Wildlife federation plans massive expansion thanks to donation
Gun violence isn’t just a U.S. problem
FBI says it’s trying to rebuild public trust after botched tip before Florida school shooting
Florida school shooting: Sheriff’s office received 20 calls about suspect, officials say
The Swiss Have Liberal Gun Laws, Too
President Trump Caves to Gun Control Demands, Moves to Ban Gun Parts
–– COMMENTARY ––
Stricter Canadian Gun Owner Mental Health Screening Demanded in the Wake of Florida School Shooting
In the wake of every mass shooting, the media-presented solution is always the same –– more restrictions on the people who did not commit the crime. That refrain is just as predictable as ours –– stop blaming the people who did not murder anyone!
Jeff Wilkinson, writing for DebateReport.com, did his best to turn an American mass murder into a call for greater Canadian firearm restrictions. Wilkinson cited statements by Iain Overton, research director for Britain’s Action on Armed Violence, as the rational for stricter mental health checks.
“I don’t think Canada should feel smug,” Overton said. “Between 2003 and 2012, over 5,500 Canadians shot and killed themselves. And this, I think, is something that really is lacking in the Canadian debate.”
What’s missing from Overton’s comment?
Full disclosure of Canadian suicide numbers by all methods. That gives a vastly different view of Canada’s suicide deaths.
Overton would have readers believe it’s a gun problem. It’s not. According to Statistics Canada, 44% of all suicide deaths are by hanging; 25% are by poison; and just 16% of all suicide deaths are from gunshot wounds.
Almost half of all Canadian suicides are death by hanging. Where is Overton’s call to ban ropes in the wake of 27,000 hanging suicides in his quoted range, 2003 to 2012? Or his call for more mental health checks at home improvement stores?
Wilkinson and Overton care only about firearm suicides. Why is that?
Are the thousands who hang themselves morally superior to those who shoot themselves? The answer, it seems, is a resounding “YES!”
You can’t blame guns for hanging suicides, and nobody will ban rope, so they howl about the smallest segment of Canadian suicides, those 16% of suicides by firearm.
The uncomfortable truth ignored by Wilkinson and avoided by Overton is this: While Canada’s suicide by firearm numbers continue to DROP, our overall suicide rate continues to rise.
In 2009, 3,890 Canadians killed themselves. By 2014, that number was 4,254, and yet Wilkinson will only talk about guns.
“If you don’t have a gun in the house, then your risk of suicide will go down, according to Overton.”
What a lovely but misleading statement. Firearms are inanimate objects. A gun cannot force a human being to do anything. A gun does not hold some mystical power over us. A gun does not, and cannot, whisper “shoot yourself” in your ear.
That’s the stuff of anti-gun fantasy and lousy Hollywood movies.
The terrible truth is this –– when people decide to end their lives and they are serious about that decision, nothing will prevent them. The annual increase in Canadian suicide numbers proves this with horrible clarity.
Only a fool would deny Canada faces serious societal problems when confronted with those numbers.
Why are the 1,957 people who hang themselves and the 1,063 who poison themselves each year ignored by Wilkinson? Because they didn’t kill themselves with a gun?
Statistics Canada dedicates an entire report to firearm suicides.
No such report exists for hanging or poisoning suicides.
We ask again –– why are those 3,000 suicides per year –– tragedies and failures of society, each and every one –– seemingly of little consequence?
Obviously, we have a national suicide problem. Those numbers don’t lie. Over 3,000 people killing themselves each year by hanging and poison is a wake-up call –– at least it should be a wake-up call.
If we want a conversation about suicide prevention in Canada, then let’s have a serious conversation. Bring everyone to the table. Stop hiding from inconvenient facts that don’t support your pet agenda.
Let’s stop “blaming guns” for suicides (and murders) and truthfully examine the state of mental health in Canada.
Are Canada’s magazine laws in desperate need of revision?
Not sure: 3.2%
Wildlife federation plans massive expansion thanks to donation
By Kathy Fitzpatrick |The Saskatoon StarPhoenix | February 20, 2018
Robert Freberg and Patrick Thompson are planning an overhaul of the Saskatoon Wildlife Federation thanks to the pair’s donation of $500,000.
It was a jaw-dropping moment at the Saskatoon Wildlife Federation’s recent awards evening.
Before the gathering of about 170 people, president Robert Freberg made a surprise announcement — a half-million dollar donation from him and his long-time friend and business partner Patrick Thompson. It’s half of the $1-million cost to expand the SWF’s building on Lowe Road by about one-third of its present size.
Not even executive director Michael Kincade knew this was coming.
Kincade’s reaction was “just shock.” To that point, the largest donations were maybe $10,000 or $20,000, he said.
“It was heart-warming,” said project supporter Mike Stensrud. “Big tough hunters standing up there and they’re all teary-eyed.”
The 7,500-square-foot addition will accommodate 16 new lanes for air rifle and archery, and more than double the existing 10 lanes in two indoor ranges which are also used for firearms.
“I saw the growth in our youth programs, both on the air rifle and on the archery, and we were getting squeezed out of capacity here,” Freberg said.
He and Thompson retired in 2016, and were looking to give back. Both have been active sportsmen — Freberg spending almost 40 years with the SWF and Thompson devoting countless hours with the Saskatchewan Falconry Association.
The SWF’s archery program started 18 years ago with 20 kids, Kincade said.
There are now more than 100 “and we’re busting at the seams.”
People are lining up to join, and the White Buffalo Youth Lodge has also asked the SWF to help it launch an archery program.
The SWF has school bus loads coming out to work on crafts, and it hopes to work more with Indigenous groups in such areas as drum making.
It also wants to grow its recently launched junior outdoors program.
“This extra range hall will help us achieve that,” Kincade said.
The new hall will do double duty as extra meeting space, to be used for such events as wildlife art shows, auctions, fundraising dinners, and functions for RCMP and conservation officers.
Kincade hopes to break ground in April.
Stensrud, who is president and general manager of Miners Construction, looked after getting the drawings done. He is now asking the local construction industry to step up with donations in kind, such as labour and materials.
Stensrud previously helped with the SWF’s new $2-million outdoor range, a facility which has drawn notice from across the country.
“I know that if (Stensrud’s) behind this, with a little bit of cash and some donations, we’re going to get this across the finish line sooner than later,” Freberg said.
The expansion is one more boost to a club that counts more than 2,000 members. Kincade and Freberg say it’s the largest wildlife club in Western Canada, and among the largest in the country.
By Jeff Wilkinson | DebateReport | February 16, 2018
The cries to take action against gun violence in the United States grew much louder Tuesday after a mass shooting at a Florida high school left 17 dead. But these cries aren’t unique to the United States. Canadians are crying for some action too.
It was just last November, when the headline on CBC Radio’s The Current web page read: “Canada has a gun problem, says firearms author.”
“I don’t think Canada should feel smug,” Iain Overton told The Current’s Anna Maria Tremonti.
Between 2009 and 2013, the U.S. had more than 56,000 gun homicides while Canada had just over 800 firearm murders, according to Overton.
“Between 2003 and 2012, over 5,500 Canadians shot and killed themselves,” Overton said. “And this, I think, is something that really is lacking in the Canadian debate.”
If you don’t have a gun in the house, then your risk of suicide will go down, according to Overton.
So what is our federal government doing about all this?
It was also last November when the government announced major new funding to tackle gun violence and gang activity.
“As part of its commitment to make it harder for criminals to get and use handguns and assault weapons and to reduce gun and gang violence, the Government of Canada is announcing up to $327.6 million over five years and $100 million annually thereafter, in new funding to help support a variety of initiatives to reduce gun crime and criminal gang activities,” the government’s announcement read.
“The Government of Canada will also bring together experts, practitioners, front-line personnel, and decision makers for a Summit on Criminal Guns and Gangs in March 2018. The Criminal Guns and Gangs Summit will be an unprecedented national summit on challenges, solutions and best practices in the fight against gun crime and in combating the deadly effects of gangs and illegal guns in communities across Canada,” the announcement went on. “The government hopes to hear from key stakeholders, including law enforcement agencies, provincial, territorial and municipal governments, community and mental health organizations, Indigenous groups, government and non-governmental organizations.”
An extensive report by Global News in December, 2015, after a mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., seemed to indicate Canada’s problem with gun violence wasn’t nearly as serious as the situation in the U.S.
“We chose several different Canadian causes of death — purposeful, accidental, illness-related — with frequency rates roughly similar to U.S. firearm death rates,” read the Global News report. “Overall, Americans are almost 70 per cent more likely to die at the end of a gun — shot by someone else, by themselves, by accident — than Canadians are to die in a car accident, 35 per cent more likely to be shot to death than Canadians are to die of a fall. American firearm death rates are almost three times higher than Canadian death rates of ovarian cancer and Parkinson’s; 42 per cent higher than Canadian prostate cancer deaths; 10 per cent higher than pneumonia.”
But there’s still gun violence in Canada. And the problem is begging for action from our federal government.
Here’s another headline from a CBC story Feb. 1: “First month of 2018 marked by gun violence in Ottawa”
About five years ago, The Coalition of Black Trade Unionists had its own summit. The summit concluded action against gun violence couldn’t be delayed.
“A theme heard throughout the summit was: The time for action is now! The Stephen Lewis Report identified the need (for) action over two decades ago yet the crisis continues,” the CBTU’s report on the summit read.
But Canada has tried to tackle gun violence before. It’s long-gun registry was a miserable, expensive failure that was more of a pain to hunters than a deterrent to criminals. Originally, the registry was supposed to cost $2 million.
But a Wikipedia summary shows just how much this ill-fated registration program really cost.
“In early 2000, the Canadian Firearms Program released a report that showed that implementation costs were rising,” the Wikipedia summary reads.
“Major backlogs in registration—largely as a result of firearm owners waiting until the last minute to apply.
“In December 2001, (the) cost rose to an estimated $527 million for the whole gun control program which included the long gun registry,” the Wikipedia summary continues. “The Canadian Firearms Program reported that a major factor behind the rising costs was the difficulty it had keeping track of licence fees collected.
“In December 2002, the Auditor General of Canada, Sheila Fraser, reported that the project was running vastly above initial cost estimates. The report showed that the implementation of the firearms registry program by the Department of Justice has had significant strategic and management problems throughout.
Taxpayers were originally expected to pay only $2 million of the budget while registration fees would cover the rest. In 1995, the Department of Justice reported to Parliament that the system would cost $119 million to implement, and that the income generated from licensing fees would be $117 million. This gives a net cost of $2 million. At the time of the 2002 audit, however, the revised estimates from the Department of Justice were that the cost of the whole gun control program would be more than $1 billion by 2004-05 and that the income from licence fees in the same period would be $140 million.
It was clear the program wasn’t working. So does that mean we should just do nothing?
The Coalition of Gun Control has been demanding action from the Trudeau government long before the incident in the U.S. yesterday.
“The evidence is clear: Gun control saves lives,” a headline on the coalition’s web page reads.
It calls on the Trudeau government to:
Establish as quickly as possible, a system for whom to track all gun sales, re-establishing and modernizing measures that were introduced in 1977 but eliminated in 2005.
Reverse the measures passed in C-42 (The Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act) and restore strict screening and routine licensing checks and verification on all firearm purchases.
Eliminate the loopholes in Authorizations to Transport restricted weapons such as handguns.
Ban military assault weapons – update the prohibited and restricted lists consistent with the advice of police experts.
Put in place the necessary measures to allow Canada to ratify important international agreements – including the OAS Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, explosives, the 2001 Program of Action on the Illicit Trafficking of Small Arms and the Marking and Tracing Agreement and CEDAW.
Restore detailed data analysis of firearms death, injury and crime; imports/exports, sources of firearms in crime to support research and track progress.
Embark on a national awareness program to highlight the risks associated with firearms in suicide, homicide and unintentional injuries, extending our Quebec firearm violence prevention initiative “Save a Life. Ask the question. Is there a gun?”
Reinstate evidence-based approaches which consider firearms in the context not just of street crime but domestic violence and suicide. Provide open and transparent access to data on guns and gun ownership, firearms death and injury.
Bring back a comprehensive approach to preventing crime, domestic violence and suicide, which recognizes the importance of effective gun control.
Bring experts on public safety, suicide prevention, crime prevention and prevention of violence against women back to the discussion table.
It appears the government is starting to work on the last initiative. But it should also be clear that the government has to do more to ensure incidents such as the one in the U.S. yesterday don’t pop up in Canada.
It won’t be an easy task. The government has to strike a balance between controlling the illegal use of guns and fairly regulating the use of guns for recreational purposes, which include hunting.
In the City of Victoria, B.C., for instance, it was reported hunting generates $350 million in economic activity annually.
So, our government faces a tough task if it wants to reopen the debate on controlling gun violence. Will it take that step? We’ll have to wait and see.
But after the shooting incident, you can be sure, the U.S. will be revisiting its gun control programs in the immediate future.
The Toronto Sportsmen’s Show is being hosted at the International Centre in Mississauga and continues the exciting five-day format.
Show dates are March 14-18, 2018. Doors open at 10 a.m.
Visit us at BOOTH 1163. Stop by and chat with our representatives and staff. Of course, some lucky participant of our draw will be taking home a brand new firearm at the end of the show.
The International Centre is located at 6900 Airport Road, Mississauga, ON.
Show Hours: Wednesday to Saturday: 10 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Sunday: 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Parking is FREE!
As always, we are looking for CSSA people who want to help out and become more involved — this is one of those chances! If you want to help out at the CSSA booth at the Sportsmen’s Show, please email Mike Duynhoven at [email protected] and let him know what days and time frames you want to help out.
FBI says it’s trying to rebuild public trust after botched tip before Florida school shooting
By Sadie Gurman | Toronto Star | February 22, 2018
The FBI’s acting deputy director says the bureau made a mistake by failing to investigate a tip that the suspect may be plotting mass violence.
WASHINGTON—A senior FBI official acknowledged Thursday that the nation’s top law enforcement agency has lost public trust after the revelation that it failed to investigate a potentially life-saving tip before the Florida school shooting, a mistake he suggested was the result of bad judgment.
David Bowdich, the FBI’s acting deputy director, said he personally visited the FBI’s West Virginia call centre this week as part of a review of why a warning that the suspect, Nikolas Cruz, had access to guns and a “desire to kill” was not referred to agents in Florida for further investigation.
“People make judgments out on the street every day. Every now and then those judgments may not have been the best judgments based on the information they had at the time,” Bowdich said, adding that the bureau is still trying to determine exactly what went wrong.
The comments, the FBI’s most extensive so far regarding the missed tip, came as the bureau faced a fresh wave of politically charged criticism, this time from the National Rifle Association, whose leaders seized on the failure as a chance to discredit the FBI’s broader work. The FBI is facing unprecedented criticism from U.S. President Donald Trump and other Republicans, who have accused it of partisan bias in its investigations of both Hillary Clinton and Trump ties to Russia.
PARKLAND, Fla. — The Broward County Sheriff’s Office and the FBI gave an update Friday on the investigation into the mass shooting that left 17 dead and 15 injured Wednesday at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The massacre was the deadliest school shooting in the U.S. in five years.
Sheriff Scott Israel said investigators don’t believe the suspect, former student Nikolas Cruz, 19, was targeting anyone during the shooting. Israel said the suspect didn’t have a gas mask during the attack, as had been previously reported. He said investigators did uncover a balaclava, or face mask.
He also said there were about 20 calls for service over the last few years regarding Cruz to the Broward Sheriff’s Office. He said he wasn’t sure if any other agencies had received calls. Israel said each call would be “looked at and scrutinized” and that he would take appropriate action should he learn his office fell short in handling them.
Israel didn’t detail the nature of the calls. Some of the calls for service didn’t involve police response and some involved phone contact with people in other states, Israel said.
“At the end of day, make no mistake about it, America, the only one to blame for this killing is the killer himself,” he said.
Investigators want to learn more about the suspect’s motive and are continuing to investigate his past, Israel said. He said the investigation into Cruz’s digital footprint continues as electronic devices were uncovered during search warrants.
“Every day we’re learning something more and more about the killer,” Israel said.
Cruz, 19, was taken into custody about an hour after the shooting began on Wednesday. Police say he initially evaded authorities by ditching his AR-15 rifle and ammunition and blending in with students fleeing the school. The school resource officer, who is armed, was on campus never encountered the gunman during the shooting, sheriff Scott Israel said. He said the campus is at least 45 acres.
Cruz appeared in court Thursday and was ordered held without bond. On Friday, the FBI admitted it had received a tip Jan. 5 about Cruz, but failed to properly investigate it. The tip wasn’t forwarded to the FBI’s Miami field office and no further investigation was conducted, the FBI said.
Robert Lasky, FBI special agent in charge of the Miami field office, apologized at the press conference Friday. He said protocol wasn’t followed and an in-depth review of internal procedures was underway.
“We truly regret any additional pain this has caused,” Lasky said.
He wouldn’t specify who failed to relay the tip, and said that’s under investigation.
“The potential of the FBI to miss something is always there,” Lasky said.
Investigators have interviewed almost 3,200 students and more than 200 faculty, Israel said. Seven people remain in the hospital.
The son of a Broward County sheriff’s deputy has been released from the hospital and is expected to recover, Israel said.
“I pray one day he will be going back to Stoneman Douglas,” Israel said.
By Krishnadev Calamur | The Atlantic | February 16, 2018
But they also have fewer gun-related deaths than the U.S.
In February 2011, Swiss citizens voted in a referendum that called for a national gun registry and for firearms owned by members of the military to be stored in public arsenals.
“It is a question of trust between the state and the citizen. The citizen is not just a citizen, he is also a soldier,” Hermann Suter, who at the time was vice president of the Swiss gun-rights group Pro Tell, told the BBC then. “The gun at home is the best way to avoid dictatorships—only dictators take arms away from the citizens.”
Apparently many of his fellow Swiss agreed. The referendum was easily defeated. Gun ownership in the country has deep historic roots and it is tied to mandatory military service for Swiss men between the ages of 18 and 34. Traditionally, soldiers were allowed to keep their weapons at home in order to defend against conquering armies. These fears came close to being realized during the Franco-Prussian War on 1871; as well as World War I, when the Swiss border was threatened; and World War II, when the country feared a Nazi invasion.
But guns are popular beyond the military, as well. Children as young as 12 are taught how to shoot as well as the rules of gun safety, and are encouraged to participate in highly popular target-shooting competitions.
The country’s cultural attachment to firearms resembles America’s in some ways, though it has no constitutional right to bear arms—it has the third-highest rate of private gun ownership in the world, behind the United States and Yemen. Yet Switzerland has a low rate of gun crime, and hasn’t seen a mass shooting since 2001, when a gunman opened fire in the legislative body in the Canton of Zug, killing 14 people, as well as himself.
So it’s possible to have widespread gun ownership without so frequently seeing the kinds of incidents that the U.S. saw on Wednesday, when a gunman killed 17 people at a high school in Florida. But how?
For one thing, Switzerland’s rate of gun ownership is still substantially lower than America’s—in Switzerland the rate is roughly one gun per four people, whereas in the U.S. it’s more than one per person, according to GunPolicy.org. The Swiss Defense Ministry estimates that there are 2 million privately owned weapons in the country of 8.3 million people. There are estimated to be 300 million guns in the U.S., but 130 million of them are owned by about 3 percent of the adult population.
Another way the two countries differ is in their rates of gun-related deaths. Swiss gun-related death rates are the highest in Europe. The figure for the U.S. is three times higher than that for Switzerland. Much of that is attributable in both countries to suicide. Mass shootings in Switzerland are relatively rare, though, with two in the past 20 years. By one estimate, there have been 30 mass shootings in the U.S. in 2018 alone, including Wednesday’s in Florida—though the number of fatalities in these mass shootings is only a small proportion of the overall gun-related homicides in the U.S.
The Washington Post offers some reasons why mass shootings are more common in the U.S. than in Switzerland:
Swiss authorities have a list of about 2,000 individuals they suspect of being willing to commit shootings. All of them are frequently approached by authorities, along with psychologists, and are forced to hand over their weapons immediately or are barred from purchasing new ones.
Some sociologists say that Switzerland’s military service comes close to an extended background check, too, and that the country’s education system teaches children early on to search for compromises instead of risking open conflicts. Hence, while almost every home in Switzerland may have a weapon, access is still indirectly regulated and the use of weapons usually follows strict societal norms.
Then there’s the question of what Swiss guns are meant to defend against. The Swiss trust their government more than citizens of other rich countries trust theirs. So the tradition of gun ownership arose more from the historic need to protect Switzerland from invaders than from the hypothetical need to overthrow a tyrannical government. And as Time pointed out in 2012, “the culture of responsibility and safety … is anchored in society and passed from generation to generation.”
The fundamental difference between Switzerland and the U.S. when it comes to buying guns is not the ease of purchase—it’s easy in both countries—but the regulations that are associated with gun ownership in Switzerland. Most firearms, with the exception of fully automatic weapons, are legal. But background checks are mandated, which is not always the case in the U.S. Heavy machine guns and military weapons such as grenade launchers are banned in Switzerland; under some circumstances they can be purchased in the U.S. Public-carrying permits are issued rarely. Guns can be transported, but must remain unloaded at all times when they’re not in use.
Hunting weapons must be registered with the local Canton. Pistols, rifles, and semiautomatic weapons require a license. The paperwork is relatively easy to obtain—and Cantons can make exceptions for individuals. (Citizens of Albania, Algeria, Sri Lanka, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, and Turkey who live in the country as permanent residents are forbidden from buying guns because of their nations’ history of civil war.)
Switzerland’s relatively liberal rules may soon face a challenge from outside the country’s borders, however. The country is a member of the Schengen area, the group of 26 European countries that allows for the free movement of people. Some other members of the Schengen area are also members of the European Union (Switzerland is not). Last year the EU tightened the restrictions on gun ownership and Switzerland, as a member of the Schengen, must bring its laws in line with the new regulations by August of this year. Swiss gun-rights advocates are already planning a legal challenge because, among other things, it revisits the idea of a gun registry.
“When conflicts arise, Switzerland must put its sovereignty first,” Christoph Blocher, the vice president of the SVP, the country’s biggest party, told Reuters. “In an emergency, Switzerland should be ready to exit Schengen.”
Washington, DC – -(Ammoland.com)- President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he had directed his Attorney General to compose changes that would ban so-called bump stocks or gun parts, which make it easier to fire guns more quickly.
“Just a few moments ago I signed a memo directing the attorney general to propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns,” Trump said at a Medal of Valor event at the White House, addressing Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
“I expect these regulations to be finalized, Jeff, very soon,” Trump said.
President Trump made no acknowledgment that machine guns are legal in the USA and already highly regulated. Also, he offered no clarification of how fast is too fast to shoot your gun?
Calls Growing for NRA Board to Repudiate Bump Stock Statement
Early last fall the NRA issued an official statement that they would allow the banning of bump stocks, which lead to sharp criticism of the organization by American gun owners and is likely what opened up the door to today’s move by president Trump. Once more, a glaring example of why you can not allow any reasonable compromise when it comes to guns and gun rights.
Moments earlier, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Trump ordered the Justice Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to review bump fire stocks, which she said had been completed. She said movement on that front would take place shortly.
“The President, when it comes to that, is committed to ensuring that those devices are — again I’m not going to get ahead of the announcement, but I can tell you that the President doesn’t support use of those gun accessories,” Sanders said.
In December, the Justice Department announced that it had begun a federal rule-making process that could reinterpret the legality of specific bump fire stock devices, a piece of equipment that enabled the Las Vegas gunman in October to fire on concertgoers more rapidly, mimicking automatic fire.
Repeatedly during the 2016 Presidential campaign candidate Trump had made direct promises to American gun voters that he supports the Second Amendment and promised to protect it at all cost. So much for that promise.
Looking for more upcoming gun shows and matches? Visit our website.
Ruger 10/22 Magazine Update
The CSSA and CSAAA are still committed to the suit but we have had a few setbacks. First, the information regarding commonality of the magazines, required for our injunction, was not forthcoming. The parent company’s U.S. lawyers said “no sales info at all,” as they claimed having that information go out would give their competition an unfair advantage.
You can’t make this stuff up.
So we contacted our firearms technical experts committee about producing expert opinions that, “Since these mags were created before the pistols, of course, they had to be designed for the rifles.” They had copies of the mags to base their opinions on.. We got ONE report back. Apparently, there were more pressing matters.
So right now, our counsel is working on another way to legally attack this now that commonality and technical characteristics are absent the evidence. Counsel feels that compensation is the best route but the CSSA feels that we need a better route since the mags shouldn’t be prohibs in the first place. Currently our counsel is working on that.
— Tony Bernardo
CSSA Home and Auto Insurance
Team CSSA has partnered with our long-time broker, ThinkInsure Ltd., to offer you Group Automobile and Homeowners insurance through Novex.
You can save 12% off your automobile insurance premiums and 10% off your property insurance premiums.
Please contact Cathy Wanvig at 905-415-8800, ext.176 or [email protected] to start saving now!
HOW CAN GUN OWNERS PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM UNFAIR CHARGES? … WITH FIREARM LEGAL DEFENCE INSURANCE.
We pay legal fees, court costs and time off work to attend court; up to $150,000 per occurrence (recently increased 50% for no additional cost!) and $500,000 total per policy year. Plus get unlimited legal advice through our toll-free Legal Advice Helpline.
What price for peace of mind?
The price is just $95 per year and CSSA members are eligible for a $10 discount – click on “Buy Now” and enter the following exclusive club code to access your savings: CSSA001.
You are not required to disclose any information about firearms in your possession.
Firearm Legal Defence insurance covers:
Defence from prosecution should you be charged with an offence arising out of the use, storage, display, transportation or handling of a firearm;
cases where a firearm is used in self defence, the defence of a person under your protection or the defence of your property;
appealing an event where a licensing, regulatory or judicial authority refuses to renew, suspends, revokes, cancels or alters the terms of your firearms license. Note that this provision does not apply to new license applications.
It will pay for:
The cost of retaining a lawyer or other appointed representative, including court fees, experts’ fees, police reports and medical reports;
costs awarded by the court to opponents in civil cases if the insured person has been ordered to pay them, or pays them with the agreement of the insurance company;
lost salary or wages for the time the insured is off work to attend court or any other hearing at the request of the appointed representative, up to a maximum of $500 per day, and $10,000 in total.