THE NEWSLETTER OF THE RESPONSIBLE FIREARMS OWNERS COALITION                                                                          DEC98/JAN99

Your input and assistance is still required to operate your local office. Whether twenty hours a week, or once a year, volunteering can enrich your life while assisting firearms owners like yourself.

If you can and are willing to help, please give us a call at the office – 532-8048

We would like to thank all present and past members and directors for their contributions of time and money during the past four years. Hopefully your support will continue.

The Vancouver Sun reported that the RCMP have instituted a new "policy" that will require applicants for a Firearms Acquisition Licence to provide the names and phone numbers of spouses, former spouses, and any person the applicant has been emotionally involved with over the previous five years. That is two (sic) years longer than required by law. Who do these guys think they are? And what the hell is "emotionally involved"?

The new "policy" follows two high-profile (domestic) shootings in Vernon that were committed by estranged partners of the victim(s). However abhorrent the crimes, and however well intentioned the RCMP are; this is unacceptable behavior. The citizens of this country are only required to obey the law. We are not required to submit to any "policy" of any police or government organization.

In the elusive search for Utopia, today’s governing bodies seem bent on creating ever more "policies" and laws to cover almost any imaginable type of extraordinary human behavior. We are being governed to death. Each new law takes away a small portion of our personal freedom. Is it not time for the well-intentioned to accept that the world is not now, or ever will be, the perfect place?

The new date for the confiscation of these registered firearms will be Dec. 1, 1999

The delay, fueled by the intervention of pro firearms lobbyists and the presence of many thousands of firearms owners rallying in Ottawa on September 22nd to voice their indignation over the confiscation, represents another major crisis for the ill conceived legislation.

At the news conference preceding the September 22nd rally, the Minister said there would be no confiscation of privately owned firearms in Canada.  Yesterday the Minister said "These changes will result in a better public service and will ensure that all interested parties have had the chance to prepare for implementation.  The regulations reflect our continuing concern for public safety."

The prohibition, initially to take effect Dec. 1, includes all handguns with a barrel length of 105 mm or shorter and all .25 and .32 caliber models, including many target models used in Olympic shooting events.

As if to imply that firearms ownership was somehow criminal, the Justice Minister used the term "amnesty" to describe the new delay. The "amnesty" means dealers with left-over inventories and individuals who bought handguns after the ban was announced will have until Dec. 1, 1999, to sell them to "authorized" owners, export or deactivate them, donate them to museums or turn them over to authorities for destruction.

The decision to grant the amnesty for certain handguns follows complaints by Canadian dealers struggling to sell or export inventories they had paid for when the government warned in February 1995 it intended to ban what are often called "Saturday night specials."

In an outrageous case of confusing "retro-active law", the Justice Ministry announced that it would back date all registry applications for this type of firearm to February 14th 1995, thereby making illegal, all of those acquired from that date forward.

Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights states that every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination; and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability.

When you read that section of the Charter, it is hard to understand how you could then use that same logic in the passing of the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada Firearms Regulations. The new regulations, which exempt the Native people of Canada from not only having to register their firearms, also include a section exempting them from the same kinds of tests and rules as the balance of Canadians must go through in order to acquire firearms. The new "Aboriginals only" gun regulations cover, Indians, Metis, Inuit and beneficiaries, under a land claims agreement.

Section 18 of the regulations outlines that on the commencement day, in order to engage in traditional hunting practices, the use of a firearm that is neither a prohibited nor a restricted firearm does not require registering.

Now, I don’t want to throw water on anyone’s fire, but the phrase "traditional hunting" has long been stretched beyond belief. When you head out hunting on a four wheel off-road vehicle, a snow machine, or in a four wheel drive truck, packing along a rifle with a scope that is designed to kill at 500 yards, that folks is not traditional, or sustenance hunting in any sense of the word.

Now, when I placed a call to Ottawa about the new regulations, I raised a couple of questions. If it is not necessary for the Native people to register their guns, does that mean that there are less shootings on reserves or in which aboriginal people are involved? They replied, we don’t keep those kind of ethnic based statistics. When I suggested that per capita, far more gun related incidents occur on reserves in Canada than anywhere else, I was informed, that may be so, but I’ve told you, we don’t keep that kind of information.

If you could argue that the aboriginal community in Canada has over the past 100 years had an impeccable record when it comes to the use of firearms, then the general public perhaps could buy into a special set of regulations. Whether the government wishes to acknowledge it or not, that is not the case. While the RCMP in Canada prepare themselves to make further cuts in police enforcement in areas such as commercial crime, major drug smuggling, rural crime, and indeed murders, we are about to spend huge sums of money registering the firearms of 95% of the population while the remaining 5% goes merrily on their way.

If part of the reason regulations are being established, as suggested, is so that police officers will know if firearms are located in a home, how then do you excuse a segment of the population?

You don’t need to look far to find the ingredients for racism if a government purposely sets the stage by driving a wedge between two groups of people on such a contentious issue.

In my mind, the new regulations are discriminatory. The federal government, buoyed by the support of such governments as the province of British Columbia, seems bent on sending the people of Canada, and in particular this province, on a collision course without ant regard to the consequences.

We are distributing the CFC Brochure Safe Transport etc. with this newsletter. The RFOCBC does not agree with many of the regulations contained within the Firearms Act but we would advise you to be aware of the legal requirements of firearms ownership. It would be a tragedy to find yourself with legal problems and possible loss of your firearms because you were unaware of the requirements. Forewarned is forearmed.

The federal government has been busy printing millions of forms for us lucky gun owners. As you are aware, registration and licensing was rescheduled (again) to commence on December 1, 1998. Starting October 1, 1998, all Postal Outlets were made agents for distribution to the public. The following is a list of available forms, followed by the date you are legally required to complete and return by mail.

Pick up a set of forms and see for yourself what will be required in the near future. We are still suggesting that you do not proceed with registering your guns or licensing yourself until the last possible moment.