A.T.T.s

Important: Note This Revision To The Information Provided In The Last Newsletter

The information on ATTs that was provided in the last newsletter has been modified.  B.C.'s  CFO has decided that an ATT for ones' owned firearms must be separate from borrowed firearms.  The CFO is requiring that registration numbers, serial numbers, and Owners Licence Number are provided on ATT applications for borrowed firearms.   Fruitful discussions are ongoing with our provincially appointed CFO regarding many other aspects of the ATT requirements.  The application form for an ATT is obtained by calling the Canadian Firearms Center at 1-800-731-4000.  The application form is then returned to Victoria by mail or faxed to 1-877-455-0045 for processing.  Allow three weeks to have your application processed.  NOTE.  Short term ATTs (i.e. moving, to gunsmith) can be obtained by phone and will be faxed to you.  There is no fee for this service.

The RFOCBC recommends the following procedure for those wishing to transport their OWNED restricted firearms or prohibited handguns to a range for target practice OR competition.

Caution:  Well-intentioned rumours abound.  The new ATTs are very different from our old C-302s.  Those owners that have applied for and received an ATT listing only one or two guns must be very careful.  Firearms that are not listed on this type of ATT should not be transported.  We suggest that another ATT be obtained using the criteria outlined above.  This action will prevent confusion by law enforcement agencies.  Destroy your old ATT when the replacement is received. 

FEDERAL LIBERALS IGNORED MARCH ’94 ADVICE FROM OFFICIALS ON GUN REGISTRATION SCHEME

"Their warnings have all come true. This document proves politics - not public safety - was the main motivation."

Garry Breitkreuz, MP for Yorkton-Melville and Official Opposition Firearms Critic, flooded another compartment in Liberal government’s Titanic gun registry.  "I used to think the officials in the Department of Justice were to blame for gross fiscal mismanagement and bureaucratic bungling.  But now I read that in March of 1994, his(Rocks) own bureaucrats warned the Justice Minister in writing of all the problems he could expect if he proceeded with his ill-conceived gun control proposals," revealed Breitkreuz.

A Ministerial "Briefing Note" dated March 4, 1994 obtained from the Department of Justice under the Access to Information Act reveals that officials gave Justice Minister Allan Rock the following sage advice:

Advice to the Minister: "Costs to the federal and provincial governments would be substantial. Specific costs cannot be calculated."  Breitkreuz commented, "Documented costs of the gun registry now exceed $300 million - 3.5 times the original estimate of $85 million."

Advice to the Minister: "While some costs could be recovered from firearm owners in the form of licencing fees, recovery of indirect costs, such as the time of police officers and support staff, telecommunications and data processing resources and similar expenses would be more problematic."  Breitkreuz commented, "In the first six months of operation the department collected only $2.9 million in user fees – about 1% of expenses."

Advice to the Minister: "There will be strong opposition from firearm owners and interest groups, who fear universal registration is the first step towards confiscation or prohibition."  Breitkreuz commented, "The Minister’s 1994 gun control proposals created a "gun lobby" in Canada for the first time.  Firearm owners’ fears were proven correct when the Liberal government rammed Bill C-68 through Parliament banning 553,000 handguns that had been previously registered by responsible firearm owners."

Advice to Minister: "Further changes may overwhelm police training and communications resources and provoke opposition among the rank-and-file."  Breitkreuz commented, "Every survey ever taken of front-line police officers shows the vast majority are opposed to universal gun registration."

Advice to the Minister: "Changes of this nature involve major program and resource concerns for the RCMP and provincial agencies."  Breitkreuz commented, "In 1991/92, the RCMP employed approximately 30 staff and spent about $2.5 million on the handgun registration system. In 1999, the RCMP employed 391 and spent more than $22 million on the Liberal’s useless gun registry."

Advice to Minister: "There are real questions about the extent to which these proposals would improve public safety and whether the high costs could be justified." Breitkreuz commented, "The logic of registering guns has been flawed from the beginning.  Placing a piece of paper beside a firearm will never stop a person from using it to commit a violent act and criminals will never register their guns, so what’s the point?"

 Bear Watch is no more. They have packed it in.  News of the closure was apparently mailed to all members of Bear Watch.  The official letter states, “Unfortunately due to lack of resources, both human and financial, we can no longer continue operating.”  The shutdown was written up in the latest issue of “The Outdoor Edge” magazine which is mailed to all members of the B.C. Wildlife Federation (www.bcwf.bc.ca).  There are no details other than the reason quoted.  No other sources could provide confirmation.  The announcement did not appear on the Bear Watch web site (www.bearwatch.org) before the site disappeared. 

Supreme Court Delay

The Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada is now scheduled for February 21-22.  A decision is not expected until the fall. 

 Reliable rumour has it that the CFC has already spent their $60 million budget for 2000 and has asked the Treasury Board for an additional $40 million to continue operations for the remainder of the year...and the Board said NO!  To add frosting to the cake, the Liberals have demanded a performance of one million NEW registrations by the end of fiscal 2000 or they will pull the plug on the registration program.

 McLellan admits gun registry facing bottleneck: Appeals to gun owners to meet 2001 deadline.

The following (abridged) article by Norm Ovenden appeared in the Edmonton Journal of February 10, 2000 

The federal government will take special measures in hopes of persuading hundreds of thousands of reluctant gun owners to comply with Canada’s unpopular new firearms rules.  Justice Minister Anne McLellan conceded Wednesday a giant bottleneck looms in the mandatory licensing and registration system unless owners can be convinced to obey the law, which now faces two constitutional challenges. McLellan ruled out extending the Jan. 1, 2001, deadline for an estimated three million gun owners to buy possession licences.

Since the national system was started in December, 1998, only 106,000 licences have been issued. Another 400,000 owners had previously been licensed for possession of restricted weapons. Anticipating the licensing of the remaining 2.5 million owners in less than 11 months will be a problem, she said the program will become a priority for the next several months.

“We realize, clearly, there’s a challenge there,” the minister said in an interview. “We are going to start a number of measures to reach out to gun owners to make sure they know they should be getting a licence.” She didn’t provide details.  The government has previously mounted several advertising campaigns to alert owners of their legal obligations.  McLellan’s task is complicated by the Feb. 21 start of a Supreme Court challenge to the 1995 law and a rumble of discontent against the legislation within the Liberal caucus.

“I predict it’s going to be a bureaucratic nightmare before it’s all over,” said Liberal MP Benoit Serre, a backbencher from northern Ontario.  “Already the system is not working. Just imagine when millions of people do it in the last few weeks of the year.”  Rose-Marie Ur hopes to see the registry scrapped. The MP from southwestern Ontario said the law is a political liability for rural Liberals and the only solution is to go “back to the drawing board.”  Ur and Serre were among nine Liberals to break party ranks to vote against the law in June 1995. “There are times we goof up. To take the high road and admit something isn’t working is so much better than trying to push it through....,” Ur said.

The system has been described by outside auditors as an inefficient mess, which has difficulty handling the small volume of applications. Police groups have asked the auditor general to investigate a huge escalation in costs.