doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Proposed Quebec gun legislation

The Quebec government introduced legislation today that calls for tougher controls on the use of firearms.

The proposed legislation, formally known as Bill 9, is going to be more commonly called "Anastasia's Law" after Anastasia De Sousa -- who was killed last September in a shooting rampage at Montreal's Dawson College.

"Gun control is not a provincial jurisdiction and this bill is a very clear example of how it is not," CTV Montreal's John Grant said Friday.

"They can control things like shooting clubs and ranges but they can't really control the people who own the weapons."

The legislation calls for the prohibition of all firearms in and around teaching institutions.

"It's now illegal or will be illegal in Quebec to have a firearm near a school, a daycare, a kindergarten a CEGEP or a university," said Grant. "It will be illegal to carry them on public transit, including a school bus... taxis are exempt."

There are also stricter rules for gun clubs trying to receive and maintain licences.

Clubs will have to log members in and out and notify police if a person looks like they could be a potential danger to themselves or others.

"We think this a move in the right direction," Coalition For Gun Control's Wendy Cukier told CTV Montreal. "We think it's a good first step and we're hoping that (Quebec Premier Jean) Charest will continue to press (Prime Minister Stephen) Harper to not dismantle the federal firearms legislation and we're hoping the resources will be there to allow the police to do their job."

Charest is scheduled to hold a news conference this afternoon to talk about the new legislation.

Meanwhile, ADQ Leader Mario Dumont was reportedly disappointed with the legislation, saying it was much less than what Charest had previously promised, said Grant.

The legislation most likely won't become law until fall at the earliest, said Grant.
With files from The Canadian Press

"They can control things like shooting clubs and ranges but they can't really control the people who own the weapons."

Controlling people - that is what GC is all about eh ?

Yeah: That's what we call a "gun free zone" down here. Virginia Tech is a sterling example of how effective that kind of legislation is when enacted. As usual; the only ones who pay any attention to gun laws are the law abiding citizens.
The safest place that I spend a lot of time at is the Scottsdale Gun Club because virtually everyones armed.
Jim

Jim, I don't think Virginians see the writing on the wall at all and the Demos are screaming for more gun control in stead of examining what would have been the case if the students had been allowed guns in their rooms as we all had when I was in college. David

I am not really in favor of having kids at college have guns in their dorm rooms. Dorm rooms are often entered by many people without any chance for proper storage of a firearm. Most dorms start out with basic beds, chest and chairs for furniture. Gun safes are not a normal item in the room. Proper storages is a major part of gun ownership in my book. Gone are the days of leaving gun in the rear window of your pickup truck when you go into town. Do that today and you will be short a few guns and have to replace a few windows.

Now if a person has a right to carry permit I can see that they might be allowed to keep their gun when on campus taking class. As the regulations read now off duty police officers might be breaking the law to carry. And if you will not let a cop carry then who might you trust to defend your life.

In fact I a getting real tired of business posting sign telling me that my right to carry permit is not valid on their property. Not like I can check the gun at the door. I just make it a point to not shop or spend money at their store unless I have no other choice.

If you're going to enact a law in response to a specific event then it would seem to me that you would want the law to have prevented the event if it had existed before the event occurred. A law that wouldn't have prevented the Dawson shooting stands no chance of preventing like shootings in the future.

Would this law have prevented the perpetrator from bringing his weapon onto school grounds at Dawson college? No.

Would placing heightened restrictions on gun clubs and shooting ranges prevented the perpetrator from gong off the deep end and shooting up Dawson college? No.

This is pointless legislation that will in no way prevent similar events in the future.

It's nice to know that the U.S. doesn't have a monopoly on stupid politicians wasting time on useless legislation.

NTaxi, politicians are driven by a pervasive unwarranted fear, here and there.

There was a change in Montreal policing, however, as a result of the murder of 14 female engineering students by another nutcase 10 years ago.

At Dawson there was no securing the area: they went straight in, guns blazing. No stopping traffic and hiding behind trees.

From the TV coverage and student videos, the cops also weren't soft with bellys hanging over their belts.

King,
I'm not sure what your point is. How the police react to a given incident doesn't have anything to do with the laws that prevent, or fail to prevent a criminal act. Incidentally, there was a mall shooting shortly after the Va Tech incident where the police reacted very much like you describe. As well they should. The Columbine High School shootings taught the lesson that you simply cannot sit and wait for all the information or backup you would like to have before acting. As I understand it entering the crisis site without delay is SOP for most law enforcement agencies who actually HAVE an SOP for this type of situation. The environment at Va Tech, and what looks to be the reaction by the folks in Quebec are both examples of the attitude "We're a gun-free zone so we won't have to worry about this sort of thing." Stupid at best and fatal at worst.

As for your thinly veiled insult to U.S. law enforcement I can only say that we who have frequented this board for any length of time are more than aware that everything North of the border is sweetness and light, and the greatest worry for Canadians are all of us obese drug-addicted gun-slinging Delta Force wannabes to your South. You needn't belabor the point.

King,
You think the politicians are driven by fear? The reality is politicians drive the voters USING FEAR.

FUD is the marketing acronym for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. It's as old as the hills and works well on the weak of mind.

What the pushers of gun control fail to answer is if these proposals had been in place before the shooting at Dawson it would have stopped the murderer or any other criminal how?????????????



Talk about your Freudian slip! They want all these gun control laws on the supposed pretense that it will keep people safe, and then admit it will do nothing because you can not control criminals who misuse them. However, they'll gladly control and disarm the innocent people who will be their victims.

There's nothing sweetness and light about Canada, believe me. We're burdened with the same bloody nonsense as elsewhere. As for big-belly police, I mentioned them because the Montreal guys appeared to be an exception. The big-belly is stock-in-trade for the TV and movie business, eh? And close to my own observations regardless of police professional competence. The authority of the law is diminished when its practitioners hobble and waddle in their jobs. If I were mayor I'd say shape up or ship out.

First step! And, therein is the real message from these folks!

King, I think you should run! Mayor King. David

I was told as a 15-year-old cub that politics is a punk's game, David. And discovered in a lifetime of journalism and public affairs that it's true. I don't denigrate the institutions nor discourage those who want to enter and change things for the better. Those who think badly of their country and institutions do not for long remain citizens of great nations.

But generally politics is who is supping at the trough of privilege and looking after friends until the whole system is debased. What's relevant to you and me never is discussed without a tsunami of spin. I've been asked to run provincially and federally many times and my answer is No. I'd rather contribute to the little region I love than try to please everybody as a politician.

King, I understand you. But in the game of poltics there is the "good, that which we like" and "the bad" My feeling is that if we can only keep the game from getting too unballanced we will survive as a nation. Ambition and hubris work against the good side in the search for power and recognition. It is a real life drama with real life consequences which make us all have to play in some way. Your choise is an admirable one and it is not much different from the one I've made. I am probably more reclusive than you, but I do involve myself in the affairs of our community. We need luck to succeed so here's to you sir, may you enjoy all good luck. (got your guns back!)
David

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

Thank you, David. We're on the same wave-length, good or bad!

They never seem to notice that there has never been any kind of shooting rampage at a gun club.

Virginian, That's good! It all about the balance of power and for us the right to bear arms is about the power to defend ourselves.

In reference to Virginia Tech, all they want to talk about is how easy it was for the killer to get the guns.

The real issue is why was someone who was documented as mentally ill, allowed to attend school and live in the dorm!

Would people feel better if he had just pushed them out of a window?

Why would a class of some 30 students cower on the floor while a lone gunman walked among them shooting whom he would. They could have easily overwhelmed him. Yes, they would have taken a few hits most likely, but more likely injury than death. How does one simply lie on the floor and hope he will shoot someone else? We seem to have learned that hijackers of airliners are to be dealt with by the passengers. Why do we not teach students to deal with an attack on their classrooms?

Rocketman:

It's a combination of fear, and the "don't get involved" culture that we live in. It is easy to say what you will do in a given situation, and quite another to react to same. I'm quite sure that those students were gripped with fear. Look at the one's who did react. One was a holocaust survivor who lived through unspeakable horrors, plus life behind the iron curtain. He gave his life because he had the courage to try to help others.

Young people today are taught to "work it out and or talk to each other". They are not trained in defending themselves against nut cases who are not interested in "working it out". Additionally, they do not want to get involved in other issues due to the law suit crazy society that we live in. Sad, but true.

You got it, Gunplumber. Perfectly. And not only young people defer or rationalize or subordinate their own and community best interests to suits. It's a general malaise whose symptoms are "It's not my business," "There's nothing we can do," "Why vote?"and "No one can take on city hall or Ottawa and win."