Ontario vows to keep collecting data on gun buyers despite federal objections

[Colpy]

Ontario vows to keep collecting data on gun buyers despite federal objections

TORONTO — Ontario says it won’t create a provincial gun registry, but it will require stores to keep records of who buys guns, despite federal objections.

Community Safety Minister Madeleine Meilleur has written her federal counterpart, Vic Toews, to say Ontario will “comply fully” with the requirements of Bill C-19, which scrapped the federal gun registry.

But Meilleur says Ontario retailers will still be required to log names and address of anyone purchasing a gun as part of the permit process.

She says the Ontario Provincial Police chief firearms officer interprets section 58 of the Firearms Act as giving him the power to impose that requirement.

Meilleur says it’s up to Toews to change the Firearms Act if he wants Ontario retailers to stop collecting information on gun buyers.

Toews sent a letter sent Tuesday to all provincial chief firearms officers, saying the collection of point-of-sale data is no longer authorized under the Firearms Act.

He asked the RCMP to notify him “immediately” if they hear of chief firearms officers engaged in “unauthorized data collection.”

Quebec want its own gun registry and has mounted a legal challenge preventing the destruction of the federal long-gun registry records.

Ontario vows to keep collecting data on gun buyers despite federal objections
​

They need to pass provincial legislation then, without the bite of the criminal code, and they need to stop declaring what they will or will not do without any reason..............

I am entirely fed up with scum that think they rule by decree, without reference to the expressed will of the people through the institutions that exist for the sole purpose of expressing that will.

Of course they don't, if they are being recorded.

You don't understand how this registry thing works, do you?

It doesn't work at all......especially now that it doesn't EXIST!

A MAC-10 is a perfect hunting weapon, no?

Naw, limited range, too high a cyclic rate..........

Now an M16.........that IS a great coyote killer!

As an M14 would be a great deer rifle.

 

[mentalfloss]

So uh.. what's gonna happen now?

 

[TenPenny]

I am entirely fed up with scum that think they rule by decree, without reference to the expressed will of the people through the institutions that exist for the sole purpose of expressing that will.

It's not 'without reason', it's following the existing firearms laws.
If Mr Toews wants that changed, he should change that as well.

 

[Colpy]

It's not 'without reason', it's following the existing firearms laws.
If Mr Toews wants that changed, he should change that as well.

That is exactly the point.

Find me, chapter and verse, where there is legislation requiring vendors to keep records on long gun sales.

Good luck. It doesn't exist.

If it does, I will apologize.

 

[mentalfloss]

McGuinty rejects fed demand to stop keeping gun records | CTV Edmonton

This means war!!!!!!!!!*#$(*@$&@#23

 

[TenPenny]

That is exactly the point.

Find me, chapter and verse, where there is legislation requiring vendors to keep records on long gun sales.

Good luck. It doesn't exist.

If it does, I will apologize.

58. (1) A chief firearms officer who issues a licence, an authorization to carry or an authorization to transport may attach any reasonable condition to it that the chief firearms officer considers desirable in the particular circumstances and in the interests of the safety of the holder or any other person.

 

[Colpy]

58. (1) A chief firearms officer who issues a licence, an authorization to carry or an authorization to transport may attach any reasonable condition to it that the chief firearms officer considers desirable in the particular circumstances and in the interests of the safety of the holder or any other person.

First of all, the CFO exists at the pleasure and at the direction of the Federal gov't........and at their direction.

I would say there is some disagreement on the application of the section in question.....

Top Mountie orders provinces to halt ‘backdoor’ gun-registry efforts - The Globe and Mail

 

[Niflmir]

First of all, the CFO exists at the pleasure and at the direction of the Federal gov't........and at their direction.

I would say there is some disagreement on the application of the section in question.....

Top Mountie orders provinces to halt ‘backdoor’ gun-registry efforts - The Globe and Mail

Not sure I understand what you mean by at the pleasure of, since

“chief firearms officer” means

(a) in respect of a province, the individual who is designated in writing as the chief firearms officer for the province by the provincial minister of that province,

It seems that the CFO exists at the pleasure and direction of the province.

 

[Colpy]

Not sure I understand what you mean by at the pleasure of, since



It seems that the CFO exists at the pleasure and direction of the province.

Actually, you are completely correct, my post was misleading.

The CFO is appointed, and does sit at the pleasure of the provincial government.

BUT the law he is empowered to enforce is Federal, and minor civil servants should NOT be able to interpret laws in the face of the instructions of their federal masters....this is Criminal Code law, and there is no room for the fevered fantasies of pissant bureaucrats in the enforcement of same.

Said best by one Joey Blogger, in the G&M comments section:

"Several provinces went to court to stop the long gun registry from being set up. Their argument was that guns were personal property and as such, fell completely within the constitutional jurisdiction of the provinces. The feds argued that the matter is one of public safety under the Federal FIreArms Act as well as the Federal Criminal Code. The Supreme Court was very clear in their decision that the feds argument won the day thereby clearing the way for the long gun registry.

Fully and clearly in Federal jurisdiction.

But in the decision that allowed for its birth, were also the seeds for its death because it is entirely within the federal authority. That is what the federal government has done.

The provinces are free to set up their own PERSONAL PROPERTY REGISTRY, but that does not carry with it threats of criminal record (as that is in federal jurisdiction) and it does not fall under the Firearms Act which is also federal.

But the problem for the provinces is that they DO NOT HAVE ENABLING PROVINCIAL LEGISLATION ENACTED and CANNOT USE the federal statutes.

That is also why the information in the long gun registry cannot be provided to the provinces. It was gathered under the force and penalties of the FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE. That was its purpose. It was not gathered under personal property registry legislation which would NOT carry criminal charges for non-registration.

Ontario is operating completely outside the law....which is just another reason why long gun owners do not trust loopy politicians."

 

[TenPenny]

So a provincial official should not be allowed to use his discretion in applying a law that tells him to use his discretion in applying the law.

 

[Goober]

Actually, you are completely correct, my post was misleading.

The CFO is appointed, and does sit at the pleasure of the provincial government.

BUT the law he is empowered to enforce is Federal, and minor civil servants should NOT be able to interpret laws in the face of the instructions of their federal masters....this is Criminal Code law, and there is no room for the fevered fantasies of pissant bureaucrats in the enforcement of same.

Said best by one Joey Blogger, in the G&M comments section:

"Several provinces went to court to stop the long gun registry from being set up. Their argument was that guns were personal property and as such, fell completely within the constitutional jurisdiction of the provinces. The feds argued that the matter is one of public safety under the Federal FIreArms Act as well as the Federal Criminal Code. The Supreme Court was very clear in their decision that the feds argument won the day thereby clearing the way for the long gun registry.

Fully and clearly in Federal jurisdiction.

But in the decision that allowed for its birth, were also the seeds for its death because it is entirely within the federal authority. That is what the federal government has done.

The provinces are free to set up their own PERSONAL PROPERTY REGISTRY, but that does not carry with it threats of criminal record (as that is in federal jurisdiction) and it does not fall under the Firearms Act which is also federal.

But the problem for the provinces is that they DO NOT HAVE ENABLING PROVINCIAL LEGISLATION ENACTED and CANNOT USE the federal statutes.

That is also why the information in the long gun registry cannot be provided to the provinces. It was gathered under the force and penalties of the FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE. That was its purpose. It was not gathered under personal property registry legislation which would NOT carry criminal charges for non-registration.

Ontario is operating completely outside the law....which is just another reason why long gun owners do not trust loopy politicians."

Appeares the Cons did not get it right again.

 

[Colpy]

So a provincial official should not be allowed to use his discretion in applying a law that tells him to use his discretion in applying the law.

Exactly.

He can not use his discretion to act outside the law.

That seems obvious.

By your definition, it would be perfectly legitimate for a province to simply stop licensing vendors or individuals........and that is obviously unacceptable.

The CFOs are enforcing a federal law, and are to be instructed by the federal bureaucracy on how that law is to be handled. The "at their discretion" is to allow some flexibility for local conditions........not to allow them to undermine the purpose of federal legislation.

 

[Goober]

Exactly.

He can not use his discretion to act outside the law.

That seems obvious.

By your definition, it would be perfectly legitimate for a province to simply stop licensing vendors or individuals........and that is obviously unacceptable.

The CFOs are enforcing a federal law, and are to be instructed by the federal bureaucracy on how that law is to be handled. The "at their discretion" is to allow some flexibility for local conditions........not to allow them to undermine the purpose of federal legislation.

Does not the law state at the discretion of the CFO - The same as it was from the 70's?

 

[Colpy]

McGuinty rejects fed demand to stop keeping gun records | CTV Edmonton

This means war!!!!!!!!!*#$(*@$&@#23

And we've got all the guns....

Does not the law state at the discretion of the CFO - The same as it was from the 70's?

In the late 1970s, under the Federal law, venders (and anyone private citizen) that sold a firearm was required to record sales and FAC numbers and to maintain them for 5 years....I was selling guns at the time.

When the registry came to be, under the Firearms Act, that requirement was dropped, as it was redundant.

It was never revived.

The provincial requirement is simply silly, as it flies in the face of Federal intention, and does not include private citizens.

Example: Jack (with license) buys a gun from a vendor and is duly recorded.

Jack goes to parking lot, sells said gun to Charlie illegally, as Charlie has no license.

Six months later, gun is found at crime scene (ridiculous, who leaves their gun behind)

Police trace to vendor, and to Jack.

Jack says. "Sold it. Guy had a license. Don't remember anything else"

End of trail.

Waste of time.

Aren't we tired of useless, pointless rules piled on us by meglomaniacal bureaucrats????

 

[Cabbagesandking]

I would not be so sure that Ontario does not have grounds, as has Quebec. From the beginning, this has been presented by the CPC as a Property and Civil Rights question. They have denied that Public Safety has any bearing: claiming, falsely, that there are no risks and no downside to eliminating the Registry.

Those are within Provincial jurisdiction.

 

[Niflmir]

Actually, you are completely correct, my post was misleading.

The CFO is appointed, and does sit at the pleasure of the provincial government.

BUT the law he is empowered to enforce is Federal, and minor civil servants should NOT be able to interpret laws in the face of the instructions of their federal masters....this is Criminal Code law, and there is no room for the fevered fantasies of pissant bureaucrats in the enforcement of same.

Said best by one Joey Blogger, in the G&M comments section:

"Several provinces went to court to stop the long gun registry from being set up. Their argument was that guns were personal property and as such, fell completely within the constitutional jurisdiction of the provinces. The feds argued that the matter is one of public safety under the Federal FIreArms Act as well as the Federal Criminal Code. The Supreme Court was very clear in their decision that the feds argument won the day thereby clearing the way for the long gun registry.

Fully and clearly in Federal jurisdiction.

But in the decision that allowed for its birth, were also the seeds for its death because it is entirely within the federal authority. That is what the federal government has done.

The provinces are free to set up their own PERSONAL PROPERTY REGISTRY, but that does not carry with it threats of criminal record (as that is in federal jurisdiction) and it does not fall under the Firearms Act which is also federal.

But the problem for the provinces is that they DO NOT HAVE ENABLING PROVINCIAL LEGISLATION ENACTED and CANNOT USE the federal statutes.

That is also why the information in the long gun registry cannot be provided to the provinces. It was gathered under the force and penalties of the FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE. That was its purpose. It was not gathered under personal property registry legislation which would NOT carry criminal charges for non-registration.

Ontario is operating completely outside the law....which is just another reason why long gun owners do not trust loopy politicians."

Its fine. I just wanted to be sure that this is what you meant.

Exactly.

He can not use his discretion to act outside the law.

That seems obvious.

By your definition, it would be perfectly legitimate for a province to simply stop licensing vendors or individuals........and that is obviously unacceptable.

The CFOs are enforcing a federal law, and are to be instructed by the federal bureaucracy on how that law is to be handled. The "at their discretion" is to allow some flexibility for local conditions........not to allow them to undermine the purpose of federal legislation.

Well, I don't know about that. Section 58 seems to allow the CFO to attach whatever reasonable strings the CFO desires when a license is issued. I don't see a section that states that the CFO must take orders from the Commissioner or a federal Minister (it could be there, I am no expert).

Given the court ruling you pointed out earlier, this is certainly the way it should be working but I think that Ontario may be acting lawfully within a loophole here. The provinces should need to use some local legislation to force gun sellers to do something like this. But from my point of view, it does look like the firearms act gives the discretion to subvert the national act of dismantling the gun registry.

Likely I am either wrong in my interpretation and a court case will uncover this, or the Conservatives will move to fix it. Then Ontario will need to decide if it wants local legislation. I don't see nothing happening about this.

 

[DaSleeper]

The province might keep a record like they do when you buy ammunition, but citizens don't have to... according to the federal government, so given enough time with private trading and selling the provincial records will not mean much.....

Seems to me tis is just more...sour grapes from opposition parties...

 

[Niflmir]

The province might keep a record like they do when you buy ammunition, but citizens don't have to... according to the federal government, so given enough time with private trading and selling the provincial records will not mean much.....

Seems to me tis is just more...sour grapes from opposition parties...

You really don't understand this concept of sour grapes do you? I think you mean to say sore loser, but you are saying something much different which doesn't make any sense in this case.

Also, the provincial government is hardly the opposition of the federal government. Plus, Ontario elected nearly half of the Conservatives, so even if they could be construed as the federal government, they are hardly the opposition.

Other than just being partisan for the sake of partisanship, what are you on about?

 

[L Gilbert]

Ontario vows to keep collecting data on gun buyers despite federal objections

TORONTO — Ontario says it won’t create a provincial gun registry, but it will require stores to keep records of who buys guns, despite federal objections.

Community Safety Minister Madeleine Meilleur has written her federal counterpart, Vic Toews, to say Ontario will “comply fully” with the requirements of Bill C-19, which scrapped the federal gun registry.

But Meilleur says Ontario retailers will still be required to log names and address of anyone purchasing a gun as part of the permit process.

She says the Ontario Provincial Police chief firearms officer interprets section 58 of the Firearms Act as giving him the power to impose that requirement.

Meilleur says it’s up to Toews to change the Firearms Act if he wants Ontario retailers to stop collecting information on gun buyers.

Toews sent a letter sent Tuesday to all provincial chief firearms officers, saying the collection of point-of-sale data is no longer authorized under the Firearms Act.

He asked the RCMP to notify him “immediately” if they hear of chief firearms officers engaged in “unauthorized data collection.”

Quebec want its own gun registry and has mounted a legal challenge preventing the destruction of the federal long-gun registry records.

Ontario vows to keep collecting data on gun buyers despite federal objections​

lol So what? People can't buy cars, homes, dishwashers, etc. without submitting some info about themselves.

Gun registry works

........... badly.
There, I finished your sentence for you.