Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Senior Member RangeBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    46,983

    Senator David Richards (Non-Affiliated, New Brunswick) speech

    December 11, 2018
    re Bill C-71, An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms.

    Hon. David Richards: Honourable senators, Iím going to speak on Bill C-71 and how it affected me. Itís a personal observation about this bill and what the previous possession acquisition cards did to the people I know and love. I donít know who else in this chamber has their possession acquisition card on them. I have mine in my wallet and I know what it took to get it.

    After hunting for 40 years, I was told I must take a course because the world we lived in was no longer safe. Others on my river were told the same thing, men and women who lived in rural New Brunswick. So for weeks we were told much of what we already knew and were shown how to do what we had always done; carry a rifle, load a shotgun, take a rifle apart and reassemble it.

    One gentleman who sat beside me was terribly nervous when it came to writing the exam because, though he had been a guide in the woods of New Brunswick for 50 years, he had never learned to read or write.

    That is, those who made the laws and arranged the test would never have lasted in the woods a day as that gentleman did, but for the hollow display of security, this test was given him.

    A friend of mine and I asked the instructors if this gentleman could take an oral test instead of a written one to save him from the humiliation, and they agreed. His rifles were part of his livelihood and he wouldnít have even heard of gangbangers or thugs in Toronto.

    Now when I go to the Canadian Tire to pick up my 180 grain 303 shells, Iím not allowed to touch them or handle them. I have to wait around for up to 30 minutes to ask a youngster to do it. Sometimes on occasion the youngster does not know what 180 grain 303 shells are and I have to point them out, and he picks them up after reaching for the .30-30 shells or the 308 shells or at times shotgun shells.

    After this I follow him like a schoolboy to the counter where a young lady, the same age as that young gentleman, rings them in, and after I show my possession acquisition card, hands them to me.

    Of the 17 people I took the acquisition possession course with, none ever committed a crime, neither before nor after the test. Not all were men, and the women committed no crimes either. But crimes were committed during that time and before and after by people who would never have taken this test or bothered to honour it if they ever did.

    My son asked me to go hunting a few years ago, and unfortunately the possession acquisition card I had in my wallet had expired. You see, like most other people, I got busy and forgot that it had to be renewed. ďOh,Ē I said to John, ďI will simply apply for another.Ē

    I discovered it would take 45 days to renew, so I would receive it after hunting season was over. They had all the information they would ever need on me on file. I had never committed a crime, but my entire hunting year was ruined by people who might never know that one hunts moose or deer during the rut.

    This utter bureaucratic mendacity is just one more way to target those who donít need to be targeted, for some have come to believe that guns are bad even in the hands of good and decent people.

    For the most part it profiles and corrals rural men, and I have long known rural men are the easiest targets to take to task in any spectacle against common sense. My rural friends are the ones monitored and catalogued if they use weapons, travel with guns or go to work. Some want to claim them a danger before they ever get to the oil field. It is a profiling which, if done with any other group, would shame this chamber and rile the face of the nation.

    It is, of course, stated that this is a law for everyone and no one should mind it, that it does not hurt, but in a way, none of this is true. It is only the law-abiding who abide by it, who have given so much information to authorities they do not know because they are loyal. They believe in and love a country that time and again has betrayed them, has set them up for a fall and has ignored them with a dismissive sniff.

    The law-abiding who will be beset by this are most often rural men and women who have grown up with rifles and dutifully follow the law. Most of the people who use guns to destroy lives donít much mind this law because they donít take the test.

    This law is in fact a solution looking for a problem. The problem that exists cannot and will not be solved by this solution. I respect those who support this bill, Senator Cormier and Senator Gold, but I do not agree. It creates unnecessary time and money and a false sense of justice and security to placate the urban and urbane.

    Yes, I know guns kill, but it is the human heart that commands it, and no law or opinion has yet had a cure for that.

    Most of the major gun crimes are done with restricted, unregistered weapons by those who donít know what a possession acquisition card looks like, in cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal. It is almost as if, since car accidents were happening along the 401, the government in all their wisdom decided to stop it by revoking the licences of drivers in Antigonish, Nova Scotia, and Chelmsford, New Brunswick.

    I know the police have a harsh and at times terrible job. Seven members of my extended family are police officers. My sister is a judge and my brother is a Crown prosecutor, but nine of the 11 murder victims I know were murdered by other means.

    I also know that having guns in the house saved lives during the 1980s when a serial killer was on the loose in my hometown. He never entered a house where young men lived and were able to protect their families. He picked on the defenceless and the elderly. A murderer will always find the means to murder. They always have.

    So I am writing this for some of the victims I know, who have haunted me through the years and whose murders seem to be forgotten in this debate: little 14-year-old Tara Prokosh, the two Daughney sisters, Mr. Glendenning, elderly Father Smith, elderly Mrs. Flam, the victim of Mr. Cunningham, the mother and daughter victims of Mr. Black. These were victims bludgeoned and knifed. But most of all, they were murdered by those who failed themselves and others by losing the very core of their humanity.

    This law, no matter how much it consoles, does not even come close to addressing that.


    Hon. Marc Gold (ISG. Marc Gold was appointed to the Senate of Canada on November 25, 2016): Thank you, senator, for your speech and for the moving tribute to those who have lost their lives. I want to ask you about some statistics. Were you aware that this past year, in 2017, in New Brunswick, 41 per cent of police-reported firearm-related violent crime involved a rifle or a shotgun? Thatís more than 10 per cent above the rate of violent crime by handguns. Thatís in New Brunswick. This 41 per cent rate involving rifles or shotguns is the highest on record for Statistics Canada, which has been collecting this data since 2009.

    My question is this: Would you not agree that better background checks could help reduce the incidence of violent crime in New Brunswick and elsewhere by the use of rifles and shotguns?


    Senator Richards: No, I donít agree. I think a person who is going to commit a violent crime with a rifle will always find a way to get one. If a person is going to, as they say at times, run amok, a background check before that happens isnít going to solve the problem.

    As far as statistics are concerned, I agree mostly with Mark Twain on this. You know what Mark Twain said about statistics: Thereís lies, damned lies, and statistics. I kind of agree with that. I always have. The arc goes from year to year, and one year doesnít signify the whole arc.

    I actually think that owning a gun in a house in rural New Brunswick is a good thing. I think itís definitely an asset to the people who live there, and it was to me.

    Iíll give you a little example, if I may. Weíre surrounded by bears in the summer. Not like in Toronto, although I know there was one here in Ottawa. When I come home at night, I shine the spotlight around to make sure there are no bears because I donít want the kids stumbling into them. There was a little bear that got out on the highway and got hit by a truck that left. The reason he left, it wasnít because he was callous. He was frightened the mother was around. He didnít want to get out with the mother there. She would maul him to death.

    This Acadian guy was coming from downriver, and we went out and got the bear up on the side of the road. We knew it was in pretty bad shape. Now, I had a rifle 10 minutes away, but I couldnít go get it because I wasnít allowed to use it. So we had to wait for an hour with that bear suffering and all the wonderful tourists coming to take pictures of it because they had never seen a bear before, before Forestry finally got there and were able to take that bear away and put it out of its misery. To me, that is absolutely imbecilic. Thatís what has happened to our gun laws in this country.

    Iím glad I have my guns at home. They are in a case. The bullets are in the opposite room. I feel very safe that no one is going to touch them, and I use them every year.

    -- https://sencanada.ca/en/content/sen/...018-12-11-e#81

  2. The Following 22 Users Like This Post By RangeBob

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked

    3MTA3 (12-15-2018), awndray (12-15-2018), BgDM (12-17-2018), chuckbuster (12-16-2018), CLW .45 (12-15-2018), Doug_M (12-15-2018), ESnel (12-18-2018), firemachine69 (12-17-2018), Gunexpert007 (12-15-2018), hawk-i (12-15-2018), joe6167 (12-15-2018), kennymo (12-15-2018), kswan (12-15-2018), lone-wolf (12-15-2018), Neil Burke (12-16-2018), quest4justice (12-15-2018), R&R Rancher (12-17-2018), Relic49 (12-15-2018), Rory McCanuck (12-15-2018), Run 'n' Gun (12-17-2018), shootemup604 (12-18-2018), SIR VEYOR (12-15-2018)

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    1,187
    41% of firearms related violent crime involved a rifle or shotgun. 10% more than handguns. That would put handguns at ~36%?

    So 41+36%= all rifles, shotguns and handguns...

    23% of crime firearms are what exactly?

  4. #3
    Senior Member Doug_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    12,479
    Quote Originally Posted by Smc View Post
    23% of crime firearms are what exactly?
    BB guns, airsoft, replicas...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times [#uc# you CCP!]

  5. #4
    Senior Member 3MTA3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    45.635887,-78.367367
    Posts
    3,547
    Great speech
    "So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot.." - George Orwell
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."-William Pitt the younger
    FTrudeau

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    858
    Very well said.

    His problem is that he's using facts and logic. That trips up the Liberal senators quite badly, so they tend to revert to their "lies, damned lies, and statistics." It's a comfort zone thing.

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    2,594
    Good too see that there are a few worthy senators in the Senate. Sad to see that they are in the minority...

  8. #7
    Senior Member Jay.ec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    581
    Good speech indeed.

    Though a good question to reply with when the senator asked about the high rate of rifles and shotguns used would be: And of the total percent of all crimes period, what was the rates of all firearms in violent encounters? I mean saying 41% of police-reported firearm-related violent crime encounters sounds high... But if that's like 10% of all encounters then that number might be very low. Suppose violent crime is like 25% of all crime. But then 10% of that is firearm related. And then a further 41% of that is shotgun/rifles. And the end result could be a number like 12 instances.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •