Quote:
Originally Posted by ehntr
That doesn't adequately explain the Firearms Act. After being "examined a Canadian can apply for a Restricted Possession and Acquisition License. He may be issued the license following a "background check". All the; he's not a crazy, his wife and anyone else agrees that he is of sound mind, doesn't use drugs, is not violent, has no criminal past, doesn't have financial problems, doesn't suffer from depression, doesn't want to commit suicide......................................... and still can only take a handgun outside his house when the gun is trigger locked, locked in an outer case, locked in his trunk and has an Authority to Transport in his possession and must take a direct route to the range where he has a membership, or any other range, or a gunsmith or to a border in order to compete or use gunsmith services in another province/state. This appears to be the most lenient of ATT's (Alberta for example). Rocky describes how the CFO in Ontario has exceeded his authority by demanding that licensed/ATT holders have invitations from gun ranges before they can transport their restricted firearms. All this makes sense? A person already has a license. A license for a shotgun does not give a person the right to take a shotgun to a theatre. The categorization and licensing scheme we have is created to bring about a fear of firearm ownership, greater fear of handguns, greater fear of restricted rifles, fear of prosection......a criminal record for a crime that has no victim and no malice attached to it (a paper crime), fear of defending yourself with a firearm? What is the harm of carrying a handgun to a range without an ATT? The license should be the only authority for this. What is wrong with taking a handgun onto public land or private land and plinking? It is certainly less dangerous to people or property than plinking with a rifle as far as overshooting your target or ricochets. Hunting rabbits or grouse with a ruger single single-six? Yes! Why not, I can hunt those animals with my ruger 10/22 with a 50 round drum. AR-15's are great coyote rifles. It's restricted to 5 rounds just like every other semi-auto. The Act is not something to hold up as being a sound "model" for gun control. The only provision for owning a firearm in Canada are for: Hunting, target shooting and collecting......self defence not included. The use of firearms for self defence has been challenged successfuly, many times over the years. So? The Act is not absolute, it really needs to be loosened up.
|
That was excellent.
You helped clarify why I find the Prescribed Storage Laws repugnant, as well. There was clearly no sense in requiring a remote farmer to store his weapons the same way as an urban, downtown condo dweller who lives with her juvenile delinquent son, nor was there any "problem" that needed solving. IIRC, those regulations resulted from the Mark Lepine shootings but I don't think there was ever a storage issue raised in that case, even by the rabid anti-gunners. And yet, that is what we were given as a solution to the non-existent public safety problem.
You point out that these laws are probably intended to instil fear in the "thing" by conveying the impression that they are highly volatile and dangerous, and/or their owners are, and hence must to closely watched. I believe you're onto something there. People do behave rationally, even the peanut gallery and Gun Zombies. Therefore, there are rational purposes for our laws and if it is not public safety (and it clearly isn't when you skip the emotions and look at facts), then what is it? What you say makes sense and it certainly fits the motus operandi of the anti-gun crowd.
In the Ontario case, I do not recall a single instance - or even a suggestion - that a Permit holder committed a crime that could have been stopped if he had only been required to have written permission to take his pistol to range "X". Yes, I think fearmongering is a possible explanation for such a stupid requirement.
That, and a desire by our opponents to make gun ownership so annoying and troublesome that when they come to confiscate them, we won't care any more.