|
|
#1
29-11-07, 21:21
|
|||
|
|||
Search and seizure has begun...RED ALERT
It has started..
The gun control freaks have convinced the other freaks that VETS over 75 can't have guns.. JEEZ..I'm moving to TEXAS.. War vets and older hunters targets of inspection O.F.A.H. cries foul over new draconian measures to secure firearms Attention: Assignment Editor, News Editor, Sports Editor ONTARIO--(Marketwire - Nov. 29, 2007) - If the Ontario Chief Firearms Officer has his way, it would appear that law-abiding senior citizens living in Toronto may no longer be protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Chief Firearms Office (CFO) has announced that, effective immediately, it will undertake a "pilot initiative" targeting owners of firearms in the City of Toronto who are over the age of 75 and who possess ten or more firearms, to a mandatory search of the premises. "Once again, law-abiding firearms owners are the focus of seriously misguided attempts to crack down on crime," said Greg Farrant, Government Relations Manager for the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (O.F.A.H.). "This move threatens the rights of senior citizens who are not a problem, and plays to the rhetoric of politicians in the City of Toronto. Instead of focusing on the real problem, the proliferation of illegal handguns on the streets of Toronto and their use against others, Toronto police have somehow convinced the CFO that seniors over the age of 75 who own several firearms are a threat to public safety. This will impact upon veterans, collectors and hunters, and the Federation opposes this tactic and encourages those affected to use every legal option available to them." The pilot home inspection project may violate several sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including unwarranted and unreasonable search and seizure. The O.F.A.H. has long advocated the need for safe storage and transportation of firearms, and continues to educate firearms owners on these issues and encourages others to do the same. Minimum requirements under the Firearms Act for safe storage require that firearms are unloaded, that a trigger lock or cable lock is used, or removal of the bolt or bolt-carrier. Firearms owners should consult Sections 5 & 6 under the Safe Storage sections of the Act. "If the CFO wants to engage in a public education and information campaign regarding the safe storage of firearms and the proper disposition of firearms through estate planning and inheritance, the O.F.A.H. would be pleased to assist them. However, the intent of this action by the CFO insinuates that these seniors are incapable of handling and storing firearms properly. Instead of educating, informing and where necessary helping individuals to come into compliance, this action seeks to inspect and possibly confiscate firearms. The move is not only discriminatory, but heavy handed and unnecessary," said Farrant. With over 82,000 members and 655 member clubs, the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters is the leading fishing, hunting and conservation organization in Ontario. For more information on the O.F.A.H. visit www.ofah.org. /For further information: Greg Farrant Manager, Government Relations 705 875-0274 / IN: JUSTICE, POLITICS, SPORTS For more information, please contact Greg Farrant, Manager, Government Relations, Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters Primary Phone: 705-875-0274 E-mail: lezlie_goodwin@ofah.org     
__________________
Alex Blair :remember :support :drunk: 
|
|
#2
30-11-07, 01:23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Search and seizure has begun...RED ALERT
Quote:
Yeah, it's those 75 year olds trippin' down the streets of Toronto with their baggy pants, do rags, bling-bling and ghetto attitude bustin' caps in the ass of the city... Another liberal legacy issue...or a donut overload for the CFO.
__________________
RHC Why is it that when you have the $$, you don't have the time, and when you have the time you don't have the $$?
|
|
#3
30-11-07, 01:43
|
||||
|
||||
|
We had a meeting last Monday evening for our gun club and one of the members brought this up. It seems it's not only seniors affected. They want to do everyone with over 10 guns and give you 30 days notice before inspection. Some younger guys have already gotten a notice.
Barry
__________________
Every twenty minute job is one broken bolt away from a three day ordeal.
|
|
#4
30-11-07, 02:01
|
||||
|
||||
|
Get Used to it
As Alex observes, so it has begun.
The whole idea with the Registry to begin with was to create an intelligence-gathering capability so that when the time was right they could invoke some obscure element within the Liberal-written law to begin wholesale confiscations. The process will start by requiring you to "justify" why you "need" that many guns... and will go on from there. I'm afraid there won't be much recourse before the courts, because in essence, we sacrificed the innate right to the private ownership of anything the instant Trudeau signed his name to that odious constitution of ours; we surrendered eight hundred years of English Common Law descended from the Magna Carta in favour of our own unique variant of the French Republic's Code Civile - in one swift movement of that bastard's pen, our victory on the Plains of Abraham in 1759 now an ignominious defeat. Brave New World indeed. Our very own New Order.
__________________
SUNRAY SENDS AND ENDS :remember :support
|
|
#5
30-11-07, 04:17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Seniors, firearms inspections, etc
Having read the above threads, I have to say the following:
Hang on a Goddamn minute. For starters, sections 7 & 8 of the Kanuckistan Konstitution do not, in absolute terms, allow the violation of one's right to silence, thus the Firearms Act(embedded in the Criminal Code), is totally in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights. But, can anyone afford to challenge it in the Supreme Court of Canada, with their Liberal appointed judges? They don't wear red robes for nothing! (Sarcastic aside, sorry.) One has the absolute right to silence until conferring with one's legal representative, yet, the Firearms Act demands that one, upon being subjected to a home inspection, must allow the investigating officer to have free access to all areas of one's domicile, with the potential of incriminating oneself by trying to be "helpful". Be advised...Canadians, especially Ontarians...that no peace officer may inspect your firearms collection unless that person is deemed to be a firearms officer. No road patrol cop can inspect your stuff! Also, the deemed firearms officer must arrange with you a mutually agreeable time and date for such an inspection to take place. Should a street cop show up at your door demanding to inspect your firearms, tell him as politely as you can to go to hell. Tell him to get a warrant. No sane JP will swear out such a search warrant. (Do we still have sane JPs?) Having collector status does help! Anyone reading this is most probably not of the Liberal persuasion, so perhaps I'm preaching to the converted. Hey, it happened to Saul on his way to Damascus! (Acts Chap GNB, not KJ v, 9 Acts 22.6-16; 26.12-18). Not a rant, just a hijacked thread advisory. 
__________________
PRONTO SENDS
|
|
#6
30-11-07, 04:56
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Seniors, firearms inspections, etc
Quote:
They can not randomly search, but anything in "plain view" while walking to the closet is fair game. So Geoff put the pot plants in the spare bedroom along with all those leather apparatus's that I care not to know further about. If I am wrong on the inspection area, please do correct me.  Sean
__________________
1944 Allis Chalmers M7 Snow Tractor 1944 Universal Carrier MKII M9A1 International Halftrack M38CDN 1952 Other stuff
|
|
#7
30-11-07, 06:29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bruce Montague from Dryden is presently in court fighting the firearms act. All of his charter challenges were thrown out on this round. He intends taking this to the supreme court. In the meantime, the Ontario Government has siezed his house as proceeds of crime (he and his wife built it themselves) so he cannot mortgage it to get funds. Many gun owners have supported Bruce in his fight, but the funds will soon be eaten up, and he is only 1/3 the way to the supreme court.
|
|
#8
30-11-07, 11:42
|
||||
|
||||
 You should try our firearms laws. You have to get a licence for the catogary of firearm you want to use. Then apply for permission to purchase a firearm giving reasons you require this type of gun, paperwork takes a minimum of six weeks to return, then you can use this piece of paper to purchase one gun. If you need more than one gun you go through this procedure one at a time until you finally have what you want. The guns have to be stored in an approved cabnet firmly bolted to the wall, floor or in some cases both. The ammunition has to be stored in a seporate lockable area usually on top or inside the cabnet. The poliece do checks by apointment, but also do random spot checks if they suspect the one cabnet is being used by various owners on apointment days. If you are not home when they call to inspect and your wife unlocks the cabnet for inspection expect to explain to a court why another person knew where your keys were. 
__________________
Robert Pearce.
|
|
#9
30-11-07, 11:52
|
||||
|
||||
|
Two Points
(1) Sean -- How can I hide all the ..er.. leather goods, when you haven't returned them to me yet?! (BTW, did you buy your own set as you told me you were going to after you tried mine?)
(2) The trouble with the whole set-up of this firearms law is that the constitution itself was deliberately written as to be vague (in all respects), in order to force recourse through the courts, right up to and including the Supreme Court. The government of the time (rightly) concluded that few individuals (or even smaller organisations) would ever be financially able to take it that far, and were at the same time prepared to fund legions of government lawyers to fight them every step of the way. And of course, the final decision rested (as Jon explained) with the Liberal-appointed Supreme Court. Game, set & match.
__________________
SUNRAY SENDS AND ENDS :remember :support
|
|
#10
30-11-07, 12:35
|
|||
|
|||
|
firearms
good morning from a cold and wet North-Northumberland...you guys think you have it bad with guns try living here!some time ago I was researcing the origins of the Home Guard...despite our PM Winston Churchill giving the order for a Home Guard with the Germans at the door!minutes from the Home Office state that"in our view its not in the public interest to arm the population"these of course would have been the same Bastards that would have done the germans bidding!(rant over)...Im told in France once can go into the gunshop with your ID and purchase a weapon then a certificate from the local mayor/permission from the landowner and your off "hunting"...perhaps thats why some many of my countrymen are moving to France! best regards to all malcolm
__________________
mally B
|
|
#11
30-11-07, 15:50
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thats nothing. There was a guy in Alberta whose firearm liscence expired (he neglected to renew it) so at 4 in the morning, the police tactical team came in right after the smoke grenades went through the living room window. He was a liscenced owner for the prohibited class of firearms, but immediately became a criminal, and treated as such, the moment that liscence expired.
Our firearms laws are a convoluted series of patchwork based on media perception and political whims, rather than real threat. Far easier to sieze the collectors "arsenal" than to actually attempt to fight real crime, and it looks better in the newpaper too.
|
|
#12
02-12-07, 03:16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Search and seizure has begun...RED ALERT
Quote:
Any society that allows a government to enact draconion regulations with no debate in the House of Commons simply by passing an Order-in-Council, or Aufträge-im-Rat as other societies have called in them, soon ceases to be a country of Free Men. People wonder (yes, a few) why gun owner's in the U.S. refuse to budge an inch regarding gun control. Well, that question gets answered every day as the rights of law abiding people around the world die the death of a thousand cuts!
__________________
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
|
|
#13
02-12-07, 04:35
|
|||
|
|||
|
Easy targets...
...guns are still easy targets and our government wants votes from large ill informed populations of voters. As a group gunowners in canada may be a force, but with voting boundaries and the way we/they are spread out we can't elect enough lawmakers , favorable to the gun owner, to really fight to represent us fairly. That means intense lobby groups and litagation.
As a Q.E.D I just took my gun course today and one example they gave us of government and easy targets is... about 480 Albertans are killed on the roads annually...while about the same number commit suicide. The government is spending billions on roads but a person who is suicidal here is pretty much out of luck. But there are a lot more voters driving cars than attempting suicide I guess. This was tied in to how guns are bad, incidentally, and how not having them saves lives Sean
__________________
1944 Allis Chalmers M7 Snow Tractor 1944 Universal Carrier MKII M9A1 International Halftrack M38CDN 1952 Other stuff
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
