CUFOA

Canadian Unlicensed Firearms Owners Association
Association canadienne des propriétaires d’armes sans permis

Licensing:
A Cancer of the Soul

homebutton contacts button articlesbutton photos linksbutton
 

June 28, 2011

891 Gleneagles Dr
Kamloops, BC
V2E 1K2

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6

Dear Mr Harper

Re: Bill C-68 Firearms Act

Your promise to repeal Bill C-68, The Firearms Act was very good news and I have no doubt that you will keep that promise. I do however, have some concerns about future firearms control legislation, based on some statements made by you or members of your party.

From the CPC Montreal Convention, 19 March 2004 (sic 2005). "strict monitoring of high-risk individuals". And, "a certification screening system for all those wishing to acquire firearms legally". The quotes may not be exact.

My primary objection to the current firearms act involved two questions in the application that had to be answered and those questions could fall under one of the proposed conditions stated above:

  1. Question 16. e) During the past five (5) years, have you threatened or attempted suicide, or have you suffered from or been diagnosed or treated by a medical practitioner for: depression; alcohol, drug or substance abuse; behavioural problems; or emotional problems?
  2. Question 16. f) During the past two (2) years, have you experienced a divorce, a separation, a breakdown of a significant relationship, job loss or bankruptcy?
  3. 17. a) Do you currently have a spouse, common-law or other conjugal partner?
  4. 17. b) Within the last two (2) years have you lived in a conjugal relationship other than with the person you may have referred to in question 17 a) above?
  5. 18. a) Last name of current spouse, common-law or other conjugal partner b)First name. c)Middle name. d) date of birth If the signature of your current spouse, common-law or other conjugal partner is not provided, the Chief Firearms Officer has a duty to notify them of your application.
  6. 19. Provide information about your former conjugal partners. This includes any person, other than the person named in Box 18, with whom you have lived in a conjugal relationship within the last two (2) years. (includes address if known and signature space). "If the signature of your former spouse, common-law or other conjugal partner is not provided, the Chief Firearms Officer has a duty to notify them of your application.

The above questions are of the most extreme sensitivity and you are going to put it in a computer that can be accessed by God knows how many people authorized or unauthorized, some of whom may know the applicant and/or conjugal partner.

Medical information. For known criminals you would need a warrant to obtain this information, for me, an honest law abiding citizen you just need to withhold my right to own a firearm.

Conjugal relationships. This is extremely dangerous information to divulge, it has the potential for: a) causing several divorces; b) blackmail; c) causing a domestic dispute possibly leading to the use of that firearm, exactly the situation that the questions are supposedly designed to avoid; and d) you are asking me to provide this most sensitive information about one or more third parties. Actually I'm the person that would need protection so please have my wife and conjugal partners register and license their kitchen knives and baseball bat, than "permission denied". (Since my wife of 43 years and who knows who else will read this I should make it clear that I can answer the conjugal relationship questions in the negative, but the above scenario is all too real in many cases.

I know that the Firearms Act and the questions are intended to be preventive measures, but freedom, individual rights and democracy comes with a price, I know because I served 35 years in the Canadian Army, but it is not only the military and police forces that have to pay the price, citizens must also be willing to accept some risk to preserve those rights and freedoms. Besides, those questions will not prevent anything, the guilty will lie and you haven't got the resources to uncover the lie.

The incredible ignorance and mind-set of so many people with the power to impose this legislation, Bill C-68 and the questions in the application is more frightening than all the firearms in our great country, its one giant step towards creating a police state. I know that that was the Liberal party and that you want to correct those errors. Just one hint, get input from as many people as you can, even laid back citizens like me have unique situations; mine in brief, is that I take my family deep into the wilderness; my rifle saved my life once; no-on is going to take it away from me; and, I will not answer those questions in the application or any similar ones.

[signed]

Marvin Dyck, m2dyck@shaw.ca, 250-372-3342