Trudeau promises more gun control and goes on the attack against Scheer

RCMP Asks Retired Police to Help With Liberal Gun Confiscations​

The RCMP is asking retired and former police in its Reserve Program to help the Liberal Party of Canada’s political and regulatory attacks against government-licensed firearm owners and businesses.
RCMP Reserve Program

The RCMP Reserve Program this month contacted members in New Brunswick, its “J Division,” to join the Liberals’ forced rifle and shotgun confiscations targeting licence holders.

They referred to the crackdown ordered on 01 May 2020 as the “Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program.” Although the Liberals have said they would pay firearm owners who surrender their gear for destruction, no compensation program exists, and the Liberals are scrambling to execute seizures they’ve been preparing since 2018.
‘Reservists Are Crucial’

“The J Division Reservists are crucial to the success of this program, please take the time to consider your participation and commitment to this RCMP public safety priority,” Allen Farrah, the RCMP Reserve Program’s New Brunswick coordinator for the confiscations, said in an e-mail to reservists.

The full e-mail is below.

Why It Matters

The RCMP is an essential Liberal partner for the authoritarian crackdown targeting honest citizens, instead of protecting honest citizens from it.

The Liberal+RCMP attacks undermine social stability and public safety by destroying respect for politicians and police, government institutions, and the law.

Although some RCMP employees support the crackdowns, many current and former staff oppose them. (Some of them subscribe to TheGunBlog.ca.)

Many Unknowns

Is the RCMP asking reservists to assist with the forced seizures in New Brunswick only, or also in other regions? Alberta and Saskatchewan have passed laws to block the confiscations, and other provinces also oppose them.

Why is the RCMP working on a compensation program that doesn’t exist? (Unless they’re copying the misleading Liberal name for the effort to criminalize and confiscate?)

Is RCMP calling on reservists to help on the ground with door-to-door confiscation raids, handing out cheques for some imaginary/forthcoming compensation, or other tasks?

Since the confiscation fantasy is on track to fail, why is the RCMP still working on it at all?

RCMP NB: ‘National Program’

“As this is a national program, I would ask that you contact our colleagues at RCMP National Media Relations office,” Hans Ouellette, a spokesperson for the RCMP in New Brunswick, told TheGunBlog.ca today after we published this report.
No Response to Our Info Requests

TheGunBlog.ca e-mailed multiple requests for information and comment to the RCMP and the Liberal administration, without any response:

RCMP Reserve Program, J Division, July 24: No reply until after we published this report. They directed us to the RCMP HQ media service.
RCMP Reserve Program, National Division, July 24: No reply.
RCMP National Headquarters, Media Service, July 25: They directed us to the Department of Public Safety, which oversees the RCMP.
Department of Public Safety, Media Service, July 25: They directed us to their General Enquiries service.
Department of Public Safety, General Enquiries Service, July 25: No reply.

RCMP Reserve Program “J Division” E-Mail

Following is the text of the e-mail from the RCMP Reserve Program

RCMP-Reserve-Letter-to-J-Division-English-1-791x1024.jpeg


thegunblog.ca

RCMP Asks Retired Police to Help With Liberal Gun Confiscations – TheGunBlog.ca

RCMP Reserve Program is asking retired and former police to help confiscate guns.
thegunblog.ca thegunblog.ca
 
IronNoggin said:

RCMP Asks Retired Police to Help With Liberal Gun Confiscations​

The RCMP is asking retired and former police in its Reserve Program to help the Liberal Party of Canada’s political and regulatory attacks against government-licensed firearm owners and businesses.
RCMP Reserve Program

The RCMP Reserve Program this month contacted members in New Brunswick, its “J Division,” to join the Liberals’ forced rifle and shotgun confiscations targeting licence holders.

They referred to the crackdown ordered on 01 May 2020 as the “Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program.” Although the Liberals have said they would pay firearm owners who surrender their gear for destruction, no compensation program exists, and the Liberals are scrambling to execute seizures they’ve been preparing since 2018.
‘Reservists Are Crucial’

“The J Division Reservists are crucial to the success of this program, please take the time to consider your participation and commitment to this RCMP public safety priority,” Allen Farrah, the RCMP Reserve Program’s New Brunswick coordinator for the confiscations, said in an e-mail to reservists.

The full e-mail is below.

Why It Matters

The RCMP is an essential Liberal partner for the authoritarian crackdown targeting honest citizens, instead of protecting honest citizens from it.

The Liberal+RCMP attacks undermine social stability and public safety by destroying respect for politicians and police, government institutions, and the law.

Although some RCMP employees support the crackdowns, many current and former staff oppose them. (Some of them subscribe to TheGunBlog.ca.)

Many Unknowns

Is the RCMP asking reservists to assist with the forced seizures in New Brunswick only, or also in other regions? Alberta and Saskatchewan have passed laws to block the confiscations, and other provinces also oppose them.

Why is the RCMP working on a compensation program that doesn’t exist? (Unless they’re copying the misleading Liberal name for the effort to criminalize and confiscate?)

Is RCMP calling on reservists to help on the ground with door-to-door confiscation raids, handing out cheques for some imaginary/forthcoming compensation, or other tasks?

Since the confiscation fantasy is on track to fail, why is the RCMP still working on it at all?

RCMP NB: ‘National Program’

“As this is a national program, I would ask that you contact our colleagues at RCMP National Media Relations office,” Hans Ouellette, a spokesperson for the RCMP in New Brunswick, told TheGunBlog.ca today after we published this report.
No Response to Our Info Requests

TheGunBlog.ca e-mailed multiple requests for information and comment to the RCMP and the Liberal administration, without any response:

RCMP Reserve Program, J Division, July 24: No reply until after we published this report. They directed us to the RCMP HQ media service.
RCMP Reserve Program, National Division, July 24: No reply.
RCMP National Headquarters, Media Service, July 25: They directed us to the Department of Public Safety, which oversees the RCMP.
Department of Public Safety, Media Service, July 25: They directed us to their General Enquiries service.
Department of Public Safety, General Enquiries Service, July 25: No reply.

RCMP Reserve Program “J Division” E-Mail

Following is the text of the e-mail from the RCMP Reserve Program

RCMP-Reserve-Letter-to-J-Division-English-1-791x1024.jpeg


thegunblog.ca

RCMP Asks Retired Police to Help With Liberal Gun Confiscations – TheGunBlog.ca

RCMP Reserve Program is asking retired and former police to help confiscate guns.
thegunblog.ca thegunblog.ca
Click to expand...
Why not use RCMP time and money to deal with criminals. More of our money wasted.
 

Lists of firearms and devices eligible for compensation​

Use the following lists to find all prohibited firearms and devices under the Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program.

More information will be provided in due course on:

  • compensation amounts for businesses and individuals
  • methods to turn in eligible prohibited firearms and devices
  • how to participate in the program

Lists of firearms and devices eligible for compensation - Canada.ca

www.canada.ca www.canada.ca

I for one will not be looking into the "how to participate" link.
They really lowballed me when they sent me suggested "compensation values" for my effected rifles - I stapled my Lawyers card to their letter and suggested they contact him directly in these matters. They have not bothered.

And I sincerely believe Poilievre will be Canada's next PM.
He has pointedly and publicly stated he will do away with this mess - something I believe he is being sincere about...

Cheers
 

Canada’s Gun Grab – Running Out of Road​

The wheels are coming off of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s gun confiscation program (“buyback”).

As proposed, the confiscation of firearms and devices that were banned as “prohibited” by Trudeau’s Liberal government over four years ago was to have been underway by now. Public Safety Canada’s website on the program titled the “Firearms Buyback Program Overview” (last updated 2023-07-26), continues to state that a “staged implementation is planned, with the collection of business stock beginning before the end of the year, and to get started with individual collection in the second half of 2023.”

Several provinces have already ruled out entirely any possibility that their law enforcement resources could be used to implement the confiscation of the banned firearms and devices. One provincial official’s position was characteristic of the spirit of this opposition, stating, “[w]e do not and will not support initiatives that only impact the law abiding, RCMP vetted, hunters, sport shooters, ranchers, farmers and others who use firearms for lawful and good reasons… we will not authorize the use of provincially funded resources of any type for the federal government’s ‘buy back’ program.”

At the start of this year there were indications that the federal government was considering hiring private entities, rather than law enforcement or similar government agents, to enforce the ban and confiscation. Government procurement/ solicitation documents envisioned a scheme in which the private contractors would take custody of the banned firearms at designated collection points across Canada, provide secure storage facilities, and transport and destroy the guns according to government specifications. The contractors, as private entities with no police powers, would necessarily rely on voluntary compliance. Another potential complication was the fact that that these contractors would not be responsible for administering the compensation payments, meaning that any gun owners who did choose to surrender their property would be relying on a separate bureaucracy for their checks. The government advised, at the time, that “Canada will be applying measures surrounding the protection” of the vendors’ identity “in order to ensure vendors do not face reprisals or retaliation,” so further disclosures on the progress of the private sector option are unlikely. Subsequent developments, though, tend to suggest that this opportunity failed to excite sufficient interest.

Canada Post, a Crown corporation, reportedly declined to participate in a mail-in collection of the prohibited firearms and devices, citing safety and security concerns. The plan was “to have owners of banned guns place the unloaded and secured weapons in government-issued boxes and then send them back to the government to be destroyed.” One Canada Post employee described the security at his small municipal post office as “zero,” adding “[t]he government is crazy if it thinks we can do this safely.” Canada Post CEO Doug Ettinger framed the matter more diplomatically on May 29, telling the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates that, due to an “internal safety assessment, … we are not comfortable with the process that was being proposed,” and that this “should be best left to those that know how to handle guns, know how to dismantle them, know how to manage them so no one gets hurt.”

A bigger issue, flagged by TheGunBlog.ca, a Canadian gun rights website, is that a 1998 regulation makes it a crime for individuals to ship “prohibited” rifles and shotguns using Canada Post. The regulation, SOR/98-209, was imposed by the Liberals “in 1998 to expand the Firearms Act, their sweeping anti-gun law of 1995.” News reports state that Dominic LeBlanc, Canada’s Public Safety Minister (the government official responsible for the implementation of the confiscation), has now introduced amended regulations. “These proposed regulations will make the affected firearms and devices mailable matter and will temporarily permit businesses taking part in the program to ship firearms or devices via post,” said Mr. Leblanc. However, his official statement at the end of May refers only to “the business phase,” not individual collection, whereby the new regulations “will provide businesses with additional options to participate in the program and dispose of the affected assault-style firearms and devices they hold in their inventory.”

Other options that the federal government may be exploring is creating “drop-off points” where owners would surrender their weapons, or using retired Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and other former law enforcement officers as collection agents. TheGunBlog.ca writes that the RCMP Reserve Program in the province of New Brunswick has emailed reservists to solicit their interest regarding participating in the gun confiscations, stating that “J Division Reservists are crucial to the success of this program.”

TheGunBlog.ca notes that this raises a number of troubling concerns. “Why is the RCMP working on a compensation program that doesn’t exist?” More importantly, is the RCMP “calling on reservists to help on the ground with door-to-door confiscation raids targeting” government-licensed firearm owners and businesses, and if so, why is the RCMP partnering in “the authoritarian crackdown targeting honest citizens, instead of protecting honest citizens from it?” TheGunBlog.ca contacted both the RCMP and the Liberal government multiple times for additional information on this “RCMP public safety priority,” without success.

What could possibly be next?

Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been spent on a program that is stuck at the starting line. The Liberal government has had to twice extend the “amnesty period” that allows affected gun owners to continue to possess (but not use or sell) their banned guns without incurring criminal liability. The latest amnesty period is due to expire on October 30, 2025.

An anonymous government source told reporters that “[n]o one is rushing to participate in the program.” Teri Bryant, the chief firearms officer for the province of Alberta, says much the same and pinpoints the reason. “No one wants to be involved in this program because it is so unpopular...I don’t see any way it can be done.”

www.nraila.org

NRA-ILA | Canada’s Gun Grab – Running Out of Road

The wheels are coming off of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s gun confiscation program (“buyback”).
www.nraila.org www.nraila.org
 

Poll: Gun control​

Should the federal government immediately enact gun control legislation passed last year but waiting to come into effect?

Several civil society organizations, including women's advocates, are calling on the Liberal government to swiftly flesh out firearm legislation passed last year by enacting crucial regulations and directives.

In December, Parliament approved a government bill that includes new measures to keep firearms out of the hands of domestic abusers.

It also cements restrictions on handguns, increases penalties for firearm trafficking and aims to curb homemade ghost guns.

A detailed brief endorsed by various concerned organizations urges the government to take the regulatory steps needed to activate measures aimed at stemming intimate violence.

"We truly believe that some of these measures are going to make a difference in keeping women safe," said Suzanne Zaccour, director of legal affairs for the National Association of Women and the Law, one of the groups behind the brief sent to key federal ministers.

"So that's why we're advocating for these important sections to come into force as soon as possible."

The brief presses the government to issue an order-in-council to make Firearms Act amendments in the bill related to domestic violence take effect, namely:

— subsection 6.1, which makes an individual ineligible to hold a firearms licence if they are subject to a protection order or have been convicted of an offence involving violence;

— subsection 70.1, which obliges a chief firearms officer who has reasonable grounds to suspect that a licensee may have engaged in domestic violence or stalking to revoke the licence within 24 hours;

— and subsection 70.2, which automatically revokes the licence of an individual that becomes subject to a protection order and requires them to deliver their guns to a peace officer within 24 hours.

The brief also calls for new regulatory measures to ensure compliance with a previously introduced requirement for sellers of firearms to verify the validity of the licence of a potential buyer.

"There have been many instances where an individual with a revoked or expired licence managed to purchase a firearm which they then used against an intimate partner or ex-partner."

The federal government should ensure an education campaign for police, the courts, the public and women's shelters includes updated information regarding the new standards for intervention to remove access to firearms as a result of subsection 70.1, as well as the expanded definition of domestic violence in the Firearms Act, the brief adds.

Others who have endorsed the recommendations include gun-control advocates PolySeSouvient, Canadian Doctors for Protection from Guns, the Canadian Federation of University Women, Ending Violence Association of Canada, Women’s Shelters Canada, YWCA Canada, Danforth Families for Safe Communities, Fédération des femmes du Québec and Fédération des Maisons d'Hébergement pour Femmes au Québec.

The Public Safety Department had no immediate response to questions about the brief.

The bill passed by Parliament also includes a ban on assault-style firearms that fall under a new technical definition. However, the definition doesn't apply to models that were already on the market when the bill passed.

Earlier this summer, PolySeSouvient spokeswoman Nathalie Provost wrote Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, seeking action on plans for a buyback of firearms banned in 2020 through order-in-council, including the AR-15, prohibition of others that fell through the legislative cracks, and stronger regulations on large-capacity magazines.

At the time, LeBlanc's office said it was "continuing to put strong measures in place to tackle gun violence."

www.castanet.net

Should the federal government immediately enact gun control legislation passed last year but waiting to come into effect?

Several civil society organizations, including women's advocates, are calling on the Liberal government to swiftly flesh out firearm legislation passed last year by enacting crucial regulations and directives.
www.castanet.net
 

Gun control group calls Trudeau government's buyback program a 'waste' of money​

'We're not reducing the risk level,' says Nathalie Provost of PolyRemembers​


The Trudeau government is losing a key ally in its efforts to take hundreds of thousands of military-style firearms out of circulation, jeopardizing one of the top items in its public security agenda.

Launched in 2020, the federal government's plan to buy back and destroy firearms it has banned — such as AR-15s — has long been vilified by firearms industry groups and the Conservative Party of Canada.

But the project is now coming under friendly fire from PolyRemembers, a gun-control group that is threatening to withdraw its support for the buyback program unless Ottawa broadens its scope to include military-style firearms that remain legal.

The group warns that owners of banned firearms will be able to use their federal compensation cheques to obtain other guns that offer many of the same characteristics and mechanical functions as the banned firearms.

"It's a waste of Canadians' money. We are not reducing the risk level, we are just replacing the makes and models," said PolyRemembers spokesperson Nathalie Provost.

The cost of the program has not yet been made public but it's expected to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

The current version of the program is "a sieve," said Provost, who survived numerous bullet wounds in the massacre that took the lives of 14 women at the Polytechnique engineering school in Montreal nearly 35 years ago.

"If our safety is important to politicians, we have to do this buyback program. But if we do it, we have to do it efficiently, not just for appearances. And right now, it's just for appearances," she said.

The group points out that other semi-automatic, military-style firearms — such as the Crypto made by Crusader Arms and the Kodiak Defence WK180-C semi-automatic rifle — remain legal in Canada.

The criticism comes as Ottawa prepares to recover firearms that were banned in 2020 and that retailers have been forced to keep in their inventory.

The second phase of the program — which will aim to recover hundreds of thousands of firearms currently in the hands of individual owners — is planned for spring 2025.

In both cases, the government buyback will target 1,500 firearm models and components. It's a complex project, especially since Canada Post refused to participate earlier this year, citing safety concerns.

Much of the work will be overseen by the RCMP but Ottawa says it's banking on support from provincial police forces in Ontario and Quebec.

Despite PolyRemembers' opposition, the federal government is refusing to change its plans just prior to the launch of the program, which looks to recover and dispose of more than 150,000 prohibited firearms and components across the country.

"We have no intention of modifying the list at this point. Our efforts are focused on successfully launching the program. That is the most concrete way to reinforce public safety in Canada and respect the objectives that we have set," said Jean-Sébastien Comeau, spokesperson for Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc.

One expert said he wonders whether the program can survive rejection by a prominent gun control group, especially now that the Liberal minority government has lost the formal support of the NDP.

"All signs are negative in terms of the implementation of a program that is so complex and relies on the collaboration of provincial governments," said Frédéric Boily, professor of political science at the University of Alberta.

The firearms industry and PolyRemembers have clashed over gun control measures for decades, but they now agree on the gaps in the buyback program.

Wes Winkel, president of the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association (CSAAA), said firearms owners can still buy many models of firearms that are similar to the ones that have been banned.

"Taxpayers should be so upset at this process because you're going to be taking money from taxpayers, buying and destroying firearms that are perfectly good. And those consumers that are licensed are going to take that same funds, turn around and buy the identical firearm with a different brand, make and model," said Winkel, who is also president of Ellwood Epps Sporting Goods in Orillia, Ont.

Winkel argued the government has adopted a nonsensical policy that is not based on an objective definition of a firearm's capabilities. He compared the buyback plan to an attempt to reduce speeding by banning Corvettes.

"Mustangs and Trans Ams and Ferraris are all still in circulation. Anybody that understands cars would say this makes no sense whatsoever," he said.

Tony Bernardo, president of the Canadian Shooting Sports Federation, said he believes the government has banned firearms based on "what they look like" and accuses groups like PolyRemembers of seeking to ban firearms because they are "black and ugly."

"If you ban all the AR-15s, what did you actually accomplish?" he said. "Nothing was accomplished, it's a dumb idea. Realistically, the Liberals probably know it's a dumb idea too. But it sells votes."

The firearms lobby predicts the buyback program will fail because of the strong opposition of both firearms owners and the governments of Saskatchewan and Alberta.

Many members of the firearms community are banking on a Conservative victory in the next federal election. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has promised to reverse what he's called a "gun grab."

In early 2021, the families of the Polytechnique victims informed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that he would not be welcome at activities commemorating the tragedy that year because the buyback program was still voluntary at that point.

In response, the Liberals strengthened their buyback program to make it mandatory.

Provost is now warning the Trudeau government that its participation in events marking the 35th anniversary of the Polytechnique massacre is once again in doubt. No decision has been made, she said, adding it will be made by the broader community of victims' families and survivors.

"How can we commemorate with the prime minister, and with Minister LeBlanc, if he didn't fulfil his promises?" she said.

Provost said the fight continues on behalf of all those who were scarred by the events at Polytechnique and who are demanding an end to assault firearms in Canada.

"It's not a time for ideas, it's not a time for promises. It's time for actions and decisions," she said.


Rather obvious who CBC supports on this one...
 

Taxpayers dole out $67M for a gun-grab program that doesn't yet exist​

OTTAWA — Lagging years behind schedule, costs for the federal government’s firearm confiscation program has exceeded $67 million without ever seizing a single gun.

Documents tabled this week in the Senate put combined expenditures for the Liberals’ gun “buy-back” scheme at nearly $67.2 million — not including millions of dollars spent on outside contractors.

“They spent $67 million so far and haven’t bought back one gun — they haven’t even developed a program,” Sen. Don Plett told The Toronto Sun.

“When I asked the question of government leader (Sen. Marc Gold,) his answer was ‘We have to get it right, so we will keep spending money until we get it right.'”

The documents are responses to an order paper question submitted by Plett, who also noted an additional $11.5 million was paid to outside consultants.

“That’s something this government is quick to do, hire consultant after consultant,” he said.

As of June 19, Public Safety Canada spent $47 million on the program, the documents state, plus $9 million in centrally withheld funds. The RCMP has also spent $11,063,597 on the program.

Phase one began last April following a $700,000 agreement with the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association to assist retailers with compensation.

Preliminary work on the program’s second phase, which involves confiscating legally-purchased firearms from licensed owners, began earlier this year.

Tracey Wilson, of the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights (CCFR), questioned why the millions weren’t spent tackling root-causes of Canada’s gun crime problem, like smuggling.

“In the response delivered by Senate Leader Gold, he said that the confiscation program is a ‘central part of the government’s plan to combat gun violence,'” she said.

“I’d challenge the senator and the Liberal government to be honest with Canadians — how many licensed owners of these legally acquired firearms are responsible for the massive increase in violence we see in our streets?

Firearms policy expert Tim Thurley said costs are only going higher.

“The released information indicates this money is being spent on program set-up, including developing communications strategies, writing impact assessments, and building and integrating IT platforms,” he said, explaining that costs will spike once the gun grab kicks into high gear.

“The logistics of collecting, transporting, and destroying firearms, program administration, and of course compensation, are all large cost drivers.”

Internal documents from 2019 pegged the total price tag of the gun grab at $2 billion — despite assurances during the 2021 federal election that the program would cost between $400 million and $600 million.

Policy analyst and thegunblog.ca editor Nicolas Johnson said these numbers represent only a portion of the money this program promises to waste.

“It doesn’t include the millions of dollars wasted by politicians and bureaucrats in the provinces, provincial firearm offices or local police,” he said.

“It also leaves out millions of dollars in destroyed personal and family wealth of entrepreneurs who were forced to close their gun stores, and of their employees who were laid off.”

He said the program’s impacts go way beyond the ledger sheet.

“The biggest cost of the Liberal attacks will never make it into the financial statements: the destroyed trust in politicians, police, and government institutions, and the resulting erosion of peace, stability, and safety,” Johnson said.

torontosun.com

Taxpayers dole out $67M for a gun-grab program that doesn't yet exist

Costs for the federal government's firearm confiscation program has exceeded $67 million without ever seizing a single gun.
torontosun.com torontosun.com
 

Liberals demote sport shooters association after criticism of gun buyback scheme​

The Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association has been demoted from its key role as a “participant” to a “consultant” in the federal government’s firearms buyback program after criticizing the Liberals’ approach to gun confiscation.

Despite being contracted to assist with the program, the CSAAA’s vocal opposition to the feasibility of the government plan from the outset has led to its role being significantly reduced.

“There is a severe lack of consultation with the firearms industry during the creation of these policies. The government’s approach often prioritizes political wins and input from victims’ groups, leaving industry experts and the legal firearms community sidelined with no say in their own futures,” reads a release from the association.

The CSAAA was originally contracted to help businesses with communications, inventorying firearms marked for confiscation, and assessing compensation for the affected firearms and businesses.

President of the CSAAA Wes Winkel told True North that his association was never to be involved with collecting and destroying guns but instead was assisting the structural administration, like helping with price estimates and getting the administrative structure set up. They also liaised with dealers and gathered feedback on websites and structure by using their dealer network for input.

The association is no longer responsible for collecting or distributing data for the government or firearm businesses. Instead, its role is now limited to on-demand consultation, offering industry expertise when requested.

True North previously reported CSAAA saying they felt like a political “pawn.”

The CSAAA called the buyback program complex. The association said it highlighted issues rather than offered solutions because none exist.

“The confiscation program is a fundamentally flawed idea,” reads the release.

Winkel told True North that his association had been a highly critical participant, warning the Liberals that their solutions would not work.

“They got frustrated with us and basically changed the contract to say that we’re now just consultants. We’re no longer doing any participation in the actual program itself,” said Winkel.

He added that the Liberals either demoted them because they criticized the feds or because they could not solve the issues and that no replacement has been named yet.

Winkel said that the main critiques were regarding solutions to the lack of transportation, facilities, and infrastructure.

Regarding transportation, he said that there are no mechanisms in the country to transport firearms back to the facilities safely. The only national carrier capable of doing so, Canada Post, has refused.

He added that in rural areas like Nunavut or Northern B.C., there is no access to couriers.

Winkel said that the Liberals have yet to allocate appropriate funds to the process.

Despite still not collecting a single gun, the cost of the program recently rose to $67 million.

In 2021, the Parliamentary Budget Officer calculated that the buyback program would cost over $750 million to compensate firearm owners.

Winkel said that the administrative costs will be “considerably more” than the amount given to firearms owners in compensation.

“Like everything the government does, the bureaucracy runs amok. And, now, we end up with huge cost overruns,” he said.

He said that the business side of the gun buyback is likely possible but viewed retrieving guns from individuals as an impossible task.

“Which is why they deferred the amnesty date until after the next federal election, because I think everyone kind of expects it to be a moot point by then, that it’s not going to happen,” said Winkel.

CEO and executive director of the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights, Rod Giltaca, told True North that he was surprised the Liberals haven’t completed the business portion of the buyback yet.

“The surprising part is that they haven’t been able to complete the retailer buyback. These are willing participants that possess invoices for exactly what they paid for these firearms, and the government knows where all these businesses are as they are licensed,” said Giltaca. “I’m sure there’s more to the story than what we see on the surface.”

Winkel said that by the next federal election, the Liberals may collect some guns to justify their ongoing process in their electoral campaign.

“But I don’t believe that there will be any substance to the volume that gets collected,” he said.

Winkel said that the Liberals haven’t kicked the CSAAA to the curb completely, and they still engage with them every week. However, they have been removed from the day-to-day structural administration.

“They no longer want us to contact the dealers on behalf of them. They want to go directly to the dealers themselves,” he said.

tnc.news

Liberals demote sport shooters association after criticism of gun buyback scheme

The Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association has been demoted from its key role as a “participant” to a “consultant” in the federal government’s firearms buyback program after criticizing the Liberals’ approach to gun confiscation.
tnc.news tnc.news
 

Cost of Ottawa’s gun ban fiasco may reach $6 billion​

Four years ago, the Trudeau government banned “1,500 types” of “assault-style firearms.” It’s time to ask if public safety has improved as promised.

This ban instantly made it a crime for federally-licenced firearms owners to buy, sell, transport, import, export or use hundreds of thousands formerly legal rifles and shotguns. According to the government, the ban targets “assault-style weapons,” which are actually classic semi-automatic rifles and shotguns that have been popular with hunters and sport shooters for more than 100 years. When announcing the ban, the prime minister said the government would confiscate the banned firearms and their legal owners would be “grandfathered” or receive “fair compensation.” That hasn’t happened.

As of October 2024, the government has revealed no plans about how it will collect the newly-banned firearms nor has it made any provisions for compensation in any federal budget since the announcement in 2020. Originally, the government enacted a two-year amnesty period to allow compliance with the ban. This amnesty expired in April 2022 and has been twice extended, first to Oct. 30, 2023, then to Oct. 30, 2025.

Clearly, the ban—which the government calls a “buyback”—has been a gong show from the beginning. Since Trudeau’s announcement four years ago, virtually none of the banned firearms have been surrendered. The Ontario government refuses to divert police resources to cooperate with this federal “buyback” scheme. The RCMP’s labour union has said it’s a “misdirected effort when it comes to public safety.” The Canadian Sporting Arms & Ammunition Association, which represents firearms retailers, said it will have “zero involvement” in helping confiscate these firearms. Even Canada Post wants nothing to do with Trudeau’s “buyback” plan. And again, the government has revealed no plan for compensation—fair or otherwise.

And yet, according to the government, it has already spent $67.2 million, which includes compensation for 60 federal employees working on the “buyback,” which still doesn't exist.

It remains unclear just how many firearms the 2020 ban includes. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates range between 150,000 to more than 500,000, with an estimated total value between $47 million and $756 million. These costs only include the value of the confiscated firearms and exclude the administrative costs to collect them and the costs of destroying the collected firearms. The total cost of this ban to taxpayers will be more than $4 billion and possibly more than $6 billion.

Nevertheless, while the ban of remains a confusing mess, after four years we should be able to answer one key question. Has the ban made Canadians safer?

According to Statistics Canada, firearm-related violent crime swelled by 10 per cent from 2020 to 2022 (the latest year of comparable data), from 12,614 incidents to 13,937 incidents. And in “2022, the rate of firearm-related violent crime was 36.7 incidents per 100,000 population, an 8.9% increase from 2021 (33.7 incidents per 100,000 population). This is the highest rate recorded since comparable data were first collected in 2009.”

Nor have firearm homicides decreased since 2020. Perhaps this is because lawfully-held firearms are not the problem. According to StatsCan, “the firearms used in homicides were rarely legal firearms used by their legal owners.” However, crimes committed by organized crime have increased by more than 170 per cent since 2016 (from 4,810 to 13,056 crimes).

Meanwhile, the banned firearms remain locked in the safes of their legal owners who have been vetted by the RCMP and are monitored nightly for any infractions that might endanger public safety.

Indeed, hunters and sport shooters are among the most law-abiding people in Canada. Many Canadian families and Indigenous peoples depend on hunting to provide food for the family dinner table through legal harvesting, with the added benefit of getting out in the wilderness and spending time with family and friends. In 2015, hunting and firearm businesses alone contributed more than $5.9 billion to Canada’s economy and supported more than 45,000 jobs. Hunters are the largest contributors to conservation efforts, contributing hundreds of millions of dollars to secure conservation lands and manage wildlife. The number of licenced firearms owners has increased 17 per cent since 2015 (from 2.026 million to 2.365 million) in 2023.

If policymakers in Ottawa and across the country want to reduce crime and increase public safety, they should enact policies that actually target criminals and use our scarce tax dollars wisely to achieve these goals.

 

BC NDP Misleads Public on Firearms, Owners​

Late last month, in the lead-up to British Columbia’s provincial election on October 19th, John Rustad stated that his Conservative Party of BC, if allowed to form government, would follow in the footsteps of various other provincial governments and refuse to dedicate provincial resources to the fulfillment of Justin Trudeau’s firearms bans; specifically the May 2020 OIC-instituted ban on 2000+ varieties of long gun, and the ban on handguns dating back to 2022 and more recently codified into law with the passage of the Liberals’ Bill C-21.

In the days since, David Eby and his BC NDP have hugely embellished this statement, claiming “Rustad's refusal to enforce bans on handguns and semi-automatic weapons would put people at greater risk,” and “under a John Rustad government, abusers, gang members, and traffickers would be allowed to carry assault weapons unchecked.”

This statement is, as all licensed gun owners know, absolutely untrue.

This claim is nothing more than a cheap attempt to leverage misinformation to sow fear among the electorate. Eby’s allegation that Rustad’s unwillingness to allocate a budget for the confiscation of licensed firearms will result in violent criminals being “allowed to carry assault weapons unchecked” conflates legal gun ownership with violent crime to an offensive degree and does so at a time when too many British Columbians have been made abundantly aware of how thin the province’s police resources are stretched.

In a recent press conference, Eby stated that Rustad’s unwillingness to spend taxpayer dollars confiscating guns owned by licensed owners would culminate in the importation of “lax, US-style handgun and semi-automatic gun rules that make us all less safe,” communicated from behind a banner that stated “stop illegal guns.” The event where this occurred was covered by the Canadian Press, which provided it with the headline “Eby supports police on guns and gangs, flanked by four law enforcement candidates.”

These comments will likely (and should) offend BC’s gun owners. Eby’s allegation that allowing British Columbians to retain firearms they’re licensed to possess is somehow analogous to gang members carrying them is, in a word, nothing short of slanderous. Licensed gun owners are among the least likely to commit crimes and their ability to retain the possession of handguns and semi-automatic firearms they bought legally does not constitute a risk to Canadian public safety.

Finally, that these claims emanate from a party whose leader is a lawyer, a former Attorney General, and once served as a professional spokesperson for civil liberties indicates that they are not the product of ignorance. Rather, it indicates the alternative: That the BC NDP has a clear, intentional, and repeated desire to incite a fear of firearms, and the nearly 400,000 British Columbians who own them.

Editor’s note: We requested a comment from the BC NDP over 24 hours ago, asking “if the NDP would like to clarify their position to the nearly 400,000 legal firearms owners in the province who may feel as if your party views them as analogous to violent criminals.” We did not receive a response.

calibremag.ca

BC NDP Misleads Public on Firearms, Owners

David Eby's NDP conflates licensed gun ownership with gang membership, trafficking, and abuse in attempt to mislead voters about gun laws.
calibremag.ca calibremag.ca
 

Ottawa’s gun buyback is rightly falling apart​

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s gun ban and buyback policy is running out of steam.

And it hasn’t even left the station.

The buyback is broken. Law-abiding firearms owners don’t want to lose their guns. It doesn’t go far enough for gun-control advocates. And taxpayers don’t want to pick up the massive bill.

“It’s a waste of Canadian’s money,” said a spokesperson for PolyRemembers, a prominent gun-control advocacy group. “We are not reducing the risk level. It’s just for appearances.”

Instead, PolyRemembers wants the government to go further and ban even more models of firearms.

But if the recommendation is to ban more guns, the solution brings a lot more problems.

And Ottawa already tried that. The federal government tried to dramatically expand the list of guns banned with committee amendments. One of the additions included the semi-automatic SKS rifle, of which there are estimated to be more than 500,000 in Canada.

After the introduction of amendments to Bill C-21 that would have seen many common hunting rifles banned, the Assembly of First Nations passed an emergency resolution opposing the ban.

“It’s a tool,” said Kitigan Zibi Chief Dylan Whiteduck about the list of rifles to be banned. “It’s not a weapon.”

“No government has a right to take that away from us and regulate that,” said said Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations Vice-Chief Heather Bear. “That is our job as mothers, grandmothers, grandfathers, and hunters

The government backed down and removed the amendments.

Expanding the buyback to include even more firearms would mean more resistance from current firearms owners and a larger cost to buyback even more guns.

The government says the aim of the ban is to keep Canadians safe, but the evidence shows that it’s unlikely to help, even if it was expanded to include more firearms.

The federal government announced a ban on 1,500 types of what it called “assault-style” firearms in May 2020. It promised to provide “fair compensation” to gun owners whose firearms it confiscates.

New Zealand tried a gun ban and buyback program that was more far reaching than Ottawa’s, banning almost all semi-automatic firearms, not only so-called “assault style” rifles.

It didn’t work.

During the decade before the buyback, according to data from the New Zealand Police, violent firearm offences averaged 932 a year in New Zealand. In 2019, the year of the buyback, there were 1,142 offences. In 2022, the number of offences was 1,444.

New Zealand’s buyback wasn’t cheap either. Costs to administer the program were more than double the initial estimates.

Experts in Canada have seen enough to know the policy is a failure.

The National Police Federation, the union that represents the RCMP, says Ottawa’s buyback, “diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.”

And it’s a lot of funding and resources.

In total, estimates show that Trudeau’s scheme could cost taxpayers up to $756 million to buyback the guns, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. That doesn’t even include the administration costs – it’s just the cost of compensating firearms owners.

Instead of taking away firearms from Canadians, that’s enough money to pay for the average salaries of 1,000 police officers for more than seven years.

The government has a history of ballooning costs for these types of programs. The government initially promised the long-gun registry would cost taxpayers only $2 million. The final tab was over $2 billion. The registry was scrapped by the Harper government and stayed scrapped under the Trudeau government.

If those were the overruns just to register the guns, how much money would the federal government waste trying to confiscate them?

Ottawa’s buyback has already cost taxpayers $67 million since 2020. Not a single gun has been “bought back” yet.

It’s time for Ottawa to cancel its gun ban and buyback. Because right now, all it looks set to do is cost taxpayers a boatload of money without making Canadians safer.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IronNoggin
Thumbs up Nathalie Provost has quit the federal firearms advisory committee
Replies
5
Views
1K
agentaqua
A
Back
Top