Pages

Wednesday, April 04, 2012

Exploding Houses

That's the title.  It's the only reason I can posit for Natural Resources Canada to change the explosives act regulations regarding the storage of firearm ammunition.  After all, changing the regulations in such a drastic way could only be justified by serious problems in need of a fix, right?  So it must be all those exploding houses . . .

Gun owners decry 'monstrous' changes to ammunition rules

Hunters and shooters are up in arms about the federal government's proposed new explosives regulations, which they say will interfere with everything from big-game  hunting and ammunition storage, to re-enacting historic battles.

The changes require — for the first time in Canada — gun owners to lock away all ammunition.
......
The proposed regulations also seriously restrict the use of big-game rifles, since the regulations define "small-arms ammunition" as bullets no larger than .50 calibre. But in Canada, calibres larger than .50 — such as the .577 Snider and the .505 Gibbs rounds — are frequently used to hunt bears and other large or dangerous game.
Since these large bullets are not defined as small-arms ammunition in the proposed regulations, Arpin said, they will fall into a more general category of blasting explosives. As a result, shooters who use large calibres will have to acquire explosives licences — such as those needed for dynamite — to continue hunting with large-bore rifles.
It gets worse.  From CanadianGunNutz.com (account needed):

Shot Guns:
  • 12 gauge is bigger than .50 calibre.  Do I need a blasting license now for a shotgun?
  • Has anyone heard back about the shotgun slug issue? (Larger than 50 cal). Unless there's a special exception that might be a real issue. 
Ambiguous anti-theft regulation:
  • Even better - if you DO add one more lock, some cop could say 'not good enough, you should have a BETTER lock' and send you to jail. It does not give any clear indication as to what's required to comply with the law. What's "good enough" to prevent theft? Only a judge can say for sure and you'll pay good money to hear his thoughts on the matter if a cop charges you.
  • I remember someone saying that padlocks weren't good enough for firearms cabinet locks. I don't recall anything official on this topic.
  • The regs require you PREVENT theft. Good luck with that, as long as it is still POSSIBLE to steal your ammo, you are a criminal.
It encourages dangerous storage:
  • Lock your ammo in a sealed steel box? Can you say "pipe bomb" when the ammo cooks off inside if there is a fire?
What about transport, or use?
  • How will the new regulations impact a person going from home to the shooting range or out hunting? Will a special transportation system be required? The way the proposed regulations are drafted, I could be charged when going out turkey hunting with 10 shells in my pocket.
  • Wait 'til you get stopped in your truck and have a couple shotgun shells in the console or a loose .22 rolling around in the back seat somewhere....or have a few rounds from an earlier range/hunting outing in a jacket pocket.
Even the guy who wrote the rules isn't sure what constitutes safe storage:
  • But Arpin said the safe storage requirements will not be as complicated as Bernardo suspects. He said any locking container — even those which can be easily removed from a house — likely will satisfy the incoming safe storage requirements.  

These new regs are ambiguous, onerous, dangerous and deceitful.  It's time for our government to stop this constant harassment of gun owners.  Write your MP today and tell them to stop making paper criminals of law abiding gun owners. 

update:  It looks like shotgun shells are specifically designated small arms and not affected by this.  Thank god for small mercies...

 


No comments: