NOTES ON BILL C-71 STATUS as of February 2023 and some 2018 SENATE CORRESPONDENCE

NOTES on Status of Bill C-71:

Subsequent to the 2018 discussion with Senator Pratte copied here and lobbying from many quarters the upshot was that the Senate did nothing to recommend amendments to Bill C-71 and the Bill was passed taking until May of 2022 for final implementation of most provisos subject to an amnesty to Oct. 30, 2023, for confiscation of the 1,500 prohibited firearms listed in the May 2020 Order in Council plus several hundred additional “variants” subsequently listed in the Firearms Reference Table by the RCMP. As of early 2023, there are 5 ongoing challenges in Federal Court with regard to the May 2020 prohibitions that will likely result in an extension of the amnesty deadline. As well the so-called “buyback program” for the May 2020 prohibited firearms has yet to be formulated into any kind of administratively feasible implementation plan and cost estimates for invocation are running into the billions of dollars.

R. P. Alton, Feb. 26, 2023

April 15, 2018

To: Senator Andre Pratte
Senate of Canada

cc All Senators, MP Terry Sheehan(Sault Ste Marie) and MP Carol Hughes (Algoma, Manitoulin, Kapuskasing)

RE: Bill C71 Discussion

Senator Pratte, I want to thank you for your reply to my April 2nd letter to you and your colleagues regarding draft Bill C71. All too often Canadian citizens become cynical after making input to politicians on policy matters because their concerns are seldom acknowledged with other than form letters so it was refreshing to receive your detailed response expressing your views. Having said that, I’d urge you to take another careful look at what C71 is proposing; and I encourage all Senators to keep in mind that at this stage it’s only a draft and that you have the full and complete authority to send it back to Parliament with needed revisions. A great many Canadians view the Senate as a meaningless entity, being the whipping boy of the government in power, but I don’t see it that way even though I supported Mr. Harper’s “triple E” view which in truth supported its basic raison d’etre.  To be sure, the Red Chamber’s deliberations have a vital role to play in the vetting of draft legislation to ensure that Canadian citizens of all minority groups are not bullied in ways such as the mean-spirited effort that the recreational firearms community (RFC) is currently experiencing with the launch of C71.

The Trudeau government has attempted to brainwash the populace into believing that C71 will improve public safety but that’s not true; and I’m sure on further examination you will see through the smoke and mirrors. If safety was the focus we’d be seeing a concerted effort to bring in measures to counteract the proliferation of serious gun crimes by drug gangs in our big cities and action to circumvent the apparent ease with which criminal gangs can smuggle in illicit firearms across our border with the USA and onto our shores from abroad; but discouragingly, despite this being the only real problem with guns, we’ve seen no such effort under C71. There’s no bolstering of resources for the Canada Customs border-watch function nor for that of the RCMP.  Instead, what we see is yet further discrimination towards the RFC in so many ways.

First I would point out that there isn’t another example in Canada wherein any group of Canadians is subject to the absolute authority of a police force to make regulations that apply to their activities. This should never happen in a true democracy; and yet that’s exactly what we are faced with in C71 which proposes to give the RCMP  authority to unilaterally classify firearms as prohibited without reference to Parliament. As a retiree having enjoyed a career in the Ontario government service in a variety of senior management capacities I can assure you I do understand very well the proper roles of the administrative and political levels. It’s the job of civil servants to make recommendations to their Minister and from there, if the Minister sees fit to take a policy recommendation to Cabinet proposing legislation, then with Cabinet’s agreement he/she will put a Bill forward for Parliamentary debate. In this case, the Trudeau government is abrogating its responsibility in its attempt to make the RCMP its scapegoat for future firearm prohibitions, even though ironically, contrary to this intended direction, this Bill itself is declaring certain specific prohibitions to come into force by June of 2018, objectionable to the RFC for sure, but nonetheless an appropriate process by the Minister not delegated to the RCMP. The RCMP with its expertise should only make recommendations to the Minister they report to, that’s the system in place now and it should remain so because fundamentally it is inconsistent with Canada’s Constitution to delegate law-making to a police force. There’s a big difference between the delegation of authority and abrogation of responsibility; the former is only legitimate when administering a law that has been passed by Parliament in the first place i.e. in this situation the RCMP would enforce a prohibition that Parliament enacts.

With respect to gun crime statistics you hit the nail on the head in that most serious gun crimes are gang-related. Statistics can be spun variously and the old saying that “they are like a bikini, very revealing but conceal all that’s vital” holds true. Senator if all the information was on the table you would be hard-pressed to find any serious gun crimes committed by licenced firearm owners. Unfortunately, as a result of the licencing system and the natural propensity of even mature adults to overlook the paperwork necessary to renew firearm licences which come under the Criminal Code, there will always be some “paper criminals” so to speak. This incongruity has been pointed out to Mr. Trudeau’s team but they refuse to take this out of the CCode and put it into administrative law as it should be. The Harper government handled this by virtue of continuously rolling over amnesties but that ended in December 2017 and what we have now is a 6 month, very finite grace period; miss that and you are a “paper criminal”, no exceptions, with prison gates opened to welcome you in; so I’m sure you can see that we need to change the law in this area as such oversights should never be deemed criminal offences. On the matter of gun-related crime statistics, I would refer you to the research of Professor Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser University which has shown that gun crime statistics compiled in Canada are somewhat convoluted thus leading to very erroneous conclusions.

On the matter of background checks, it should be noted that those of us that have purchased firearms since the Firearms Acquisition Certificate (FAC) came into force in the late 70s and was then replaced by the Possession and Acquisition Licence (PAL)  under the Chretien government’s 1995 Bill C68, have already been on the system for almost 40 years so to bring in a lifetime background check system is superfluous. What would make more sense would be a lifetime PAL rather than the current 5year rollover process that’s subject to ridiculous fees and creates a needless and costly bureaucracy to administer; and this licence should only be subject to cancellation if the licencee committed a serious, “non-paper” gun crime measured against specific, well-defined criteria. The CPIC system is accessed by the RCMP daily so red flags would be quickly acted upon; it has always been thus so the lifetime window dressing in C71 is truly meaningless. And besides, as we all know, except in very special circumstances, a citizen’s mental problems and doctor files are protected by privacy legislation so unless that can of worms was opened and dealt with the political pronouncements pursuant to C71 simply won’t happen.

Finally, as I’m sure you know there is a serious concern in the RFC regarding the duplicity of Mr. Trudeau’s team in the matter of their promise to not return to a long gun registry (LGR). Despite that commitment what we in fact see in Bill C71 is the makings of a “back-door registry” via the invocation of processes at both the commercial and private level of long gun transfers that amount to just that. Forcing sporting equipment establishments that are licenced to sell firearms to maintain personalized sales records of long guns for 25 yrs. not only creates a serious hardship to them but is in fact keeping a registry of private long gun ownership data. Since the Harper team wisely abolished the LGR in 2012 the process followed for private sales has been efficient and perfectly safe e.g. if you and I are duck hunters and you wanted to buy a shotgun from me there was an onus on me to see your PAL and ensure it wasn’t expired by examining the relevant term dates on the licence along with your picture emblazoned thereon; and in turn you needed to similarly see my PAL to ensure it was in effect thus knowing I could legally own such a gun and legally sell it to you; pretty simple and foolproof I think you’d agree and this has been ongoing since 2012 with absolutely no safety issues whatsoever; no need to call the bureaucracy to invoke a complicated and costly process, just two law-abiding citizens enjoying their hunting culture within the law. The verification process being thrust at us under C71 is the same as the redundant process that existed pre-2012; it’s totally unwarranted and nothing more than a sound bite to make the government appear to be doing something useful; but most significantly it will once again create a LGR of sorts given the personal data being created and stored; and additionally this will waste copious amounts of taxpayer dollars in the process.

Senator I’ve copied your colleagues with this message, I hope with your approval. I look forward to the Senate having an intensive debate on Bill C71 and listening carefully to organizations making committee presentations thus giving you the opportunity to examine the details methodically and separating fact from fiction. Your exercise of due diligence on this file will deservedly put the Trudeau government’s feet to the fire and hopefully, with appropriate amendments, ensure respect for the civil rights of law-abiding firearm owners in Canada. I’ve also copied the two MPs in my local NE Ontario region where our hunting culture thrives and law-abiding firearm owners comprise a voting block of several thousand. Yours truly, Ron P. Alton.  April 9, 2018 Email letter from Senator Andre Pratte to R.P.Alton in response to concerns expressed to Senator Pratte re Bill C-71

Yours truly,
Ron P. Alton

April 9 , 2018
Email letter from Senator Andre Pratte to R.P.Alton in response to concerns expressed to Senator Pratte re Bill C-71

Thank you for your e-mail and for bringing your views to my attention.

For my part, I am in favor of bill C-71. As a matter of fact, I will sponsor the bill in the Senate. The bill comprises measures that will improve public safety, while they will not change anything, or at worse very little, for law-abiding firearm owners.

Amongst the measures that I support, bill C-71 will provide that the final word on firearm classification belongs to the RCMP specialists, not to politicians. I believe police officers are better suited to fight crime than politicians.

 Background checks will extend further than five (5) years, which is a wise decision considering someone’s past violent behavior or mental problems, even if they happened longer that five (5) years ago, may be relevant to the decision to issue a firearm license.

Fortunately, gun violence is not as serious a problem in Canada as it is in the United States, by far. Still, we should not underestimate it. As you probably know, according to the latest Statistics Canada data, in 2016, «for the third year in a row, firearm-related homicides increased in number and rate. In 2016, there were 223 firearm-related homicides, 44 more than the previous year. This represents a rate of 0.61 per
100,000 population, a 23% increase from the rate in 2015 and the highest rate since 2005. The higher number and rate of firearm-related homicides is due to increases in all firearm types, with the exception of sawed-off rifles or shotguns.» This is due in large part to an increase in gang-related murders, but not only. For instance, in 2016, 50 homicides were committed using rifles or shotguns, compared to 30 in 2013.  

There are more firearms than ever in circulation in Canada. For instance, according to the latest report published by the Commissioner of Firearms, in 2016, there were 839295 restricted firearms registered in Canada, nearly 180000 more than three (3) years earlier.

This is why it is prudent to take additional measures in order to protect public safety. That being said, I can assure you that Bill C-71 will be studied thoroughly in the Senate. All points of view will be heard and amendments will be considered.

Best regards,

André Pratte


By R.P. Alton
January 2023

The fundamental tenets of reasonable Canadian firearm-related law have been in place for many decades spanning the gamut of regulations on criminal background checks, safety certification, safe storage, transportation and use. Subsequently, with a continuous barrage of supposed safety-tweaking changes, law-abiding Canadian hunters and others thought they had seen every gun control curve ball imaginable thrown at them but then in 2022, Bill C-21, “An Act to Amend Certain Acts and to make Certain Consequential Amendments (firearms)”, hit the echo chambers of liberal gun control ideology and reverberated off the walls of over 2 million God-fearing Canadian families exceeding by any measure the liberal-proud authoritarian policies we’ve been engulfed in since the Chretien government force-fed Canadians with Bill C-68, the 1995 Firearms Act, sponsored by Allan Rock, Minister of Justice, who’s famous quote, “only the police and military should have firearms”, symbolizes the ethos of the Liberal Party of Canada. C68 marked a turning point in our traditional right to property as it forced a licencing requirement on us to own what we already legally owned and it was backed up by a newly concocted registration system for our duck guns and deer rifles, the long gun registry (LGR), because according to the liberals, in the interests of public safety, it was necessary to know where each and every duck gun in Canada resided and, despite the fact that many of these were family heirlooms just like grandma’s jewellery, it didn’t matter because the dictates of big government decreed it so thus laying the groundwork for the intrusive inanities of what was to follow.

Over 2.2 million Canadians have been forced to hold mandatory firearms licences pursuant to C68, a Possession & Acquisition Licence ( PAL), to legitimize gun ownership and this is a puzzling direction for the government to have taken given that handguns in Canada have been registered since 1934 but there was never a licence requirement to own them and there shouldn’t be now. Prior to the enactment of C68 Canadian law required citizens wanting to purchase any firearm to hold a Firearms Acquisition Certificate (FAC) and this ensured that criminal background checks had been done; the policy was implemented by the government under Pierre Trudeau in 1979 and served the intended purpose very well for many years and we should still be operating under that system as the change to PAL’s was redundant, an administrative waste of taxpayer dollars and nothing more than a demonic assault on the freedoms of law-abiding Canadians. Pierre Trudeau once said, in reconciling with the long-held evils outside of heteronormativity, that “the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation” and by the same token that philosophy should apply to our gun cabinets if we are truly living in what he called “a free and democratic society”.

Nothing in our history has been more divisive than so-called gun control except perhaps for the Separate School debates in the early years following Confederation or the conscription policies during the World Wars; but the striking difference that resonates with the firearms file is the non-exhaustive nature of liberal gun control fallacies that serve only to discriminate against law-abiding firearm owners while claiming to enhance public safety without a stitch of supporting evidence. Draft Bill C21, sponsored by Marco Mendicinio, Minister of Public Safety and National Security who replaced Bill Blair in the recent Cabinet shuffle, is the latest iteration of the continuing saga and it follows on the heels of Bill C-71, “An Act to Amend Certain Acts & Regulations in Relation to Firearms”. These Bills taken together are an out-and-out assault on the cultural rights of traditional Canadian families that revel in their multi-generational pursuits of hunting and target shooting sports as the intent and direction of the liberal government’s push for this legislation is meant to eliminate the use of property that has been legally owned and used for decades and to prevent any new ownership of such property, all under the guise being championed by the liberals that the guns in question are only “assault weapons”. That’s hogwash and a good example of the politics of make-believe since only full automatic firearms used by the military fall within any definition of assault weapons and they were prohibited in Canada in 1978.

Bill C-71 was drafted under the guidance of Bill Blair, a double-dipper that took up federal politics after a long career with the Toronto PD ending as Chief of Police for a number of years. Blair’s effort with C-71 was no surprise as it was never lost on the recreational firearms community (RFC) that Blair, when Chief, had been openly supportive of the LGR and Toronto Mayor Miller’s and PM Paul Martin’s advocacy to ban the ownership of handguns in Canada, a position in stark contrast with his predecessor, Chief Julian Fantino, who had stated that the LGR had not helped the Toronto PD solve one crime. Blair’s stance deliberately ignored the reality that virtually all handgun-related crime in Toronto is committed by gang warfare using guns smuggled across the border. Blair fit right into Trudeau’s need for an abolitionist in Cabinet. Chretien’s Bill C-68 had invoked the diabolical LGR and after 17 long years of bitter debate and the waste of billions of taxpayer dollars, money that could have done something meaningful like bolstering the resources of our border security to prevent handgun smuggling, the Harper government finally abolished it in 2012; but C-71, despite liberal promises to never bring in another LGR, saw to it that a back door registry was created under the edict requiring firearm dealers to keep detailed sales records for 20 yrs. allowing open access to the authorities thus demonstrating once again that liberal promises mean nothing, a well-demonstrated trait that even those that assuage their selective amnesia must admit given the magnitude of historic lies such as Chretien’s promise to abolish the GST in the lead-up to his 1993 majority. Chretien once said that “a proof is a proof” in the context of policy validation, an interesting test, and I don’t recall seeing him squirm since his dumping of C-68 on law-abiding firearm owners proved to be completely useless in curbing crime.

Bill C-21 was originally being drafted to incorporate the May, 2020 prohibition order of 1,500 models of semi-automatic centrefire rifles and several hundred additional variants that have been added to the list by the RCMP along with the companion administrative framework for what the government called a “buyback program” being designed to pay compensation for firearms on this list turned in for destruction. RFPs were issued in an attempt to find a contractor to implement the buybacks and after three attempts a proposal by IBM Canada was selected to the dismay of firearm owners as the proposed compensation schedule recently announced is an insult to the true valuation of the various firearm models. An amnesty to October 30, 2023, is now in place and it needs to be extended as the battles are far from over. A similar program was invoked in New Zealand after the horrendous 2019 mosque shootings by a deranged terrorist and to date, well past the government’s deadline, estimates are that less than 25% of the estimated prohibited firearms have been turned in for destruction. Similar results are likely here since a large number of the firearm models on the May 2020 list, as in NZ, were not restricted and thus not registered so “Big Brother” has no idea where they are.

The next chapter of draft Bill C-21 is focussed on handguns and, after years of liberal rhetoric, was initiated in the summer of 2022 with Melanie Joly, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Marco Mendicino holding a news conference and waving their heroic flags of gun control self-righteousness announcing the government’s cleverly concocted sudden ban on the importation of handguns using as their authority “The Export and Imports Permits Act” administered by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There was no debate in Parliament to justify this policy and no consultation with the firearms industry so it has now become obvious that Trudeau loves surprise attacks on this file using quick and efficient Orders in Council to get what he wants. Joly is the failed candidate for the mayoralty of Montreal that jumped into the liberal pork-barrel of federal politics in 2015 at the personal urging of Trudeau, re-elected twice since then, and moved through various lesser Cabinet positions leading to her current appointment as Minister of Foreign Affairs with little relevant experience to justify her appointment. Mendicinio is a former prosecutor so at least there’s some technical relevance to his Cabinet appointment. The import ban was in essence pre-emptory since C21 was in draft and there’s no authority in the Firearms Act to invoke an import ban; it was specifically aimed at preventing firearm dealers from restocking their shelves since the sale of handguns in Canada had mushroomed dramatically since Trudeau became PM with 1.1 million registered as of 2020 according to RCMP data, a 71% increase since 2010. It’s doubtful that Joly even knew she had authority within her mandate to invoke an import ban until she was put up to it and, despite her legal background, it didn’t speak well of her perspective on the economic impact given there was no reaching out to the 4,500 firearm businesses in Canada via the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association (CSAAA), a callous decision considering the economic fallout on hard-working families in the sector and also antithetical to the norms of policy development in her Ministry thus demonstrating that when it comes to liberal attitudes towards the RFC it’s OK to do whatever you want to whomever you want whenever you want and to hell with the mere pedestrian aftereffects of the intrusions since any means justifies the ends of anti-gun ideologues. CSAAA data puts the jobs created by its industry at 48,000 and the contribution to Canada’s GDP at $5.9 billion and this of course is multiplied several times over if the pursuits of the RFC were taken into account.

Before the dust had settled on the import ban controversy the door to handguns was slammed shut in October when, unbelievably, the government, out of left field, announced a policy to ban the purchase and transfer of handguns in Canada and introduced a regulation by Order in Council to implement this policy once again bypassing Parliament, the peoples’ House (it’s called the Commons for a reason), and without any consultation with stakeholders. Not only does this policy discriminate against the owners of handguns and their family inheritance rights, it will also serve to eliminate any recruitment to Canada’s elite corps of international-level handgun competitors thus deliberately phasing out our longstanding excellence in this sport, not on the playing field but by government fiat. Shamefully, The Shooting Federation of Canada which oversees the certification of our national shooting teams was not consulted before this policy announcement.

This policy does not include any buyback program and only allows for continued ownership and restricted use of handguns for the life of current owners unlike the semi-auto rifle ban of May 2020 that requires mandatory confiscation. This is the point where things get very complicated as the liberals cited as their authority to ban handgun purchases and transfers Section 117 of the Firearms Act; this is the section of the Act that gives the Governor in Council the authority to pass a host of regulations (via Orders in Council) with transfers being cited within the matrix but, and it’s a big but, I believe the ambit of reference to transfers here is entirely permissive with no underlying authority to invoke bans. I conclude this since Section 23 of the Firearms Act makes transfers perfectly legal, it’s the Section that authorizes them in the first place and nothing in Section 23 speaks to bans so that in essence means that the authorization to pass transfer-related regulations under S117 is meant only to put regulations in place that detail the processes of transfers that S23 makes perfectly legal. Under our system of regulatory controls, it’s the section of an Act that spells out the legal authority that enables the making of regulations under that specific authority. A regulation cannot legitimately be made to contradict the section of an Act so I believe in this case that the liberals have deliberately obfuscated on the issue, an extreme example of socialist obscurantism, and reached above the law to invoke their purchase and transfer ban. In my view, their action vitiates the ban and authorizes nothing more than blatant promiscuity with the obligatory rudiments of the legislative system deliberately showing contempt for Parliament and deceiving all Canadians. The only legal means to invoke this ban in my view would be a repeal of Section 23 to include the authority they don’t now have and this is exactly what they’ll do in Bill C-21 if they eventually pass it into law. In the meantime, the policy they’ve invoked has turned the 4,500 firearm businesses in Canada upside down and interfered with the lives of over a million law-abiding Canadian handgun owners all of which have significant financial implications.

Draft Bill C-21 went through 2nd Reading in the House of Commons and then went on for review by SECU, the House Committee on Safety and National Security. Near the end of the Committee deliberations, after all, witnesses had been heard, an amendment to Bill C-21 was put forward by the government to SECU in late November through their errand boy, MP Paul Chiang, who sits on the committee, another sneak attack without it having had any debate in Parliament. The amendment expanded dramatically on the May 2020 prohibition list and included a long list of semi-automatic centrefire rifles and shotguns to be declared as a new category of prohibited firearms based on their design feature to potentially accept removable magazines capable of holding more than 5 rifle cartridges or shotgun shells. As in the case of the May 2020 prohibited list the government deemed all such firearms to be “assault weapons” but in this round, there was no buyback offer.

The redundancy of this amendment is evidenced by the fact that Canadian law already prohibits detachable magazines for centre-fire semi-auto rifles capable of holding more than 5 cartridges; they don’t exist in Canada as they are prohibited devices and even owning one is a criminal offence so the only way a criminal could obtain one would be to smuggle across the border. Additionally, shotgun magazines are restricted to 3 shells under the “Migratory Birds Convention Act”. Thus, as all of the firearms listed in the amendment are ordinarily used for hunting and target shooting and, are already limited to carrying capacity by law, as are those on the May 2020 prohibition list, it’s plain to see that the amendment is a deliberate façade targeted at the unwashed portion of society, particularly the social justice warriors that pollute the internet, mainly urbanites, and intended to keep them snorkelling around the periphery of current firearms law, believing what the liberals feed them, with no deep dive into the facts.

The amendment is meeting with a firestorm of opposition from all quarters of the firearms industry and the RFC and has also been the subject of a resolution by the Assembly of First Nations who oppose it given the impact on sustenance hunting and, notwithstanding Trudeau having Jagmeet Singh in the bag, there are even some NDP members joining opposition from Conservative benches. Additionally, there are now five provinces and territories officially opposed to the C21 amendment and the May 2020 prohibitions (AB, Sask, MB, Yukon, NB). Alberta is currently developing its own Firearms Act as has Saskatchewan to put up firewalls to undemocratic federal intrusions and they will likely be joined by others. Trudeau has been formally advised by these jurisdictions, all of which are policed at the provincial level by the RCMP under contract, that they will not commit any resources to administer and enforce the proposed long gun confiscations. Also, and of historical importance, “The Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act”, passed in November as promised by new Premier, Danielle Smith, sets the stage for rebuffing any federal policy that adversely affects Alberta’s citizens or the Province’s ability to manage its own natural resources. This developing federal/provincial schism is reminiscent of the carbon tax challenge from several Provinces thus adding to the mounting legacy of Justin Trudeau’s divide and conquer philosophy with bifurcations of the country knowing no bounds in his tenacious drift from reality to reform Canada into a statist model for what he sees as Canada’s globalist fit into the “post-national” World.

While Trudeau has busied himself focussing on firearm prohibitions that only persecute law-abiding firearm owners the country has experienced an escalation in crime under his watch with a 32% increase in violent crime and a 92% increase in gang-related shootings based on Statistics Canada data. The wisdom of PM Harper’s government to get tough on crime is coming home to roost since Trudeau’s liberals passed Bill C-5, “An Act to Amend the Criminal Code and The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act” that repealed the former’s minimum sentence legislation and, unbelievably, also brought in so-called bail reform under Bill C-75, “An Act to Amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential Amendments to other Acts”, that now has 1,100 firearm offenders out on bail in Toronto alone. The recent murder of OPP officer Grzegorz Pierzchala by just such a person is a tragic result of a broken system that surely will spawn changes but probably not so long as Trudeau is at the helm. We have seen how opportune the liberals have been in bringing in their gun control edicts riding on the backs of grieving Canadian families and using fresh-off-the-press USA shootings to gain sympathy: C68 followed on the heels of the 1989 murders at Ecole Polytechnique in Quebec, C71 was drafted following the 2017 Quebec mosque shooting and the 2018 Danforth shooting, the May 2020 semi-auto rifle prohibitions were announced soon after the April 2020 mass murders in Nova Scotia and the C21 prohibitions now being challenged were drafted with the horrible 2022 Uvalde, Texas and Buffalo, NY shootings still in the news. What goes largely unreported by mainstream media, and thus not picked up on by the public at large, is the fact that the maniacs that commit these heinous crimes almost always obtain their guns illegally and if not obtain them under false pretences through loopholes in the gun control rules of the day, often failed background checks, but you never hear the liberals mention any of that.

C71 gave the authority to establish prohibitions to unelected bureaucrats, the RCMP; this repealed legislation brought in by the Harper government to keep such policy-making at the Cabinet level. PM Harper had it right since any proposal to limit long-established freedoms must of necessity be tied to the Minister and debated by Parliament as any such direction has serious civil rights implications. This RCMP systemic aberration is widely seen as another example of Trudeau’s contempt for Parliament.
Too, it’s obvious that the RCMP has run amok in the creation of the current prohibition lists by deliberately ignoring the traditional use of these firearms and this is at the heart of current court challenges. There are already five cases in Federal Court challenging the May 2020 prohibitions brought forward either directly or via sponsorship by Canada’s National Firearms Association (NFA), The Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights, The Canadian Shooting Sports Association, and by individuals and businesses impacted by the prohibitions. Additionally, the CSSA has now launched a challenge to the handgun prohibitions and with the introduction of the C21 amendment, more challenges will come forward in the days ahead. It was recently announced that Alberta’s Justice Minister, Tyler Shandro, has been granted intervenor status by the Federal Court in challenges filed to date and it seems likely that other Provinces will follow this lead.

At some point, I would hope that Ontario will step forward and give Trudeau some resistance on this file given Premier Ford’s constituency of hunters and competitive target shooters, the largest of any Province, but I don’t expect Quebec to do much since recent Provincial governments there going back to Jean Charest have shown a negative attitude towards law-abiding firearm owners having established Quebec’s own LGR that exists to this day despite the 2019 efforts of the NFA to challenge it at the Supreme Court on constitutional grounds. A large percentage of PAL holders reside in these two Provinces; but Trudeau’s calculation that he’s only dealing with licenced gun owners is a gross miscalculation of reality. You don’t have to own non-restricted long guns to hunt or to shoot in competitive target shooting competitions; you can borrow them so long as you are certified with the relevant safety training and thus no PAL is required. I would conservatively estimate that for every PAL holder, there are at least two other family members that hunt and shoot but do not personally own guns and that number in some families runs to three or more so the fraternity in reality is probably upwards of ten million, a far cry from the 2.2 million PAL holders, maybe 20% of Canada’s population, many of whom are kids not yet old enough to vote, but they soon will be and they’ll have long memories.
Interest in hunting and competitive target shooting sports in Canada has been growing steadily, especially amongst women and kids, partly through the efforts of organizations such as “The Canadian Sportswoman Society”, “The Canadian University Shooting Federation” and “The National High School Rodeo Association” but also through the efforts of hundreds of gun clubs across the country, the many Provincial competitive shooting associations and hunting and conservation associations such as Ducks Unlimited, Delta Waterfowl and the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters.

Taken together, given the federal/provincial entanglement complexities and the likelihood of appeals, the legal challenges now underway and those to follow will quite likely take us through to the next election without resolution and thus without the government having the full authority to implement the provisos of C21 even if it passes with NDP support and subsequent liberal-controlled Senate approval. This will result in prolonged amnesties for individuals and the sequestering of currently lawful equipment and a devastating situation for firearms businesses many of which will no doubt go bankrupt as they are kept in limbo. Pierre Poilievre, the recently elected leader of The Conservative Party of Canada has been critical of Trudeau’s unwarranted gun control policies affecting law-abiding Canadians in lieu of actual crime control, and especially the underhanded way in which Trudeau has avoided Parliamentary debate; he has committed to a full review of our firearms law if he forms the next government and if that happens it won’t be a moment too soon!

Ron P Alton

Dear Premier Ford:

The actions by the UK and Denmark outlined in the attached report wherein Covid jabs have now been “prohibited” for teenagers, young children and those under 50 yrs of age have largely been hidden by the media but it’s time to let the cat outa the bag. How long will it take before your government does the right thing and passes legislation to FORBID any org, especially those run by out-of-control bureaucrats such as the exec of U of Western and U of T, some hospitals and sports orgs such as Ont Minor Hockey from mandating Covid jabs.
I’ve been a member of the Conservative Party of Ontario for many years and a loyal contributing sponsor but my faith in what was once a sound, common-sense political establishment is rapidly waning as I watch students, youth in sports and nurses being sacrificed on the altar of Covid pseudo-science while your government fails to take responsible action in support of a citizen’s right to decide what goes into their body.
No org, ever, should have the authority to force anybody to take an experimental injection fraught with well-known side effects such as blood clotting and myocarditis and yet your government is standing by and allowing this to happen. For God’s sake Premier get out of Trudeau’s straw once and for all; a public apology admitting that you’ve been duped isn’t necessary but please get your Caucus together and make a decision NOW to end this madness as with each passing day of inaction your credibility is going downhill fast!

Ron P Alton



It’s now 2022, two years into the Covid-19 pandemic, and officialdom is still in chaos. The primary lesson learned is being ignored i.e. the falsity that lockdowns across the board actually accomplish the intended objective of saving lives. The WHO preached against the practice based on history but Canada seemed intent on following China’s draconian lead even to the extent of idiotic curfews in Quebec. We know lockdowns cause major strains on families and play havoc with the economy; and we know they are futile since jurisdictions that didn’t lock down have mortality rates no worse than Canada and some lower, Sweden for example at 1.2% compared to 1.5% for Canada.

One might ask why are we into this lockdown insanity right now in spite of the facts?  In my opinion, apart from the politics, it’s for one reason only, the paucity of ICUs in our hospitals. Canada ranks 10th in the listing of OECD countries with only 10 ICU’s/100K population; the US is in top place with 35 which says something about their 2-tiered healthcare system; they do have Medicare for seniors and Medicaid for the handicapped that few Canadians seem to realize when bragging about our system. Our medical teams have been quite loud about the ICU problem and pushed for lockdowns even though there’s no evidence that the practice reduces hospitalizations. Despite this governments at all levels accede to the pressure so the perception is created that they are taking useful action. It’s all purely political but at the same time authoritarian and that’s dangerous; after all this isn’t communist China.

So given the ICU situation do we know how we got here? We should if we pay attention to recent history. If we go back to the Chretien government of the 90’s we see that the budget was balanced by way of huge health transfer cutbacks to the Provinces, many billions of dollars that have never been put back into the system. Premiers have been decrying that but Trudeau hasn’t listened; his answer to the pandemic was to borrow over $400 billion and write cheques on that borrowed money paying people to stay home and not work in support of harmful, useless lockdowns. Muddleheadedly, under Chrystia Freeland’s direction, this is still happening; and we definitely need to get unshackled from this policy.

But there’s a big “what-if” in my mind because if only a small portion of that wasted money had been put towards ICU creation we wouldn’t be facing this dilemma. I’m told that setting up an ICU costs between $25-30,000, three times the cost of regular beds; and given that hospital construction doesn’t happen overnight the way through this in the short term in my view would have been the development of ICU portables. Doing this would have created thousands of jobs and could have doubled our ICU count by now. Canada is well endowed with industrial expertise in this area; ATCO trailers for example are found in forestry, mining and oil patch camps across the country as well as add-ons to schools. It’s still not too late for such action but what a pity so much money went and is still going down the toilet.

People are fed up; they’re sick of sleeping with one eye open; the catastrophism has to end. The portmanteau that best describes what we’ve been through is “fear-mongering”; and it brings to mind FDR’s philosophy when implementing his “New Deal” job creation projects during the Great Depression when he said to Americans, “the only thing we should fear is fear itself”, indeed!

Ron P. Alton


It’s mute justice, not a mere coincidence and definitely not a moment too soon that Jody Wilson-Raybould has come out with her blockbuster memoir “Indian in the Cabinet-Speaking Truth to Power”.  Although PM Trudeau had considered the SNC-Lavalin affair over and done with prior to the 2019 election, remarkably surviving the scandal by the skin of his teeth given that Canadian media basically let him off the hook, with the publication of this book, Canadians are now aware that it’s far from over and if truth truly prevails it will serve to expose him as the partisan, manipulative autocrat he is and justifiably contribute to bringing down his government.

The mystery of Jody’s decision to not run again as an Independent in her Vancouver Granville Riding is now solved; she said that “Parliament has become toxic and ineffective” but we now know that Jody has devoted herself to a more important mission, namely the exposure of Justin Trudeau’s corruption as a pansy of a large Quebec, liberal-doner corporation and his blatant lack of respect for the office of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, not to mention his disdain for her personally as a supposedly malleable Indian woman he had obviously put in place to do his bidding when necessary.  It’s amazing to me how quickly Canadians forget about recent history; Jody is seeing to it that history counts. 

Trudeau’s attempt to excuse SNCL from a criminal prosecution trial for the alleged bribery allegations the company was charged with regarding contracts in Libya and have them go through the process of a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) was targeted at Jody in her role as Attorney General via his minions in the PMO and when that failed Michael Wernick, Clerk of the Privy Council, the highest level civil servant in the federal bureaucracy, was induced to try and get Jody to override the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and instead bring on a DPA. The office of DPP was established by the Harper government to make prosecutions more transparent and create a separation from the potential political influence of the Attorney General.  The AG can override a prosecutorial decision though and that’s what Trudeau was trying to get Jody to do.

Jody taped the conversation with Wernick which resulted in his resignation and Trudeau’s castigation of Jody saying that her tape was “unethical”. In my mind her action was smart, damn smart; if you are a little mouse being cornered by a bunch of rats you do what you must to survive. If investigations by the RCMP had turned up evidence of obstruction of justice by Trudeau and his team, then anything Jody might have said could have implicated her and so she was careful in her duly recorded chat with Wernick to maintain her integrity.

Throughout the affair, Trudeau had maintained that his only objective was to protect Canadian jobs and he stayed with that line over and over again. During the Parliamentary committee review of this scandal Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party, came out categorically stating that her office’s research showed that no jobs were at risk because SNCL had billions worth of government contracts already approved and thus any conviction would not have affected jobs at all. Ironically the media did not pick up on that which I found strange. Additionally, I happened to catch an interview on BNN with SNCL’s CEO, Neil Bruce, and when asked he confirmed that indeed no jobs were at risk. Shortly after that interview, he was terminated by the SNCL board and again the media hardly picked up on that. It would seem that CEOs of liberal-donor corporations must never expose a Liberal PM if they value their job.

It’s timely that Jody Wilson-Raybould’s censorious revelations have given Canadians a truthful accounting of the manipulative skulduggery of Justin Trudeau’s inner circle throughout this affair and blown away the benignity of Trudeau’s stance. Her travails through all of this should be taken to heart by all of us. Realpolitik works in strange ways, sometimes people pay attention, sometimes they don’t. If nothing else this will bring to fruition in no uncertain terms the old adage that “hell hath no fury like a woman’s scorn”. It smells funereal; could it be the final nail in Trudeau’s coffin, we’ll see?

Ron P. Alton