Open Carry in the Bush

[Gilroy]

WTF hunh

post 177

[greatwhite]

There was nothing illegal about it back then, in fact that is what they recommended rather then my put it on the luggage van and someone possibly steal it.

post 177

[topher]

Well we do still provide a Big Mac,fries and coffee in the overnight lock up before your arrival in court the next morning.LOL

Toronto police don't provide that any more.. you get an orange juice, and a hot pocket thing... also your no longer held the local station any more over night... now they deliver you to a station depending on location... 51 (parliament), 23(the one in rexdale). 43..
I know Newmarket gave you an egg mcmuffin and a coffee for breakfast.

[greatwhite]

IN Ontario they had a charge in collage we called it the drunk tank charge I believed it 53.53.

In NB if they picked you up walking and falling drunk they just picked you up for the night and free breakfast in the morning. No Charge.

Free in NS to but no breakfast.

Toronto police don't provide that any more.. you get an orange juice, and a hot pocket thing... also your no longer held the local station any more over night... now they deliver you to a station depending on location... 51 (parliament), 23(the one in rexdale). 43..
I know Newmarket gave you an egg mcmuffin and a coffee for breakfast.

[M_P]

I took the bus across town (0.10C) when I was a youngster and arrived at KMart. Bought myself a brand new shiny single shot Cooey, two boxes of shells and a gun case. Paid at the cash. Put the gun in the case and proceeded to the bus stop. Got on the bus for the ride home. Bus driver said to me. You get a new gun son? Me all proud said Yes sir!
Try that today.

HA

I've told this one before on this site but 1986, walked down to Week's Hardware at the corner of Mill and Dundas in Waterdown on my lunch break. 16 yrs old with my brand new FAC in my pocket. Bought a lakefield .22 semi and a box of .22 long rifle. Back to scholl and into the locker it went but not before a couple of teachers had to see it first. It rode home on the bus with me at the end of the day.
Today?...........
The 1st week of November was always mid-term exams. Somehow i always managed to do certain ones early. Those were the classes taught by the teachers that understood deer season was almost sacred.

[Gilroy]

There was nothing illegal about it back then, in fact that is what they recommended rather then my put it on the luggage van and someone possibly steal it.

I know I was just pulling your leg.

[mooboy76]

From
http://www.oodmag.com/community/show...-bear-defense/

I figured I'd reply to and link both threads to keep everything easy to find. The quotes are all from the above thread, but obviously relate to this discussion.

1. I don't see this as a "different goal". It involves firearms legislation, and amending same. Something which the NFA has already been lobbying, and has the legal chops to do so.

The NFA has lots on their plate already, plus this is not a new issue. People have been complaining and grumbling about ATC-3 inconsistencies and issues for years. Another firearms owner set up his own Wilderness handgun carry information campaign and website a couple of years ago, to bring awareness to the issue and try to get support, without much traction.

Yet, I have never read anything regarding ATC-3 and wilderness protection/carry out of the NFA offices. I don't know that it is even on their radar.

Someone has decided to take on this specific issue, outside of their regular employment, and is gaining momentum with support. At this point, it doesn't look like they need the NFA for what they are planning.

2. This "grassroots movement" you're referring to has no identifiable mandate. Other than a slick website where donations can be made, and some info on bear attacks, there isn't much substance there.

They have objectives; a bit vague, but I doubt they will lay out their strategy on the website.

OUR MISSION

http://www.wildernessprotection.ca/about-us/
To ensure that all outdoor enthusiasts across Canada are offered equal opportunity as citizens to protect their own and other human life during the occurrence of a dangerous animal encounter.

OUR OBJECTIVES

To collaborate with outdoor enthusiasts and organizations across Canada in order to create a unified, powerful and effective movement.

To advocate for the equal right for all Restricted Possession & Acquisition License holders to carry a legal registered holstered handgun on rural and Crown land where a dangerous animal encounter is possible.

To educate about prevention and avoidance strategies that pertain to dangerous animal encounters and the best way to survive an attack via all means possible including a handgun.

To lobby politicians and public officials encouraging them to care about and defend our goals. To remind them that our intrinsic rights in this regard are granted and clarified in the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms sections 7, 12 & 15.

To take action in a legal manner that works effectively towards policy or legislative change in order to reclaim our right to carry a legal registered handgun on rural and Crown land for wilderness protection of human life.

There is no identifiable board of directors, or any actual human names associated with this organization. It is particularly suspect that they haven't sustained any endorsement from an organization like the NFA ( which is free, just saying that we agree with this policy). Nor have they sustained any support or identifiable supporting organizations, other than a few websites and organizations listed. Even their Facebook feed has very little info.

The last I read, they were putting together the BoD, but I haven't seen an update on that. As for the NFA, or other like group, endorsement, I think that was covered previously. Even adding a 'stamp of approval' from a professional organization could taint the fact that this is an issue being raised by Joe Blow Canuck.

Can't find it on the website, but Joe Blow Canuck is Steve Boissoin in AB, working in modular home designs and sales.

The laywer handling this, and the firm holding the funds in trust, is Gerry Chipeur at Miller Thomson, LLP

http://www.millerthomson.com/en/our-...rald-d-chipeur

I've read indirectly that Ed Burlew supports this initiative (other forum post by his also-lawyer wife), but you are right that there does not yet appear to be a list of supporting organizations. Wilderness Rod & Tackle in Red Deer, Alberta, is the company that has donated the three rifle/scope packages so far.

3. There seems to be very little mentioned about this at all. In any reputable venue, save forums like this.

That's true, and it may be due the fact that this whole thing kicked off at the end of October of this year; the website is three weeks old - set up with the initial donations after the retainer, and the facebook group is only two months old.

Nothing wrong with being wary though.

It is for the aforementioned reasons why I think that this would be a "splitting the pie" approach to firearms in Canada. As stated, the NFA already advocates for all firearms owners, and if identified as a viable issue to take to task by its members, the NFA certainly has more going for it, other than a thought, and a website. Given the legal scope involved, persons donating to it have nothing to show for their money, except a vague promise that once they get $150K the ball will get rolling. This organization is also not registered for not for profit status ( I just checked).

The pie is already split, and it doesn't look like anybody is eating this piece. The NFA is not a panacea for firearms issues, they have their strengths and are playing to them right now. The NFA also seems to be on the outs with the some key politicians, and their message might be muted because of that.

Hopefully the updates are forthcoming soon for the Canadian Wilderness Protection Initiative, so that people can have that transparency and reassurance that is currently lacking.

What do they think they can do with a lawyer?

If you want to open up wilderness carry, you have to change the law. Challenging the law on the basis of your S. 7 right to security of the person is a non-starter. The courts have ruled on numerous similar arguments, always with the same result. Regulating firearms does not violate your S. 7 rights.

Honestly, I don't know what their strategy is. Other than it has now entered phase two, with an introduction-type letter campaign. I don't like that the letter campaign includes a ringing endorsement of C-42, but amendments at committee are still an option, as are regulations of the Act. If C-42 actually ascends, then there are always options for further amendments to the Firearms Act in a later Parliamentary session.
First Letter Campaign
http://www.wildernessprotection.ca/be-heard/


The lawyer's accolades seem to suggest that he is professional, so I don't think he would take this on if he thought it was a damp squib:

http://www.millerthomson.com/en/our-...rald-d-chipeur

• Bachelor of Laws (1984) and Master of Laws (1990) from University of Alberta Law School
• Past Chair and Co-chair for a number of Canadian Bar Association committees, including the national Constitutional and Human Rights Law Section and the Canada for Tomorrow Committee of the Alberta Branch of the Canadian Bar Association
• Member, Federal Judicial Advisory Committee for Alberta, 2006-2008
• Served as an adjunct professor at Canadian University College, 1993-1997
• Appointed Queen’s Counsel, 2006
• Awarded Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal in 2012 for public service to Canada
• The Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory, Litigation - Public, 2014

Like I wrote above, it is good to be wary, but I think it would be a good thing if this got initiative got some legs.

I have not donated yet, but will after my second January pay.

[Bluebulldog]

Mooboy.

Very good post.

It wil be interesting to see if it develops.

As you pointed out though, the objectives are a bit vague, and not listing persons associated is a huge put off. Particularly since they could very well have listed what you did on their website to their benefit. The whole initiative seems a bit haphazard, and without definite outcomes and set timelines ( I am a project manager), like I said, I'm not inclined to contribute funds.

As stated though, I think if this was identified as a hot-button issue with NFA membership ( and there are a lot of us), it would definitely be a ball that they could carry in the game further than someone just starting out. I regard the NFA as basically an NRA in its infancy...

[Pat32rf]

Gilroy- Was it Holman, or Hickeys son who was the gunsmith on Straughan above the old OPP Lakeshore garage? Real nice guy but kinda noisy in the garage when he was firings own into the water tank...
The gun vault where all the seized, turned in guns were kept was also on the same floor. Never seen so many old Cooeys and SMLEs in one spot. Even had a sled mount water cooled Browning in there one day....

[Gilroy]

Dont know about that one Pat.