in E News

TEAM CSSA E-NEWS – August 1, 2014

TEAM CSSA E-NEWS – August 1, 2014 ** Please share this E-news with your friends **


Nearly four years after the CSSA first revealed it, a certain Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) in PEI is once again taking serious heat for creating a “gag” photo of her staffers atop a pile of confiscated guns with the cutline, “WANTED: GUNS…OR ELSE.”

That photo is coming back to haunt CFO Vivian Hayward for her misleading criticism of Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney’s proposed Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act announced on July 23. Hayward coloured way outside the lines by suggesting the minister’s changes to current Authorization to Transport (ATT) legislation would clear the way for “…the U.S. style having the gun on their hip authorization to carry, which people in this country don’t have.”

The CFO’s anti-gun mantra was delivered to make Canadians quake at the mention of the U.S. boogeyman. Oh pull-eeze. Hayward admitted her knowledge of Blaney’s proposed Act was limited to media coverage, yet that didn’t prevent her from dissing the plan as soon as there was an open mic. Welcome to “The Gong Show Meets Anne of Green Gables.”

Hayward was chewed to pieces this week in myriad firearms blogs and media commentaries. All we could do is pile on. There is reason, however, to highlight the vehement rebuttal provided by Minister Blaney, who is waging war against any CFO who tries to dine out on his legislative proposals to increase their own stock. The Minister of Public Safety’s response to the PEI CFO’s silly fear-mongering is unprecedented by the Harper government – and most welcome. Recent developments show they are willing to pull rank on the fifth columnists still lurking within the civil service.

Blaney’s office blasted Hayward and her ilk publicly in this July 28 story from Sun News’ Bryn Weese:

“Law-abiding firearms owners are sick and tired of harassment by unelected, unaccountable provincial firearms officers,” Jean-Christophe de le Rue, a spokesman for Blaney, told QMI Agency Monday. “This official is wrong. And if she had taken a moment to examine our government’s proposals, she would have seen clearly that there are no changes to safe transport requirements. Indeed, owners of restricted firearms will continue to be required to lock their firearms in an approved container, separate from ammunition, and travel by the most direct route to an approved firing range. A responsible CFO would have informed herself rather than trying to fear-monger and intimidate.”

Incredibly, there remain a few pro-gun extremists who continue to discredit Minister Blaney for what he isn’t doing, rather than expressing support for his protection of their turf. Gun owners would benefit from cooling the threats of abandoning political support for now and see what this guy can bring. A little credit where it’s due, folks.

After a year of getting to know Minister Blaney, the CSSA is grateful to him for taking a stand to rein in CFOs. While there remain many more firearms laws that require major surgery, he continues to earn his reputation as the Lion of Lévis-Bellchasse.



The CBC and The Canadian Press (CP) are in a lather that Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney dared suggest that gun ownership is “a right that comes with responsibilities.”

It appears the only opposition the anti-gun media can muster to oppose the minister’s proposed Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act is a weak personal attack. A CP report disguised as news says the minister’s statement fails its “baloney meter test” because it is at odds with the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) ruling that gun ownership is not a “right” in Canada. (See article excerpt below.)

The CP story should trip an alarm in every gun owner’s baloney meter. Everyone knows that the law can be an ass – and the SCC is its designated protector. This is not to say we don’t need the Supremes to defend our current laws on the books, but the CBC and CP are claiming that Minister Blaney is wrong based upon the SCC finding. Sadly, CP even cites the Firearms Act as a source to prove it’s point. This trips the siren on our credibility meter.

The Supreme Court of Canada has no business adjudicating “natural” law. The right to protect our lives and the lives of others entrusted to our care is natural law. A mother bear attacks to protect her cubs. The parents of fledglings take a run at anything that comes close to the nest. Humans are limited in their ability to bite, scratch, ram and run fast, so we have big brains to create the weapons nature denied us to survive. Using firearms to defend and to feed ourselves is our natural right, and the minister’s statement includes the thoughtful caveat that legal firearms access requires the application of responsibility.

The SCC may be arguably correct when it states that Canada does not have a constitutional right to bear arms. That’s one more thing gun owners in this country should be seeking. The SCC, however, cannot rule that Canadians do not have a natural right to bear arms. And keeping ourselves and our families safe must surely be within the mandate of a Minister of Public Safety. Bottom line, personal protection is not something any government can deem impermissible – it is the most ancient instinct that all normal creatures possess.

So, the CBC, CP and SCC are dead wrong to suggest we don’t have the right to bear arms. And Minister Steven Blaney is quite correct in saying gun ownership is “a right that comes with responsibilities.” Any government that tries to take that away goes against the natural rights of all living creatures – and history has demonstrated the danger of governments that do not respect the rights of their citizens.


“Allan Rock said he came to Ottawa with the belief that only the police and military should have firearms. I believe that firearms ownership is a right, but a right that comes with responsibilities” – the Hon. Steven Blaney, Minister of Public Safety



MEDIA CITES SUPREME COURT “FACTS” TO SHOW GUN OWNERSHIP NOT A RIGHT: “To possess a firearm is a right, and it’s a right that comes with responsibilities.” — Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney at a news conference in Powassan, Ont., while announcing planned changes to Canada’s gun laws, July 23, 2014.

The Canadian Press has examined Blaney’s statement and put it to its baloney meter test — a dispassionate examination of political statements that culminates in a ranking of accuracy.

Spoiler: On a scale from “no baloney” to “full of baloney,” the claim would appear, from a strictly legal standpoint, to meet the criteria for a “full baloney” grade. By law, there is no right in Canada to possess firearms.

The facts: The right to bear arms has been a hotly debated topic in the United States for decades.
That right, say advocates, is deeply entrenched in the U.S. Constitution, and provided for in the Second Amendment that was adopted Dec. 15, 1791, as part of the United States Bill of Rights.
In Canada, such a right is not specifically spelled out in the Constitution, although proponents of the notion argue that such a right exists.

But does it? According to the Supreme Court of Canada, it does not. “Canadians, unlike Americans, do not have a constitutional right to bear arms,” the high court stated in 1993, in a decision over the possession of convertible semi-automatic weapons. “Indeed, most Canadians prefer the peace of mind and sense of security derived from the knowledge that the possession of automatic weapons is prohibited,” said the court.

The rights issue was tested again in the case of an Ontario firearms dealer and manufacturer. Bruce Montague was charged with several weapons offences after police found more than 200 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition at Montague’s home in northwestern Ontario.

Montague didn’t renew the registrations on his weapons, convinced that he had a constitutional right to bear arms without government interference or regulation, despite the passage of Bill C-68, the Firearms Act, in 1995. Montague argued that he had “a constitutional right to possess firearms for self defence” derived from the constitution of Britain.

He pointed to the preamble of the Constitution Act, 1867, Canada’s founding constitutional document, which in his view imported the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which states in Article 7: “That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.”

Montague further argued that in 1982, this historical right was shielded from any ordinary legislation by section 26 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which reads: “The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.”

His convictions were upheld in the Ontario Court of Appeal and in September 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear a final appeal, without offering reasons.

Montague is facing further legal troubles after the Ontario Court of Appeal further ruled last month against his challenge of the Criminal Code’s automatic forfeiture provisions. That, after a judge ordered most of his weapons cache — including sub-machine guns, assault rifles and sawed off shotguns — be turned over to the province of Ontario. He may also lose his house to forfeiture…. (The Canadian Press – July 31, 2014)

Supreme Court of Canada Judgements, R. v. Hasselwander, May 19, 1993.
University of Alberta, Centre for Constitutional Studies, article, “Ontario Court Confirms No Right to Bear Arms in Canada; Supreme Court Will Not Hear Appeal,” Oct. 4, 2010
Firearms Act, 1995
The Right To Keep And Bear Arms In Canada website,
English Bill of Rights, 1689.
Arming and Disarming, a History of Gun Control in Canada. University of Toronto Press, 2012.
Canada’s National Firearms Association website,

See the entire article:


GUN SHOW – Sunday, August 3 at the Marriott Hall, 630 Trinity Road, Jerseyville, Ontario. Show runs from 7:30 a.m. to noon. Lots of free parking. For more information please call Carrie at 1-705-754-2081 or cell at 1-705-455-7228.


B.C. SHOOTING COMPETITION DRAWS WIDESPREAD BUZZ: They are a throwback to the Wild West, when cowboys let their six-shooters do the talking. Starting Thursday, 287 competitors at the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) Canada National Championships will pull out their guns to show off their shooting skills at the The Thompson Mountain Shooting Association’s 60-acre shooting range in Pitt Meadows. But they are not your average Dirty Harry wannabes, since none of the competitors will use a .44 Magnum because it’s too slow to reload and not the type of gun that will get you on the podium. “We have a different skill set, we are speed and accuracy,” said match director Stephen Price of the difference between the types of shooting found at their competitions and the shooting skills shown by someone like a police officer.

During the competition, shooters are put in situations where they often have to move fast to get a shot off at a target that can also be moving. By the end of the event, the shooters will fire off about 350 rounds each and Price estimates there will be about 90,000 bullets fired by the time the event winds up on Sunday, when they have a fun shoot-off to wrap up the competition. (The Province – July 30, 2014)

See full story:


BREITKREUZ SUPPORTS BLANEY – OWNING FIREARMS IS A RIGHT: It’s another step in the right direction says Yorkton/Melville MP Garry Breitkreuz in regards to a recent federal decision on firearms. Breitkreuz says he’s pleased with the recent announcement by federal Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney that makes Swiss Arms and CZ-858s rifles legal to use, as they were before February 25, 2014.

“The coming-into-force of an expanded Order Declaring an Amnesty Period (2014) is welcome news for owners of these rifles who will be able to use their property once again.”

Minister Blaney also announced the Conservative Government’s intention to table the Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act when Parliament resumes in the autumn.

“This legislation will streamline licensing and eliminate needless red tape for law-abiding gun owners, while keeping Canadians safe,” says Breitkreuz. The legislation will:
• merge the Possession Only License (POL) and the Possession and Acquisition License (PAL);
• restrict the ability of Chief Firearms Officers to make arbitrary decisions;
• create a grace period so that individuals who inadvertently miss renewing their firearms license are not made into criminals for paper work infractions;
• make Authorizations to Transport a condition of a license;
• require mandatory firearms safety courses for first-time gun owners; and
• strengthen firearms prohibitions for those convicted of domestic violence offences.

“This Conservative Government will always stand up for the rights of law-abiding hunters, farmers and sport shooters,” adds Breitkreuz who also co-chairs the All-Party Parliamentary Outdoors Caucus. “Hunting and sport shooting remain important outdoor heritage activities in this country. I am very pleased to be working with Minister Blaney on these important firearms issues. Like me, he believes that owning a firearm is a right, but a right that comes with responsibilities. The measures outlined here are a good step in the right direction. I am confident that under the leadership of Minister Blaney, law-abiding gun owners in this country will benefit from fairer firearms laws.” (The News Review – July 31, 2014)


SUN NEWS EDITORIAL TELLS IT LIKE IT IS: The title of the Tories’ latest proposed gun legislation is on target. The Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act is just that. While people on both sides of the firearms debate may be unhappy with certain clauses, the changes strike the right balance. First of all, it eliminates red tape. As the law stands, you need a permit whenever you want to transport a restricted weapon. Under the new law, transportation will simply be included under the licensing process. This will save paperwork, time and tax dollars. Someone who is already getting a licence for a restricted weapon has clearly shown they’re serious about following the rules, including transportation.

Anti-gun activists who like to bring out the domestic violence argument should be happy with the proposed change that makes it easier for a judge to take away the guns of someone convicted of a domestic assault. This too is common sense. These people have already outted themselves as high risk.

The firearms community may be unhappy with a mandatory safety course for first-time owners. It’s true that many prospective gun owners already choose to take such a course prior to writing their test. They’re clearly responsible and safe in their conduct. But this doesn’t automatically mean there’s no need to make it compulsory.

Owning a firearm is a right in a society like ours. The government certainly has the right to place a monopoly on certain uses of force. But it doesn’t have a right to place a monopoly on general access to force. Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney put it well in his announcement, in which he said gun ownership is a “right, and it’s a right that comes with responsibilities.”

How can it not come with caveats? Firearms have the potential to do great harm if used improperly. Taking a safety course isn’t too much to ask. Having said that, everything should be done to ensure this mandatory course doesn’t become its own cash grab and yet another bureaucratic behemoth. The anti-gun crowd can learn from this proposed law. Toronto mayoral candidate Olivia Chow’s pitch for a total handgun ban doesn’t make sense. She confuses the law-abiding owners with the urban gun-crime criminals. But this proposed legislation respects those who play by the rules. (Sun News – Editorial – July 28, 2014)



The CSSA is the voice of the sport shooter and firearms enthusiast in Canada. Our national membership supports and promotes Canada’s firearms heritage, traditional target shooting competition, modern action shooting sports, hunting, and archery. We support and sponsor competitions and youth programs that promote these Canadian heritage activities.

To join or donate to the CSSA, visit:
To subscribe to the CSSA-CILA E-NEWS, send email to: [email protected] or visit
To unsubscribe send email to: [email protected]
To change your address or manage your subscription options, visit:
116 Galaxy Blvd, Etobicoke ON M9W 4Y6
Phone 416-679-9959, Fax: 416-679-9910
Toll Free: 1-888-873-4339
E-Mail: [email protected]