“Car Control” in Canada

September 30, 2010

Have you ever stopped to think about what Canada’s Traffic Laws would look like if they were designed and enforced like Canada’s Gun Laws?  Here’s a quick overview of what we’d be looking at:

————

Mopeds, Scooters, Motorbikes and Sports Cars are all being reclassified as “Non-Essential Vehicles” as these are the vehicles that seem to have little practical use and seem to be the most dangerous.

Mopeds and Scooters are going to be outright banned and confiscated as they’re simply too slow and thus dangerous to share the road with faster vehicles.

Motorbikes and Sports Cars will require a “Pleasure Vehicle” endorsement on your license which will only be available after additional training. Also, these vehicles will only be allowed to be driven on special government approved driving tracks of which you must pay a yearly membership to be a member of. If your membership expires, you will be forced to turn in your Pleasure Vehicles as you obviously have no valid use for them any longer. Driving Track records will be kept and anyone who does not regularly frequent the course will have their Pleasure Vehicles confiscated.

Because it’s impossible for Police Officers to tell what kind of engine a car has, vehicles that even LOOK fast will be restricted to track use only.

If your driver’s license or vehicle registration expires, you will no longer just get a ticket; instead, ALL your vehicles will be confiscated and held until your paperwork is in order. If this takes too long, (30 days I think – and it probably will since you will only be able to apply for renewals via snail-mail) your vehicles will be destroyed with no compensation AND you will be charged under the Criminal Code – as it is YOUR responsibility to keep your paperwork valid.

Since these vehicles are more dangerous than other “Passenger” or “Commercial” vehicles, the doors must remain locked at all times when not in use AND in a locked garage so that no one without a “Pleasure Vehicle” endorsement can gain access and use them illegally.

And if you’re caught on the open road with one of these vehicles, the entire police force including the SWAT team will arrest you at gunpoint, handcuff you and the rest of your family and then refuse to issue an apology when it is later discovered that the car you were driving only LOOKED like one of the banned ones.

Yes, this actually happened here in Canada to a legal gun owner (and his family) who had done no wrong.

————

Kind of messed up, eh?  But this is frustrating reality that law-abiding gun owners in Canada have to deal with.

“Well…” you might say to yourself, “…these are GUNS we’re talking about here.  They’re more DANGEROUS than cars are!”  Well actually, they’re not.  Literally thousands of more people are killed every year in car accidents than in gun accidents.  Even when you compare what guns are primarily used for in Canada – hunting – cars STILL kill TEN TIMES more animals than guns.

So why have we allowed ourselves to be treated like common criminals when it comes to our guns?  I don’t know either.  But the next time you think that the latest gun law that is being put into effect is “reasonable”, imagine that it was being applied to your car instead and see if it still sounds like a good idea.


I am a Proud Canadian Firearms Owner!

March 25, 2010

Shooting is a link to my ancestry and heritage from a time when it meant survival.

I know how to safely handle a firearm and I was taught this from an early age. Most importantly, I follow these practices.

I hunt paper, clay, metal, edible meat, and farmyard pests; not people.

I enjoy hunting for the time I spend being surrounded by and soaking in the great outdoors for I know that even though I am within in it I can never completely be a part of it.

I enjoy target shooting because it’s good clean fun!

I respect the value of life including that which I take to put food on my table.

I honour the game I take for my table as I know that it knew far more about living in the wild than I ever could.

I respect law and order, not crime and anarchy.

I do not believe guns are evil or immoral because I know that those traits come from within an individual, not an inanimate object. I believe individuals are responsible for their own decisions and actions and in personal accountability for them.

My guns do not have a mind of their own, are not possessed, and do not cause me to have evil thoughts.

My guns have helped me to sharpen skills like discipline, focus, self-control, and personal responsibility.

I believe people have the legal and ethical right to defend life and property- with a firearm if necessary. I do not relish the idea doing so.

My guns are tools, and at times toys, not weapons. For it is the way an object is used that defines what it is. I sincerely hope my firearms never have to be called in to that kind of service.

I am a Canadian Gun Nut!

www.canadiangunnutz.com


What Didn’t Stop a Killer and What Did

March 1, 2010

A teacher has been shot and killed in a school parking lot. It’s not necessary to go into specific details of the incident, which are easy enough to find, but I will provide some observations that are generally applicable.

Schools are, for the most part, legally-designated “gun free zones” as far as “ordinary citizens” are concerned.

That did not stop the killer.

The killer had a restraining order placed against him.

That did not stop him.

The killer had been arrested for violating the restraining order.

That did not stop him.

ROs and violations typically result in orders to surrender firearms.

That did not stop him.

It is illegal to stalk someone.

That did not stop him.

It is illegal to murder someone.

That did not stop him.

The only thing that stopped the killer was another person with a gun.

That stopped him.

Each of us has a right not to be hurt by someone else, and if someone tries to hurt us, we have a right to protect ourselves.

The corollary to this fundamental truth is equally simple: We cannot effectively protect ourselves without the possessing the means of defense.

It’s really no more complicated than this. Put in such simple terms, one can only marvel at the type of mind that would deny it, and demand enforced defenselessness of others.

Courtesy Oleg Volk, A Human Right

http://www.examiner.com/…What-didnt-stop-a-killer-and-what-did


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

October 21, 2009

Documentary loaded for bore; comedy team has terrible aim

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

————————————–

By: Brad Oswald / Watching TV

21/10/2009 1:00 AM

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

Guns. Ammunition. Americans.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lock ‘N Load fires blanks.


Canadian Gun Laws are Confusing – Part 2

September 18, 2009

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

Mini-14

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

mini-14_target(no, that’s not a “silencer”, but an adjustable weight that allows the shooter to tune the harmonics of the barrel to allow for superior accuracy)

scary_Mini-14All three of the above rifles have the exact same fit and function, only the form has changed.  You’ll notice that the bottom two have extended magazines, but don’t worry, they both conform to Canada’s laws and have been modified to only allow 5 rounds of ammunition to be held.  (I’ll talk about this silly law some other time.)

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

AR-180B

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

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

AR-15

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

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

Does that make any sense to you?

Me either.


Accuracy of the Media

August 16, 2009

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

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

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

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

“Guns Save Lives”

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


Letter to the NB CFO

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.