in E News

Team CSSA E-NEWS – May 1, 2015


Team CSSA E-NEWS – May 1, 2015 – ** Please share this with your friends ** Unsubscribe



(presented by Tony Bernardo, Executive Director | CSSA | April 30, 2015)

Brief to the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security at SECU #66

The Canadian Shooting Sports Association and its members support Bill C-42. It is the intention of this brief to draw the attention of the SECU committee to a number of areas that require attention or clarification.


It has been suggested to this committee that this provision creates sweeping new powers for the federal Minister of Public Safety and the Governing Council. This is not true. These powers were put in place with the inception of the Firearms Act created by the previous government. In that legislation, the Minister was granted the ability, through order in council, to put any firearm into the restricted or prohibited category. The addition of the new provision contained in Bill C-42 now levels the playing field, allowing the Minister to place firearms into the non-restricted category as well as restricted and prohibited categories.

As to the allegations that this provision moves authority away from the RCMP in regards to the classification of firearms, it must be pointed out to the committee that the RCMP never had that authority to begin with. This lack of clarity is a glaring omission in the Firearms Act, which provides for the classification of firearms, but does not state who has the authority to provide that classification. Clearly, with numerous classification errors over the last 20 years, it seems obvious that the RCMP does not possess the knowledge and technical expertise to unilaterally make these decisions with a guarantee of correctness to the citizens of our country.

This provision is an important tool to apply uniformity to Canada’s firearms laws. Previous rounds of legislation have incorrectly classified many firearms and Canadians, in order to comply with our laws, have the right to expect consistency with our statutes. This provision is admirable in its attempt to establish a mechanism to provide that consistency.


In the discussion regarding the merging of Possession-Only Licences (POL) and Possession and Acquisition Licences (PAL), it must be pointed out to the committee that those people that have Possession-Only Licences have had them continuously since 1995. Since that time there has been no new issuance of these licences. Enquiries made to the RCMP illustrate identical safety records between the holders of POLs and PALs. Empirically, the holders of POL licences can demonstrate that they have learned all the lessons of the Canada Firearm Safety Course. And of course, all new licence applicants must take the CFSC and exam. It stands to reason that all holders of firearms licences in Canada will have demonstrated and/or been trained in the culture of safety for which our community is well known.

The committee must also be reminded that all people who hold a firearms licence in Canada are subject to the RCMP Continuous Eligibility Program. This program, which has been in place for many years, actively cross-references every licensed firearms owner in Canada to every police computer in real time. Any licensed firearms owner whose name is entered into a police computer automatically shows up in the Continuous Eligibility Program for further scrutiny.


Section 12 of Bill C-42 provides a potential limitation to the god powers currently enjoyed by Chief Firearms Officers (CFO) in Canada. Currently CFOs may make any condition to any licence or Authorization if they deem it in the interest of public safety. However, there is no litmus test as to what “public safety” constitutes. As currently contained in the Firearms Act, a 58 (1) decision is about public safety merely because the CFO, an unelected bureaucrat, says it’s about public safety. When a bad decision is made, there is no appeal and no mechanism to override that decision. That these powers are given to an unelected bureaucrat is purely bad governance. No public servant should wield this kind of power over the law abiding without oversight.

C-42 places the most moderate oversight on the unbridled powers contained in section 58 (1). It permits the government of the day to override a bad 58 (1) decision by means of passing regulations. While perhaps the most cumbersome way that this could be accomplished, it nonetheless provides some measure of scrutiny over the actions of a Chief Firearms Officer.


Successive governments have expressed a desire not to expose honest firearms owners to criminal sanctions due to paperwork errors or omissions. For the mere failure to fill out a renewal form for your firearms licence, a person can be plunged into criminality without ever committing a real offence against our society. By the standards expressed by all political parties in Canada, this is simply wrong. Bill C-42 will enact a six-month grace period upon expiration. While the acquisition privileges for firearms and ammunition will be suspended, this period will permit people to bring themselves into compliance with the law without facing criminal penalties. Furthermore, the six-month grace period will permit Canadians to retain valuable (grandfathered) private property without fear of confiscation. In addition, the six-month grace period keeps Canadians who own firearms in the RCMP’s continuous eligibility system. The previous system expelled the person from Continuous Eligibility when an individual’s firearms licence expired, regardless of whether they retained possession of their firearms.


One of the more contentious portions of Bill C-42 is the widely misunderstood changes to the Authorization to Transport. The Authorization to Transport (ATT) is an obsolete vestigial document that hails from the days before firearms licences. When an ATT is issued, the information does not go into CPIC. In fact, the only person who knows an individual has an Authorization to Transport is the recipient and the bureaucrat that issued it. A police officer cannot access ATT information on the police car computer. Approximately 300,000 ATTs are issued each year across Canada.

When an Authorization to Transport is issued, it may be issued for any term up to the duration of the individual’s firearms licence term. It is very common for an ATT to be issued for a 3-5 year period good 24/7 for transport to any Section 29 range (and other locations in some provinces) in the province of residence. This would permit individuals to transport restricted and prohibited 12(6) firearms to any range in the province at any time. This is how it is done now and there are no problems with illegality.

For border crossings, no firearms may be brought into the United States by a Canadian resident without completing a United States Form 6NIA application. This document is valid for a period of one year. Currently, the Chief Firearms Office will issue an ATT to border crossings in the province of residence for the corresponding one-year period.

An individual cannot apply for issuance of an ATT unless they have the necessary firearms licenses and registrations. Former Ontario Chief Firearms Officer, OPP Superintendant Chris Wyatt, stated publicly that during his tenure as CFO he had never revoked an ATT for cause and, in fact, could only recall one instance of refusing an ATT application. The individual refused subsequently challenged the refusal in court and won.

The obvious question must be posed. If there is a permit that no one can apply for without the qualifications to receive it and it is almost never refused or revoked … what use is it?

Despite the positive changes to ATTs contained in the bill, there are still problems. For example, the bill does not permit the issuance of an ATT for the purposes of instruction. Yet Ontario and Quebec both require additional safety courses with live fire on shooting ranges. Instructors for these courses are routinely given Authorizations to Transport their firearms to various places for the purposes of instruction. Bill C-42 would provide for the issuance of ATTs to the very same ranges for the purposes of target shooting but not “instruction.” This seems very counterproductive at best.

As well, the bill does not provide for the issuance of an ATT for the purposes of completing a transfer. To explain, it is necessary to understand that many transfers of restricted and prohibited firearms are shipped by mail. Aside from the obvious fact that persons working for Canada Post do not possess either firearms licences or Authorizations to Transport, an individual must get an ATT to take the firearm, securely packaged in accordance with the law, to a Canada Post outlet. Of course, it follows that the person needs an ATT to bring the firearm home from a Canada Post outlet.

Authorizations to Transport specify the firearm make and model, the serial number and the registration certificate number of the firearm; but nowhere on the shipping box does it say what is contained inside the box for obvious reasons. It stands to reason that for the individual to successfully receive an Authorization to Transport the firearm home from a postal outlet, they would need to unbox and examine the firearm at the post office, verify the serial number, the make and model of the firearm and the registration certificate number for that firearm before being able to correctly apply for an ATT to bring the firearm home. Needless to say, this would create tremendous disruptions at Canada Post outlets. Because of this, Chief Firearms Officers have traditionally turned a blind eye to the requirement to have an ATT. If the CFOs don’t even want this, it should be added to the list of prescribed ATT purposes in C-42. It also stands to reason that it is no more dangerous to transport it to Canada Post to ship it, than it is to pick it up and transport it home. Authorizations to Transport, for the purposes of completing a transfer, need to be included in C-42.

The third item would be the ATT for the purposes of changing residences. This is one of the conditions an Authorization is issued daily across Canada. It makes sense to add this common occurrence to the list of lawful purposes attached to a person’s restricted firearms licence.

To re-cap, we believe that C-42 should be amended to include the Authorization to Transport for the purposes of instruction, completion of a transfer, and changing residences.

The Canadian Shooting Sports Association supports Bill C-42. Our members believe it is a positive step towards fairness for lawful firearms owners and has absolutely no negative impact on public safety.


CSSA ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING – SATURDAY, MAY 30, 2015 – OTTAWA CONFERENCE AND EVENT CENTRE, 200 COVENTRY ROAD. AGM from 10 a.m. to noon. Afternoon seminars from 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. featuring world-renowned firearms researcher, Dr. Gary Mauser will discuss the latest and greatest statistical trends in the firearms world; Natural Resource Director-General Patrick O’Neill will share his vast knowledge on the Explosives Act’s hand-loading and ammunition regulations; and CSSA Life Member, Keith Beasley of the hugely popular television show “Canada in the Rough” will discuss public relations and the image of firearms owners. Members may register for these seminars at [email protected].

Lastly, the evening of May 30 brings a very special “Stick to your Guns” dinner. Recognizing the unprecedented achievements of retiring Member of Parliament Garry Breitkreuz, this STYG Dinner is themed as a “thank you” to the best friend Canadian gun owners ever had. There will be many special guests, fabulous food, exciting draws, raffles and auctions, and a good time guaranteed to all. Tickets are $69.95 each and a table of eight is $499.95.



“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 Honourable Steven Blaney, Minister of Public Safety



PETER MACKAY: WHAT THE COURT GOT RIGHT — AND WRONG — ON MANDATORY SENTENCES FOR GUN CRIMES (By Peter MacKay, Justice Minister of Canada | National Post | April 21, 2015)

Recently, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that our government’s law requiring a mandatory sentence of three years for the crime of “possessing prohibited or restricted firearms when the firearm is loaded or kept with readily accessible ammunition”; and five years for the second or subsequent offences, was unconstitutional.

It is important to note that, while the majority struck down the mandatory sentencing law, it did so on very narrow grounds. All nine justices — the six in the majority and the three in dissent — actually agreed that mandatory prison sentences are legitimate criminal justice tools and are appropriate in the vast majority of gun crimes. In fact, the Court upheld the sentences of the two individuals whose sentences were at issue, both of which were longer than the mandatory sentences that the Court struck down.

Overall, we are pleased that the Court recognized that our mandatory prison sentences are appropriate tools to fight serious gun crime. However, we agree with the three dissenting judges that it is unfortunate that the majority used a far-fetched hypothetical scenario to stretch a law designed to take gang members and those who seek to commit violent gun crime off the streets into a law that could impact law-abiding firearms owners.

Our government has consistently respected the rights of law-abiding hunters, farmers and sport shooters, which is why we eliminated the wasteful and ineffective long-gun registry scheme set up by the previous Liberal government at a cost to taxpayers of more than a billion dollars. And we have full faith — as the three dissenting justices do — in the ability of the Crown to use appropriate discretion not to seek the mandatory sentences in cases involving only technical violations of firearms licensing laws.

With respect to mandatory prison sentences for firearms offences, the intention of Parliament was very clear: our laws are meant to target dangerous and violent offenders. We believe that gang-related gun crime, particularly gun crimes committed by repeat offenders, are serious offences that deserve serious penalties. Light sentences for such crimes rightly offend public sensibilities and undermine confidence in our judicial system. In the words of the dissenting justices in this case, “Parliament’s choice to raise the mandatory minimums in s. 95 reflects valid and pressing objectives.”

Mandatory prison sentences are nothing new; they have been used as a way to deter violent criminals since the Criminal Code was created more than 120 years ago. Today, the Criminal Code provides for more than 60 mandatory sentencing provisions for a range of serious criminal acts such as murder, kidnapping, treason, and impaired driving causing bodily harm. We are pleased that all nine justices of the Supreme Court have recognized their validity in addressing violent crime.

We agree with the Court that penalties should match the severity of the crimes committed. This was clearly demonstrated by the use of new sentencing provisions introduced by our government to impose consecutive terms of imprisonment — 75 years in total — in the sentencing of the assailant who shot four RCMP officers in Moncton. And, while we agree with the three dissenting justices that the majority’s concerns in this case “are not grounded in experience or common sense” and do not provide “a sound basis on which to nullify Parliament’s considered response to a serious and complex issue,” we do welcome the Court’s suggestion that Parliament could re-enact the same mandatory sentences with a carve-out for technical violations of licensing provisions that do not pose a direct danger to others. In responding to the Court’s decision, we will carefully consider this invitation.

Our government will also continue to strive to toughen sanctions where we feel Canadians are at a risk from serious crimes — whether it be gun crime, offences against children, human trafficking, gang-related violence, or sexual assault. We strongly believe that we are acting in the best interests of families and communities, within the bounds of the Constitution, with respect for the democratic process, and with the confidence of Canadians.

Peter MacKay is the Justice Minister of Canada.

See the letter:


STARS ALIGNING FOR HARPER IN QUEBEC (By Konrad Yakabuski | The Globe and Mail | April 18, 2015)

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government has a terrible record before the Supreme Court of Canada. And even its one rare win of late had all the markings of a Pyrrhic victory.

It seemed like the entire political class in Quebec had been unanimous in insisting that Ottawa turn over its records from the defunct long-arm registry so the province could set up its own program. Quebec even appealed to the top court to force the Harper government’s hand.

When the court ruled 5-to-4 last month that Ottawa was within its rights to shred the Quebec data there were cries of condemnation by politicians in the province. In their dissent, the three Quebec judges on the court said that’s not how the federation is supposed to work.

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard insisted his government would go ahead and create its own registry. And the Harper government appeared once again to have gone out of its way to alienate Quebeckers by refusing to hand over the data in the spirit of co-operative federalism. Cue the anti-Harper backlash.

Oddly, the opposite happened. Instead of the groundswell of sympathy Mr. Couillard expected, voters in the province considered most supportive of gun control balked at his registry plan – more evidence yet of the vast divide between Montreal and the rest of Quebec.

The greater Montreal area accounts for about half of Quebec’s population of 8 million. Beyond the ethnically diverse and hip urbanites of Montreal proper and the suburbanites in neat subdivisions lies a far different electorate. Voters outside the Montreal GMA are conservative – whether they admit it or not, and whether or not they always mark their ballot in accordance with their core beliefs.

That helps explain why a Léger Marketing poll last week showed that a solid majority of voters outside the Montreal area opposes Mr. Couillard’s registry plan. Two-thirds of voters in eastern Quebec said they were against it; in the Quebec City area, fully 57 per cent said no to the plan.

In rural Quebec, hunting is popular and government, in general, is not. A Tory riding association near Quebec City recently proposed raffling a Winchester rifle to raise money, only to cancel the plan after the Montreal media got wind of it.

The Conservatives have seen their Quebec poll numbers spike in the wake of last fall’s terrorist (their word) attacks in Ottawa and Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu. The government’s anti-terror bill is being piloted by Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney, a sunny 50-year-old Quebecker dubbed “Mr. Smile” by one television host.

It is rare that a government in the 10th year of its mandate manages to lure star candidates anywhere. But Mr. Harper has attracted a sudden flurry of them in Quebec.

The biggest is Gérard Deltell, a popular former TV journalist and Coalition Avenir Québec MNA, who resigned his provincial seat last week to seek the Conservative nomination in Louis-Saint-Laurent. The riding fell to the New Democrats in 2011’s Orange Wave, but Mr. Deltell looks like a shoo-in in October – so much so that polling analyst and blogger Bryan Breguet suggests the Tories are silly to waste his talents there. Better to run him in a more competitive riding.

Based on recent polls, Mr. Breguet predicts the Tories would win upwards of 15 of Quebec’s 78 ridings, up from the five they hold now. That could be the difference between a majority or minority government. If the Tories do hold on to power, it would also provide Mr. Harper with a less embarrassing front bench in a province where (Mr. Blaney aside) he seriously lacks strong surrogates.

A rumour has former foreign affairs minister Lawrence Cannon returning from Canada’s embassy in Paris to run for the Tories in the Quebec City area. If true, the Conservatives will finally have a Quebec “team” it can advertise as cabinet-worthy.

Neither Justin Trudeau’s Liberals nor Thomas Mulcair’s New Democrats have so far shown much success in recruiting stars in Quebec. The Bloc Québécois is even worse off. Former mayoralty candidate Mélanie Joly is seeking the Liberal nomination in Montreal, but her move has drawn howls of criticism since she vowed in 2013 to stay in municipal politics for the long haul.

So, Mr. Harper has reason to be optimistic about his Quebec chances – with one big caveat. No one can predict how even basically conservative but always fickle Quebeckers will be feeling on election day.

See the story:



This weekend, Keith Beasley heads to Alberta with two of Canada’s most coveted hunting tags in his pocket, a mule deer and whitetail rifle tag. The hunt takes place on Canada’s largest First Nation reserve, the Blood reserve. The prairies are littered with rutting deer, and Keith climbs and stalks the river bottoms and coulees in search of two mature Alberta bucks.

See the teaser:

Canada in the Rough can be found on OLN, WILD TV, and CHEX. For a full schedule, visit:


TORONTO POLICE REVOLVER CLUB – ANNUAL MATCH – JUNE 13, 2015 – EDEN MILLS, ONTARIO. Location: Guelph Rod and Gun Club. GPS Navigation is 4877 Wellington Road #29, Eden Mills, ON. Open to any person that has been holster trained, including police officers, CPCA, CSSA, IPSC and IDPA trained members. Matches: 1200 PPC (2 X 600) Two modified police courses using B-34 for the 24 round stage. Fees: 1200 Match is $35 (TPAAA $30). All service and duty matches are re-entry matches. Shoot as many as you wish, refires $5. Barbecue included. For further information, please contact: Kevin Kaposy at [email protected].


FIREARMS INDUSTRY ECONOMIC IMPACT RISES 125% SINCE 2008 (By the National Shooting Sports Foundation | April 20, 2015)

NEWTOWN, Conn. – The total economic impact of the firearms and ammunition industry in the United States increased from $19.1 billion in 2008 to $42.9 billion in 2014, a 125 percent increase, while the total number of full-time equivalent jobs* rose from approximately 166,000 to more than 263,000, a 58 percent increase in that period, according to a new report released today by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the industry’s trade association.

“We have seen continued dramatic growth in the firearms and ammunition industry that is the direct result of consumer demand for our products since 2008,” said Stephen L. Sanetti, NSSF president and chief executive officer. “In our nation’s economic recovery since that year, our industry has been a standout, increasing our direct workforce by 78 percent, adding jobs that pay an average of more than $52,000 in wages and benefits. Wildlife conservation is the real winner here, as we increased federal tax payments by 108 percent, Pittman-Robertson excise taxes that support wildlife conservation by 145 percent and state business taxes by 106 percent. And gratifyingly, throughout this period of growth, both criminal and accidental misuses of firearms continued to drop.”

The Firearms and Ammunition Industry Economic Impact Report: 2014 provides a state by state breakdown of job numbers, wages and output covering direct, supplier and induced employment, as well as federal excise taxes paid. Access the full report here.


9TH ANNUAL PRINCE GEORGE ROD & GUN CLUB – MAY 9-10, 2015 – PRINCE GEORGE, B.C. Gun, Knife, Archery & Sporting Goods. Prince George Coliseum, 888 Dominion Street. Saturday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.; Sunday from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Admission is $5 per person. Accompanied children 12 and under are FREE. Table rental is $35 per 8-foot table. For more information, please contact Don at [email protected] or 250-613-0151.



Have you been entered into RCMP Firearms Interest Police (FIP) data bank?

Is the information correct?

It’s free to find out. Just complete a Personal Information Request Form:

And send it to:

Supt. David Vautour
Access to Information and Privacy Coordinator
73 Leikin Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0R2


2015 DON MOORE MEMORIAL PISTOL MATCHES – MAY 16-17, 2015 – CRPTC (CONNAUGHT) RANGES – WEST OF SHIRLEY’S BAY, ONTARIO. ISSF Events: Standard Pistol; Center Fire Pistol; Sport Pistol; Free Pistol & Air Pistol* PPC Events: PPC (Police Pistol Combat) 1500, Snub Nose Match & Slug Gun Match CDN Events: CDN 1800; 9mm Service Pistol* For more information phone 613-596-5062 or cell 613-864-5062. Send entry form to: Ed Stevens, 2650B Moncton Road, Ottawa, ON K2B 7W1. Email: [email protected]. Fax: 613-829-9733. Or register online at:


MATT GURNEY: A LITTLE URGENCY OF GUN LICENSING, PLEASE (Matt Gurney | National Post | April 20, 2015)

Canadians want to live in a country with effective gun control laws. In general, they do: millions of us lawfully own and use firearms of all different kinds, yet gun crime is vanishingly rare here — and most of the crimes that do occur are traced back to guns that were brought into the country illegally anyway. Those of us who own firearms, however, know a few things about the system that might surprise the rest of you.

One of the most important distinctions the broader public fails to grasp is the difference between gun licensing and registration. The gun registry tracks specific firearms by their serial numbers as they move from owner to new owner, or from manufacturer/importer to store to first owner. It may serve some utility as an investigative tool after a crime, but it is not a public safety tool. The public-safety aspects of our gun control system rest with the firearm licensing system, which controls who can purchase and possess firearms and ammunition. Licences can be revoked, if warranted. If an applicant can’t pass a detailed police background check, they can be refused in the first place.

Responsible firearms owners know what guns can do and why it’s important for everyone to keep them out of the wrong hands. Licencing is genuinely a matter of public safety … which is why the story I recently heard is so disturbing.

A reader of this column, aware of my interest in Canada’s gun-control system, wrote to me with a worrying tale. He asked to remain anonymous, so we’ll simply call him Mark here, but he was able to provide me with documents corroborating his claim.

Several months ago, Mark, who lives in one of our large cities and is a sport shooter at a properly accredited gun range, heard about a firearm for sale. It sounded like a good offer, and it was, alas, too good to be true. The sale was bogus — a fraud. Mark was scammed out of several thousand dollars. That’s bad and embarrassing, obviously, but what’s more worrying is that, as part of the bogus transaction, Mark provided his personal details, including name, address, and firearms licence number.

He had to. Under Canadian law, you’re only allowed to sell a gun to someone with a valid firearms licence. Verifying that a would-be purchaser has a valid licence is required and can be done with a call to the Canadian Firearms Centre. And now some fraudster out there, who is clearly willing to break the law, has Mark’s name, personal details and firearms licence number. With this, they would be able to purchase firearms online using Mark’s good name and clean criminal record.

Mark reported this to the police. (He’s shown me the police report.) He also notified his financial institution, hoping to recoup his money, and no such luck there. (I’ve seen this report, as well.) But as a responsible citizen, he also went a step further, and notified the RCMP, who run the Canadian Firearms Centre, that his gun licence had been compromised. They advised Mark to reapply at once for a new, clean licence.

It’s now mid-April, and Mark’s application is still listed as being in the initial processing stage.

He did so. In February. He’s shown me proof of that, too — the RCMP website that gun owners can use, which he showed me a screen grab of, confirms that his paperwork was received on Feb. 25. It’s now mid-April, and Mark’s application is still listed as being in the initial processing stage.

The Firearms Centre, typical of a government operation, has never been quick. I wrote a column last year describing my latest experience with them — suffice it to say, speed and customer service were not major factors in the process. But this is, or at least ought to be, an exceptional circumstance. A responsible citizen has reported that his licence is compromised and has done the legwork and paid the fees to get his licence replaced. What’s taking so long?

Part of the problem, as noted above, is that the Firearms Centre’s default operating speed is comparable to that of spilled molasses. Another problem seems to be that, when sending in a licence renewal, there is no way to flag it for urgency in a case such as this. It’s probably gone into the same stack as all the first-time applicants and those looking to renew. But that has to change. Gun licencing is the most important part of our firearms system — the only part we really need. It’s important that it works well. A member of the public has done his part here. Get the lead out, government.

See the story:



“Quis costodiet ipsos custodes?”–“Who will watch the watchers?”

In order to improve public safety, Canadian Firearms Registry Online (CFRO) information should be withdrawn from routine perusal on the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC). As is done with other information on law-abiding citizens, information on firearm-licensees should be restricted to investigational purposes that require a warrant.

Currently the RCMP treats licensed law-abiding Canadians as criminals by systematically misusing licensing information and by encouraging police officers to consult this information prior to attending a call. This practice ignores strong evidence.

The CFRO is available on CPIC virtually without restriction to policing agencies. By providing information on law-abiding citizens through CPIC, the RCMP encourages police officers to treat licensed firearms owners the same way they would treat dangerous criminals. This practice violates basic principles of policing as well as good sense. Not only does it systematically subject law-abiding citizens to police heavy-handedness (thereby jeopardizing public cooperation), it dangerously misleads police officers by confusing law-abiding citizens with dangerous offenders. Encouraging police officers to consult CFRO before attending a call endangers police officers by creating the false belief that almost all firearms and their owners, including violent criminals, are in CFRO. This is false.
The inclusion of firearms licences on CPIC has been justified on the grounds of public safety. Such a decision is supportable only if the mere possession of a firearm by a lawabiding citizen posed a serious threat to public safety. This paper shows that the facts do not support such a claim.

Read the rest:


5TH ANNUAL KOOTENAY GUN SHOW – MAY 23 AND 24, 2015 – CRANBROOK, B.C. Located at the Cranbrook Curling Club, 1812, 2nd Street North, Cranbrook. Saturday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.; Sunday from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Admission is $5 per person over 12 years of age. For more information, please contact Rick Grant at 250-427-0158 or Duncan Waugh at 250-422-3469, or you can email [email protected].


OPEN HOUSE – KINCARDINE NIMROD CLUB – SATURDAY, JUNE 13, 2015 – KINCARDINE, ONTARIO. Located at 2334 Concession #12, Huron-Kinloss (Aintree Road) east of Lake Range Road (south end of Kincardine) just down from the golf course. 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Enjoy a barbecue prepared by the local 4-H Club. Watch demonstrations of cowboy action and soldiers from 1812. Try your hand at various rifles, black powder guns and handguns under the direct supervision of qualified members. Young, old and in between, including ladies, are welcome. Come out and see what we are all about!


INTO THE FRAY – CANADIAN HISTORICAL ARMS SOCIETY TOUCH HISTORY EXPO – JUNE 20-21, 2015 – EDMONTON EXPO CENTRE, 7515 – 118 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta. Touch historical and modern arms: medieval arms and armour, Sherman tank, artillery pieces, small arms. $10 at the door.


IT’S FINALLY HERE – THE 3RD ANNUAL WOMEN’S OUTDOOR WORKSHOP (WOW) – JUNE 20, 2015 – BLENHEIM, ONTARIO. Located at the Rondeau Rod & Gun Club, 10260 Campbell Line. AVOID THE INTIMIDATION AND FRUSTRATION OF LEARNING ON YOUR OWN! Courses Offered: Archery, ATV’S, Compass Orienteering, Duck/Turkey Calling, Gun Cleaning, Handgun Target Shooting, Leave No Trace, Reloading, .22. Entry fee is $75. Pig Roast is $5 for WOW participants; $10 for guests. Pre-registration is required. Registration deadline is May 30, 2015. For registration and information, please email: [email protected] or visit us at the club on Wednesdays from 6-10 p.m. Find us on Facebook!



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:

Subscribe /Unsubscribe to the CSSA-CILA E-NEWS on our website.

To subscribe send an email to: mailto:[email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to: mailto:[email protected]


116 Galaxy Boulevard, Etobicoke ON M9W 4Y6
Phone: 416-679-9959 | Fax: 416-679-9910
Toll Free: 1-888-873-4339
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website :


Tags: ,