From: andre sponselee Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 15:46:00 -0600 Subject: Senate hearings: CSAAA (Mock, Roberge and Williams) Senate hearings on Bill C-68 18 Sep 2:00pm RENE ROBERGE (Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Assc) Represents over 7000 retailers with AB permits. Spoke of a 50% decline in sales from Bill C-17 and that Bill C-68 would destroy what was left. RCMP stats show a 25% decline in business permits, most in the last four years. Expressed specific concerns to import/export permits and the proposed Firearms Identification Number (FIN), also that about 30,000 jobs will be eliminated if Bill C-68 is passed. Sen. GHITTER: asked for more specific data on how legislation has caused a reduction in firearms. Mr. ROBERGE: detailed the proceedure to obtain a currrent FAC and police checks of references, neighbours, time and costs involved as being instrumental in discouraging applicants. He added that he has seen a 50% decline in sales, FAC purchases declined by 75% and that people are not buying firearms. Bill C-68 will have a terrible effect on business. Sen. GHITTER: "The impact of the Campbell legislation is such that...maybe we do not need any more registration provisions. Is that your position?" Mr. Roberge: Yes. Further legislation will decimate our industry. Mr John Williams CSAAA: Echoed loss of sales and added concerns of re-classification of firearms impacting on sales. "Customers are afraid to buy a semi-automatic rifle or shotgun because they fear that in two or three years it will be declared banned or prohibited". Sen. GHITTER: "Is there a potentially larger, illegal gun trade occurring where people are avoiding buying in the legal sense and are buying in a more subversive way?" Mr. ROBERGE: Compared it to the cigarette smuggling problem. He continued stating that we're dealing with a social problem and that Bill C-17 should be given time to mature. Sen. ADAMS: Asked if dealers have records of transactions and if there was a charge for it. Someone in his territory was charged $70.00 by a store. Mr. WILLIAMS: Felt someone was jumping the gun on that one, and reflected on current and proposed costs to own and register firearms, emphasising that sales would stop. Sen. ADAMS: asked how Bill C-68 would affect "trade-ins" and some more questions pertaining to projected costs of registration. Mr. WILLIAMS: re-iterated that if this bill goes through he would be out of business within two years, and regarding registration stated that to have any validity, the police would have to be the ones to categorize firearms, not individuals and a card system. Costs would be prohibitive. Mr. ROBERGE: "hunting and fishing do not feel recession. In recessionary times there are more fishermen and hunters because they have more time to do it". "The decline we have experienced is a direct result of government legislation. It has happened four years ago and is still happening today". Sen. DOYLE: Asked some questions on the effects of smugling on business. Sen. ANDREYCHUK: Asked some questions from a tourism aspect and guiding. Mr. TAYLOR: Quoted data showing the monetary losses from cancelled hunts by Americans and Mr. ROBERGE added the effects on the spin-off industries such as ATVs, camping equipment, etc. Mr. JOHN MOCK, CSAAA: Outlined the problem of importing firearms using the FIN numbers at a cost of about $8.00 per firearm, as well as being required to pay for export permits, problems with serial numbers, duplication and the impossibility of bringing up an item on a computer by a simple description. He gave an example of one gun having been registered 32 different ways. He also described the bureaucratic nightmare of importing. He continued by stating that people are ensuring that they have fewer than ten guns in order to stay out of the home inspection requirement. Mr. ROBERGE: Informed the committee that he needed six different pieces of paper in order to hunt, that he was being bureaucratically devastated as costs were accumulative. Make it restrictive enough and people will say "no thank you". Mr.TALYLOR: Informed the committee that all his employees were required to have FACs regardless of what area of the business they worked in, and emphasized again that arms exporters would be the only industry in Canada that would be charged for export. Regarding FIN numbers, he believes that all firearms will be required to have a FIN number. Sen. GHITTER: "How so?" Mr. TAYLOR: "Why should they apply a FIN number on an import and not apply a FIN number on a firearm already in Canada. It is an overall system to identify firearms, so it will be applied to all firearms". Sen. GHITTER: "Do you understand that the government will now be putting numbers on 12 to 17 million guns?" Mr. WILLIAMS: "The government will assign a FIN number to the firearm and that and the serial number are on a plastic card". Mr. ROBERGE: "Don't worry about it. If they apply this thing it is just going to kill us anyway". **************************************************************************** Andre Sponselee, CD, SSM "Ponder the path of thy feet, and Site 485, C19, RR4 Courtenay let all thy ways be established" B.C., Canada, V9N 7J3 Proverbs 4:5 (604) 334-3996 E-mail: hunter@comox.island.net http://www.comox.island.net/~hunter **************************************************************************** From: andre sponselee Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 14:59:47 -0600 Subject: Senate hearings: 18 Sep. (p.m.) Senate hearings -sept. 18- afternoon Mr. Patrick Healy, Standing Committee on Criminal Law Mr HEALY: "We are all of the opinion that there is no such right (to bear arms) in Canadian constitutional law. The structure of section 7 of the Charter is that there can be no infringement of life, liberty or security of the person without regard to the principles of fundamental justice. The CHAIRMAN: referred to an article in Time magazine where Harvard professor Lawrence Tribe argued that even under the American Constitution there is no such thing as the right to bear arms. Mr. HEALY: "one should always bear in mind that there is a distinction between legally recognized rights and other considerations that might not find protection in a constitutional guarantee of rights. There are concerns about ways of life.." He referred to Regina v.s. Hazel Waters, a case that determined that there is no right to bear arms in Canada. Sen. GHITTER: Requested more information concerning penalties for basically the same offence in both the criminal code and firearms legislation, and asked if there were other areas in which it was common to have a Criminal Code violation against a regulatory act. Mr. HEALY:There are some examples that deal with mining, fish stocks and a variety of substances and situations. Under the Explosives Act there are a number of offences dealing with unlawful posession of explosives. You will find the same thing in the Criminal Code. Sen. GHITTER: Law-abiding citizens are saying, "potentially, you will be making me a criminal". What are your views on it being removed from the Criminal Code? Mr. HEALY:"I don't see in anything that has been presented for public discussion an argument that would support removal of the coverage of firearms from the Criminal Code". Sen. GHITTER:"I am only referring to those who do not register their firearms" Mr. HEALY: Clause 112 of the firearms bill will allow for something other than either a hybrid or an indictable charge for a first-time offender. Sen. GHITTER asked if a conviction carried with it a criminal record to which Mr. Healy replied that the practical consequences for a summary conviction are different, such as being able to apply for a pardon more quickly. Sen. GHITTER asked for an opinion regarding Orders in Council making a violation of regulations a criminal offence. Mr. HEALY replied that as a general principle Parliament, and not the minister, should decide what is or is not a crime. - ------------------------------- Mr. Brian R Hodges, Regional Director IPSC, Canada Mr. HODGES: Emphasised the need to stress enforcement and send a strong message to the criminal element and IPSC involvement in community safety programs. His main concern rested with the issue of "large capacity magazines" and that they could not be used by competitive shooters. - ---------------------------------- Mr. J>G> Kirton, Vice-President, DCRA, President, DQRA Mr. KIRTON: Outlined the history and contributions to firearms training by the Dominion of Canada Rifle Association from 1868 to the present time and that Bill C-68 would drastically curtail their shooting programs such as cadet training in marksmanship. Two areas of concern were the registration of all firearms and associated costs and improper use of OICs. Specifically in regards to the AR-15 rifle which is owned by about 5000 members and members of provincial rifle associations. He asked that the AR-15 be exempted from the legislation. - ------------------------------------- Mr. John L. Perocchio, Shooting Federation of Canada. Mr. PEROCCHIO: stated that the legislation was ill-conceived, ineffective, overly expensive and unnecessary, and that Bill C-68 is as well an offence as a private property issue. With reference to the Auditor General's report, he asked that the federal government be held accountable. He also outlined the effect that Bill C-68 will have such as massive devaluation of private property, closed businesses and native rights. He asked why the Martin budget reduced the ranks of customs officials if one of the necessities this bill was to adress was that of smuggling. Sen. GHITTER: mentioned the cost figure of $1.2 Billion as having been "put to bed" by Minister Rock, and although the figures are scaled down he still hearing a $500 - $600 million figure. "There is a big difference between $85 million and $1.2 Billion". He asked if there had been a breakdown for these figures and that it would be worth looking into. "We are talking about huge discrepancies". Sen. ADAMS: wondered how much it would cost the government to translate everything into the Inuit and Indian languages. The RCMP will need an interpreter in the community to read and answer the application form. Sen. LOSIER-COOL: asked if the opinion of a member of the IPSC board and editor of a newspaper that gun control is part of the Quebec government's plan to disarm Canadians was also Mr. Kirton's opinion. Mr. ROWE: Stated that that member expressed a personal opinion and that it was not official IPSC opinion. Mr. PEROCCHIO: emphasized that criminals are outlaws and ignore the legislation while target shooters were being forced into all kinds of regulations and at the same time being deprived of property rights. He also mentioned that the chiefs of police were dependent on the minister and would therefore agree with his requests for support, and stated that the rank and file officers did not support the bill. Sen. ANDREYCHUK: changed the subject and mentioned that "marksmanship goes hand in hand as a tool of responsible leadership, manhood and a way of life". MR. KIRTON: Concurred that statement and mentioned the over 300 cadet corp in Quebec. He then refered to the bill and stated that failure to register carries a potential sentence of ten years while the use of a firearm in a criminal event carries only a minimum of four years. Sen. DeBane: Replied that was applicable only if the accused "knowingly" and "without lawful excuse" committed the offence. Mr. KIRTON: "That does not sound quite right to me". Sen. DeBANE: "Sir, if it does not sound right, you should apologize that you have not read what I am telling you. If it does not sound right, obviously your ears and your eyes have been closed for the last few months. If it does not sound right, obviously you have not been hearing or listening or reading the amendments which have been adopted. If it does not sound right sir, you are living on another planet". Sen. GHITTER: As a lawyer having read these clauses and to try to understand these varying degrees of so-called "guilt" for the same offense is very confusing. Mr. ROWE addressed concerns with the bill's prohibition clauses and registration. "Leaving it (firearm) loose in a garage is a threat to society, not the fact that it is registered or not registered and I have mailed in a card or not mailed in a card". Sen. ADAMS: "I was slightly shocked that witnessess who come here are told that they do not know what the hell they were talking about". Mr. KIRTON:(in regards to shooting ranges) "We have a contract with DND, but in my province the Surete have said, That is an army range, We do not approve that range. We only give transportation permits if we have previously approved the range. Therefore we will not give a transportation permit". Mr. ROWE: (regarding interpretation), a major firearms registrar in Ontario publically stated, "I do not care what the federal government says. I do not believe that collecting is a valid reason to own a restricted firearm, therefore I will not give you a permit". Mr. PEROCCHIO: "Are we concerned about safety or are we concerned about control. The clause where the government (federal) wants to control shooting ranges is a total waste of time and money". **************************************************************************** Andre Sponselee, CD, SSM "Ponder the path of thy feet, and Site 485, C19, RR4 Courtenay let all thy ways be established" B.C., Canada, V9N 7J3 Proverbs 4:5 (604) 334-3996 E-mail: hunter@comox.island.net http://www.comox.island.net/~hunter **************************************************************************** ----- End Included Message ----- ------------------------------ From: andre sponselee Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 16:10:23 -0600 Subject: Senate hearings on Bill C-68, Sept 19, am. Highlights of Senate hearings on Bill C-68, Sept 19, am. Ms LISA ADDARIO, National Association of Women and the Law: The NAWL is also a member of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women and the National Council of Women of Canada. "We do know that when domestic assault occurs, the assault is 12 times more likely to end in death if a firearm is used". (Section 7 of the Charter) "which guarantees the right to life, liberty and the security of the person, affirms the regulation of weapons which in certain circumstances may lead to a threat to the lives of others". Senator Carstairs: asked if she knew how many prohibition orders were issued each year and how they would work. Ms Addario didn't know the numbers but added that it would enable police to seek prohibition orders on "reasonable and probable grounds" Sen. ADAMS: outlined the lack of support from himself and his community (the territories) for Bill C-68. "We are not a violent people. We use our guns every day to hunt. This bill is not good for the people living in the Territories". Sen. Andreychuk: expressed concern that the bill, "will be a tool beyond a hope of helping women". In other words, "there is no causal relationship between someone registering a gun and the reduction of violence". "The difficulty is that many groups have said that only responsible people will register firearms and that the majority of deaths come from irresponsible activity or criminal activity". "Where in this legislation do you believe that we attack the irresponsible and criminal elements?" Ms Addario: replied that a registry will allow police to know if there were firearms in the home and influence their response speed, call in additional personel and diffuse the situation more quickly. "I do not regard registration as punishment. I am not sure why others do". Sen. Cools: "You seem to use "wife abuse" and "wife killing" synonymously. The truth of the matter is that most wife abuse never leads to homocide....Of the number of women who have been killed by their spouses, you also turn around and tell us that most of these men have no criminal records. What percentage of persons where there has been a lethal case have had contact with police authorities?" Ms. Addario could not provide that data. Sen. DeWare: commented that only .05% of guns were used in domestic violent cases. (homocide, suicide, et cetera). Ms. Addario asked if that statistic referred to people who acquire firearms solely for the purpose of domestic violence. Sen. DeWare replied that that was out of all the firearms owned in Canada, over 8 million, and that, "we are therefore talking about a piece of legislation that will look after .05% of the violent cases in Canada. It would also affect 99.95 % of gun owners ... Do we need this kind of legislation to look after only .05 % of all gun owners, rather than using the money for other things?" Ms. Addario: replied that while more money was needed to assist in shelters for women, her group considered it (registration) an appropriate resource to spend money on. Ms DANI ANN ROBICHAUD (NAWL): The features of this bill, primarily registration and licencing, will provide the police with the information necessary to effectively diffuse violent domestic altercations. Registration will assist the police to locate and remove firearms from those against whom prohibition orders are issued. It will enable protection of the public while respecting their legitimate use and aquisition by law-abiding Canadians". Senator Adams: mentioned that businesses have reported losses of 25-30 % under current gun control and may be wiped out by Bill C-68. Ms Robichaud: stated, "We are of the opinion, equally, that it will not affect the sales of firearms for legitimate businesses". She also presented opinions that rural gun violence was greater than urban gun violence. Sen. Ghitter: asked about OICs turning gun owners into criminals when they're found in possession of a firearm that was reclassified to prohibited. Ms Robichaud stated that the police can use discretionery powers to apply the bill "fair and equitable and in the interests of justice". Sen. Ghitter: responded that by OIC, firearms can be prohibited without any requirement to notify owners or for owners to go to court or express a contrary position. After reading clause 117.15 of the bill. Ms Robichaud: replied that the government can prohibit certain firearms in protecting Canadian society as a whole. In the event where they (firearms) cannot be justifiably allowed for hunting or sporting purposes, she saw no problem where OICs could not form the basis of legislation. Sen. Ghitter responded by saying that contrary to previous legislation where an individual could contest the minister's actions in court, the new provisions take away that right and in effect, the minister is saying, "This is my decision, and that is it". Ms Robichaud: "As an elected, democratic society, many organizations promote and discourage gun use in our society. I believe that would form part of the basis of contestation". Sen. Ghitter: "That is what Parliament is all about. That is what we as parliamentarians are doing today, representing society". Ms Robichaud: stated later on, that the legislation would be able to distinguish between simple inadvertence and deliberate non-compliance. - --------------------------------------------------------------- Andre Sponselee, CD, SSM