I found a post about "Polysesouvient" on CGN - last fall. It potentially might be the platform for discussion in the house of common’s - this coming week. This post isn't to send everyone down another dark rabbit hole - only for learning more, about the "hot topic" of the day.
Polysesouvient's platform on Facebook : "We are a voluntary organization seeking all criminals,drug dealers,ganstas and real badd asses have no guns."
http://polysesouvient.ca/Documents/M...rmesAssaut.pdf (in French)
English translation:
June 2017
Issues and recommendations related to the availability of assault weapons in Canada (Federal Act)
1) Definition of assault weapons
Canadian law only defines weapons as "restricted" and "prohibited" and that is according a series of criteria. It does not define what constitutes "assault weapons." The gun lobby claims that assault weapons are already banned, because it defines them as the gun can fire "automatic" (which are indeed prohibited by law). However, government authorities around the wrld define "assault weapons" otherwise, according to specific criteria too. For example: According to a definition of the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and weapons (ATF), the existence of a "military configurations" following (other than the ability to accept a detachable magazine) made a weapon an assault weapon, not "sport": the ability to accept a detachable magazine, a folding stock, a bayonet mount, a pistol grip on a long weapon (to ensure more
stability when firing at succession "rapid fire"), a flash suppressor, a bipod, a grenade launcher and night vision lenses. More recently, the Supreme court of the United States confirmed the Maryland assault weapons ban as defined by the law: "all semi-automatic rifles that can shoot ammo center fire that can
accept detachable magazines and have two or more configurations as a flash suppressor or a pistol grip. " Thus, although certain features or accessories are prohibited in Canada, simply that a firearm has the ability to incorporate in itself a "military configuration" which increases the risk to public safety. In fact, the RCMP found that circumvention prohibitions or restrictions on shippers and firing mechanisms is fairly easily and commonly.
2) Deficiencies in the current system - arbitrary nature of the criteria
The problem with the current system is that the criteria do not reflect a systematic or consistent risk to public safety of various categories of weapons. Indeed, on this point we agree with the pro-gun groups
based on physical characteristics such as length of the weapon or the barrel, the classification appears often arbitrary. Criteria for restricted weapons: "According to the Criminal Code, a firearm is restricted: - a handgun that is not a prohibited firearm; - any firearm - which is not a prohibited firearm - with a barrel of less than 470 mm in length which can draw center-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic manner; - any firearm designed or adapted to discharge when it is reduced to a length of less than 660 mm by folding,
telescoping or otherwise; - any firearm designated as such by regulation." Take just the example of the Beretta CX4 Storm or the weapon used in the killing at Dawson College, which at the time was a restricted weapon. Since the killings, the manufacturer has brought to market a new model at the end of 2013, a slightly modified version in order to escape the requirements of the restricted class. Since this new model has a slightly longer barrel 470 mm (18.5 inches), or 19 inches, and that the firing mechanism is "rimfire" and not "central percussion", it is an unrestricted weapon. This is a perfect demonstration of arbitrary classification, which differs for two almost identical weapons simply depending on a slight difference in the length of the barrel.
3) Deficiencies of the current system - neglected regulations
The system had to rely on an update of Regulation containing the list of restricted and prohibited Weapons: The update of the list of restricted weapons and prohibited is especially necessary given the practice some manufacturers use to circumvent the intent of Parliament by slightly adapting and giving a new name to restricted or prohibited military weapons, all so that they can benefit from a less severe classification: "The expert in firearms and ballistics Alan Voth explains that arms manufacturers study the laws of each country and create a version adapted to the legislation of each of the markets, which gives them more
sales opportunities. "In order to thwart the spirit of the law, manufacturers can rely on manifestly arbitrary criteria such as the exact length of the barrel, as well demonstrates the example of the latest model Beretta CX4 Storm, whose classification is not restricted. The coroner who conducted the investigation into the tragedy at Dawson College was rightly criticized the federal government for failing in its responsibility in connection with the classification of the weapon used, saying that if the spirit of law would have been applied, the CX4 Storm Beretta was prohibited. " The legislature did not foresee the development and subsequent development of the 'bullpup' design when it adopted the 'Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridge Magazines, Ammunition and projectiles as prohibited or restricted'.
The spirit of the Firearms Act was that the firearms, such as the CX4 Storm Beretta used by M. Gill, are prohibited rather than restricted. Only the government knows the reasons behind the sad fact that the
updating of the list has no (or almost no) was made since its creation in 1995, but it is reasonable to believe that the latter is connected to the enormous pressure from weapons amateurs towards a greater availability of assault weapons.
4) Deficiencies in the current system - classification by third parties
Another problem with the current system is that it depends on the good faith of manufacturers or importers, two entities that hold financial interests in the least severe classification of weapons produced or traded. Despite this conflict of interest between public safety and profits, these are private entities, respectively, design weapons and who propose a classification at the time of import. In general, physical verification of each weapon by the RCMP is done only on rare occasions. This therefore results in thousands of weapons that are wrongly categorized according to the RCMP, which emphasizes for this purpose "several false statements made by importers and auditors".
The case of the family of "Swiss Arms" and F-858 are but two examples that have attracted the attention of the media. Despite their initial classification as non-restricted weapons, subsequent investigations have prompted the RCMP in 2014 to revise it to "prohibited" because of their ability to "be converted into a fully automatic firearm." Given the thousands of such weapons already in circulation as well as the abolition of the register of non-restricted weapons that prevents the RCMP from identifying the owners,
the result is a huge public safety issue extremely difficult, if not impossible to solve. Another less known example is that of the unrestricted SKS rifle. In 2014, the RCMP issued a bulletin for the benefit of companies like anything, "a Russian SKS rifle without restriction manufacturing fully automatic discharge, which raises concerns in terms of public safety. ... The weapon fires only in automatic mode (no semi-automatic mode);" The Quebec controller estimates that "tens of thousands" of them were imported into Canada, of which more than 5,000 in Quebec. But to date, no action on their classification as
non-restricted weapons appears to have been undertaken. Why this inaction? Again, there is that pressure from pro-gun groups that may explain this stagnation in our view.
5) Deficiencies of the current system - unrestricted assault weapons
All of these elements have resulted in thousands of assault weapons that remain not only legal, but not restricted. Take another example, that of the IWI Tavor Tar-21: this weapon is considered an assault
weapon by his Israeli manufacturer and "developed in collaboration with the Israel Defense Forces." As a weapon not restricted, it is not only legally accessible to ordinary citizens, but it is also not restricted - that
is to say, not recorded, and therefore invisible to the authorities. IWI Tavor Tar-21 - Open weapon in Canada in all, many unrestricted assault weapons are commonly available on the web and in catalogs from merchants.
6) Approval of new models
Despite their own mandate to "act to eliminate ... the assault weapons of our streets ", the RCMP continues to approve the sale of new models of assault weapons (two of which are called" submachine guns "by their respectful manufacturer and which is classified as non-restricted weapon). Questioned
about this, their political aide said that "the government will not intervene in the decision of the police concerning the classification of weapons, since they are the experts in these technical decisions." However, as pointed out the RCMP in response to this, the police have to deal with the "definitions laid
down in the Criminal Code," which are set by the government - definitions that currently allow legal assault gun ownership. The RCMP therefore has little room for maneuver in terms of decision-making authority regarding decisions on the classification of a public safety perspective. Their role is limited to the
interpretation of the Act and the manifestly arbitrary criteria in this regard. Recently, the RCMP approved the marketing of three assault weapons, including a subject of advertising clearly presenting its "military"
use.
7) risk to public safety
There is no reason that can be rationally used to justify private ownership of firearms designed to kill humans. This position is shared by a member of the Liberal cabinet, having itself found that there was no
reason to allow Canada the possession of semi-automatic weapons like the one used to shoot down 20 children in Connecticut (referring to the AR-15, another model of assault weapon that is legal in Canada) and that the goal should be "put out of circulation, not to allow their use." There are many examples of recent tragedies committed with legal assault weapons, not only in the US but in Canada, including the murders of three RCMP officers in Moncton, the PQ election night, the killing at Dawson College, and the
tragedy at the Mosque of Quebec according to some media reports.
Moreover, the RCMP repeatedly alerted the federal Minister of Public Safety as to the risk posed by the availability of these weapons to public security. Justin Bourque used a semi-automatic rifle "Winchester 308 M305" to shoot three RCMP officers in June 2014 in Moncton. This weapon was a Chinese semiautomatic version of the weapon of the American military, the M14, the favorite of military weapons collectors. Bourque legally possessed this weapon. Richard Bain had in his possession a CZ-858 and a 30-
round magazine in the attack against Premier Pauline Marois in September 2012. If the weapon had not jammed when he tried to shoot a police officer, the results would probably have been very different (one person was shot: the stage technician Denis Blanchette). According to an academic expert, the CZ-858 is similar to the AK-47, with a few differences: CZ is more powerful and is known among experts as not as reliable. In 2014, the entire family of this weapon model was deemed prohibited by the RCMP because of his ability to "be converted into a fully automatic firearm", but their original classification "unrestricted" or "restricted" (depending on barrel length) was reinstated by the Harper government with the power he has given through Bill C-42, just weeks before federal elections in October 2015. In 2014, the majority of these weapons (7061) were "unrestricted", while 412 were "restricted". This is probably why, if we go to some media reports, Alexandre Bissonnette has been in lawful possession of a CZ-858 as part of the tragedy at the Mosque of Quebec in January 2017. As in the case of the attack against Marois, the weapon would be checked, which would mean that this is the second time that the death toll would have happened close to being much more important. The legal availability of such weapons is a serious risk to public safety.
Recommendation: the government should establish a new classification system that will ban once and for all assault weapons, or those designed to kill humans. Such a system must be based on a whole new range
of criteria, including the capacity of the weapon to accept military accessories (even if they are prohibited), its power, its scope and effectiveness or speed shooting among others. The system should also incorporate physical verification by the RCMP of each new model, including weapons identified by manufacturers as unrestricted and it BEFORE any classification and market introduction. Finally, a precautionary approach should prevail in any decision leading to classification in unrestricted or
restricted, that is to say which allow its legal possession by ordinary citizens.
8) Deficiencies in the current system - large capacity magazines
Finally, the 1991 Act (C-17) imposed a limit of 5 cartridges and 10 cartridges for long guns and handguns respectively. This was generally accepted and repeated by many official sources, including the safe handling firearms manual. Now, under the previous Conservative government, the RCMP has advanced a new interpretation of the law on these restrictions, interpretation going against the legislative intent of the Act of 1991 as evidenced by the Senior Political Adviser the Minister of Justice at the time, Ms. Kim Campbell, who had himself worked on the drafting of the bill in question. Indeed, in March 2011, the RCMP issued a special bulletin saying the law is only concerned with the
magazines of the firearm model for which that magazine is designed, not the gun that could accept the magazine: "the maximum allowed capacity of a magazine is determined by the type of firearm for which it was designed or manufactured and not by the type of firearm to which it can be used. Example: the Marlin rifle model 45 (Camp Carbine) calibrated 45 Auto accepts magazines designed and manufactured for the handgun Colt 1911. Therefore, magazines of seven bullets and eight bullets are allowed. " In other words,
a semi-automatic long gun" X "can be equipped with a magazine for more than five cartridges, provided that the magazine was not designed for this specific weapon, for example if it has designed for a gun "Y" and, even if the gun is prohibited in Canada, and although the magazine contains 10 rounds or more! Thus it would be legal to use a magazine filled with 15 cartridges (5.56 caliber) rifle designed for "Beowulf" (size 50), a prohibited weapon in Canada, in a semi-automatic rifle as long as the latter Beowulf is not, as confirmed by the RCMP in response to a reporter's question. Such a configuration is illegal in at least six US states. This interpretation is incredibly absurd and extremely irresponsible.
Recommendation: Clarify the rules to eliminate the loophole created by an abusive interpretation of restrictions on high capacity magazines, and to impose an actual limit of 5 cartridges for unrestricted weapons and 10 for restricted weapons
Linear Mode
