray and a collapsible baton & a pair of good quality handcuffs. While these are not the best options compared to a sidearm, it will give you some protection.

      I can see it coming to this in the near future where all Canadians will start open carrying because they’re sick and tired of being victims or crime and unconstitutional laws. All it would take for things to change is ACTION! If all gun owners started carrying their firearms and a copy of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms where in section 7 it states our rights to ‘Security of the person” the authorities have no jurisdiction and would be overwhelmed to be able to file charges against everyone. This eventually would force public awareness and dialog with elected officials. If asked Don’t accept any fines, don’t consent to having your property taken and if taken by force file charges against that officer for taking your personal property without a warrant.

      It would be nice to hear from civil rights attorneys and have support from them and members of our communities and gun clubs…etc.

      A nation wide non-compliance is what is needed. Perhaps where everyone starts carrying an empty gun holster as a means of protest. When asked from anyone why the empty gun holster you can mention, that you’re carrying it as reminder that you’re being denied your rights without explanation from governments and the CFO, and while criminals carry guns you being a law abiding, human being with unalienable rights, who pays taxes is not allowed to “security of the person” and left with the option of an empty holster, but no means of protection from criminals.

      Keep the comments coming people, there’s so many stories that need to be shared so that more awareness is seen by the public about unconstitutional injustices and victims of crime.

      • upset says:

        “…everyone starts carrying an empty gun holster as a means of protest.”

        This is a great idea.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Its a suggestion. The main objective is to start somewhere, it will visually spark curiosity and perhaps some dialog and a window of opportunity to educate the public. As a side benefit it will slowly accustom people to the idea of citizen’s open or conceal carrying and remove negative stigma’s against guns and gun owners.

        The whole issue isn’t really about guns, its about our Rights and the options for each sovereign to decide what he or she feels is the right choice for them. Some people may not want to carry a firearm, that is their right to not want one without question. They may feel that pepper spray, telescopic baton…etc is sufficient in their environment, some may not have a need to carry anything at all which is great one can hope we can have a future where crime is obsolete. The whole issue about open/conceal carry is that its an imperfect world and some won’t respect people’s rights and the rule of law, options should be made available to those who wish to secure themselves from threat or injury.

        With government officials, police…etc feeling the need to regulate peoples rights to choice is the problem as it interferes with our inalienable, constitutional rights. If no laws have been broken why the need for preemptive anti-gun legislation’s, and only when crimes have been committed shall due process be applied. Its just makes more sense this way and its a reasonable form of law.

  21. andre a.k.a progun says:

    this is an email i sent to stephen harper

    Mr. Harper,

    I was surprised to see in the globe and mail that you have new and improved security, new guns and new vehicles. It must be pretty scary having so many attempts on your life to have to resort to that kind of security. Between you and the RCMP’s and local police forces being attacked by criminals so much that you all require to carry firearms for defense. I’m surprised the the criminals still find time to harass the rest of us. To my knowledge, us law abiding citizens that fund your government are required to have at least three attempts on our life to even apply for a permit to carry a gun. The last time I checked, a leader was to lead by example, not do as I say not as I do. You will get more respect from people when you lead by example. Having armed security for yourself and family is fine but not when you ask the people you count on to fund your government to let criminals rule over them. To me that is very hypocritical and it shows on particular web sites, and the same can be said for the CFO’s who are probably the biggest hypocrites. Believe me, you want peoples respect? You need to give us the same rights and freedoms that you’s have. I and many people I speak with are very insulted in the fact that you and the CFO’s even think you have the right to tell us we can not properly defend ourselves. How are your lives any more valuable than ours? I thank you for your time and would really appreciate a response, but not a typical we appreciate your input and will consider your thoughts. I want a real response.

    Thank-you.

    • Hard Justice says:

      New guns, new vehicles and improved security…how nice! All with our tax dollars, what do we get in return police harassment, CFO denial of the ATC, and the generic “we appreciate your input e-mails”…pure garbage!

      Since I’ve last posted I’ve seen the frequency of stabbings and shootings in the GTA increase to at least a minimum of 1 per day and recently as high as 3 IN ONE DAY! I’m willing to wager confidently that ALL of those incidents are with illegal firearms and or not self defense incidents.

      If anyone has been following the news recently of that execution style shooting of a 35 yr old man at a crowded cafe in broad daylight, while watching the soccer game shows more proof how brazen criminals are getting. Another incident of a stabbing of a teen not 20 min from where I live. I’d like to know what Stephen Harper and Adam Vaughn think about all these incidents, its obvious they DON’T CARE! Adam Vaughn’s moronic bullet ban would have prevented all those shootings…I think NOT!

      Its evident NOTHING will change for us citizen’s until we do something. We’re asking the stupid CFO and politician’s for rights that already exist and are available to us, why they feel the need to interfere is stunning and infuriates me. They’re avoiding the need to answer our e-mails because they know we’re in the right and they have no solutions besides more media rhetoric and grandstanding aka. EMPTY PROMISES and the illusion of them working on reducing crime with more police as you pointed out. All that new equipment given to cops is just a big spectacle to look busy and effective, after all they don’t want the public to know how powerless, ineffective their tact is and how wasteful they are with our tax dollars. The CFO & politician’s lack of provident solutions is what will lead to more innocent victims. Its like they want us assaulted, robbed, raped, our homes invaded, this is what they are saying with their silence. I have received the same generic “we appreciate your input” e-mail as well, which to me is a steaming pile of horse crap!

      Everytime I see a crime happen I blame the CFO and politicians. Police show up after the crime, but its not their fault they’re mindless drones who take orders. They know full well what’s going on yet don’t speak up on behalf of the citizen’s rights.

      Criminals are predictable and one can expect the worse from them and you can bet the frequency of crimes will continue. It is not the criminal who’s denying us our rights, its the CFO, police and politician’s play the role of leadership and to uphold the law and it is they who are the one’s interfering with our safety and personal security.

  22. andre a.k.a progun says:

    i just read in the globe and mail today, for one another toronto shooting on Saturday evening but nothing to worry about they seem to have criminals under control….. NOT.

    but today i am writing about the gay pride parade coming up.
    and no im not a basher but my point is this, things like gay pride , racism ( though im sure will always exist ) has also gotten more accepted gay couples are more accepted more rights are even coming out for trans genders, which is all fine. the funny thing is the more gun owners fight for their rights the more the government wants to take away our rights. here is the logic, when ever a crime is committed by a person with a gun they want to ban guns. when someone kills someone drinking and driving they never want to ban alcohol or cars they go after the individual. take the guy who killed his partner (lover) and sent body parts to the government, do they want to ban being gay, no they went after the individual and rightly so. so why not go after individuals in gun crimes instead they focus on the guns. well its about time we start having annual parades to fight for our rights. if these other groups can protest on the streets so can we. we need to find a way to protest in Ottawa in a way were we can maybe wear holsters or something along those lines. the point is we need to point out that other groups are tired of being abused and so are we. the only problem is our government is giving these groups more rights all the time, but its our government abusing us.

    • Hard Justice says:

      Excellent points!

      Just a suggestion, you should send your comments to Stephen Harper and others, this is very impact full and well written. We should organize a “Tools for Liberty” (or whatever people want to call it) day all across Canada. People who cannot make it to Ottawa can hold their own National open carry day in their own city with a empty holster as a symbol that they support open/conceal carry for all and to show everyone in public that our rights are being unconstitutionally denied. I can design some T-shirts or flyers with slogans that people would like to see, anyone who wishes to make their own designs is encouraged to also please contribute. The main objective is gather support and attention. The homosexual community and other groups got their rights recognized because there’s power in numbers. We have the numbers with over 7 million guns owners (I don’t know the exact numbers) so all we need is more people to get involved…apathy amongst the firearms community is evident.

      We need posters, t-shirts, bumper stickers, buttons, pins, hats, flags, with a design that becomes a national symbol like the U.S. (don’t tread on me), NRA, etc Then we need to sell, distribute these items amongst firearms owners at firearms shows, shooting clubs, gun advocate groups and individuals…etc. The money could go to paying for the ATC for members of Open carry groups. People could form their own groups in their area.

      I’m going to start designs and will post them up when I get done, any suggestions are welcome. All designs are encouraged, there are NO bad ideas any suggestions could spark a new concept. Any involvement is appreciated and its better than no involvement. Even those who don’t own firearms are encouraged to participate. It has nothing to do with guns its about everyone’s rights to “Life, liberty and security of the person” We could also have designs with pepper spray, batons even neutral non-weapon related designs like… “The Right, to Right’s…is Right!”

      Thanks to all getting involved, we are the change we want to see in our lives. Let’s make this happen!

  23. Hard Justice says:

    I was looking for updates on the case of Mr. Ian Thompson the man who used his firearm’s to defend his home from a
    firebombing and attempt on his life. There is video of this attack.

    This is the latest news, if the case is won the laws will have to be changed and that includes the availability for ATC (authorization to carry) permits and national recognition of castle doctrine laws which we do have, but the current laws are unconstitutional and denying us our God given inalienable rights.

    story below:

    A staunch group of freedom loving Canadians from all over southern Ontario, attended Ian Thomson’s court session today in the lower court room of the Welland Court house expecting to hear a final verdict from the judge, but alas that was not to be. A final verdict was stayed because of the introduction a Constitutional challenge by Ian’s lawyer (Ed Burlew) into the process. Mr. Burlew had formally submitted a notice of a Constitutional challenge application to the Attorney Generals office, expounding that Sections 7 (“The Right to life, liberty & security of the person”) and 11 (Habeas Corpus) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom are been infringed upon by the vague and unclear wording of the standing firearm safe storage regulations. Mr. Burlew contended that the standing safe firearm storage regulations impede the practical ability of a person under threat to effectively defend themselves with a defensive firearm when they are faced with unexpected imminent danger because the firearm and ammunition cannot be ‘readily accessible’ under law. As such, the right of ‘security of person’ is compromised.

    As a result of this Constitutional challenge, the Federal Department of Justice announced in court that they would now be joining forces with the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General to continue prosecuting the standing ‘unsafe storage of a firearm’ charges against Ian. After this development the court session was quickly adjourned to July 17, 2012 when the Federal Department of Justice attorney’s will present their formal arguments in court. We do not know what those legal arguments are at this point in time. Another court session was also scheduled for October 25, 2012 when formal evidence and testimony will again be presented.

    Outside in the main foyer of the Welland Court House, Mr. Burlew gathered all the disgruntled and disappointed supporters who attended Ian’s brief court session that day for a briefing. At this briefing Ed implied that the reason the Federal Department of Justice has opted to join forces with the Ontario Crown attorneys to continue prosecuting Ian was to defend the status quo. Mr. Burlew speculated that if Ian’s Constitution challenge was successful, the whole notion of using firearms for self defense, up to an including carrying a concealed firearm for self defense in public, would have to be renegotiated and standing laws would have to be realigned to suit. It is obvious that Harper’s CPC Federal Department of Justice attorney’s do not want this to happen, despite the lip service their political comrades continue to make in the House of Commons to law abiding firearms owners about loosening gun control restrictions. The message is clear. The Federal government does not endorse the use of firearms for self defense at this time and have now committed the full force of their legal branch to protect this undeclared social policy view.

    As much as I sympathize with Ian’s continued plight, I deem this to be a positive development for all law abiding Canadian firearms owners. This is exactly what we have been waiting for. It’s unfortunate that Ian will have to bear further stress and anguish in court brought on by the unrighteous agents of the unjust status quo, as well as further legal expense, but this is our chance to really change things and roll back our current gun controls that are so out of alignment with natural law. Ian knows this as well and is prepared to bravely bear this burden if the outcome will bring about positive change in this regard. Let’s continue to support him for he now fights for US all.

    • andre a.k.a progun says:

      very well said hard justice

      its funny how Harper is spending 20 million on protection for himself this year alone. kind of hippo critical dont you think.
      kind of how i mentioned there are gay rights, racial rights, rights for trans gender, and the newest issue on woman’s rights to abortion which is a whole issue in itself but it is supported in law and financially by the government, but the right to stay alive is not permitted by the same government. the government supports abortion rights and it is covered by ohip but the government warns on cigarette packs with pictures of fetuses know that’s an oxymoron. it shows the government is a do as i say not as i do mentality and just wants to control people. the bottom line is we pay the governments salary, and life is a right no matter what the government says. i personally will attend a rally in Ottawa to show what ever needs to be showed down their throats to wake them up.
      I hope to hear more on Mr. Thomson s case in the mean time lets keep hounding them via email or letters. i am requesting a meeting with my mp to discuss these topics the nice thing is he is only 5 minutes from where i live. i will post any results i get from the meeting

      ps good luck mr thomson and lets keep our fingers crossed

  24. andre a.k.a progun says:

    this is an email i just sent to my mp

    lets hope he calls

    Mr. Comartin

    my name is Andre Desbien the purpose of this email is to hopefully set up a meeting to discuss gun rights for Canadians in regards to self defence.
    I see on the news and newspaper rights for gays, people of different races, trans genders, woman’s rights to abortion (covered by ohip by the way) and these are rights they should have
    excluding abortions being covered by ohip. That being said gun owners have been taking abuse far to long by their governments past and present. why is it no one wants to ban cars when some is killed mostly by drunk drivers, instead they go after the individual and rightly so. but the governments logic is hypo critical, if some one kills someone with a gun say a criminal for instance the first thing the government does is stereo type and go after law abiding citizens figuring that a gone committed a crime so lets go after everyone with a gun. but more people die a year in Canada from falling than someone dying from a legal gun owner (stats Canada). just being born we have a right to life no government can take that away, but ours seems to think they have the power to tell someone if they can defend themselves or not. it is very hypo critical and disappointing that the same government telling us we cant defend ourselves properly is spending 20 million dollars a year for protection for him and his family. but the very people funding the government are told that we cannot apply for an authorization to carry for self defense unless there has been three recorded attempts on ones life. i thought leaders were supposed to lead by example. i am not concerned with the licence part of it like most people who believe we don’t need a license since life is a right. my concern is if you pass the safety course and the background check required ( both being very important ) i don’t want just anyone having a gun either, or if you already have a restricted permit which i do then you should be trusted with that fire arm. like i said the stats on legal gun owners committing crimes are extremely low. let me put it to you this way would you rather have a loved one be it a child or family member killed or raped by someone only to see your tax dollars feed and shelter, and have better health care go to the criminal that committed this crime or have a fair chance at being able to prevent the crime in the first place. i know what my choice and the choice i would think of every person would be to prevent the crime. so if i could meet with you to discuss these matters it would be appreciated, but i would certainly like to hear back from you.

    thanks for your time

    andre

    • Hard Justice says:

      Excellent letter. I feel that there’s a positive turning point coming our way soon with the unfortunate case of Mr. Ian Thompson. Its strange to think that this negative incident can bring about the change that is needed for all Canadians. I’ve contacted his attorney Ed Burlew to see if I can send in some money to help with the court fee’s put upon Mr. Thompson, its the least I can do to help him through all his troubles. Even though he’s stressed and enduring all these court costs, he’s fighting this trough because he knows this court decision can have a big impact on all gun owners in a positive manner. I applaud him for his sacrifice.

      They know the stats, I’m sure we’re not the only one’s e-mailing our concerns to them (I hope there’s others lol), but they continue to undermine us with their generic e-mail reply’s thinking these concerns and issues will go away. I agree with your points. I don’t have my restricted license so I cannot comment to the procedures on how easy or not it is to attain. A few people I spoke with find the questions asked are stupid, unnecessary & invasive. I don’t know the exact words, but some people told me that they ask personal questions along the lines of…

      “Do you have mental illness or have you suffered from it?” Who’s going to admit that they have, especially if they’ve suffered from severe mental illness where suicidal tendencies have come to mind in the past or present. I’m not naive to think that people haven’t lied before on that one.

      Marital, common law girlfriend questions. What does that have to do with having the ability to use the firearm and knowing the common law. It goes back to people thinking that those who own or want a gun are psychopaths, salivating at the chance to kill someone. Why would someone go through all the trouble of getting a gun to commit murder then get caught and go to jail…that’s so stupid! As if a kitchen knife, and axe, hammer…their own hands won’t be as effective. A gun is loud and will attract attention. *I’m not endorsing anyone to use any of the items stated above to commit crimes btw. lol*

      Job related questions…let me guess they think some guy just got fired and wants revenge on the whole world. LOL, that’s completely stupid!

      I’m sure there’s other questions that are pointless and don’t provide proof one is responsible or knowledgeable about the common law, peoples rights or their effectiveness with the firearm.

      Its obvious these people who are put in the positions to decide the fate of the country aren’t too bright, and the policy makers and creators of such licensing paperwork are further down the the scale of cognitive reasoning, so such outdated regulations need to be changed.

      What many in the populace are lacking is understanding the basic fundamentals of human rights. Its not whether they have the ability to use the firearm, many I’m sure passed and couldn’t tell you what The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is and that should be a bigger concern. I know my rights and the common law more than most gun owners do and I don’t even own a firearm. Yet I would be denied the tools to defend my rights because I may fail some PAL questions or find them invasive of my privacy rights and refuse to answer them. So I believe knowledge of the laws and understanding and respecting the rights of others is far more important than those questions. The only part I agree with is the hands on portion of the test, I don’t think anyone should automatically fail if they make a mistake. The error should be pointed out and another follow up test should be made the following day. If mistakes are made at that point the individual should fail and then have to reapply at a later date…why? Because although they failed they still have the right to be allowed the tools to defend their person. Some peoples learn curve is different than others, but it doesn’t mean they can’t learn to a reasonable degree.

      Laws can and always will change, but our rights don’t change and that is what is important and question about our charter and everyone’s basic human rights should be known and asked.

      A whole new course should be made for those applying for a gun license, even including live fire to prove you can handle the firearm effectively. Restraint training on how to deal with different scenarios because every incident is different and some situations could be diffused with brandishing the firearm and telling the offender their “under arrest” until the police arrive. The whole system needs to changed because what we are effective trying to do is for them to recognize our rights and that we have the same powers as any law enforcement officer if one isn’t available for assistance at the time of incident.

  25. andre a.k.a progun says:

    i sent this to mr harper and mr toews today i dont seem to get any responses from them so every one please email and send your letters they can keep ignoring us.

    i am interested in the governments thoughts on giving the people of Canada the right to realistic self defense laws.
    I know the government gets letters and emails all the time from Canadians requesting our rights to open carry for self defense.
    the government needs to change the law from may issue permits to shall issue permits, here is a letter from Marty Gobin to the Windsor star back in 2008
    please take the time to read this article and let me know where you stand in changing the law to protect the people funding the Canadian government
    In a recent Windsor Star article (“Cops see spike in number of crime-fighting do-gooders,” June 25), it was reported that there has been a rise in private citizens defending themselves or others against criminals.

    Whether it was a veterinarian fighting an armed robber off with a garbage can, or a bystander chasing a violent mugger who beat a man for his prescription medications, it is clear that Canadians are responsible enough to use defensive force in a reasonable and legal fashion.

    That said, it’s time that Canadians be permitted to carry weapons for defence against criminals.

    This wouldn’t be such a drastic change in law. It’s already legal under Section 34 of the Criminal Code for Canadians to use necessary force to protect their life, up to and including the use of deadly force.

    It’s also legal to own a firearm.

    Canada even has a permitting process in place for people to carry firearms at the discretion of their provincial Chief Firearms Officer (CFO).

    The only thing Canada would have to do to enable Canadians to better protect themselves is change the issuing process for an Authorization to Carry (ATC) from “may-issue”– a permit issued at the discretion of the CFO –to “shall-issue,” a permit which must be issued to anybody who meets clearly defined, reasonable training and background check requirements.

    Such a change in the ATC-issuing process would make it more accountable, in that the CFO would have no arbitrary authority to withhold or grant the right to defend oneself. That kind of authority should never be held by any one office.

    The change would also ensure that every similarly qualified and screened Canadian has an equal right under the law to defend themselves, their families, and their neighbors, regardless of whether they have any political ties that would grease the wheels for a carry permit.

    Now, some of the more sensationalist politicos out there may suggest that allowing Canadians the suitable means to defend themselves would result in shootouts every day in the streets at high noon.

    This kind of Chicken Little approach to the right of one to preserve his or her own life has been proven wrong time and time again south of the border. Michigan switched from “may issue” to “shall issue” permits in 2002, and yet thousands of Canadians manage to travel across the border daily without witnessing any bloodshed.

    Vermont, which has no laws regulating the possession or carrying of arms by non-criminal adults, has the third lowest violent crime rate per capita in the USA. (In fairness, that could be accredited to the similarly lax regulation of public nudity in the state combined with the aging baby boomer population scaring off all of the potential muggers.)

    Overall, over thirty states have gone the route of shall-issue permits since the early nineties, and none have seen fit to go back to the days of may-issue. The U.S. experiment has shown that there would be no bloodbath resulting from Canadians being allowed to protect their lives.

    Not only has there been no public safety crisis as the result of Americans being able to pack heat, but there have actually been numerous potentially large-scale massacres stopped in progress by those authorized to carry a weapon.

    In 2002, a shooter on a rampage at the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia was stopped after not one, but two students in different locations heard his shots and retrieved their weapons from their cars, returned, and placed him under arrest until the police arrived.

    In February 2007, an off-duty out-of-area police officer who was carrying his weapon at the Trolley Square mall in Salt Lake City managed to keep an armed madman under fire until Salt Lake City police officers arrived to assist.

    This last December, an armed man went to the New Life Church in Colorado after having left a suicide note saying he intended to kill as many people as possible.

    He only managed to kill two people at the church before a parishioner shot him.

    One can only imagine how these massacres would have turned out, if, like Canada, off-duty police and private citizens were not allowed to carry guns for self-defence. Certainly the murderers in each case, who were intent on committing capital crimes, would be unlikely to care whether or not any law forbade them from carrying a gun.

    Both the American example and the recent case of Canadians defending themselves and others in a responsible fashion have proven that private citizens and should be trusted to carry arms without any resulting chaos.

    Hopefully our legislators will, in the near future, acknowledge that Canadians have the right to defend themselves guaranteed by the Criminal Code, and modify our weapons laws so that we may have a realistic chance of exercising that right.

    Marty Gobin is communications director, Ontario Libertarian Party Member, Canadian Shooting Sports Association in Whitby, Ont.

    • Hard Justice says:

      What a coincidence you posted this, I e-mailed Stephen Harper yesterday evening. The frequency of illegal gun crimes are everyday, overall crime has gone up dramatically across Canada and its makes me very angry. There’s a murder every friggin day this needs to stop one way or another and cops aren’t doing a damn thing except put up police tape.

      Since Canada day there’s been 5 assaults in the GTA alone, I’m sure the numbers are 4 or 5 x’s that across Canada maybe even higher. Once I read all these stories I got pissed off and wrote the letter and I learned these morons, they don’t give a shit plain and simple. They’re ignoring us, I’m sure they’re being swamped with e-mails and I also encourage people to e-mail them. Get involved, get angry, get pro-active. I don’t wish for it, but if anyone on here reading this has a loved one be a victim of crime I guarantee it will change your life forever!

      I’m tired of being polite to these political meat puppets while innocent people get hurt or killed. Who’s side are they on! I hold police responsible also, if I was a cop and a citizen was carrying without an ATC but had his license I would turn a blind eye…God’s honest truth! When they show up to a call why do they arrest or interfere if a citizen defends himself whether it be with a firearm, a baseball bat, pepper spray, a knife, anything! They’re saying we’re as guilty as the criminal for a natural instinct to fight back. Even an animal or insect has that natural response, almost like a reflex action…Fight or Flight. I’m tired of Flight and I’m tired of the government and police interference.

      How ridiculous that we’re e-mailing them for permission to defend our lives. We should be e-mailing them that WE’RE GOING TO BE CARRYING and to mind their own business if they’re unable to offer logical solutions. The right to life is NOT AN OPTION and ITS NOT UP TO THEM TO DECIDE WHO LIVES OR DIES! People need to remember police are a social service and it can be declined simply by “I do not require your services”. Its come to the point where police think they own the whole damn city and some are disrespectful and exceed their limited actions and rule of the law. What good are cops anyway they show up after the incident to put up police tape and scratch their heads wondering what happened or they end up asking the public for leads/info on the crime…are they joking! They get paid and then need us to do their job, this is stupid and unacceptable. If any of us were incapable at our jobs we’d be fired!

      Now they’re developing cell phone apps for people to help them solve crime, I’m not a snitch, that’s NOT my job and that’s dangerous and irresponsible. Now the loose lipped, paranoid, yuppie anti-defense liberals have a new tool to go on and spy and turn anyone they want in for some ridiculous reason. Big brother snitches.

      Below is the e-mail sent to them:

      Thank-you for reply, but I would appreciate some answers or solutions to my concerns because according to the law as it stands criminals have equal if not more rights in my home or in public than I do if I defend myself. Tell me that I shouldn’t be concerned because I and others I speak with are growing tired of all the crime in the city and the interference of the law against the public defending themselves from criminals. I and others would like to know where Stephen Harper stands on this issue about citizens rights and their safety!

      Since I last e-mailed you we have seen a dramatic increase in overall crime in the GTA. Some of the individuals of those illegal gun crimes happened to be acquaintances of people I know. I don’t appreciate the generic response, its insulting as I feel that I’m being put aside and given no answers to some serious questions that I and others have. I know for a FACT others have e-mailed Stephen Harper with the same concerns as this is becoming a very serious problem for many in our fine cities across Canada.

      The way you’re treating citizens with these cut and dry responses is condescending and offer no solutions. I don’t like to be left out in the dark about issues that personally pertain to me directly and I’m really upset with the lack of action on the part of police and politicians in regards of informing and giving the public options & acknowledging their rights to prevent any further victims of crime.

      Does the Prime Minister not feel that the issue of the ATC (authorization to carry) and peoples inalienable rights to reasonable and necessary self defense isn’t important to be addressed?

      Why are the police and politicians turning a blind eye to peoples rights to “Security of the person” and labelled as vigilantes and lynch mobs if people defend themselves from criminals in our own homes or in public?

      Why is it that the distinction from “illegal gun crime” and “law abiding gun owners” isn’t mentioned when these incidents occur to the media?

      Why hasn’t the Prime Minister stood up to defend Mr. Ian Thompson and spoke out in his defense when his house was firebombed by criminals? Link for story below

      http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/20/man-faces-jail-after-protecting-home-from-masked-attackers/

      Why are citizen’s being denied the rights to be allowed to defend their person in and out of the home when being victimized by criminals?

      Why does the criminals rights come first if I of any other law abiding sovereign citizen defends themselves from an assault?

      Who has the right to decide how much force is necessary except the person who’s being a victim of crime. When applying for an ATC (authorization to carry) one must have 3 attempts at their life to be considered. That makes absolutely NO SENSE what so ever! Should one be denied car insurance until after an accident? Be denied the right to own a fire extinguisher because no prior fires in the home occurred?

      Are police told to have that much restraint with their firearms, where’s the regulation on them…none! They’re given free and clear options to use as much force necessary to incapacitate the threat with no fear of accountability should any unlawful actions should occur.

      How much level of restraint does the security staff of the Prime Minister be told to have if he were to be assaulted by an armed assailant? Any at all I wonder? Why is it that the tax paying citizens are being denied our inalienable rights with legislation? Do we not have the same rights as police, armored truck security officers, park rangers…etc Banks money are more important than citizens rights?

      The fact is in Canada the penalties issued for gun crime are not a deterrent and given to people with lengthy criminal records. Repeat offenders don’t respect the rule of law or consequence what’s the worst that will happen a few months in jail or prison…they don’t care. The taxpayers pay for his legal aid lawyer which further adds insult to injury. The penalties for concealed carry of an unregistered firearm by an unlicensed criminal are miniscule compared to the penalties a responsible, employed, tax-paying citizen will face for the same “crime”.

      Don’t you find it strange that in Canada criminals carry firearms with impunity, but if my family is attacked we must plead for our lives, and then wait several minutes for the police to write a report.

      Where are the rights for the citizens of Canada?

  26. andre a.k.a progun says:

    the thing i think i find to be so hypocritical besides the fact that only law abiding people are the ones left defenseless, is also that we are encouraged not to be stereo typical when it comes to peoples rights. example we are told not to stereo type all blacks as thief’s, and we shouldn’t. we are told the same for gays, woman , the police the list can go on and on. funny thing is why are groups and governments not following the rules when it comes to guns. a person gets killed with a gun, automatically they want to ban guns because if you own a gun you will eventually commit a crime. im calling bullshit i own both restricted and non restricted firearms and i have for almost 16 years. i at least understand but dont agree with why some people think guns are bad , their only real knowledge of guns is from the news and government. the government on the other hand can only be interested in disarming the people to gain full control and start to dictate. because common sense and stats show law abiding gun owners are not a threat to the public, and it only makes sense to give the people that fund the government financially, the right to protect themselves from criminals. so i am really confused as to what their motives are. i hope self defense laws improve here in canada as a result of the ian thompson case but i wont hold my breath just yet

    • Hard Justice says:

      Unfortunately things won’t change, the only change that comes is the one that’s forced upon the minority by arbitrary denial of our rights, in this case its the law abiding gun owners and advocates of home and personal defense.

      This is FACT, there is no rule of law only statutes, by laws and legislation which is, and can be changed to suit their (legislators) needs primarily to tax the capitalist blue and white color slaves.

      Change won’t happen because we won’t make the change happen and act on it. Many are too meek and concerned of consequence to do anything. These bureaucrats just ignore us and sit on their useless asses and think of other laws to tax us, that’s all they’re good for. Just look at the Open Carry Canada petition, only 25 signatures. It shows the level of apathy of people in general, its a disgrace for those who actually own firearms…they just don’t care. They follow orders and bow their heads, just look at the registry. Millions of gun owners in Canada and no one got angry, billions wasted and no one protested. Complacency at its finest!

      In a flip side do you think any of these ridiculous laws would have happened to our friends in the south (U.S)…NO! They would have called, wrote, e-mailed and protested to repeal such draconian laws and rightfully so. Here we have politicians making decisions for all of us and in the process say things like “We can’t have people running around with guns like vigilantes”, “We aren’t gun totting American’s, we need to keep our streets from turning into wild west shootouts”

      These weren’t the exact words, but it was somewhere along the lines of it said by some politicians for the changing of self defense laws in Ontario.

      I agree with you, nothing will ever change until the masses stand up and demand the change they want to see. If everyone started open carrying, I’m talking millions of gun owners without any fear in their hearts and using defeatist words like “we can’t”, “its not allowed”, “we should be responsible”, “what will people think”, “what if we get arrested”, and any other excuses people come up with, and instead started stating the laws and demanding their rights there wouldn’t be any debate. The law would step down, the politicians would raise and eyebrow and the courts would change the laws…they’d have to, the people have spoken and the change is non-negotiable, it has been put into effect literally by the will of want!

      What are they going to do at that point arrest millions for exercising rights? They know our rights, they just want to see what we’re going to do and if we have the balls to grow up and instead of groveling peasants or confused children we stood up like sovereigns with the knowledge that free people don’t ask permission from no one for rights that rightfully belong to us. This is why they aren’t responding back to us…its our move! Its a battle of determination…enough talk!

      Like I said before, if we had people carrying empty holsters it would be a visual sign of protest. T-shirts with slogans…etc.

      I’d like to hear some ideas, time for solutions! What and who are we waiting for? We know they don’t listen to us, we’re just the bovine to them. NOT ME, I’m a thinking human being with rights and reasonable needs.

      btw when is Mr. Ian Thompson’s trial, I’m going to give my best effort to make it to support him.

  27. andre a.k.a progun says:

    this is an email i just sent to mr harper

    mr harper

    I can only say i hope your mind is in the right place on this issue when it comes to standing up for Canadian people. this U N gun grab will not be accepted by Canadians signed or not. the Canadian people are fed up with our gun laws as they are now. the governments know the only reason for a complete gun ban would be to have complete control and enslave the people. your job as prime minister should be the to protect the rights and freedoms of all Canadian citizens. if you are not apposed to a U N gun grab then you are against the people that voted you in. i would appreciate knowing what your stand is on this issue, i will be waiting for a response .

    thank you

    • Hard Justice says:

      Only a leftist anti-gun liberal would want a UN gun ban. People don’t seem to understand that you cannot reason with a criminal, this is absurd to think you can.

      They still don’t give us an answer as to why don’t politicians care about their citizen’s and stop creating legislation’s that incriminate us if we defend themselves from the criminal. How about letting citizen’s engage the criminal instead of expecting them to be submissive subjects…NO! That would be down right logical.

      Crime will keep happening because we allow it to happen. We have the power to make changes, but we need to stop being bleeding heart apologists for criminal. No sympathy for the criminal, throw the book at them and if you can’t, allow the citizens to throw bullets back when they shoot.

      Law abiding citizen’s are responsible, reasonable and respectable, how much more patience should we have while mass shootings keep happening? Should we all apologize for being robbed and assign our bill folders in our front shirt pockets to make it more convenient for the crooks?

      Crime exists because the criminals have no opposition. The law of physics even states “For every action there is an equal and opposition reaction”, but we don’t have opposite reaction because politicians are incriminating the citizens for wanting to protect themselves and not going after the criminals. A person defending themselves will get charged for attacking the criminal and the criminal gets free housing, free food, free health care all at the cost of the tax payer he just assaulted.

      They ignore us, for what looks like many reasons. For One, they don’t respect us, they never give us a response. Reason number two, perhaps they’re afraid because if we all start carrying firearms it will open our eyes and give us equal power…the power to tell them to stuff it when they infringe on our rights. This is how it should be anyway, they are servants of the people, but they’re corruption knows no bounds. We are tax slaves to them, revenue producing bovine.

      This is why the founding fathers in the United States were Noble men, because they treated their fellow men and woman as equals and not subjects. They knew that to allow all free people the right to bear arms allows protection from enemies both foreign and domestic, liberty with no bounds.

      Here in Canada we have legislative freedoms no real rights or liberty.

      We’ll see if they respond, I highly doubt they will. I haven’t heard from them yet, they’re too busy finding new ways to tax us.

  28. NS says:

    Humm…… I want an ATC for wilderness protection…. many miles in the woods…. no cell phone coverage, no 911, no police, no people, just me and bears. I hike. No trails nor roads either. I’ve had some close encounters with bears and packs of coyotes but I’ve always had my shotgun…. but why do I need to pretend to be hunting? Why carry a large shotgun?

  29. Bill Gibbons says:

    @Hard Justice – Sorry for the late reply.

    Regarding my April 9th comment on carry rights for “certain people.” let me clarify this.

    The idea is to start with a phasing in period, starting with licenced investigators, security guards, and people working alone at night in a 7/11 or a gas station where they would be vulnerable to robbery and/or acts of violence. However, you and I both know that the RCMP will fight tooth and nail to stop citizens from carrying concealed firearms, which smacks of elitism anyway.

    Needless to say, the Castle Doctrine should be fully implemented as soon as possible. The problem here is, Canadians are too bloody timid – to too laid back – to stand up for their rights Sorry, I’m a Scot and not overly polite or politically correct. For the record, I love Canada and would not want to live anywhere else. But we MUST stand up – collectively – for our rights to self-defence against violent, armed criminals.

    The recent Toronto shootings only highlights the fact that both the security guards in a mall – and the citizens attending the block party, were all completely unable to defend themselves. Only the criminals that did the shooting – and the cops who attended after the fact – were armed. Yet the same airheads from the left are calling for “gun bans,” as if the criminals will comply.

    Here in Alberta we now have licencing in effect if you want to wear body armour. This is apparently to stop gang members from wearing body armour, thus reducing the incidences of gang shootings.

    needless to say, if the criminals are carrying unlicenced (and banned) guns with complete disregard for the law, they are not going to worry about getting a licence to wear kevlar!

    Stay safe.

    • Hard Justice says:

      Its not a personal attack towards your perspective or idea, but giving investigators, security guards and shop attendants firearms is “special privileges” which is the wrong way to go about it. In effect they’re given higher priority due to financial status or job position than anyone else which is unconstitutional. Shouldn’t “Life, liberty and security of the person” be for everyone? Why is anyone putting limitations on these Rights. My or anyone’s Rights aren’t based on opinions, its like the Right to breathe, who has the choice to decide who breathes or NOT its one of the fundamentals of existing.

      When you start giving privileges or placing limitations its like saying that they’re lives are more worthy than someone not in that line of work or in a certain wealth class because that’s what it always comes down to…money!

      In two recent rapes here in Toronto, both woman were unarmed, do they not deserve the rights to choose how they wish to preserve their lives. We are NOT slaves, We are NOT the property of anyone, We are NOT pets, so why do we need to ask anyone for permission to save our lives in a crisis situation. Why do we need a piece of paper from some stranger to excercise rights granted to us from nature. It a basic instinct to want to defend oneself from danger, its automated and not by choice…its like flinching when something flys towards one’s face. All of this anti-gun crap is absurd and we consent through our complacency. Should we ask them when to breathe, and if they say no should we comply! Its on that level of necessity in situations when crimes happen, its kill or be killed.

      In a recent incident the most shocking part is the reaction of the police, in a local newsprint the article read and I’m quoting word for word:

      “If you feel you are in danger, you are probably right”: Cops to woman.

      The article is too long to write on here. In the article basically you have the incident, how it happened, where it happened, the description of the attacker and so on…what I failed to see even after such a ominous headline from the police was any solutions on how to prevent such situations from happening to anyone else. Not one single option, Not even a bloody hint, indirectly.

      They could have said:

      “Perhaps people should consider options of personal defense, there are many legal options available at your convenience. If people have any questions they could contact the local military surplus shop, security company or martial arts class to see what options are available.”

      Police and politicians have NO conscience, they have no remorse or consideration of what these victims of a failed system have to endure for the rest of their lives. I wonder what would their reaction be if these victims were family members.

      No psychotropic medication or counseling will EVER console or repair the damage done to their minds, and we have these pathetic, quasi-apologetic cops toss their puppet audience a pathetic milk bone of sympathy too appease the minds of the leftist, yuppie mindless anti-gun jellyfish. In turn, the grade A sheep could be heard trumpeting “Yes the police are doing all they can to keep us safe, its the best they can do. Lets blindly put ALL our trust in them and sit on our hands & wait for help DO NOT, I repeat DO NOT defend yourselves you don’t want to hurt the attacker and its immoral on your part, don’t lower yourself to their level. If we get robbed or raped oh well, at least we can fill out a nice police report to make them look efficient and then we can drug ourselves into a stupor via health care, while we wait for our next rape crisis counseling session.” *Face palm*

      The issue is politicians and police are inept, they’re capitalists trying to bank on social/moral decay. They have limited cognitive abilities and think everyone is on the same level of reasoning that they’re on. Their limited mental capacity, personal interests (being primarily monetary) mothering on a grand social scale is dangerous & intrusive…and to me personally I am SICK AND TIRED of STRANGERS aka police making decisions on a social scare via legislative bills for everyone arbitrarily.

      What I have to say to all of this…

      “Keep your LAWS off of my RIGHTS!”

      I never gave consent to any of their statutes and bylaws, I never gave them permission to force their anti-carry gun legislation’s on me. Who gave them the Right to decide anything for anyone without consent, as if what we’re doing is unreasonable. As if tomorrow if open/conceal carry is implemented people are all of sudden going to go into convulsions, eyes start twitching, trigger fingers get itchy, grow long mustaches and start shooting in the air yelling “Yippee! Yippee!” like Yosemite Sam from bugs bunny. Its complete lunacy and anyone who believes that needs psychological counseling.

      Everyone has all the answers, except when it comes to their own lives so police, politicians and any anti-gun lemming needs to mind their own damn business, and until a crime is committed they can stuff their pre-emptive “Carrying a gun on you is illegal” bull crap to themselves. Its about choice, if you want to get robbed or raped that’s your right and you’re entitled to it, but don’t expect the rest of us with functioning brains to think along the same lines.

      So essentially, we have politicians restricting us through legislation, police restricting us through violence and incarceration, and criminals who know no limit to their immorality and greed, and the rest of us with our thumbs in our mouths like children waiting around to see which wolf rips us apart.

      The police and politicians decide who’s smart enough to know how to handle firearms, only they know when to moral and justifiably use them. Everyone else needs to sit down like children and do as they’re told.

      I don’t need anyone telling me anything, I’m an adult, and this arbitrary “We’ll decide when, who gets to have a firearm. Until we decide, you’re not worthy of our permission, and if you get assaulted or violated that’s just the way things are” That’s how they think towards us, its condescending, perpetually stupid, immoral and outright criminal on their part.

      The basic human right of “security of the person” as defined in section 7 of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms” does not define limitations, so where are they pulling these laws from that we all need ATC? So I need to be licensed to protect my Right to live? Isn’t that slavery! Without that permit everyone should let themselves get violated. OMG! do people not realize how insane that is, and these politicians and police are put in these positions of social responsibility and put people in these situations knowing the outcome. Every crime that’s is committed is the police & politicians fault, they are the one’s who will restrict and arrest you if you defend your lives. This is what irritates me with police, politicians and judges, they swore an oath to defend the constitution and in turn are violating the very people who pay their salary’s through taxes.

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, its all about CONTROL. They know firearms give almost unlimited power against any oppressor and they don’t want to give up the gravy train. Think about it like this. Who benefits from high crime and scared voting public…the police. It keeps them employed via a scared, incapable society who needs a big brother to look after them. The lawyers and judges, more crime = more criminals in the courts, it keeps them employed 365 days of the year. The jails, keep those criminals coming in and keep them filled, the prison guards, the cooks, the stock holders are ALL making money (Yes stock holders, in the U.S. prisons are private and they trade on the stock markets…look it up) Its a big monopoly. This is why harper wants private prisons here, its big business for them. What’s also strange is some people really think police are that competent as a deterrent to crime LOL I laugh at that one. If that were the case crime would be unheard of and if crime wasn’t so bad why do they need guns? Protection! They know the threat is real, but they need us subservient to the system as I stated above.

      Do you or anyone thinks they want us all armed, educated, informed, empowered. Think about if and when a citizen cop gets out of line, you could tell him to go f**k themselves and he’d have to as you both are on a even keel as he is in violation of a sovereigns rights.

      Now I’m not advocating lawlessness, but there’s enough video evidence on youtube to prove that not all cops are some perfectly tuned moral compass with philanthropic intentions beating in their loving hearts 24/7…that’s unrealistic non-sense. They’re citizen’s who are bound to the Constitution like everyone else, they’re NOT above the law and they’re NOT the law. They swore an oath to protect the constitution and that uniform is only to identify themselves in public eyes to their duties as a citizen, nothing more.

      If people want to know how to measure the intentions and morals of an individual, look at their works towards their fellow man or woman. Good people always are on the side of respect, reason and responsibility and sound moral conduct. What side of the law are the judges and police on because I see no morality in their actions.

      I know the rule of law, why should I or anyone else be treated as a criminal if no violation was committed in an unjust manner. We are all advocating a basic human right of self defense against criminality and the Right to “Life, liberty and security of the person.” Is that too much to ask for.

  30. Jason Freer says:

    I agree we should be allowed to carry a
    concealed weapon.
    I find the police for the most part are
    completely useless.
    I’ve had a knife to my throat and a gun
    pulled on me. Just the other day a hunter
    was mauled by a grizzly.
    I’m so dissappointed with the government
    and the police to provide proper defense against criminals not to mention crooked police officers!

    • Hard Justice says:

      The only thing that’s stopping us from carrying is the very system that we put in place to ensure the constitution and the rights of sovereigns are well protected from criminals or tyrants. That system has failed us all, and it has itself turned into a treasonous cabal that is in complete violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for their own self gain. The most despicable fact of it all is, if one speaks on the side of the constitution and you remind them of their oaths you’re looked upon as an enemy. It leads me to the only plausible conclusion, and question…What side of the law are police, politicians and judges on because I see no lawful behavior on their part.

      We have allowed ravenous wolves to watch over us.

  31. Jeremy says:

    I,for one, am proud to live in a country with such strict gun control!

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      Be proud if it helps you sleep better at night. But understand that there’s no statistical evidence that gun control keeps you any safer. If fact, studies show that quite the opposite could be true.

    • Hard Justice says:

      I used to think that way until I was assaulted 3 times in my life. We’ve had people try and break into our home a handful of times aswell. What people fail to understand is all of the crimes that go unreported by police and the media. I’ve seen many incidents of crime, people shot, people stabbed, people assaulted with hammers, people beaten by mobs of 30+ people, heard story’s from friends of others being assaulted with frying pans, baseball bats, hockey sticks, razors…etc.

      Back around 1998 a young guy pulled a knife on me ON THE BUS just because he and my friend had an argument. No an argument doesn’t justify to behave in an unlawful manner. We live in a free country and we have the RIGHT to disagree and it shouldn’t result in being threatened.

      Another time a small group of teens threatened to stab me because I was standing up for my friend who’s sister was being harassed. The last incident I was robbed by two men not five minutes from my home, I don’t know what weapon he had because he had his hand in his pocket. When I asked him why was he doing this, his reply was “Because I can, now give me your money”

      You have no idea how helpless you will feel, I was looking around and pleading with him trying to buy time. Believe me NO ONE will come to your aid…no one. So what if I call the cops after the fact, what will that do if I got injured. The whole point of carrying a means of defense (gun, knife, pepper spray…etc) is as a pre-emptive measure, to prevent loss of life. I guess you suggest everyone get car insurance, a fire extinguisher after you’ve got into an accident or your home has burned down (I’ve survived a fire in my home btw) Now I have fire extinguishers on each floor of my home.

      “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” ~ Benjamin Franklin

      That quote makes too much sense for most. Being irresponsible and blaming others for their well being is so much easier.

      Back in August, my good friend was walking in the downtown area when he was “Flash Mobbed”, anyone who doesn’t know what that is, its when a large group of about 10+ people surround you and go through your pockets (sound fun eh!) He was so stunned he couldn’t move. When it was over he was so upset he grabbed one of them and punched them and knocked them to the ground, he fought with a second man and finally over powered him. At that instance two other men walked up to him and both of them pulled out guns to his face and told him “hey tough guy, you wanna get shot!”

      Let me ask you, how would you feel about those situations if it was you or one of your family members?

      I guess you suggest people call the cops for help. Stats show the average time for police to show up for a call is 15 mins by then you’ll be dead or the crime will be over.

      My friend made a report that same night and to this day none of them were caught and he lost his rent money and lost his place to live, but hey, as long as criminals can get their illegal guns (and they do), and the rest of us can be left unarmed and helpless so people like you can sleep better at night and/or blame responsible gun owners for other action of individuals who commit ILLEGAL GUN CRIMES. One day you might be on the receiving end and you’ll see first hand the whole experience.

      Law abiding, responsible, reasonable and respectable gun owners are some of the most intelligent, kind hearted people you will ever meet. Chances are if you’re ever in trouble they’d come to your aid, but unfortunately “guns are bad and all those who own them” and we couldn’t help you because then we’re the criminal and besides you’ve advocated for laws to disarm us making you a victim. That’s smart!

      When you beg for gun control all you’re doing is asking for control, because the people with power eventually abuse it. Guns offer the choice of equal force to protect ourselves from tyranny from anyone. This is why the Magna Carta 1215 was created because the King at the time was tyrannical. The Charter of Rights & Freedoms is derived from the Magna Carta which states :We are sovereigns and we’re all equal, we are not slaves to anyone, guns just ensure that freedom when you cannot reason with the unreasonable just like those criminals who hurt people, no matter what you believe those people who commit crimes DON’T CARE ABOUT YOU!

      Another reason to own firearms is to prevent mass tragedy’s. Hitler was the first person to create the gun registry. The Jews were disarmed and unable to defend themselves and we all know what happened to them.

      I suggest you look at this vid below, this is what can potentially happen when you have a completely disarmed society. I also suggest you research what Stalin, Mao tse tung, hitler, pol pot did to their people who were unable to defend themselves. I guess that can’t happen here right?

      “First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

      Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

      Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

      Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.” ~ Pastor Niemoller

      • pau says:

        Thank you for taking the time to write such a thoughtful response.

        But I do this you overemphasized Hitler’s role in gun control in Germany. Much gun control existed before Hitler. And much of what Hilter did was long after he had full control of the country, so it really wasn’t done to help him gain power. I found this article very informative: http://guncite.com/gun_control_gcnazimyth.html

        I will certainly watch those videos you posted though.

      • Hard Justice says:

        The article you sent is a speculative piece of literature, I assure you history’s tells a different tale. Watch the vids and you will see for yourself how irresponsible any gun policy is. Exercising the inalienable/unalienable right to firearms is about FREEDOM. The freedom of individual choice, the freedom of self preservation, the freedom to not be oppressed by anyone.

        Those 6 + million people who were killed in the holocaust, the 60 million killed by the fascist regime in China under Mao Tse tung, The millions that were murdered and starved under Stalin…etc

        Back in the times of the Romans, people were forbidden from owning swords. The issue doesn’t lie with guns, its about criminally insane people who try and legislate and void the rights of individuals from being the first line of defense in their sovereign lives.

      • pau says:

        I did watch the videos you posted. And I do agree with your arguments and conclusions (in general).

        My point is that your argument becomes much better when you don’t make mistakes about facts, even if those are minor facts. Hitler didn’t create the gun registry. He certainly (mis)used it. But he didn’t create it.

        (If you can point me to evidence that Hitler did create the registry, please do so.)

    • Hard Justice says:

      Sorry I sent you the wrong vid, but listen to it anyway its informative.

      This is the “no guns for jews” vid

  32. Misterm says:

    I personally carry a knife, a tactical folder, and as I like to tell people when they ask me why I carry a knife? I tell them because I’m not allowed to legally carry a gun, but criminals do anyway. Kinda sad, I do hope some day CCW will become something that the everyday law abiding citizen can do, hopefully sooner than later, but until then, I’ll keep my gun in my gun locker and my knife in my pocket.

    • KJQ says:

      Be careful. It is against the law in Canada to carry a knife for self-defense, just as it is illegal to buy a handgun for the purpose of self-defense. If you happen to have a knife or a handgun for legal reasons (e.g. opening boxes and target shooting respectively) and are attacked, you can use them for self-defense. Crazy laws but that is the way they are worded.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Why would it be against the laws of nature to protect yourself, its a defensive response…an instinct. Even an house pet would defend itself, a cat would posture itself in a defense position and paw its claws at you, even a pet bird would peck any threat. I’m sick and tired of people accusing other people who are victims of being unreasonable. Plain stupid!

        If anyone is unlawfully being attacked do what ever you must do to survive, this is non-negotiable. A criminally insane person CANNOT BE REASONED WITH! How difficult is it for police, judges, lawyers, anti-freedom/anti-gun liberals to understand this.

        Its not a gun issue, its not a knife issue, its not a pepper spray issue, its not a collapsible baton issue or any other object that could potentially be used for preservation of life…

        This is a BRAIN ISSUE! People who advocate passivity towards criminals are mentally ill and need psychological counseling.

        The police and governments are a bunch of authoritarian criminals. Its o.k. for police, armed guards, military to protect themselves lawfully, but anyone else needs to ask for permission. We allow insane lunatics to ingrain these absurdities into our logical minds. I’m not anyone’s slave, I’m not anyone’s property, I’d like to see the contract where I consent to their laws or ideals of amnesty towards criminality what side of the law are they on expecting people to stand around and be violated. This is downright stupid and immoral and I won’t compromise my life to appease a bunch of despotic hypocrites..

        Telling someone they can’t defend themselves is like saying they don’t have the right to live, saying they don’t have the right to breathe. Just think about if for a minute, how stupid has humanity stooped to, to go along with this insanity. Go ahead and hold your breathe for government authoritarians who lack cognitive reasoning.

        “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ~ Voltaire

        Since when do we need licenses to live or breathe, who cares what they think, they work for us. Our taxes pay their salary. People need to stop being apologists and advocate for their own enslavement to these control freak dictators.

        “To serve and protect” mean anything to anyone…its a fraud. They don’t protect anyone, they show up after the fact to put up the yellow tape, take pictures and chalk outline the corpse, that’s all the police are good for.

        Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms clearly states:

        “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”

        Lets look at the definition of Security in the dictionary.

        se·cu·ri·ty
        [si-kyoo r-i-tee] Show IPA noun, plural se·cu·ri·ties, adjective.
        noun
        1.
        freedom from danger, risk, etc.; safety.
        2.
        freedom from care, anxiety, or doubt; well-founded confidence.
        3.
        something that secures or makes safe; protection; defense.
        4.
        freedom from financial cares or from want: The insurance policy gave the family security.
        5.
        precautions taken to guard against crime, attack, sabotage, espionage, etc.: The senator claimed security was lax and potential enemies know our plans.

        Look at # 3, It says “SOMETHING that secures”…something! its not defined what it is, it could be a gun, it could be a shoe, it could be a guard dog, it could be a stick with a nail in it…its not defined. So the government saying you cannot use firearms or anything for that matter for your SECURITY OF THE PERSON is UNLAWFUL!

        Section 34 of the criminal code states:

        34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.

        (2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if

        (a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and

        (b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

        Again the laws state to use force by force. Now doesn’t that sound logical. Sir Isaac Newtons 3rd law of motion says something along the lines of that aswell.

        “To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction”

        Criminal with illegal gun = Action
        Law abiding citizen with legal gun = equal and opposite reaction.

        Reasonable grounds, I think that most law abiding gun owners are more than reasonable considering that most haven’t shot home intruders, or store owners defending their place of business from unreasonable criminals, or citizen’s started conceal carrying their firearms with all the crimes going around. That needs to change.

        Time for people to start using their brains and get off their butts and contact the CFO, Prime minister and mayor, get petitions going, start dialogue with people at their local gun range other guns owners and family or friends who are police or military.

        Our lives aren’t based on strangers opinions who take government jobs and bully us with unreasonable, irrational legislation.

      • KJQ says:

        @Hard Justice:

        I’m totally with you on this. I think our laws regarding weapons and self-defense are immoral. They are written such that all weapons are illegal, and all violence is illegal. Then they list certain things that “provide a defence” against being charged! These include things like being an on-duty police officer, or having a PAL, or having been or about to be attacked in the case of self defense.

        The more I look at our laws as written, the more I think we have bad tradition of being thought of as subjects rather than citizens.

        Back to my original point, I was not defending our unjust laws, merely pointing out to Misterm that he should not tell anyone he is carrying a knife for self-defence, because by law that makes it a weapon, and it is illegal to carry a weapon under those circumstances. Similarly, it is illegal to buy or own a handgun (even with a PAL) for the purpose of self-defense. You can only lawfully buy or possess one for target shooting (collectors notwithstanding). However, if you own a handgun for target shooting, and you are violently attacked, and you can get it unlocked and loaded, you can use it to defend yourself. Even then, you will be arrested and then have to defend yourself by proving that the use of lethal force was justified. Again, not defending this, just telling it like it is :-(

      • Hard Justice says:

        By the way I’m not directing my comment towards you in any negative, my post was a general one. I understand that its not you or I creating the legislation’s to violate peoples rights…its the system that’s messed up. We’re just victims of this corrupt government.

        I don’t personally use the words weapons when I’m referring to any tools of defense. Most lack the ability to know what defense is so I don’t give them the words to fuel their irrationality any further. We all know that the cognitively challenged (anti-freedom, Anti-gun types) seem to base life on opinions and their feelings instead of logic and statistics.

        From my perspective violence is wrong and should be shunned, but self defense is not violence, its a counter action “an equal and opposite reaction” as Sir Issac Newton’s 3rd law of motion states, its a repelling of irrational, unjustified, unreasonable violence.

        That’s true, we are not sovereign human beings with independent, critical thoughts, we’re taught from a very early age that there exists a hierarchy in both government and society, we’ve been taught we have superiors in both wealth class and in our work environment. We’re indoctrinated in statist schools with a grading system that I have found similar to how they grade beef.

        Grade A prime beef is the cut of choice, its gets a A grade and it passes inspection.

        The school system works in the same manner, you don’t do as your told, you don’t follow curriculum, you don’t achieve at the matrix indoctrinated “don’t think, just take the blue pill and follow blindly” sheep mentality and you FAIL, and not only that your ousted as an “unsatisfactory”, a delinquent, a pariah…etc. Now a days they even prescribe children with psychological counseling and are given psychotropic drugs such as riddlin, but I digress.

        That’s where the problem lies, I pointed all all those facts and corrupt, inept laws for a reason, so we don’t have to be tip toeing around elected officials (politicians), corrupt courts/judges, and having to explain ourselves to civil servants (police) which our taxes pay their salary. They don’t like hearing it, but too bad are we still under king ruler-ship or a sovereign nation?

        Adults don’t need to ask for permission for anything, that’s what responsible, reasonable, respectable people do live and think independently.

        We need to stop with the “Is this o.k. to do” mentality. Everyone should ask themselves, do we live in a free society? If we do then why are we given irrational, immoral rules & regulations to follow?

        Look at your post, don’t take it personally I’m just pointing out what we’ve ALL be conditioned to follow.

        Me personally I don’t recall agreeing with these terms. We’re on the same side, and I have been guilty of thinking like this in the past, giving authority to madness!

        We are what’s wrong with the way things are. We can’t blame these cops, judges, criminal defense lawyers to know any better they work for a paycheck, they bend the rules to their advantage, they don’t care about morality or the rule of law…many think they’re above these laws. There’s two set of rules, None for them and the rest to us. Why? So they can tax us to death and they can stay employed and in positions of power.

        Why shouldn’t anyone have to explain why they are carrying a knife or a firearm. Those items do arbitrarily make on a criminal, its the ACT of a crime which is an offense, a violation of another sovereign human being which is immoral and illegal.

        Its not a crime to carry anything, until an offense HAS been committed. A hammer could be used to commit an offense and it has, but why should anyone fear a hammer.

        What happened to “innocent until proven guilty in a court of law”, There needs to be someone who’s been offended for there to be an offense”

        We revert back to “They say” laws, the cops say, we obey. The judges convict, we obey. The liberal hypocrites judge, we obey. In the end who suffers? The innocent, unarmed victim. The only person who feels the full effect of an unjust, immoral society is the rape victim, the person who was robbed, the individual who has his home broken into…etc.

        You also said

        “Similarly, it is illegal to buy or own a handgun (even with a PAL) for the purpose of self-defense. You can only lawfully buy or possess one for target shooting (collectors notwithstanding). However, if you own a handgun for target shooting, and you are violently attacked, and you can get it unlocked and loaded, you can use it to defend yourself. Even then, you will be arrested and then have to defend yourself by proving that the use of lethal force was justified. Again, not defending this, just telling it like it is”

        The laws are twisted, there’s no doubt about that. Why is it ILLEGAL to buy or own a handgun for self-defense even though section 7 of the Charter and section 34 of the criminal code say’s specifically you can own something for “security of the person” or meet “Force with Force”

        You said:

        “IF” you own a gun, “IF you can get it unlocked and loaded.”

        So again we’re restricted with many immoral and irrational intrusions by some law to prevent us from protecting our lives.

        You said:

        “you will be arrested & then have to defend yourself by proving lethal force was justified”

        You have to explain yourself to the hypocrite police after all the stress and probable injury, and then belittled by some despotic judge and have to justify your actions that a criminal was violating your freedoms and convince them you’re worthy to live.

        WOW! That is not freedom and that is unjust without a doubt! This country is demented and messed up beyond hope.

        Again, I’m not blaming you or criticizing what you wrote, I’m just pointing out that we’re all in deep trouble. The criminals have more rights that your or I have and the courts just see us as tax slaves…subjects.

      • KJQ says:

        That should have read “a defense against being convicted”, not “charged”.

      • KJQ says:

        @Hard Justice: I am SO with you on this. It’s hard to believe we’ve let things get this bad. We need to change the hearts and minds of our fellow citizens if we are to have any chance of improving things (although I’m all for pointing out the absurdities to our elected officials every chance I get). For my part, I’m trying to change people’s minds one conversation at a time, and by invitations to our shooting club so they can try shooting a real handgun/rifle/shotgun and ‘demystify’ them a bit (i.e. counter fear of the unknown).

        I found Dr. John Lott’s books (“More Guns, Less Crime” and “The Bias Against Guns”) incredibly useful in ‘arming’ me with the facts for those one-on-one conversations with acquaintances.

        We’ve also joined the NFA, and will be planning our family vacation this year so we can attend.the AGM in May :-)

  33. Hard Justice says:

    Misterm good on you its god given right to defend yourself. I carry a folder everytime I got out aswell as I’ve have been a victim of assault and robbery on more than one occasion (not a good feeling). I’m waiting on a Kersaw Tremor, look into it, its a very good folder…very affordable.

    Why the courts, police, RCMP, CFO interfere with someone’s ability to protect themselves is obvious, they need to neuter people from their natural instincts so people feel helpless, incapable and useless so they need to call them for assistance and they keep their jobs. its completely despicable. its all about MONEY, keep the courts filled, keep the jails full, keeps the guards, police, judges, lawyers…etc employed. If everyone was responsibly armed there would almost be no need for police, we’d be the first responders.

    Well, on a brighter note a big win for all law abiding gun owners across Canada thanks to Mr. Ian Thompson and his attorney gun advocate Edward Burlew. I received an e-mail yesterday.

    Dear…

    As I sit here in my hotel room in Welland at 3:00AM (listening to my roommate snore) waiting to return to Toronto to catch our flight back to Montreal later this morning, I would like to advise you, for those who haven’t heard the news, that Ian Thomson was acquitted of all charges yesterday afternoon in a Welland courtroom.

    This is a significant win for all Canadian firearms owners as well as Canadians in general.

    I wish to thank all of you for your support, especially those who made the trek out to Welland to assist in the support of Ian Thomson. I can speak for Ian when I say it meant a great deal to him to feel he was not “alone” in the courtroom.

    Many thanks go out to Peter Evangelidis, who has been a staunch supporter of C.A.S.D. and CanadaCarry from the start, and for so generously picking up the tab for our travel expenses (airfare, car rental, hotel, meals) to Welland to support Ian.

    To those who sent in $5, $10 or $100; you folks are the fuel who keep the machine running. Thank you.

    To those have sent in letters to Harper and Toews, lets keep hammering them… we must not relent. Thank you for supporting our efforts.

    Let us continue our work in 2013. It is encouraging to see our progress in these particularly trying times.

    Stay safe, and again many thanks.

    Norman “Griffon” Lapierre
    Cell: (514) 5xx-xxxx

    This is the full Ian Thompson story in the link below for those who don’t already know it, and there’s the youtube vid of the firebombing attack on his home.

    This is what the Courts CFO, RCMP & Local police want for us, to stand around and do nothing while being attacked. Now the laws need to be changed, this is the time for all gun owners and freedom advocates alike to stand together and voice the changes we wish to be seen. We need a castle doctrine now, ATC for all who feel responsible enough to carry & any other changes. We need to throw out ideas right now everyone on how to get this done.

    http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/20/man-faces-jail-after-protecting-home-from-masked-attackers/

  34. KJQ says:

    Does anyone know what happened to the constitutional challenge that Ian Thompson’s lawyer was pursuing? I know he won the court case because the judge believed he had his guns stored properly, but what about his having challenged the storage laws themselves as being unconstitutional? No mention of that since last summer.

    • Hard Justice says:

      I posted what happened above. I received an e-mail.

      “Dear…

      As I sit here in my hotel room in Welland at 3:00AM (listening to my roommate snore) waiting to return to Toronto to catch our flight back to Montreal later this morning, I would like to advise you, for those who haven’t heard the news, that Ian Thomson was acquitted of all charges yesterday afternoon in a Welland courtroom.

      This is a significant win for all Canadian firearms owners as well as Canadians in general.

      I wish to thank all of you for your support, especially those who made the trek out to Welland to assist in the support of Ian Thomson. I can speak for Ian when I say it meant a great deal to him to feel he was not “alone” in the courtroom.

      Many thanks go out to Peter Evangelidis, who has been a staunch supporter of C.A.S.D. and CanadaCarry from the start, and for so generously picking up the tab for our travel expenses (airfare, car rental, hotel, meals) to Welland to support Ian.

      To those who sent in $5, $10 or $100; you folks are the fuel who keep the machine running. Thank you.

      To those have sent in letters to Harper and Toews, lets keep hammering them… we must not relent. Thank you for supporting our efforts.

      Let us continue our work in 2013. It is encouraging to see our progress in these particularly trying times.

      Stay safe, and again many thanks.

      Norman “Griffon” Lapierre
      Cell: (514) 5xx-xxxx”

      Now what all firearms owners and even people who don’t own firearm’s question should be what happens now. We need a Castle doctrine and conceal carry laws made official. It is up to us to make things happen, the judges, lawyers and police don’t want people armed and self reliant…they’d be out of jobs!

      Why hasn’t this made National News? Canadians abroad are complaisant, inept and want to be looked after by big brother.

      Go out and start a petition, start dialogue with gun owners, at the gun range, with family and friends who believe in the rights of self preservation, conceal carry. If you know someone in law enforcement & they’re abide by their oaths then talk to them about what can be done.

      if you’re inclined go here and sign the “Open Carry Canada” petition.

      http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/open-carry-ontario.html

      • KJQ says:

        Thanks. I know what happened at trial, I’ve read the judgement. He was found not guilty of unsafe storage. The judgement was not, however, on the grounds that the safe storage laws are unconstitutional, but that Mr. Thompson did not have his firearms unsafely stored under the terms of the current legislation in the opinion of the judge. I was/am hoping that the safe storage laws themselves would/could have been overturned. I haven’t read what happened to that constitutional argument his lawyer had made, apparently back in October?

        Thanks for the link to the petition. Unfortunately, I don’t live in Ontario so it would be moot. I’m actually not a big fan of open carry as it would unnecessarily intimidate some fellow citizens, and it would also let criminals know who to shoot first. Probably should still be legal, though. What we really need is ATC’s.

        I think we need to lobby the Federal Government to change the Firearms legislation such that ATC are “shall issue” vice the current “may issue”, which we know in practice is almost never. Short of a criminal record or history of mental illness (which has already been pre-screened in Canada through the PAL process), anyone should be allowed to CC who chooses to, and anywhere except a few exceptions for places already protected by armed personnel (e.g. courts, airports).

      • RicoDB9 says:

        2 FULL pages worth… I will drop in mail tomorrow :)

      • Hard Justice says:

        2 pages full of the open carry petition?

        don’t forget this petition below aswell, I was recently informed about it. This is the exact e-mail. Forward to everyone you know, the wind is blowing in all our favor.

        Petition to end CFO’s

        M.P. Cheryl Gallant is requesting your help in collecting signatures for a petition to end bureaucratic excess within the Canadian Firearms Program by calling for an end to provincial firearms offices.

        For full details and printable forms, please visit the Canadian Shooting Sports website at http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2013/03/CFO_petition_release_en.html

        All petitions must be hand written and mailed (no postage required) to:

        Cheryl Gallant, MP,
        RM 604 Justice Bldg., House of Commons,
        Ottawa. K1A 0A6

        Government rules require your full home address, or the city and province, or the province and postal code as well as your name and signature in order for your vote to count.

      • KJQ says:

        Update to my question RE Ian Thompson’s constitutional challenge of the safe storage laws: I met Ian and his lawyer Ed at the NFA annual meeting in May. He said they had to forget about pursuing the constitutional challenge because of money. It costs thousands of dollars to see such a challenge all the way to the SCOC, and he just didn’t have the funds. Too bad. Pretty much the whole of C68 needs to be repealed. Firearms ownership laws do not belong in the criminal code, all stop.

  35. brittney says:

    so when getting a divorce in canada, can they take your gun lisence away from you, without even assauting your wife with it? is it a new thing where they are taking guns away from ppl now?

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      One of the first things a gun owner should do when considering a divorce is transfer all firearms into a trusted friend’s name. It is way too easy for even a false complaint to be levied against you by your spouse that will result in your firearms being confiscated. This is sadly not a new development.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Excellent advice. I know someone who’s friend firearms were taken away because of a divorce and the vengeful spouse called the authorities and said their spouse had firearms and they were concerned for their safety. Every gun, even heirloom guns were confiscated without reasonable cause and no receipt was given and no respect for the gun onwers rights were considered. We have limited liberties and those can be denied from some stranger with a badge under the false pretense of the rule of law. NO trial by jury, no habeas corpus its communist confiscation and that’s all you have.

        No freedom for anyone. How did we let it get so far to this point where civil servants who are hired with our tax dollars are above the rule of law

  36. Lifesworthit says:

    People say the states are bad and that’s why they carry protection, here in Canada is no different. I’ve seen situations where victims if had a firearm, the situation would have never taken place. I don’t mean using the firearm , most times them knowing or seeing the firearm is enough. I agree with the rest of Canadian citizens who believe our personal protection is worth more than money. Why else do armored guards carry protection.

  37. Mathieu foley says:

    I have been beaten almost to death.
    I don’t want this to happen again. What would have happened to my wife if she had of been with me.
    I should have the right to protect myself.
    I have no criminal record, and am a well educated individual.
    This has happened to me on more than one occasion.
    Random at best.
    I will Carry one way or the other eventually. I would like to be following the law when it happens again

    • denlaugal says:

      keep a good lawyer on retainer (and a full bank account), I’ve used a firearm to protect myself and wife from a gun wielding criminal only to be charge by RCMP for doing so…This is Canada, we’re unarmed, defenseless and it’s the law!

      • gunningforthetruth says:

        I’d be interested to hear more about your experience. I host a pro-gun podcast called Canadian Reload Radio and we talk about self defense with guns on a regular basis. Perhaps we could do a short interview with you? Let me know.

  38. gunningforthetruth says:

    Good on you Dennis. Thanks!

    • Hard Justice says:

      Dear Sir:

      Is it possible to do a pro-gun podcast about the petition below to get the message to as many listeners out there.

      We need this petition to go nationwide, all across our great country.

      Thank-you for your consideration.

      Petition to end CFO’s

      M.P. Cheryl Gallant is requesting your help in collecting signatures for a petition to end bureaucratic excess within the Canadian Firearms Program by calling for an end to provincial firearms offices.

      For full details and printable forms, please visit the Canadian Shooting Sports website at http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2013/03/CFO_petition_release_en.html

      All petitions must be hand written and mailed (no postage required) to:

      Cheryl Gallant, MP,
      RM 604 Justice Bldg., House of Commons,
      Ottawa. K1A 0A6

      Government rules require your full home address, or the city and province, or the province and postal code as well as your name and signature in order for your vote to count.

      • gunningforthetruth says:

        It will be mentioned this week on Canadian Reload Radio.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Thank-you for your efforts, much appreciated! Be well. If you don’t mind letting us know when the podcast is available or a link.

        Thanks again.

  39. RicoDB9 says:

    OK so great blog… I read the whole thing from top to bottom. Ive also filled out the petition at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/open-carry-ontario.html

    My 2 c… if you’re going to write a letter or email to the PM or Mr. Toews BE NICE. Snide remarks aren’t going to get us anywhere. Be thoughtful and courteous. Whether you approve of the PM or not is not the point.

    You can catch more flies with honey…

    So it seems that some are signing the petition and some are sending letters.

    It would sure be good to have a united front. Might I suggest that EVERYBODY sign the petition and any CFSC instructors reading this pass this on to their students. I passed it to my instructors.

    These laws are clearly in violation of our rights to defend ourselves and they need to be changed. If the laws from the 1600s are still relevant, then the CFOs should take my $100 and give me my carry permit.

    Im not sure where there are provincial CFOs overlaying administration of a federal law…. its so stupid.

    Is there a point to engaging the lawyer (Ed Burlew) along with the NFA and posing a constitutional challenge to the carry laws? Is that insanely expensive? I assume it wouldn’t be cheap but maybe Mr. Burlew might be interested in taking it on.

    • Hard Justice says:

      Good work and comments RicoDB9, that’s the type of enthusiasm and independent research we need. I believe you can contact the RCMP to ask them about your questions directly.

      I don’t think your oversimplifying, it makes sense. Why can brinks security staff be allowed to carry fireamrs and we cannot.

      I always drive the question who’s working for whom? Who’s paying these politicians, police, RCMP’s….etc salary’s? It is we the tax payers is it not? So they’re working for us and they’re the boss? That right there should be the question being asked by all Canadian tax payers.

      Its evident the course is available to security personnel, we should research where they take their course and follow through aswell. If one is being denied then there is a bias and special privileges to certain corporations at who’s interest? Are the banks more important than us…have more rights? Is the CFO in cahoots with the banks and getting some financial compensation for his preference on who he allows the ATC? It arouses questions that never seem for the CFO to give answer to.

      This is a Constitutional challenge!

      I was told by a very reliable source that the courts don’t stand a chance in court in a Constitutional challenge, but the court fees would be in the multiple hundreds of thousands. The courts do this on purpose to discourage anyone from contesting their twisted legislation’s.

      This is why a grass roots petition like the one I posted to end the CFO is the best option.

      http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2013/03/CFO_petition_release_en.html

      In this manner, its a collective of ALL firearms owners and not a standalone individual enduring the costly task in the bowels of the corrupt judicial system. Ian Thompson was a prime example of how the courts knew they didn’t have a case against him, but went along with the trial as they knew it would cost Mr. Thompson huge court fees in the tens of thousands. This would discourage and dishearten most, its cheaper to let the criminals steal your belongings as crazy as that sounds…all thanks to the judicial system.

      The judge must have thought, “you want your freedom, we’ll you’re gonna pay for it.” Its despicable, because the case could have been thrown out, CFO removed & legislation’s changed…but!

      This would mean armed, independent citizen’s and they can’t have that. The slaves would rebel & they might come to a realization that we don’t need big brother anymore.

      Crime would plummet, cops would be obsolete with reduced crime, courts would be empty, prisons and morgues would be full and the rest of the criminals would flee to another country where they’d be protected by liberal laws…but I digress.

      Simply put, Its best we remove the CFO parasite altogether and not be bothered with it showing up ever again, like that draconian gun registry. We must be vigilant of these nefarious law makers they know no bounds and their hearts are full of disdain towards the tax paying peasants.

      That’s my 5 cents.

      • RicoDB9 says:

        With respect to the “firearms proficiency and use of force training”, I have contacted Brinks and asked them if they offer their course to the public or if they use a contract company to do training.

        I will post the reply when I get it.

        I have also contacted a few companies in the US who do handgun training (which is more than just shooting, its overall self-defense and the awesome responsibility of carrying) and asked them for their curriculum which I intent to send to the CFO. I will pose the question to the CFO and ask if what these US companies are offering is sufficient according to Canadian legislation and will satisfy the law.

        I sure they will give me a straight yes or no answer :|

        Anyway, it seems after reading the blog that without this hurdle removed we are blowing sunshine up our @sses. If this is part of the legislation, the CFO will ALWAYS have a reason to decline us no matter if we are being chased with a baseball bat by a freak.

        We must either find (or create) a course so that the CFO stops dangling the ATC in front of our noses but not giving them to us by saying “you don’t have the right training”.

  40. Hard Justice says:

    All gun owners (even non-gun owners) please read below. This is monumental, and those who have been wanting gun reform here’s YOUR chance to take back some of your rights and freedoms. Please forward this to family, friends, co-workers, gun clubs & ranges…etc.

    Thank-you Mrs. Cheryl Gallant, and a big Thank-you to Mr. Tony Bernardo aswell.

    Petition to end CFO’s

    M.P. Cheryl Gallant is requesting your help in collecting signatures for a petition to end bureaucratic excess within the Canadian Firearms Program by calling for an end to provincial firearms offices.

    For full details and printable forms, please visit the Canadian Shooting Sports website at http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2013/03/CFO_petition_release_en.html

    All petitions must be hand written and mailed (no postage required) to:

    Cheryl Gallant, MP,
    RM 604 Justice Bldg., House of Commons,
    Ottawa. K1A 0A6

    Government rules require your full home address, or the city and province, or the province and postal code as well as your name and signature in order for your vote to count.

  41. RicoDB9 says:

    Here is something interesting…

    http://www.gazette.gc.ca/archives/p2/2004/2004-12-15/html/sor-dors267-eng.html

    REGULATIONS AMENDING THE AUTHORIZATIONS
    TO CARRY RESTRICTED FIREARMS AND CERTAIN
    HANDGUNS REGULATIONS

    AMENDMENTS

    1. —SNIP—

    2. Section 4 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

    4. A chief firearms officer shall not issue to an individual an authorization to carry a particular restricted firearm or prohibited handgun that is needed in the circumstances described in section 2 or paragraph 3(a) unless the chief firearms officer determines that

    (a) the individual has successfully completed training in firearms proficiency and the use of force that is appropriate for using the firearm in those circumstances; and

    (b) the firearm is appropriate in those circumstances.

    Unless Im reading this wrong, if you can acquire the training, which Im still looking for, and you have been trained in “firearms proficiency and use of force” with your handgun, the CFO has no reason to decline you.

    Did I oversimplify the law here?

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      A little bit. You have to be able to prove to your CFO that you need the gun for self defense and that the local police force cannot protect you. I wish it was as simple as you put it. In a perfect world, it would be.

      • denlaugal says:

        I’ve been robbed, police were never there when it happens, it took them 8 minutes to get to my store after an armed robbery. One guy got away (police never did catch him) I caught other guy, he went to jail for 4.5 years. Looking back, every incident we’ve had over the years police were never there during the crime, they aways showed up too late….Yet they claim they are providing adequate service to the community…Many retailers in my area no longer call police after being robbed, there’s no point.

        My point, The CFO believes the Police when they say they are providing service to the community, even thou we all know they can’t be there when the crime is actually committed. The CFO will not believe you when you say the police can’t protect you. Even if you’ve been killed.

    • Dennis says:

      I’m a jeweller and been through a armed robbery, I’ve taken the recognized armored car course (use of force) sitting along side employees of armored car companies. I have a valid business reason and need to have a firearm for protection. I was denied….Three most fatal (killed on the job) jobs in Canada – Taxi driver, Police officer & Jeweller. The CFO can make up reasons out of thin air to deny you.

  42. gunningforthetruth says:

    The podcast is called Canadian Reload Radio and is available at canadianreloadradio.ca

    Cheers!

  43. Hard Justice says:

    Those are some incredible accounts Denis & Denlaugal. I’ve been on the receiving end of a knife before on more than one occasion…not fun let me tell you. Seen lots of very bad things in my life and its insulting to think the local police, RCMP & local police are so naive…or playing the fool because they know the crime stats.

    Each individual can do as they please, but speaking for myself its clear who’s denying us the ATC and our rights to self defense and that’s who i intend to get rid of with this petition. I’m done trying to explain myself to a hypocrite who has a gun, but doesn’t want anyone else to have one. I’m not jumping through any hoops, or going to do any courses…etc.

    Once these CFO clowns are out of the way we can go back to living our lives as free individuals and not in a pre-emptive communist society under some microscope, looked down upon by some bureaucrat.

    My individual sovereign rights are inalienable/unalienable.

    • Dennis says:

      The reason I jump through all the “hoops” was to test the process. I had all my ducks in a row and a professional (employment reason) for a firearm. Had the verified “Armed” theats, had all the proper recoginzed training, storage requirements, etc, etc. I’m a mature citizen 52yr old, and not some young punk. I had already been through one incident which involved protecting myself and wife with a firearm at work,,,I could not justify the need more other than dying from an attack,,,,still I was denied.

  44. bgibb50 says:

    Yesterday, I spoke with my Wild Rose Allience MLA and Justic Critic Rob Anderson about the ATC-3 situation in Alberta. He actually called me at my office after I had sent him an email proposing changes in the issue of ATC-3 permits here in Alberta. He listened to everything I had to say and stated his support for changes to make law abiing citizens ansd responsible gun owners.

    Rob reaffirmed the WRA’s committment to concealed carry and the implementation of the Castle Doctrine in Alberta, and agreed to have me do a short feasibility study & recommendation paper, which I am now working on. There is no doubt that even if a WRA provincial government were to implement the changes we all want, the “Conservatives”, Liberals and the NDP will do everything they can to block the move. The WRA have a justice and legal advisor who will call me shortly to discuss this matter futher.

    Keep your fingers crossed!

  45. RicoDB9 says:

    WOW… If you want to hear something scary go to CFRA (580 AM Ottawa) and stream Lowell Green’s podcast show from Thursday April 25 (http://devel.autopod.ca/chum/43/podcasts/) and Google “Inspire Magazine”. If this is not a compelling reason for CCW I don’t know what is. It is certainly a CRYSTAL CLEAR indication that the police absolutely cannot protect us against imminent danger.

    • Hard Justice says:

      I won’t get into a political or religious debate on here, that’s what the powers that be want…Divide and conquer through FEAR propaganda which can come from all sides.

      That being said, the real issue at hand is there are threats from all parts of life, that’s why intelligent people own fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, locks on their doors, air bags…etc as a preventative means. It makes no sense to go out and buy a fire extinguisher or auto insurance after the fact.

      Conceal carry isn’t about glamorizing guns or fantasizing about shooting people, or any other ridiculous claims that uneducated, anti-freedom, anti-gun people make, its about diffusing a potential threat.

      Just a few days ago on Sunday April 21 at a local TD bank here in Toronto 2 armed men tried to rob the bank. I’m very familiar with that area. 2 people were shot because some stupid civilian tried to play the hero.

      Police are NOT an intelligent means as a first responder, time and time again we see they show up after the incident. Put up the yellow tape, ask the public for help in capture of said criminal…etc So what are they getting paid for? putting up yellow tape!

      You’re absolutely right with your last statement,

      “It is certainly a CRYSTAL CLEAR indication that the police absolutely cannot protect us against imminent danger.”

      If you look at your local news there’s a handful of crimes each and everyday. I’m sure its like that all across Canada. When good people are disarmed, only criminals will have guns.

      All these anti-gun legislation’s WILL NEVER work, criminals don’t abide by the laws.

      The bottom line is, each individual is a human being, with a brain and the same basic human rights as the next person.

      Each individual should decide what he/she needs as a tool for self preservation. Some may not want to carry a firearm, and that’s their right, and it should be respected. Some may be suffice with pepper spray, knife, collapsible baton…etc and that’s good for them.

      The issue is NOT about guns, its about “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and NOT to be deprived of…” Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

      The issues is about Freedom of individual choice, and I and others want to have the right to choose, without pre-emptive condemnation or interference from anyone.

  46. Thanks for any other magnificent article. Where else may just anyone get that type of
    information in such a perfect method of writing?

    I’ve a presentation subsequent week, and I am at the look for such information.

  47. Jeremy says:

    I know for a fact I rather have a ton of court cases than a dead family member.
    I’ll be more than glad to fight back than be murdered.

  48. bgibb50 says:

    I ran into Rick Hanson, Chief of Police for Calgary today when I was downtown. So I took the opportunity to ask him about carry permits for us (security guards and private investigators). Our brief conversation went like this:

    Me: I’ve would like to see the carry permits tweaked so we can have side arms on the job.

    Hanson: Why?

    Me: We’ve been confronted in the past by crazies with broken bottles, knives and even the occasional drug dealer with a gun. It would be good if the provincial carry rules can be loosened a little to include us. Our night time patrol drivers are more at risk as they have to check buildings at night when the criminals and the crazies are on the prowl.

    Hanson: That’s a federal decision.

    Me: I thought the that CFO for each province made the decision on issuing carry permits, considering that the reasons to issue tem differ from province to province. Can a provincial government still decide who gets an ATC-3 independent of Ottawa?

    Hanson: No, its still a federal decision

    Me: What about implementing the Castle Doctrine?

    Hanson: What’s that?

    End of conversation. He vanished into an elevator before I could give him a business card. Now, I like Rick Hanson. I think he’s a great chief of police for Calgary. But I am concerned that not one chief of police in Canada seems to be on our side. They have this idea that only they should carry guns, and they are willing to fight us, the little people, to stop us from having full self-defence rights in Canada, including the Castle Doctrine and carry permits, even if the job demands it. I would be more impressed if they spend as much energy getting the criminals off the streets with THEIR (unregistered) handguns.

    In closing, I had an interesting conversation with Shane Saskiw, the Wild Rose Alliance Solicitor-General-In-Waiting. he was open to the idea of liberating the carry licence (I guess he might have to appoint a new CFO to get that done), and wants more information on how the change can be done at the provincial level. Can anyone help me to put this information/proposal together for Shane?

    Bill Gibbons

  49. Jim says:

    You do not need an ATC to protect yourself at home like the author suggested in the example.

    • Hard Justice says:

      very true Jim.

      Legislative Summary of Bill C-26: The Citizen’s Arrest and Self-defense Act *

      Section 34(1) of the Code, therefore, permits the accused to stand his or her ground, even when there is a possibility of escaping the situation. The question for the court is whether the force used was necessary to enable the accused to defend him or herself, not whether such a defense was wise in the circumstances.

      full link below.

      http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?ls=c26&Parl=41&Ses=1

      We still have a big problem when dealing with criminals outside of the home, we need conceal carry laws now, not after 3 attempts at our life.

      I have little to no respect for judges and police, they’re immoral and authoritarian goons. The oaths they took are a big joke, they’re out protecting big corporate interests who fund their departments, and they look upon the tax payers with disdain.

      Prime example when bgibb50 encounter with chief of police rick hanson.

      “Me: What about implementing the Castle Doctrine?

      Hanson: What’s that?”

      How obtuse of you Mr. Hanson, or how convenient to resort to the tact of denial to avoid giving a logical response.

      Who’s paying who’s salary? We’re the bosses and we are all being bullied into their policy, its disgusting and pathetic!

      Its the peoples fault though, you cannot blame a sociopath for behaving like one, but the fact that we let them do this is the sad part. We have NO unity in the gun community, all we have are complaisant, obsequious, apologist bobble heads who complain about draconian guns laws, but then at the same time side with their oppressors. We have a whole slew of mentally unstable people who suffer from Stockholm syndrome.

      We’ve come to a point in society where we must consider the well being of the criminal first, and put ourselves and our loved ones at risk because of political correctness and morally subversive legislation.

      What now?

      • Joe says:

        possibly a petition in every gun store, and shooting range in canada should be attempted. If the right to carry was given I still believe those citizens must have gone through the safety courses and have the proper licence.

      • Hard Justice says:

        Joe, too much regulation leads to more rules and hoops to jump through, we have enough of that already. How about people stop being apologists and statists and apply common sense to common law. Why would anyone who’s gone through the PAL/RPAL need another safety course, so it gives big brother another license they can revoke when they feel the need to. Its another hidden tax, have we not learned from the long gun registry…I guess not!

        Since when has the “Fight of Flight” instinct, and the right to live require permission from anyone? Should anyone stop and call the CFO or local police department if you’re being assaulted, your home invaded by drug crazed criminals or one of you loved one’s violated?

        This leads back to the mindset the mass majority has, they want freedom, but look around for some authority figure to give them permission for their walk in life. How about we as individuals learn to be more self reliant, autonomous instead of obsequious, servile lackey’s for the machine.

        I know for some the idea of thinking for themselves is an outrageous concept, but many states in the United States have no licensing and one would think that gun incidents would be astronomical, but that is not the case.

        If anyone needs a course on how to handle firearms or how to use one’s fundamental instincts to self preservation then the real issue isn’t licenses or firearms, its lack of critical thinking on the part of said individual…of course exceptions apply, but most won’t expect a 5 yr old child to have the mental capacity, or even understand the responsibility that goes with firearms ownership and handling so that is a mute issue.

        I’ve never taken a firearms course and I know how to safely handle firearm’s, though this make shock the average thumb twiddler its basic common sense how to handle guns properly. I’ve even learned how to re-load ammo on my own successfully, but common sense isn’t so common anymore.

        I don’t mean to come off condescending, but all this political correctness non-sense that’s going on in the world is leading us right into serfdom.

        Here in Toronto, now they want to make helmets mandatory for people who go skating. This is a side issue, but it goes to prove a point that if you let emotional basket cases make up rules there’s no end to the nanny state mothering.

        Next they’ll want to cover everyone is bubble wrap, and have camera’s in our homes to monitor us from every possible knee scrape. The big government coddling MUST END!

        I’m personally sick of it, its pathetic!

  50. Joe says:

    Ok, lets say we allow anyone with enough mental capacity to own and carry guns, who is to make the decision a person has that mental capacticy. We can’t honestly say everyone out there is completely with it. I dont want you to think im against you, I am all for the the right to carry firearms. I realize outright criminals will get there hands on weapons no matter what, but requiring someone to go through a simple evaluation of sanity should be somewhere in the process. possibly to lessen the amount of firearms in the hands of nut cases that do exist. “Guns dont kill people. People kill people”

    • Hard Justice says:

      That’s true what you say, we cannot say everyone out there is mentally stable, but simple evaluation isn’t possible. Define the line of mentally stable. There has been incidents in the U.S. where people have got into a moment of insanity due to road rage and shot others. The obviously passed the requirements to acquire firearms, but in a moment of weakness they lost it and it does happen. Society is a dangerous place…but!

      This is why there are laws in place, we could enact conceal carry laws by tomorrow, no background checks, no permits, no restrictions why? Because the laws are in place, nothing changes. If you’re responsible with your gun you will be all the time, whether its at home, in your car or on your person. You commit a violation on another individuals rights in an unprovoked manner you will face the punishment. We don’t need any special laws, you assault anyone regardless if its with a gun, a baseball bat, a rock on the street if its done in a criminally malicious manner you should be charged…very simple!

      In regards of checking for mental illness that’s a tough one, who’s to say it can’t happen to anyone of us. We could be fine and then some circumstance happens and we could falter. I’ve seen this happen many times unfortunately, most of the people were young and I noticed a pattern…work related stress!

      As you pointed out if anyone wants a gun they will get it by illegal means, and i doubt a criminal is going to care what mental state the purchaser is in. So in the end its pointless to do mental checks because if anyone for example is looking to commit a massacre they’ll just get one by illegal means, and the strange part is they’ll be able to get fully automatic, suppressors, armor piercing ammo…etc The black market doesn’t follow laws or bans.

      This is what makes me think those who are in charge of gun policies are not only bias, they’re very stupid.

      Why lump everyone in with the mentally ill, criminals, gun runners, gangs, drug dealers…etc Things should be on an individual basis, if someone committed a crime with a certain type of firearm why should it be anyone else fault and their guns be targeted.

      The equivalent of this would be someone gets drunk with vodka, gets into their Honda civic and cause a 10 car accident killing 20 people should Vodka and Honda civics be banned? NO, the person behind the wheel is responsible no one else.

      …or

      Someone walks into Canadian tire, buys two 12 inch butcher knives puts them in a bag, goes to a busy mall with Christmas shoppers knowing its the most busiest time of the year, pulls out both butcher knives and starts hacking and slashing killing 18 people and injuring 12 others. Should we banned knives or have licensing to own one?

      NO! the person behind with the knives injuring others is responsible, no one else.

      The government fails to realize we can’t live in plastic bubbles and no one should be made to live in one, and you CANNOT legislate morality or prevent mental illness. We live in an imperfect world, BUT we have the freedom to choose and that should never be infringed upon.

      Thanks for the stimulating conversation, it keeps the mental juices flowing. Its a shame we don’t have critical thinkers in politics, the courts, CFO and the police departments. Things could be so much easier. LOL

  51. Mark says:

    I just wanted to post this here for anyone to read or show to politicians that will listen, like the Wild Rose Party.

    In the Czech Republic it is a common citizen’s right to conceal carry. Guess what? You need to get trained, certified, register all your hand guns, be a good shot (to prevent accidental shootings in case you need to defend yourself), get a note from your doctor and have a clean criminal record.

    Did you know that in 2009 the Czech Republic had a murder rate of 1.7 per 100,000 and in the same year Canada had a murder rate of 1.8 per 100,000?

    The reason the US has such high shooting rates/murder rates is because they don’t require any training (except for carrying; in fact people who carry are the most law abiding), licences, etc. to get a firearm. Getting a firearm is not hard in the USA.

    The Czech Republic proves that you don’t have to have draconian gun laws banning concealed carry like Canada does; you just have to prevent crazies and criminals from getting guns easily, that’s all you ever need to do.

    There are millions of legal gun owners in Canada, yet you never hear of them going on shooting sprees. It’s not the guns; it’s how easy it is to get them that’s the problem.

    I know people want to use the argument that people will go shooting each other over parking spaces, yet, that does not happen in the Czech Republic, that argument is a myth. There are proper training procedures to follow when conceal carrying and misuse will lead to serious jail time.

    The are many other things to add to this. Several mentioned above.

    Remember that in order to pass such a law in this country you need to make the gun fearing population understand that Concealed Carry will not hurt them. Convincing them may be the most difficult thing to do, actually, many will still oppose this law, even if presented with the facts from the Czech Republic.

    Just too many damn totalitarians in the government and freedom hating people out there.

  52. Bob Smith says:

    And I keep reading about our “god given right”. God doesn’t exist first of all an if you still believe in that superstitious fabrication and still live your life on a book written 2500 years ago, which by the way, also says slavery is morally just and women essentially have no rights, well then you are, atleast logically, and morally speaking are not mature enough to carry any kind of weapon.

    God was invented at a time before guns existed do don’t use that excuse.

    Secondly, there is no arguing the facts. Places where guns are legally purchased and sold to its citizens without proper training or justifiable reasons have higher homicide rates, gun related accidents and crimes involving fire arms.

    Move to the states and you can stick pile ammunition with the rest of the morons. Canada is much safer without easily acquired guns.

    If you aren’t a cop, military or armed guard, the bottom line is you don’t need one. You think if someone walks up, puts that cold barrel at the base of your skull and says empty your pockets Is going to be thwarted by the fact that you are wearing an obvious holster? Guess what? Now he has your gun too.

    And you’re right back where you started. Except now criminals have a much easier time getting there hands on these guns. It’s difficult to get a handgun in Canada either legally or illegally. And that’s a good thing.

    • gunningforthetruth says:

      First of all, God exists. If you choose not to believe, that is your business and I’ll not mock you for it. I’ll thank you to do the same and not mock my beliefs which are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

      Secondly, the Bible in no way condones slavery as we know it today. Slavery in Biblical times was a solution for an individual in debt. The passages that talk about slavery instruct slaves to respect their masters, and masters to treat their slaves “justly and fairly”. (Colossians 4:1) Also, the Bible recognizes women as equals, having only different roles to play in life from a man. They are in no way inferior and the Bible never alludes to this. “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. [...] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, [...] (Galatians 3:26-29) This passage clearly indicates that we are all on equal footing.

      Third, you say that God was invented before guns. I obviously disagree. However, I will concede that the Bible was written before guns were invented. Not before personal weapons were invented however. The Bible speaks clearly on the position of having personal weapons at your disposal for the purpose of self defense:

      When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are safe;
      (Luke 11:21)

      But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
      (1 Timothy 5:8)

      He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
      (Luke 22:36)

      I hope that clears up the Biblical confusion for you. I know you don’t believe, but to be fair it was you who brought it up. :-)

      Fourth, you say that there’s no arguing the fact that where there are more guns, there is more violent crime. Happily, I am easily able to argue this with you using not only articles in the mass media who have backed their findings with documented statistics, but aso using government findings as well. Please see the following links:

      http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/24/Concealed-Carry-Proves-Guns-Are-Part-Of-The-Solution-To-Gun-Violence

      http://www.collegiatetimes.com/opinion/columnists/article_ba2d7bb8-2faa-5686-bc79-85d9361f62d4.html

      http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&sid=cp112313am&r_n=hr277.112&dbname=cp112&&sel=TOC_10311

      All of these links show very clearly that in every jurisdiction where law abiding citizens are afforded the right to carry weapons for personal protection, violent crime fell.

      Open your mind, get your head out of the sand, and look into this for yourself. This is too important of a topic to be so uninformed in.

    • RicoDB9 says:

      TO ALL… Bob is obviously a Liberal “progressive” who thinks that if you don’t think what he thinks, your a back-woods, corn-grower with manure on your boots.

      He’s trying to illicit a reactionary response… DONT GIVE HIM THE SATISFACTION !!!

      Bob… You’re a bit of a pompous ignoramus aren’t you?

      Ok, let’s take God out of it.

      The law is the law and we have had the right to protect ourselves from English Common Law dating back 500 years. Including your friend Pierre Trudeau’s (albeit flawed) Charter of Right and Freedoms.

      Have a nice day.

    • Mark says:

      Bobby, Bobby, Bobby. Everyone has a right to their beliefs. I don’t care what anyone believes. Why do you?

      You’re right, there is no arguing facts. Fact is, the Czech Republic allows properly trained citizens to acquire pistols for concealed carrying for the purpose of self-defence and it is a far safer country than Canada, gun ban United Kingdom and even stricter gun ban Australia.

      Earlier I stated that the Czech Republic had a murder rate 0.1 per 100,000 people lower than Canada; I was wrong. It’s even better. Teaches me a lesson to never use Wikipedia again. Using UNODC stats, in 2011 the Czech Republic had a murder rate of 0.8 per 100,000 while in the same year Canada had a murder rate of 1.5 per 100,000. Nearly twice as many murders! That’s huge!

      It’s laughable that you say “Places where guns are legally purchased and sold to its citizens without proper training or justifiable reasons have higher homicide rates”. Absolutely false. Perhaps in most places but not all. In fact, Vermont is one of the least restrictive States when it comes to firearms and allows person 16 and older to carry firearms concealed or open without a licence or any training at all. In 2012, Vermont had a murder rate of 1.3 per 100,000.

      Vermont doesn’t have really poor areas, so that’s the real reason murder is so low. Due to the fact that inner cities have more poor and less civilized folk, it demands stricter control on guns like Canada, but not bans in my opinion but I could be wrong.

      What right do you have to decide if I “need one”? Who the hell are you? Here is another fact for you; Canada has roughly 45% more crime per capita than the Czech Republic. That’s because in the Czech Republic people can defend themselves and that is a huge deterrent to criminals. So in fact, by being against self-defence, you are in fact supporting the higher violent crime rate and murder rate in this country.

      If a gun is concealed how the heck is a criminal “going to be thwarted by the fact that you are wearing an obvious holster”? There will be no obvious holster Bob, its concealed right around the rib area, not in your pockets or hip. It’s not openly displayed like a police officer. If a criminal has you at gun point, you comply and give them your wallet. That’s all they want. Most crimes do not involve guns but knives or fists. a gun is an equalizer. Now let’s says that you’re a rapist Bob. If a big man such as yourself wants to rape a small framed lady, she will over power you quite easily. She will be trained for such situations and you will shit yourself while she blows off your gonads, if required. (See, huge deterrent). Luckily for you, most situations are resolved with just the sight of a gun, no shots required. This lady will also be trained to be a very good marksman/woman, so no innocent bystanders are hit in the process if she is required to shoot.

      You also have no idea of how easy it is to get a gun in the States at a gun show or privately and drive it across the border. Not difficult at all. I would never do such a thing but a criminal would and they do.

      Now try and explain to me in a progressive liberal way, why the Czech Republic, having approx. 200,000 concealed carry holders, is safer than Canada?

      Now if your concern is criminals getting your concealed gun IF they manage to, a couple of years ago a company came out with a GPS tracking device that can be embedded permanently into your gun in case it is stolen. Problem solved.

      Also, I agree, it is a good thing that you can’t just go into Canadian Tire and buy a gun and walk out without any licence or training, however, it’s not a good thing that you cannot defend yourself in this country, not even with a gas-pistol, mace or Taser. Why can’t we get a licence for even these less lethal defensive tools? They allow it in many European countries such as Germany. Poland, the Czech Republic, etc. and they all have a much lower murder rate than us.

      So please, wake up and stop basing your fears on U.S. statistics and look at more common sense European laws. They’re a lot better.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers

%d bloggers like this: