Letter to the NB CFO

August 10, 2009

Attn: Ron Clark, NB Chief Firearms Officer

Dear sir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Advertisements

Authorization to Transport

July 24, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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