Dr. Wendy Cukier, President and co-founder of the Coalition for Gun Control and Associate Dean of the Ted Rogers School of Management at Ryerson University, was recognized today as one of 25 Transformational Canadians for “immeasurably improving the lives of others” through her long-time work as a gun control activist.

Having seen first-hand the powerful impact that mobilizing a large coalition of groups and individuals can have on the legislative process, I wish to thank Dr. Cukier for her tireless work and inspiration.

I feel honored to have worked with her throughout these months to ensure that Canada’s gun control laws were not weakened through the repeal of the long-gun registry.

Cheers Boss.

“Tom, if irony were made of strawberries, we’d all be drinking a lot of smoothies right now.”

September 22, 2010:
House of Commons – Parliament Hill
Ottawa, ON

Vote:
That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (recommendation not to proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry)), presented on Wednesday, June 9, 2010, be concurred in.

Result
Yays – 153
Nays – 151

Hurray!

(p.s. it’s a numbers game)

It all sounds a bit too familiar.

A political issue with a perceived division between rural and urban populations (except this particular issue is a public safety one,  first and foremost, that should be above such politicization).

A party, claiming to speak on behalf of rural citizens despite ignoring all of their other concerns, that doesn’t hold back its disdain for urban “Toronto elites“.

A gun community with some valid concerns but who instead choose to make gun registration, and not any other form of registration, a battle over “freedom“.

A gun association – with it’s own legislative action institute (where have I seen that before?) – lobbying on behalf of gun owner’s rights (sorry, no 2nd amendment here).

An aggressive “us vs. them” campaign, including radio ads and billboards, that leaves no room for compromise or cooperation.

A politician suggesting that there is a conspiracy between police and government to support the long-gun registry so that they can eventually take away Canadians’ guns.

I mean, where the hell did all this come from?

Oh wait. The NRA has been giving “tremendous amounts” of assistance and logistical support to gun lobby groups in Canada to fight the registry?

And these same lobby groups are the ones influencing the Conservative government’s firearms advisory committee?

Ah, nevermind then. It makes sense now.

And for the record, I am just as upset that Avaaz is meddling in our politics. They suck too.

Things that the Conservative Party has done in the past two weeks to emphasize that their bill to eliminate the long-gun registry is strictly a Private Member’s one:

- launched an anti-long-gun registry billboard ad campaign in 20 rural ridings held by opposition MPs across Canada;

- created a targeted radio campaign to coincide with aforementioned billboards;

- hosted another rally, this time in Estevan, Saskatchewan (without fried chicken);

- started up a twitter account with two followers: PM Stephen Harper and Minister Jim Flaherty;

- went on the road with a bus tour of their own; and

- falsely promised to pay for a new arena in Quebec (thus briefly bringing back memories of the beloved Nordiques).

In case you are wondering how that last item is relevant, ask yourself: how do you think PM Harper got all of his Conservative Quebec MPs to vote against the long-gun registry, despite the their constituents’ overwhelming support for it?

The only thing worse than teasing the hopes of Canadian hockey fans is playing political games with a public safety tool that is supported by police, women’s groups, emergency physicians and nurses. And victims. People should listen to them.

9 months ago, RCMP Chief Superintendent Marty Cheliak was vetted and hired as Director General of the Canadian Firearms Program to “raise awareness and promote firearms regulations and safety to all law-abiding gun owners.”

That includes ensuring that all gun owners are properly licensed and that ALL guns (including handguns and long guns) are registered.

During his testimony at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (SECU) in May, he explained how “the information and expertise provided by the Canadian firearms program is vital to the prevention and investigation of crimes related to firearms. The program also helps to reduce firearms-related death and injury in Canadian communities by enabling and promoting responsible firearms ownership, use, and storage.”

No surprise then that the SECU committee, after hearing expert opinions on the matter, submitted a report recommending that the House of Commons “not proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry), because the Committee has heard sufficient testimony that the bill will dismantle a tool that promotes and enhances public security and the safety of Canadian police officers.”

Interestingly, Mr. Cheliak was scheduled to present a comprehensive pro-registry report at an important police chiefs meeting this month as well as receive an award for his work in improving the registry. Instead, he was removed from his position with the absurd excuse that now was the appropriate time for him to undertake French language training (!?). This isn’t the first time the government has prevented a pro-registry report from being released. Nor is the first time they remove an influential figure for speaking out in support of the registry.

The very next day, Monsieur Harper decides to “jump the gun” and tell employees at the Canadian Firearms Centre that they will all have new jobs once the registry is abolished (as if it was a certainty).

As we approach the vote on the SECU committee’s recommendation, the Conservative government has no fear of demonstrating just how fake of a Private Member’s Bill C-391 actually is. First they come out with a national radio ad campaign promising to abolish the registry. Then, this “private member’s legislation” comes up with a website “Authorized by the Registered Agent of the Conservative Party of Canada”. And just yesterday, they went through the trouble of gathering several MPs, Senators and a Minister at a fried chicken restaurant for a gun rally that nobody showed up to.

(side note: if you cannot attract supporters or curious folks DESPITE associating yourself with fried chicken, maybe your stance isn’t that popular..)

You would think that firing an RCMP Chief would finally make NDP leader Jack Layton realize that it’s OK to whip the vote on an issue that affects public safety. I mean, the Conservatives are doing it too you know.

Democracy Inaction!
One of the first things that I experienced while working with the Coaltion was going to Ottawa to hear some testimonies in front of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (SECU) regarding Bill C-391. Bill C-391 is a so-called “Private Member’s Bill” put forward by Conservative MP Candice Hoeppner that seeks to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (and by doing so repeal the long-gun registry). The reason most people view Bill C-391 as “Private Member’s” in name only is because the Conservative party has continuously used the gun registry as a rallying tool for its base, supporting it with aggressive advertising campaigns. This is also an issue which the Prime Minister has consistently promoted and is commonly mentioned during election periods as part of party platform.

Photo Credit: Oscar Alvarado 2010 AP Peace Fellow Ottawa, Canada (June 2010)

So, what does Bill C-391 propose?
* To repeal the registration of unrestricted firearms. This category of guns includes rifles and shotguns, such as the powerful semi-automatic Ruger Mini-14 used in the Montreal Massacre.

* There are no provisions in this legislation to reinstate the requirement that businesses keep records of sales. This has been a requirement since 1977, and was removed when the Firearms Act passed in 1995 as the information would be contained in the registry. Without this information there is no way for police to investigate the source of rifles and shotguns used in crime.

* There is no mention of erasing data currently in the registry, yet the Firearms Act has provisions that could make it possible for this to happen through certain regulations, and it is also unlikely that the regulations on privacy and personal information would allow the RCMP to keep information they would no longer be allowed to obtain. Even if the RCMP could retain the information, it would quickly become stale and its utility to law enforcement would be compromised.

Photo Credit: Oscar Alvarado 2010 AP Peace Fellow Ottawa, Canada (June 2010)

So, in front of 12 MPs from all parties, expert witnesses set out to testify for and against the long-gun registry. On the registry’s side were victims advocates, public health officials, police chiefs, union leaders and women’s groups (full list of all witnesses form both sides available at: http://bit.ly/9kOORV).

Opposing the registry were the leaders of gun and hunting associations, individual police officers and rural Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLA). Oh, and Prof Mauser (below), a government adviser who is adamantly opposed to all forms of gun control:

Prof Mauser

Yes, the Liberals completely mismanaged and overspent the initial implementation of several aspects of the Firearms Act:
They may also have played political side-games with it for the sake of further pummeling the Conservatives in that 93 election, which Kim Campbell did not deserve.

But the investment and hard work has already been put in and to throw away all the accumulated data the registry has obtained would be an even greater waste of taxpayers’ dollars. This is especially true when one considers how often police officers and attorneys use the registry on a daily basis. And it’s not as if the Conservatives would ever play political games with public safety, right?

In contrast to the Conservatives’ ideological approach to the long-gun registry, the public safety implications of this issue means it practically makes sense to keep the registry and continue improving it. After all, it is just one component that helps strengthen the whole range of gun control measures. Police, nurses, physicians, academics, labour groups, public health officials, victims advocates, church organization and violence prevention groups all agree.

And gun control, as part of a comprehensive strategy, is just another tool that helps reduce the frequency and impact of violence, wherever it may occur.

Unfortunately, Canada is also not immune to gun-related violence and tragedy.

On December 6, 1989 Marc Lépine shot 28 people at the École Polytechnique in Montreal before committing suicide. In the end 14 young female engineering students were killed with a legally acquired Ruger Mini-14 rifle and hunting knife. In the wake of this massacre, students and advocates came together to form Canadians for Gun Control, a precursor to the eventual Coalition for Gun Control which formed in 1991.

In 1990 Conservative Justice Minister Kim Campbell (who would eventually become Canada’s first female Prime Minister after Brian Mulroney stepped aside) introduced a bill that would have banned military weapons and improved the FAC screening process. However, the bill never made it past second reading and died when parliament was prorogued that year. Despite this setback, a revised version of the bill, Bill C-17 was unveiled by Kim Campbell in 1991 and began undergoing the process of committee hearings shortly after. By 1993, C-17 had passed the Senate and was proclaimed law.

Some of the changes to the screening process included: imposing a mandatory 28-day waiting period for an FAC; expanding the application form to provide more background information and a mandatory requirement for safety training. In order to demonstrate knowledge of the safe handling of firearms, applicants had to pass the test for a provincial firearms safety course or a firearms officer had to certify that the applicant was competent in handling firearms safely.

After the 1993 federal election, the new Liberal Government under Jean Chretien indicated its intention to proceed with further controls, including some form of licensing and registration system that would apply to all firearms and their owners. This was made even more urgent after a professor kills four colleagues Concordia University in Montreal.

In 1995, Bill C-68 (also known as the Firearms Act) introduced new, stricter, gun control legislation. This provided harsher penalties for crimes involving firearm use, licences to possess and acquire firearms, and registration of all firearms, including shotguns and rifles. The FAC system was thus replaced with Possession Only Licences (POLs) and Possession and Acquisition Licences (PALs). In 1996 the Canadian Firearms Centre (CFC) began its operations to develop the regulations, systems and infrastructure needed to implement the Firearms Act.

Given that the Criminal Code of Canada was amended in 1995 to include the Firearms Act, the government of Alberta challenged the law by arguing that it was in relation to personal property and thus was a matter in the jurisdiction of the province. The federal government, however, argued that the law was in the realm of criminal law, which is under federal jurisdiction. In 2000, the constitutional validity of the Firearms Act was upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada in a unanimous decision.

As of January 1, 2003, individuals need a valid licence and registration certificate for all firearms in their possession, including non-restricted rifles and shotguns. Firearms businesses also require a valid business licence and registration certificate for all firearms in their inventory.

In 2006, after years of accusations of mismanagement and waste, responsibility for the administration of the Firearms Act and the operation of the Canada Firearms Centre was transferred from the Ministry of Public Safety to the RCMP. The Commissioner of the RCMP assumed the role of the Commissioner of Firearms. Two years later, the RCMP amalgamated their firearms-related sections, the Canada Firearms Centre and the Firearms Support Services Directorate, into one integrated group, the Canadian Firearms Program (CFP).

The Firearms Act continues to be the most significant and influential legislative act in shaping Canada’s gun laws and future changes. Subsequent ammendments and bills have been aimed at modifying the Firearms Act, including Bill C-391 which is currently up for vote in the House of Commons on September 22, 2010.

But hopefully this serves to shed light on the political context and historical background that underlies today’s current debate on gun control. The front line of this debate is now focused squarely on the requirement to register long-guns and rifles, something that the current Conservative government is trying to repeal.

For more information, please visit: http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/pol-leg/hist/con-eng.htm

All I want is for this to be just another account of the peace, confusion and chaos that occurred in reaction to the G20 Summit in Toronto on June 26/27. As a Human Rights Monitor with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, I was present at several gatherings throughout the weekend, which varied from calm to hectic and beyond. The wide spectrum of social advocacy, in all its forms, was fully displayed and I dedicate this to all the victims of some of the violence that unfortunately occurred.

For all pictures, please visit: Fellow Oscar’s Flickr Set

THE PEACE - Friday (June 25)

The whole week leading up to the Summit was filled with peaceful protests, marches, rallies and gatherings all over Toronto. The first one I observed and attended was a march for Gender Justice.

From my friend’s balcony, we saw the crowd slowly make its way along College St towards Queen’s Park. The mood of the crowd was festive, emotional and vocal! Naturally, there was a police presence but it was mostly passive and proportional to the crowd (although I did receive a lot of cold stares for taking pictures of them). This mood, amongst both protesters and police, would continue until Saturday afternoon.

THE CHAOS - Saturday (June 26)

My first shift as a Human Rights Monitor was interesting and fairly relaxed. So many diverse causes were being represented and no one was letting the rain ruin the atmosphere.

Once my shift ended, I headed to my friend’s roof for BBQ. There we met 2 undercover police officers who would remain there with us as events on the streets unfolded throughout the day. As a peaceful rally marched through their designated route, a group who had blended in with everyone else splintered off and began a path of destruction (where not even Tim Horton’s was spared). Using Black Bloc tactics they set several police cars on fire, vandalized countless ‘symbols of capitalism’ and looted shops all along Queen St W, Yonge St and College St. Knowing that the other peaceful rallies would be ending at Queen’s Park, these anarchists changed back into plain clothes and joined them there.

When I arrived at Queen’s Park at around 6pm, the scene was that of protesters scattered on the lawn, passively taking advantage of their right to peaceful assembly. At around 7pm, for reasons still unknown and despite Queen’s Park being the designated protest area, the riot police began encroaching on protesters and arresting individuals.

Eventually police resorted to force as some protesters began to throw objects, despite the pleas of protesters for them to stop. After several hours, the group had effectively been dispersed from Queen’s Park and had made its way to Bloor St W and then down Yonge St until Dundas Square. On my way home, I was randomly and illegally searched by police.

THE REACTION - Sunday (June 27)

The day after, the tension in the air was palpable. The police was put on high alert, monitors were given extra safety measures and protesters were advised not to gather in large groups. Inevitably, a large peaceful gathering eventually made its way to the intersection of Queen St W and Spadina Ave. After a rendition of Oh Canada!, the riot police barricaded the intersection and prohibited people from leaving. The result was over 200 people being detained in the cold rain for 4 hours for breaching the peace. At least some of us had fun though.

In the end, the G8/G20 Summit cost over $1.2billion and resulted in 900 people being arrested, a new record for Canada. As a neutral observer, I recognize the limits of my objectivity but in doing so, I end my account here without any commentary, opinion or judgments.

While the intense debate over gun control in the United States is well known around the world (partially thanks to Michael Moore), a less contentious but equally relevant debate has been occurring in Canada since the early days of Confederation. Below is a brief  history of gun control in Canada which will hopefully serve as backdrop to the current debate regarding the long-gun registry. This is Part 1 of 2, which discusses gun control up until the 1970‘s, before some of the more significant changes were made.

Having no “right to bear arms” under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadians have found it much easier to progressively implement gun control policies over the decades, albeit not without opposition.

Before 1892, Justices of Peace had the authority to impose a six-month jail term on anyone carrying a handgun, if the person did not have reasonable cause to fear assault against life or property.

After the Criminal Code of Canada was enacted in 1892, the first requirements for basic carrying permits and records of gun purchases came into effect. These measures were strengthened with an amendment of the Criminal Code in 1920, which required individuals to obtain a permit to own a firearm. For some reason, British subjects were exempt of this requirement for shotguns and rifles already in their possession (but not for newly acquired ones). At the time, a central firearm registry did not exist and records were maintained by local authorities.

In 1934, the first real registration requirement for handguns was created. The new provisions required records identifying the owner, the owner’s address and the firearm although this information was still not centralized. Registration certificates were issued and records were kept by the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) or by police departments that provincial Attorneys General had designated as firearms registries. Starting in 1939, handguns had to be re-registered every five years. Also, the minimum age was changed to 14 years and the first ‘minor’s permit’ was created to allow persons under 14 to have access to firearms.

During World War II, re-registration was postponed and eventually discontinued after the war ended. By 1950, firearm owners no longer had to renew registration certificates since they had become valid indefinitely.

The registry system for handguns was eventually centralized under the Commissioner of the RCMP for the first time in 1951. Automatic firearms were added to the category of firearms that had to be registered and now had to have serial numbers. 

It was not until the late 1960‘s that the categories of ‘firearm,’ ‘restricted weapon’ and ‘prohibited weapon’ were created. This ended confusion over specific types of weapons and allowed the creation of specific legislative controls for each of the new categories. For the first time, police had preventive powers to search for firearms and seize them if they had a warrant from a judge, and if they had reasonable grounds to believe that possession endangered the safety of the owner or any other person, even though no offence had been committed. The current registration system, requiring a separate registration certificate for each restricted weapon, took effect in 1969.

In response to the tragic Centennial Secondary School shooting  in Brampton in 1975, the liberal majority government, led by Pierre Trudeau , passed Bill C-51 in the House of Commons in 1977, a bill which came into force over the next two years. The two biggest changes included requirements for Firearms Acquisition Certificates (FACs) and requirements for Firearms and Ammunition Business Permits, which involved the screening of applicants and record-keeping systems.

…. Il y avait beaucoup de dates et information, non? Alors, on va faire une petite  pause.

But before I go, it is very much worth noting that some of these very components, which include ownership and commercial records, are now being threatened by a Conservative MP’s bill that would dismantle the long-gun registry and all the information acquired until now…

This despite the fact that most Canadians, including cowboys, support the registry.

(To be continued…)

For more detailed information, please see the RCMP’s page: http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/pol-leg/hist/con-eng.htm