Bob asks:

What are the “alternative” certificate courses allowed for a PAL? I spoke with the BC CFO office and they informed me an RCMP Officer and CO or Fishery Officer are not trained or recognized as having been trained to qualify in Safe Handling and Storage (CFSC) of firearms, a PAL? So what possible other training could count as “alternative” to them?

They did say for me to just to challenge the test. On the application form it asks if you have a CFSC certificate or alternative and no one seems to know what that alternative is.

 Just curious as it seems kind of contrary that a person such as a RCMP Officer or Fishery Officer with all their training, is not deemed qualified to handle or store a firearm unless they take a CFSC test? On the other hand, why should anything dealing with firearms in this country make any sense?

I know I can just challenge the exam but it begs to be asked why.



Hi Bob,

Thanks for the great question. Unfortunately there really is no answer that makes a great deal of sense, certainly not common sense any thinking person can accept.

It was with great surprise when a few years ago a friend asked me to store his shotgun while he would be away for an extended period of time and would be giving up his apartment. His daughter was a police officer in a nearby municipality so I asked why he didn’t have her take possession of the firearm. I was told by her that although she was a police officer and carried a weapon while on duty she did not have a Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) and so could not legally possess a personal firearm. I must tell you my jaw dropped.

Herein lays the fallacy of the Firearms Act created by Bill C-68, An Act Respecting Firearms and Other Weapons, introduced in 1993 by the Chrétien government. This Act gave sweeping powers to the police, many of who are not trained and licensed to own firearms by definition of the Firearms Act, to set policy and define what is and what isn’t a non-restricted, restricted and prohibited firearm in Canada and set “policy” about safe storage, safe firearms handling and other situations. Since 1993 the situation has degenerated to each Province having a Chief Firearms Officer, some RCMP some Provincial Police, who operate completely independently when setting policy and therefore amendments to the Criminal Code and Firearms Act of Canada, by setting their own interpretation of Canadian Law, including whether to comply with the passing of Bill C19 “Demise of the Long Gun Registry” passed in April 2012. In essence what happens in BC is completely different than Quebec and making an unwitting “law abiding citizen” a criminal by simply crossing a Provincial border.

I do wish the BC CFO office staff would stop giving out erroneous information about the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act. This isn’t the first time I have heard of incorrect information passed to BC firearms owners or potential firearms owners given by a particular few staff members of the BC CFO office. I spoke with one at the HuntFest in Chilliwack earlier this year that was intent on trying to mislead me about how it is and I do wish she would stop. If you cannot give legally correct information just don’t say anything at all.

But I digress.

The Firearms Act, An Act Respecting Firearms and Other Weapons (1993), did anything but respect firearms and opened holes large enough to drive a Semi through. I have no answer to your question and I seriously doubt anyone in Canada does as well.

On the job conservation officers, police officers, military personnel, prison guards and others do not require what you and I do when possessing or using firearms. When on the job these people are exempted from safe handling and storage training because supposedly they are under an “authority or command” and have “on the job training”.


PS: I just don’t understand why I’m having to spend so much time answering inquiries from my readers about issues they have with the BC CFO office. This insanity started, or at least I was made aware of the problems, a little less than a year ago – about the same time the Canadian Government announced they would do away with the Long Gun Registry (LGR) then followed through on that promise. I indicated that I felt it was because the writing was on the wall that with the end of the LGR there would have to be reductions in the CFP staff. I have always maintained, still do and will to my last days, the police/RCMP have no business making policy in anything – they are an enforcement agency, end of story. The handling of all things firearms in BC just shows how quickly the RCMP can go from enforcement to abuse and Empire building when allowed to operate a Police State, their interpretation of setting policy.



Please follow me on TWITER  or  FACEBOOK

I have to admit I was surprised. It was last Tuesday and I had just received a letter from Pierre Perron, Assistant Commissioner, Director General, CFP, Policing Support Services in answer to my persistent contact with Minister Vic Toews office about issues I have with the BC CFO office over lack of communication with the public.

No sooner had I opened the letter when Ms. Hamilton’s phone call came in. Firstly, I would like to thank Ms. Hamilton for her efforts. It was pretty clear she was more than just a little ill and it was hard for her to continue with the conversation.

We had a frank discussion that lasted for approximately 20 minutes. In that time we discussed:

  1. The complete lack of the BC CFO office dealing with a disclosure of the CFSC instructors so a perspective student seeking instruction/examination to get a PAL or RPAL. Ms. Hamilton says it is because of a privacy issues to do with the Federal Government. She says her office is looking for a central civilian body to take over the governance CFSC’s, Master Instructors and control of the CFSC in each location according to population. I agree with the need for a civilian body, as the less police/RCMP control over this matter is desirable, but my opinion is that the CFSCs are private businesses and no control over how many or where they are located is required, as most do this as a part time “job” out of the interest in promoting the shooting sports. Many already do teach students from outside their area already with beneficial effect. Some areas are just under represented and it is easy for a couple of CFSC instructor/examiners to set up a class in a remote location. No Police/RCMP bureaucratic interference is required.
  2. There is presently a huge backlog of 2 plus months for the issuance or renewal of PALs, RPALs, short and long term ATTs in BC. It is so critical that I have complaints every day from my readers that they applied 2 months before their PAL was due to expire and yet 3 weeks after the expiry date still have not received a renewal. Although I have it on written record that the person with an expired PAL is not in violation of the law the expired PAL poses problems, big problems. An expired PAL means one cannot purchase a firearm – even if the opportunity of a lifetime were to present itself. Also how can one purchase ammunition?? Does every police officer in BC understand that because the PAL is expired it is still legal and not seize a hunters firearms? Ms. Hamilton says the delays are due to a staffing problem in her office – she is short 1/3 normal staffing. Fair enough except that Canada is in the process of downsizing its public service. Just 13 September it was announced that 1,500 Canadian civil servants were given notification of job redundancy – 149 of the RCMP staff. For the BC CFO office it isn’t going to get any better so it is time to think of ways to streamline how things are done without jeopardizing “public safety” if that is really what all this cumbersome interpretation of the Firearms Act really is. I cannot see why a re-issue of a PAL, non-restricted, restricted or prohibited, takes a great amount of investigation of the applicant. If he/she has held the license for 5 years or more and has no infractions that would require closer scrutiny issue the renewal. We are in the age of IT and every police cruiser that I see has the ability to tell my life’s history, including if I were stopped last night and why, so how does the BC CFO staff need weeks to determine the same information? They don’t.
  3. We both agreed that communication between the BC CFO office and the BC public needs to be improved. As virtually none does now, anything would be a major improvement. I have offered Ms. Hamilton full access to this site. If she chooses to make a public statement I will publish it verbatim – unedited. This website is not like the anti-gun media and I would support anything that helps legal and law abiding firearms owners in BC possess and transport their firearms to their chosen venue. I certainly hope Ms. Hamilton’s office will take my offer.

All in all I feel the conversation Ms. Hamilton and I had was certainly a step forward. I do hope she feels the same. Times are a changing and our bureaucrats need to change with them. It took a long time for the draconian firearms laws inflicted on the Canadian firearms community in the 1990s to start to be corrected. It has only now just begun to heal the gaping wounds law abiding firearms owners have had to bear. It was a $2billion plus boondoggle that accomplished little except to make law abiding Canadians into criminals. It is time to bring some sanity to the issue.

The Criminal Code and Firearms Law need to be applied in St John’ to Vancouver to Inuvik to the northern tip of Baffin Island. One country – one law evenly applied – no provincial policy input.

Police should not set policy only enforce law. We do not live in a Police State we live in a democracy governed by publicly elected representatives.



OTTAWA – September 7, 2012 – The Honourable Vic Toews, Canada’s Minister of Public Safety, announced today the Government of Canada’s intent to repeal the Gun Shows Regulations. The Government’s proposal to repeal the Regulations will be published in the September 8th, 2012 issue of the Canada Gazette. The Gun Shows Regulations were introduced in 1998 under the Firearms Act but have never come into force.

“Repealing the unnecessary Gun Shows Regulations shows our Government is focusing on protecting families and communities and not pushing administrative burdens on law-abiding gun owners,” said Minister Toews. “We will continue to tackle crime by getting guns out of the hands of criminals and off our streets.”

“Allowing redundant regulations to come into force would only introduce an unnecessary burden on law-abiding citizens,” said Candice Hoeppner, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety. “We have successfully introduced legislation that fights gang crime, drug crime, violent and repeat offenders. These are the reforms that Canadians need and deserve most, in order to tackle real crime and real criminals.”

After they were introduced, the Gun Shows Regulations were deferred from coming into force to allow for further study and stakeholder consultation. The deferral gave officials the opportunity to explore if there was a need for the Regulations and to identify any overlap with already existing regulations.

The Gun Shows Regulations are unnecessary as the storage and display of firearms at gun shows are already governed by the Storage, Display and Transportation of Firearms and Other Weapons by Businesses Regulations and the Storage, Display, Transportation and Handling of Firearms by Individuals Regulations under the Firearms Act.

“The sport shooting community is very pleased by the Harper government’s repeal of the unnecessary regulations on Canadian gun shows,” says Tony Bernardo, executive director of the Canadian Institute for Legislative Action and spokesman for the Canadian Shooting Sports Association. “These rules were never imposed because they were never needed. We were treated like criminals. Kudos to the Harper Government for standing up for the rights of all law-abiding Canadians.”

“Many people forget that sport shooting has been with us since the inception of the modern Olympics,” says Olympic gold medalist Linda Thom. “Firearms shows are a lifeline for our sport. We are very pleased this government appreciates that gun shows are safe and wholesome sporting venues.”

“Like the long gun registry, the gun show regulations introduced in 1998 were an unwarranted intrusion which, if enacted, would have done nothing to enhance public safety. We are pleased that once again the Harper government has demonstrated common sense in its approach to legal firearms by repealing regulations that would have posed an unnecessary burden on lawful activities, and choosing instead to continue focussing on the real sources of crime,” noted Greg Farrant, Manager, Government Affairs & Policy, Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters.

The Gun Shows Regulations were supposed to come into force on November 30, 2012. With the repeal of these Regulations, gun shows and the security of firearms displayed at gun shows will continue to be regulated by the existing general storage and display regulations for businesses and individuals under the Firearms Act. Firearms regulations related to transfers, possession and transportation of firearms still apply.

Follow Public Safety Canada (@Safety_Canada) on Twitter.


Media Relations

Public Safety Canada


Julie Carmichael

Director of Communications

Office of the Minister of Public Safety



About time! Thank you Minister Vic Toews.



Have Canadians gone completely delusional? When I went to school, albeit I left more than 4 decades ago, I was taught that Canada was made up of 10 Provinces and 2 Territories (since then there are three). Confederation set out the division of responsibilities where law was concerned. To flesh it out simply in my mind I have always understood the Federal government was responsible for international affairs, defense, and the Criminal Code and something called direct taxation. The Provinces were responsible for civil law, education, roads that were not considered federal and the law that governed the use of those roads, administration of health services and something called indirect taxation. I’m sure someone conversant with legalese can probably clarify all this but for this purpose I think it is pretty clear. Criminal Law and the Firearms Act  are not the jurisdiction of the provinces but rather the Federal government.

I’m pretty sure the Criminal Code and thus the Firearms Act are Federal else why would the Jean Chrétien government’s draconian “1995 Firearms Act was created by Bill C-68, An Act Respecting Firearms and Other Weapons”. (The statement itself is an oxymoron.) This Act foisted on ALL Canadians – coast to coast to coast – a set of laws that were purposefully confusing obviously intent on making criminals out of legitimate firearms owners for the purpose of seizing “guns for destruction”. It must always be remembered that this crazy law cost, not the $2 million predicted by the Chrétien Liberals but exceeded $2BILLION and never succeeded in registering all the firearms in Canada nor did it do one thing to reduce “Gun Crime” in this country.

Earlier this year Bill C-19 was introduced to undo some of the damage the 1995 changes did to a large portion of the Canadian public. Bill C-19, passed into law 5 April, 2012 ending the Long Gun Registry.

Not for Quebec apparently. Immediately the Province of Quebec launched a protest and court challenge – a Provincial Court challenge – against the changes to the Criminal Code and Firearms Act, a federal jurisdiction. Of course the Quebec manipulated court was going to rule in favour or Quebec, but to what avail? Now the Feds have to waste even more tax payer’s money to settle this in the Supreme Court of Canada!!

Outgoing provincial justice minister Jean-Marc Fournier said in a statement he was “very happy that Quebec won the fight,” adding that “Quebec’s long-gun registry’s data and its functions will be preserved in the province.” Sorry Jean-Marc, a little bit of delusion on your part – not your jurisdiction. Time you realized Quebec is part of Canada.

Perhaps the CFOs of the various provinces that still haven’t got the message that you are there to serve the Canadian public might want to pay attention as well. The Criminal Code and Firearms Act is Canadian – coast to coast to coast – not your private Empire to rule.



Ted writes:

I have 2 questions I hope you don’t mind answering for me.

 My father-in-law is now in a nursing home. He has 4 guns he used for hunting. He can no longer sign his name. His wife wants to sell his guns and wants to know what she has to do or if there is anything she has to do to legally sell them. We tried our local police and they said she cannot sell them/possess them or offer to sell them and that is a criminal offence if she does. They have told her she must allow the police to come into the house and retrieve ALL guns and ammunition (The guns are currently at a friend’s house who is permitted to have guns).

Ever since we first asked the police about selling the guns, they have been around here wanting to search the house under the threat of arrest at least 3 – 4 times a month. So the question is, can she legally sell them?

The second question is, is there a way we can find out what they are worth now. The friend who is currently looking after them has given us the best description possible for each gun.



The police are not very truthful in this case. Worse yet they are harassing and attempting to intimidate and coerce this woman into allowing them to seize personal property while she is having to handle the stress of her husband’s health problems. Its obvious the police officers are well aware their actions are not legal or they would have produced a search warrant and seized the property already.

On 5 April, 2012 Bill C-19 became law and ended the hated and much abused Long Gun Registry. Ever since then some Provincial Chief Firearms Officers (CFO) have obviously taken it upon themselves to further abuse the system – in some cases ordering that a gun registry of sorts exist and stepping up their efforts to scare people into allowing them to seize private personal property without compensation. This isn’t the first time I have heard some police officers resorting to outright lies to accomplish this.

The police need a search warrant to enter your premise or car and search them. There is an exception where firearms are involved but I think it is pretty clear that public safety must be at imminent risk from those firearms. There must be “probable cause” in order for that to happen. Never give to police permission to enter and search your property even though you know there is nothing there for them to find. Doing so only leads to the erosion of your rights as well as endorses the police to run a “police state”.

Presumably your father-in-law holds a PAL (Possession and Acquisition License) or a POL (Possession Only License) and so the firearms are legally owned. By placing the firearms with a friend who can legally possess firearms the full letter of the law has been met. As there is no Long Gun Registry the police DO NOT have the right to know who possesses the firearms as long as you assure them the person possessing the firearms is licensed to do so – beyond that, not their business. While a PAL/POL is required to purchase ammunition there is no license requirement to own or possess ammunition so the police have no authority to seize the ammunition.

As your father-in-law is incapacitated, cannot write, perhaps someone can witness him verbally giving his wife Power of Attorney over his affairs. If he is not capable of that I would guess the PoA is implied. As such his wife can authorize the person now in possession of the firearms to either hang on to them until he recovers or sell the property for him/her. I have handled other people’s firearms through Power of Attorney and it is an acceptable practice according to the Canadian Firearms Centre in Ottawa .

As to valuing the firearms, if the person that now holds them cannot evaluate them perhaps he can take them to several local sporting goods stores for a written quote of their value for insurance purposes. The quote will be high in that case but it will give you an idea of their value. Another way to go about it is contact the people who run the gun shows in your area. They will either evaluate them for you or find a member of the club that will. Check my website for a listing of many of the Gun Shows in Canada along with contact information. You can also contact the National Firearms Association of Canada (NFA) for information or even legal advice on firearms and the police.

Please, if you have any further questions contact me immediately.



“I got my firearm back that was stolen because of this registry, I’m pissed it’s gone and fed up with people giving a sigh of relief to it going.”

Joel didn’t write much but said a lot. I have to agree with Joel if there was anything good for us shooters and hunters from the Long Gun Registration did made it a little more difficult for a thief to use a stolen firearms. Just a very little bit mind you.

Considering that nowhere near all registerable firearms in Canada were actually registered and the RCMP lost massive amounts of the registries there is no way the chances were good that the “Gun Registry” would not find a stolen firearm. Also considering the amnesty to register firearms continued from the registry inception and still existed when the “Long Gun Registry” was abolished a stolen rifle or shotgun could languish for decades without actually being registered and so returned to the original owner. There was a case in Feb 2012 on Vancouver Island where an employee stole a quarter $ million from the shop and resold many. They were registered to those he sold them to, and they had to return the stolen property.

Considering, though,  that the intent of the nightmare of gun registrations were to make Canada a safer place and prohibitions of firearms for absolutely no discernible reason, like .25 and .32 calibre handguns used by Olympic Competitors, the mess that the Cretien Government brought in cost the Canadian Tax payer $$Billions and never accomplished anything except to make many law abiding shooters criminals overnight.

I have heard the argument that “If I have to register my dog, car or motor cycle you should have no problem with registering your guns.” Well if you park that motorcycle off the public roadway you don’t become a criminal if you don’t licence it any more. That’s why all Pit Bulls are licensed, right?

Your stolen firearm, Joel, would have had as much chance of being returned to you had you filed a police report about the theft and provided them with the make, model and serial number of the stolen property. You did record that information on your own, right?



What a difference 24 hours makes. I no sooner posted that the BC CFO was telling BC firearms business that they must keep a record on all firearms sales when I get I get notified that the BC CFO has written to BC firearms dealers they no longer have a requirement to run a registry on those who purchase non-restricted firearms.

To: All British Columbia and Yukon Firearms Businesses
From: Terry Hamilton, Chief Firearms Officer
Re: Changes to Conditions for Business Firearms Licences
Date: July 5, 2012
The Government of Canada has introduced new Firearms Act regulations which provide
that businesses cannot be required as a condition of a licence to collect information on
the transfer of non-restricted firearms. These regulations came into force on June 29,
Please note that, pursuant to the new Firearms Information Regulations (Non-Restricted
Firearms), all conditions currently listed on your firearms business licence pertaining to
the keeping of records on the transfer of firearms no longer apply to non-restricted
firearms. The conditions continue to apply with respect to restricted and prohibited
It is recommended that this notification be printed and attached to your existing
business firearms licence. We will not be re-issuing all business licences with new
conditions at this time, but they will be included on the next version of the licence that is
Please note the regulations do not affect any business practices you have in place
regarding inventory control, warranties or returns.
Businesses are also reminded that all individuals must still have a valid Possession and
Acquisition Licence to acquire non-restricted, restricted and prohibited firearms.
Businesses have the option of calling 1-800-731-4000 to verify if the firearms licence is
Please contact 1-800-731-4000, extension 9530 if you have any questions. Your
ongoing cooperation and support is greatly appreciated.
Terry Hamilton
Chief Firearms Officer for British Columbia and Yukon Territory
118 – 5477 152nd Street
Surrey, British Columbia V3S 5A5

I phoned the BC CFO office today after learning of this directive. I was told the yes there was a directive and no I cannot get a copy unless I’m a firearms dealer. I was directed to the CFC website for the announcement there. I asked if it was the one dated 5 April 2012 and was told that was it. I then asked if the copy of the directive to BC firearms dealers from Terry Hamilton, the BC CFO, dated 5 July, 2012 was the actual directive and read it in part. I was told that that would be the one but I still couldn’t get a copy sent to me because I wasn’t a dealer.

I have to wonder what is going on in the BC CFO office that information about firearms law as applied to BC is on such a “need to know and you don’t need to know” basis? Why is it the BC CFO and the staff in that office, that by the way is set up to administer the Firearms Act which is a Federal Act, has decided to withhold information on that Firearms Act from the general population of BC? It is time by far that the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act were treated the same from coast to coast to coast. After all Canada is not a collection of sovereign states like our neighbor south of the border. Canada has a Federal Government that makes and enforces the Criminal Code which is the same Criminal Code across this nation. The Firearms Act is part of that Criminal Code.

Why is the BC CFO office withholding information on the administration policy of that Act? I thought all this nonsense was over once Bill C-19 was adopted into Canadian Law and did away with the “Long Gun Registry“. Why did it take the BC CFO from 5 April to 5 July 2012 to clarify the issue to the BC firearms dealers something that was perfectly clear 2 months earlier?

Please note that Terry Hamilton, BC CFO, states in her directive that ” These regulations came into force on June 29, 2012.” If you read the CFC website these “regulations” came into force on 5 April, 2012. Perhaps that is why there is truth to the story Terry Hamilton’s office was directing BC firearms dealers to continue to register all firearms sold in BC.

Ms.Terry Hamilton, BC CFO, now needs to clarify that ALL the registrations of non-restricted firearms collected from the late 1970′s, when records were first required, be destroyed and expunged from all government records.

I guess it ain’t over yet.



On 6 June, 2012 I wrote to the Minister of Public Safety, Honorable Vic Toews asking his office look into the matter of the public listing of CFSC instructors in BC. It seems that my inquiries to the BC CFO’s office came up against a stone wall and they would give me absolutely no information what so ever – not even 1 CFSC instructor. It seems as if the BC CFO’s office refuses because of the “Freedom of Information Act” and also because supposedly some of these instructors might no longer be instructors and so might be committing fraud. Fraud??!!?

Why? They told me I was a commercial enterprise and because I wanted to offer the CFSCs advertizing space for their courses on this site I could have no names at all. It seems to me that the BC CFO is impeding those wishing to acquire a PAL.

If I were seeking instruction to get my PAL they would supply me with 3 names – 3 names only. Considering there is approximately 20 CFSC instructors in Surrey alone – according to the BC CFO office – how can anyone find the best prices or the instructor that might have the most informative course? Are they the same 3 every time? Are they the highest price? Do they have the best course for the money??

So I wrote this letter to the Minister of Public Safety in Ottawa. I know they got the letter because I have followed up with E-mails, which were acknowledged, and a phone call on 15 July to Honorable Vic Toews office and they said it was with the RCMP.

Minister of Public Safety

House of Commons

Ottawa, Canada K1A 0A6

Re: BC CFO office

Today I contacted the BC Chief Firearms office seeking information on how to get hold of the CFSC Instructors. I have developed a website ( that has the capabilities for these individuals to advertise up and coming courses. I was completely surprised by the answer I received by the CFO office.

First it took me nearly 10 minutes to figure out that the listed extension posted on another site on the internet was not valid. I then contacted the CFC at 800-731-4000 and explained my problem and wish to contact the CSFC instructors and was told that each province handled that information and I was put in queue which took another 10 minutes to have someone from the BC CFO office to answer.

I explained what I was trying to do and was told I was not entitled to that information. When I explained that I have constant inquiries though my website on where to find a CFSC instructor and have been referring them to the few I know personally I was told I still was not entitled to that information but I could write a letter to the CFO and if they decided it was a valid request might allow me the information, but otherwise I was not entitled to that information. I was given:

 Ms. Terry Hamilton

Unit #118

5477 251nd St

Surrey, BC   V3S 5A5

 No there was no E-mail address because of SPAM.

I then asked how does someone find out how to locate a CFSC instructor I was told they will ask my location and then give me 3 names I can choose from in my area. Yes, it was confirmed only 3.

I asked why this was BC policy considering Ontario posts their CFSC instructors on line and was told Ontario operates under a different set of rules from BC and it was because the list is a “living thing” in that instructors come and go on the list and anyone inquiring would be given the current instructors in the immediate area. Apparently this was to protect the customer from fraud in that an instructor might have been taken off the list because of an infraction and may still be contacted and take the money from a student only to find the instructor was not certified any longer. I then asked does this fraud happen often?? But the answer was very vague, pretty well non-existent.

The CFO’s offices job is not to withhold information from the Canadian public especially where private business are concerned and these CSFC instructors are private businesses. This is reprehensible on the part of the BC CFO’s office. I think an explanation is in order as to why the BC CFO’s office operates in a “bubble of secrecy” in this matter. This is certainly information that must be readily available to British Columbians so they can shop around for their choice of CSFC instructors and the pricing available. Perhaps this is why some CFSC instructors can charge what they want, in some cases exorbitant fees and may be the reason why the BC CFO’s office is concerned about fraud. Secrecy such as this opens the door wide open to fraud.

Can your office please look into this matter for me?

Ken Olychic

Burnaby, BC

Some CFSC instructors offer institutionalized instruction with large classes, others in small personalized classes and yet others offer to come to the students premise. The student should be offered as much information and choice possible.

I also have to question why the Minister of Public Safety has not answered the inquiry in six weeks. I’d surely like to know who is stonewalling whom in this matter



One would have thought with the passing of Bill C-19 doing away with the long gun registry 5 April, 2012, an immensely wasteful of tax payers dollars boondoggle brought in by the Jean Chrétien  Liberal Party in 1995, that that would have been the end of it. Not so says the BC CFO. The Honorable Vic Toews really doesn’t know what he is talking about even though Minister Toews has written the CFOs directing them to stop any form of the registration of long guns. Some, including the BC CFO are still directing their own form of registry program. The following is a re-posting of the letter sent to the BC CFO by Sheldon Clare, President of Canada’s National Firearms Association:

June 12, 2012

Chief Firearms Officer Terry Hamilton
British Columbia and Yukon
118-5477, 152nd Street
Surrey, British Columbia
V3S 5A5

Dear Chief Firearms Officer Terry Hamilton:

Subject: Complaint about efforts to continue registration of long arms

The NFA has been receiving complaints from firearms businesses claiming that the BC Firearms Centre is still trying to force business to use the bound paper ledgers to record sales of all firearms, and to try to make businesses record the PAL number, name and address of purchasers of non-restricted firearms.  This is despite the letters of Justice Minister Toews and RCMP Commissioner Paulson to all Chief Firearms Officers that make it clear that there is to be no back door registry for non-restricted firearms.  Stores are not required to record the PAL, address, or name of the purchaser of non-restricted firearms.  In several cases the business owners have told us that they were contacted by the Firearms Office both from local areas and from Surrey and informed by firearms officers that “… Public Safety Minister Vic Toews and Commissioner Bob Paulson don’t know what they are talking about… and that the ledgers and recording names addresses and license numbers must continue as they have been in place since the 1930s.”  In addition, we have received complaints from firearms vendors at guns shows that Firearms Officers have been telling people that triggers locks were required on all firearms leaving gun shows.

It is the position of the NFA that while many stores operate inventory control systems for stock control reasons, there is no longer any requirement in the law to record PAL numbers, address, or names of purchases of non-restricted firearms.   In addition, the NFA regards it as an affront to parliament and the law to be intimidating business owners into continuing to record registration information such as PAL number, and the name and address of the purchaser.

Canada’s National Firearms Association respectfully requests that the Chief Firearms Officer direct area firearms officers to cease and desist harassing firearms business about registering purchases of non-restricted firearms – the government has made it perfectly clear that the practise of registering non-restricted firearms must stop.  The NFA will continue to vigorously oppose attempts by the firearms bureaucracy to keep operating a regime trying to force registration of firearm sales.  I have copied this message to my staff, and to the Minister of Public Safety and the Commissioner of the RCMP for their information.

Yours truly,

Sheldon Clare, M.A.

President – Canada’s National Firearms Association – 250-981-1841

CC. Hon. Vic Toews, MP Minister of Public Safety

Candice Hoeppner

Bob Paulson

One really must wonder why public servants just won’t follow the law. After all if you go to the Canadian Firearms Program website the first thing you see and it is highlighted:

Changes to the Canadian Firearms Program

On April 5, 2012, Bill C-19, Ending the Long-Gun Registry Act, came into effect. The key changes are as follows:

  • Removal of the requirement to register non-restricted firearms
  • Destruction of the existing non-restricted firearms registration records
  • Allowing the transferor of a non-restricted firearm to obtain confirmation of a transferee’s firearms acquisition licence prior to the transfer being finalized

Until further notice, due to a Court Order issued by the Quebec Superior Court, residents of Quebec are still required to register non-restricted firearms with the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program.

It is important to note that the new law does not change the requirement for all individuals to hold a licence in order to possess a firearm. The licensing, safety training and safe storage requirements for anyone who uses or owns a firearm continue to be in force.

The legislation also does not impact registration requirements for restricted or prohibited firearms.

I thought that was pretty clear.



Changes to the Canadian Firearms Program

On April 5, 2012, Bill C-19, Ending the Long-Gun Registry Act, came into effect. The key changes are as follows:

  • Removal of the requirement to register non-restricted firearms
  • Destruction of the existing non-restricted firearms registration records
  • Allowing the transferor of a non-restricted firearm to obtain confirmation of a transferee’s firearms acquisition licence prior to the transfer being finalized

Until further notice, due to a Court Order issued by the Quebec Superior Court, residents of Quebec are still required to register non-restricted firearms with the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program.

It is important to note that the new law does not change the requirement for all individuals to hold a licence in order to possess a firearm. The licensing, safety training and safe storage requirements for anyone who uses or owns a firearm continue to be in force.

The legislation also does not impact registration requirements for restricted or prohibited firearms.

RCMP-CFC Announcement.

With a sigh of relief firearms owners across Canada have seen the ending of the Long Gun Registry. The nonsense that was brought about by the  Jean Chrétien Liberals with Bill C-68 giving us “An Act Respecting Firearms and Other Weapons” has finally had some of the humiliation legal firearms owners in Canada have had inflicted on them removed. The mere fact that if hunting and you forgot your registration in your other jacket made you a criminal was an insult to responsible citizens of this country.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper keeping his word to Canadians deserves a big thank you. Job well done!!

Unfortunately the Quebec Government, the home of Jean Chrétien and other anti-firearms politicians  have not seen fit to allow the firearms owners the freedom the rest of the country enjoys. We can only hope Quebec comes to it’s senses and realize that this issue is Federal jurisdiction, not Provincial.


© 2012 Straight Shooter Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha
Powered by WishList Member - Membership Site Software