Canada’s National Firearms Association announces Operation Zero Tolerance;
It has come to the attention of Canada’s National Firearms Association that the political police chief heads of law enforcement associations are planning a nation wide blitz against licensed firearms owners, as retribution for the political action of the Canadian firearms community that has resulted in the final vote in parliament of Manitoba MP Candice Hoeppner’s Bill C-391.
The Canadian Association of Police Chiefs (CACP) has formed a “National Firearms Policy” in order to coordinate enforcement initiatives against licensed firearms owners with registered firearms. Canada’s National Firearms Association has information that CACP will be directing their members to clamp down on licensed firearms owners with registered firearms as punishment for their political action to reform bad firearms control laws.
Details and contact information at the link.
According to gun control advocates, gun owners are unnecessarily paranoid about the emergence of a police state in the absence of an armed populace. Concern confirmed.
biffjr., you must be new to Canada and this site as most of us here are aware that the journalists in Canada have been in the Liberals back pocket for the last fifty or so years. ‘Investigative journalism’ as with ‘journalistic integrity’ are somewhat oxymoronic in Canada. When police departments cannot keep track of their own guns they shouldn’t be allowed access to ours. A few years ago the Victoria Police department “misplaced” twenty service revolvers and didn’t realize it until one of them appeared at a crime scene. So much for registering firearms!!!
slaw said: “Wait, is this the good kind of civil liberties violations by police (the G20) or the bad kind (harassing Caledonia protestors in Ontario)? I can’t keep the partisan angle straight.”
slaw, you just cited two examples of the same thing. Police letting violent protesters do whatever they want, then cracking down on whoever happens to be standing around doing nothing.
What’s your point?
“* Registered firearms will be seized despite their legal use or status, with the onus put on their owners to navigate the firearms bureaucracy and legal system in order to retrieve them.”
WTF, isn’t this a form of theft, if they’re legally registered how can they take them??
Will the police be confiscating service revolvers from each others homes so they can “navigate them back” or are they the protected class?
I have a friend with a shiny new criminal record: “Person Of Interest, Guns Found” under the mental health act section something or other, no court no judge no nothing.
He found out because he ordered a background check on himself. He and his wife are trying to adopt and the criminal record check is mandatory, their adoption councillor will not submit their application (after taking his $5000 of course) with this on his record. He is otherwise a police supporting clean as a whistle do-gooder who doesn’t even speed.
He mistakenly allowed the paper work to lapse on his hunting hardware and the cops came a knockin last year and confiscated all of them.
He has them back now and most have been registered twice by the bright lights at HQ.
This is an evil force we’re dealing with here, whether you’re legal or not you’re going to get harassed and victimized by the pointy end of the State.
These fat bureaucrat statist pricks need to be taught a lesson.
richfisher, we have always known this was coming. Registration then confiscation is an invariable historic fact and everybody said so ‘waaaaay back in the 1990’s when all this crap started. I’m surprised it took them this long.
You have no property rights generally, but with guns your continued possession is a -privilege- that is granted to you by government and can be revoked at any time.
That’s what a gun license means. The gun is not yours, its something you are allowed to keep on sufferance unless or until some bureaucrat decides otherwise. They don’t really need a reason.
Lets not be confused about where we stand here, shall we?
“biffjr., you must be new to Canada and this site”
Actually it’s “no” on both counts. I’m just naive enough to believe that there exists a journalist somewhere in Canada who is ambitious enough to dig up the truth and an editor possessing the intestinal fortitude to print it. Wishful thinking on my part I suppose.
I strongly suspect that Mr. Pugash, largely due to his belligerent and defensive attitude, was lying. Seeing him publicly called on it would be very entertaining.
I hope everyone here who is annoyed and complaining about this new round of social engineering stupidity is:
-donating to the NFA and CSSA or buying memberships
-writing editorials to the newspapers expressing your displeasure
The recent court ruling that the government has to pony up cash payments to those who’ve had their “Chartered Rights” violated could come into play. If the police are being ordered to shake down lawful gun owners by the Chiefs I’d say that crosses an ethical and moral line and could make them financially liable for pain and suffering awards.
I know that police are at arms lengths from the government, but since the Chiefs of Police have jumped waaay over the line, I’m anxious to see how far Harper can shove his boot up their asses! I hope he starts by charging individual police departments $1 for every inquiry to the registry and see how fast the Chiefs of Police want to get rid of the thing.
Then keep the registry around for another year so that they really get the point not to abuse their powers and mess with law abiding citizens!
In his position, with his knowledge, it is certain that Pugash was lying.All queries are made via CPIC.The whole point of the system is integrated information access, so that you don’t have to go to disparate data bases to access the information that you want.
Registration was always about eventual confiscation.Remember that Liberal Alan Rock’s stated goal was the disarming of the Canadian populace.
With the Conservatives gun law of C-17 1991 and the Liberals gun law of C-68 1995, millions of ordinary Canadian citizens found themselves the target of arbitrary political repression, raids, seizures, even thrown in jail under threat of further charges and destruction of their property, homes unless they gave up their Charter Rights to due process. From Case law many citizens have been subject to this repression.
Then Reform and Canadian Alliance party members critiqued these unjustified, arbitrary measures, often citing the Auditor General’s Reports which reviewed C-17 and later C-68.
Those reports found there was no evidence that such legislation and regulations would increase public safety.
Early Conservative Party policy was that the Firearms Act should be scraped and replaced. That stopped with the ‘new’ Conservative Party being elected.
The present Harper Conservative Party government has ‘endorsed’ retaining 98% of Mulroney/Campbell C-17 and Chretien/Rock C-68. Millions of Canadians(perhaps 30% of gun owners) licenced/registered themselves and
their firearms. This is the result.
Now those who attempted to comply with the law are the most vulnerable to a Police Chief campaign of political repression.
Unlike the latter half of the Twentieth Century the citizenry didn’t need to fear either the police nor violent criminals. Now both are a clear and present danger to our once ‘Free and Democratic Society”.
The current Harper Conservative government appeasement policy has brought us to this situation.
Only a provincial government can protect it’s citizens from this persecution.
This time Chiefs are dictating political policy by using their enforcement powers.
Very dangerous in any democratic country.
Stan:
Blair thinks $4 million will pay for 200 civil servants? That’s $20,000 per year each in salary – and zero for computers, offices, heat, electricity, etc. Sounds like Blair’s been smoking some of the confiscated dope.
And, of course, there’s the usual 800-lb gorilla that the MSM never mentions: if the gun registry is so useful, can they point to a single crime that was solved (let alone prevented) by the registry, without spouting the bogus “we consult it 10,000 times a day!” nonsense?
A few words about Pugash. He is a UK import (explains a lot) and corporate communications director for the TPS. He reports directly to Bliar (explains the rest). Needless to say he’s slicker than a carnival barker pimping on the side. Of course he was lieing, he’s known for it.
This is why many people are not registering. Once you do, you become an easy target for harassment.
It would seem that you are safer (from government) by not complying.
Our government is our worst enemy.
Those thugs need to watch this video, and then hang their farking heads if shame the arseholes the lot of them.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTb6qdPu8JE&feature=player_embedded
The real Question is why we are allowing Police in politics to begin with? Its a direct conflict of interest.
Time to put the brakes on a Government that would countenance this. If harper has any brains he will go after these guys like a falling mountain.
JMO
As I have said before, the RCMP are dedicated to the protection of the Crown.
They have a mandate to make sure the Royal Subjects (that’s you & me – the taxpayer) are kept in line and do the sheeple thing. When the sheeple get restless from test runs like the G20, to watch how the “subjects” are responding, they come out with propaganda like the police chiefs and MD’s and a whole pile of other public servants who rely on all our sheeple tax dollars to fund their pet projects.
It will not be long before the backlash starts and then the enforcement and confiscation begins.
Bad sheeple!! Bad!!!
glacierman, shouldn’t that be “Baaaaad sheeple! Baaaaad!”?
Just a thought experiment:
What if every registered gun owner reported that all his/her guns were stolen, preferably on the same day (say, November 5, 2010)? How many man-hours would Billy Blair and his pals put into investigation? What use would the registry be then, if every gun in it would then obviously be in the hands of criminals who haven’t registered them?
Just wondering…
This truly sucks. I made the (apparent) mistake of registering just in time to comply. So much for being a good, law abiding dude. I guess the only good thing is that in the last couple of years – for a variety of reasons – my guns have acquired that ole’ travellin’ Jones and never seem to be in the same place for very long. Catch me if you can.
Posted by: Knight 99 at August 26, 2010 4:42 AM
Nicely put. The Police have become thugs to those they can control, & cowards as Caledonia proved. To much pandering to Islamists or other “Identity” groups.
Every civilization needs a police force, but usually its strictly none political.
If not its only a matter of time before they become the enforcement arm of a tyranny.
This is Canada’s infant police state starting teething. Soon it will haver fangs.
JMO
I sent an email to Mr.Hagen asking if there was any more information – I’d like to pass it around, and do some rabble-rousing, but a little more proof would be nice. Not that I don’t think it’s plausible the CACP would do something like this…
…and the physicians support the registry because..?
What possible connection is there between what they do for a living and the oppression of law abiding gun owners?
How would one less or one more registered rifle make a difference to what they do?
I’ll bet downtown surgeons treat more gunshot wounds from illegally procured handguns than registered rifles..
Any physicians here want to explain the correlation between a long gun registry and physicians who support it?
Please explain the rationale..
If we had actual journalists in this country, and not progressive mouthpieces, questions like this would actually get asked of the police:
How many crimes have you solved using information available in the gun registry? Was that information available only in the gun registry or was it available in another police database or as a product of an investigation?
How accurate is the information in the gun registry, in your view? How many police resources have you expended on registry information that turned out to be incorrect? How many false negatives have you encountered – people who own firearms despite the gun registry stating they do not?
You say the gun registry saves lives. How many lives do you estimate it has saved? What is your methodology for this estimate? What studies have you done that support this methodology and estimate? Have you done any studies that cast doubt on this?
You frequently state the gun registry is accessed thousands of times per day. What information are you accessing when you do this? Is that information relevant to the investigation(s) taking place and how often is it so?
And that’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure real journalists could follow up with dozens more. If we had any in this country.
a good rule of thumb is not believe a single word a pig says. Pigs are politicized pathological liars.
Kursk asks: “Any physicians here want to explain the correlation between a long gun registry and physicians who support it?”
I’m not a physician, but I’ll have a go.
Two things about doctors and gun control. First, the medical journals have been the main vehicle for anti-gun propaganda since the 1970’s. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ), The Lancet in England, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and of course my favorite, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) have been publishing one or two major anti-gun papers every year since about 1980 or so. Doctors pretty well have to read these journals, so they see these papers. Hundreds of them. No rebuttal allowed in the journals, of course.
Second, there are many doctors out there whose primary occupation is Professional Leftist. These are Ruling Class apparatchiks who grease the wheels of the gravy train for a living.
Most Canadian doctors are -far- too busy to even develop an opinion on the issue, they just parrot whatever the PC party line is this week in an effort to get along. Doctors that don’t do this burn out pretty quick in the Ontario medical system. PC party line is set by Liberal Party operatives and bureaucrats, among whom are medical educators in university, nurse’s union thugs, hospital management weenies, social workers, OHIP and the OMA licensing board.
The pressure to shut the f- up and go along is really quite remarkable. Its amazing any doctor comes out -against- gun control, frankly.
The name “reg dunlop” is associated with defending cops vehemently on other sites.
agent provocateur…?
I thought we left the Cheka policies behind in 1926.
It sounds like the chiefs really do want to make Canada a police state. This combined with the “sensitivity training” from left-wing extremists that leaves the cops intolerant of protests against marching crazies (which we saw a few times in 2009 in Toronto and Calgary) do not bode well for the future of the country.
Meanwhile, it would help if the PM would stop hiding his light under a bushel. Start explaining why your policies are good instead of just trying to plow ahead in silence.
92% of Canadian police officers get it, 70% of the general public gets it, 99% of SDA commenter’s gets it.
What part of this issue is it that a few of our “tax funded public servants” don’t get?
Medical bureaucrats and Police Chief’s alike.
This is not a matter of wishful desires by a few law abiding gun owners. This is based on overwhelming evidence through comprehensive studies and statistical data from Canada, the US and around the world on the Crime Deterrent and Costs associated with Gun Registry.
Simply put, that dog don’t hunt, and the few bureaucratic dissenters are pissing in the wind and all over themselves.
One of the things that I’ve noted since I’ve been a doctor is that there are very few Libertarian physicians in Canada. Not sure why this is the case and the rationale given for totalitarian solutions proposed by physicians is “public health”. There seems to be incredibly myopia on that part of many physicians that their “public health” positions result in severe erosions of civil liberties.
In med school I first encountered this idiotic attitude when I seemed to shock instructors when I mentioned that I didn’t wear a seat belt and saw no use for bicycle helmets and was opposed to any laws which required me to do so (this was before the push for firearms elimination in Canada).
The same process that is happening with the chiefs of police happens with medical associations in that people who are more concerned with pushing a political agenda than doing the work they’re supposed to be doing end up in positions of “leadership”. I don’t know why these individuals are in favor of statist solutions and my response to this is to not be a member of either the BCMA or CMA and I’ve let these organizations know why I refuse to join them.
In cities there are very few doctors that hunt or shoot. A lot of them are terrified of firearms and want to make them go away. The worst offenders among medical specialties are pediatricians who seem to want the world to be totally “child safe” and seem to have no conception of the notion of individual freedom which includes the right to do stupid and even fatal things.
Where I practice now a lot of doctors hunt and most people have guns. There’s very little support for anti-gun positions.
Unfortunately most doctors don’t look at the big picture and think for themselves. While not dealing directly with firearms, it illustrates how totalitarian laws get through. I was at a dinner meeting one night in Vancouver and the discussion at the table was about the dangers of “crystal meth”. One fellow seemed to be obsessed with the extreme toxicity of “crystal meth” and was supporting more totalitarian laws to prevent it’s production. I then asked him if he prescribed dexedrine in his practice at which point he answered in the affirmative. I then asked him how the N-methylation of dexedrine suddenly created this brain-rotting drug that he was ranting about and realized he was ignorant about amphetamine pharmacology. He also had no idea that methamphetamine was available as a prescription drug in the US as Desoxyn, or of the periodic occurrences of methamphetamine abuse that occur every 10-20 years or so, or that the Wehrmacht consumed methamphetamine in industrial doses during WWII.
This is an example of how event the presumably intelligent can be duped by statist propaganda which relies on the ignorance of the population to create artificial crises. The solution to this problem is to research things oneself and, failing that, instill an attitude in people that anything emanating from government should be instinctively distrusted. At least in the US the 2nd Amendment provides constitutional protection for the RKBA. The fight is harder in Canada, but maintenance of the firearms registry is not a high priority with the vast majority of people.
Where PMSH really screwed up was in not decriminalizing cannabis. Most firearms violence is now between various groups of drug dealers settling differences; decriminalize their highest cash value drug and suddenly the cost plummets and the only result is that one has a large number of unemployed drug dealers, narcs and crown prosecutors. Nothing else will change as those people who smoke cannabis will continue to do so and those who don’t will continue to do so. I’m sure the chiefs of police are opposed to decriminalization also as this would mean there would be fewer police needed and they’d actually have to go after real criminals.
Very well said Loki!
A summary point would be city dwelling Liberal doctors, who only see guns as impliments of crime.
I also think there is big merit in Phantom’s comments about where the gravey comes from in a socialist run medical system – to paraphrase.
I agree with most of your points about street drug legalization. A problem I’ve always had with that (sensible) theory, is that criminals will always be criminals. I believe you just shift the produce of one flavor of crime to a other. What that would be who knows? Criminals are inventive, and violence will always follow. I would agree it should help reduce addicts.
I am an ER physician.
I have to agree with Loki, its pretty much a group of political minded epidemiology obsessed groupies who run the organizations and pretend to speak for all of us. They have a fascist view of how society should be run. Quite honestly if it were up to them we’d all be wearing helmets and body armour.
They base their opinion of really bad evidence and correlations.
I have written articles in the National Post refuting all their pseudo evidence. Their favorite is to claim gun deaths have declined since the laws were enacted but they fail to mention that gun deaths were declining long before these laws.
If you go against them, as a physician believe me you end up hearing about it, and they’ll try and ridicule your mental capabilities instead of debating the evidence.
The are a large number of physicians who shoot for hunting or sport reasons and are against the registry because it serves no purpose and has no evidence to support it. Of course our voices will not get heard…
langmann
Body armour is presently in the process of being banned/illegal in some provinces.
Perhaps bubble wrap?
All Hail Emperor William of Blair the First!
Bill Blair, David Miller and Dalton McGuinty… a triumvirate of Toronto politicians who need and deserve a lesson in where the boundaries of their domain end.
btw Curious, I don’t own the trademark to “reg dunlop”, its just a handle.
Body armor banned!
That’s halariois. If true the Liberals are almost 100% guaranteed to hand over Canadian streets to the criminals.
Who needs comspiricey theories when you have Libs around? They just make it so.