Danielle Smith's Firearm Policy

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Danielle Smith is the new leader of the upstart "Wildrose Alliance" provincial party in Alberta Canada. Ms Smith is more than just a pretty face. She is a very intelligent person.

Keep in mind Canada's firearm laws are pretty restrictive compared to the USA, but here is what Ms Smith thinks about possible gun law changes in Alberta:

Quote

Let’s Make It Happen – New Directions for Firearms Policy - Danielle Smith September 17, 2009

For over a decade, Danielle Smith has worked tirelessly as an advocate promoting everyone’s fundamental right to own and enjoy property, including legally acquired firearms. She believes no Albertan’s private property should be expropriated or devalued by government action, at any level, without demonstrable public benefit, a fair process, and fair and prompt compensation. Danielle also believes that everyone’s Charter right to life, liberty and security of the person includes our right to protect ourselves, our families, our homes, and our property as expressly affirmed in sections 34 to 41 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

As for the useless gun registry, Danielle had this to say in a Calgary Herald column in 2006: “The government has it backwards. We should not have a registry of individuals who are allowed to own guns; we should have a registry of those who are too dangerous to own guns”. She also believes that the federal Firearms Act (Bill C-68) should be replaced with a gun control regime that works, one that respects the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces, one that has the support of front-line police officers, and one which respects the rights of responsible firearm owners. Real gun control should target those who commit armed crime, not Alberta’s law-abiding hunters and sport shooters.
As leader of the Wildrose Alliance, Danielle would be a strong champion for every law-abiding person’s right to own and enjoy legally-acquired firearms, and for the heritage activities of hunting, sport shooting and collecting. To achieve this objective, Danielle would:

• Appoint an owner-friendly Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) who answers to us – not to Ottawa. The PC government chose to leave law-abiding gun owners at the mercy of the RCMP and federal government appointees. A Wildrose Alliance government under Danielle Smith would exercise this provincial right.

• Re-assert exclusive provincial jurisdiction for regulating the non-criminal use of firearms, as described in the Constitution. The PC government bungled this in 2000 by only challenging the constitutionality of the long-gun registry and not the handgun registry. A Wildrose Alliance government led by Danielle Smith would revisit the constitutional question on behalf of gun owners and all Albertans.

• Aggressively prosecute the illegal use of firearms by real criminals, while instructing a provincially-appointed CFO to use common sense and the considerable discretionary powers afforded by the Firearms Act to mitigate the RCMP’s enforcement of made-in-Ottawa paper crimes of licensing and registration.

• Entrench property rights protection in law that would provide the right to a fair hearing, the right to appeal confiscation orders and the right to fair and timely compensation when legally-owned firearms are confiscated from law-abiding gun owners due to an arbitrary change in federal regulations (i.e. changing semi-automatic hunting and sporting firearms to a prohibited category).

Finally if people out there are curious who this woman is and you have some free time, visit her website to read up on her various policies as well as listen to a few of her radio interviews. It is rather refreshing to have a fiscal conservative libertarian running for office after all these years.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

• Re-assert exclusive provincial jurisdiction for regulating the non-criminal use of firearms, as described in the Constitution. The PC government bungled this in 2000 by only challenging the constitutionality of the long-gun registry and not the handgun registry. A Wildrose Alliance government led by Danielle Smith would revisit the constitutional question on behalf of gun owners and all Albertans.

Complete and utter waste of time. The constitutional question has been answered. This amounts to very expensive posturing. If you read the constitution the provinces have exclusive jurisdiction over precious little.

[ryoder 1,590]

Sounds good!We'll trade you: Sarah Palin for Danielle Smith....PLEASE!
OK, OK, we'll even throw in Alaska.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Sounds good!We'll trade you: Sarah Palin for Danielle Smith....PLEASE!
OK, OK, we'll even throw in Alaska.

I am holding out for Alaska, Hawaii and Colorado ... but you can keep Palin.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Andy9o8 2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danielle_Smith_(politician)

Well, she's smart

Quote

Smith holds a B.A. in English and a B.A. in Economics from the University of Calgary. Her education in public policy began with a one-year internship with the Canadian think-tank, the Fraser Institute.
Smith later joined the Calgary Herald as a regular columnist and editorial board member—one of the youngest women ever to do so in a major Canadian market.

In September 2006, she co-hosted the Calgary Congress, a national assembly of citizens and economic and constitutional specialists to consider basic federal reforms for Canada.

And she's fairly moderate, principally a pragmatic libertarian (including being pro-choice):

Quote

Politically she has been described as "a moderate libertarian" and "a libertarian and social moderate." She identifies herself as a conservative but qualified that saying she was a "libertarian and pro-choice."

But, UH-OH!

Quote

Previously married to her college sweetheart, in 2006 Smith wed her second husband, David Moretta, a TV news executive.

"No matter how hot she is, somebody, somewhere, is sick of her shit."

[Andrewwhyte 1]

She is smart as well as media savvy, which is much different from our rural based premier.
She, and the party are touting themselves as libertarians. I am undecided as to whether that is an accurate description as there is some pandering to the religious right. It is to be expected in this market but still, it is concerning.
The party's position on oil and gas revenue seems to be one of utter capitulation. This concerns me a lot as the majors have run this province for too long. Compared to the deal Palin got for Alaska our current deal is not bad for Big Oil at all. The truth is Oil is pummeling the premier for the policy, pretending it is the reason for the downturn when $5.00 natural gas is the real reason.

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

Quote

Sounds good!We'll trade you: Sarah Palin for Danielle Smith....PLEASE!
OK, OK, we'll even throw in Alaska.

I am holding out for Alaska, Hawaii and Colorado ... but you can keep Palin.

If you want Alaska, you must take the bad with the good.
"Act now, and we will throw in a free Joe Lieberman!"

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

We don't need Palin, so I guess Alaska is off the books.

Let's see ... how about Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and Hawaii for Danielle Smith? Think about it Robert. You would then be one of us and we would be one of you and because of this we would end up keeping Ms Smith and in return you would be part of this new energy giant. Of course we would need to include portions of Saskatchewan (Like Alberta they have a lot of valuable natural resources) and possibly include much of rural BC. Haha you would be free from your clowns in Washington DC and we would be free from our fools in Ottawa.

PS: I only include Hawaii because it's a warm place to vacation at. Hawaii is optional.

Of course what does this have to do with Ms Smith's Firearms Policies? jaja

Here is one thing I really like that she has to say:

"Canada's gun registry is useless. The government has it backwards. We should not have a registry of individuals who are allowed to own guns; we should have a registry of those who are too dangerous to own guns”.

makes sense to me ...

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

"Canada's gun registry is useless. The government has it backwards. We should not have a registry of individuals who are allowed to own guns; we should have a registry of those who are too dangerous to own guns”.

Makes sense to you? It isn't even true.

I am allowed to own guns, but am not in the registry.

It's nothing more then a cheap talking point. Like the rest of the platform. They are pandering to public opinion in a province that is not doing as well as before.

I like her thoughts on many things, but the program is very weak and I am not sure they could actually deliver if in power. Time will tell.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

It is true that what is written above was not 100% accurate on how the actual laws work. The infamous gun registry is not a registry of who is allowed to own firearms. But the majority of the public do not know the actual laws, so here is a politician trying to play down to the lowest common denominator. I like Danielle Smith, I think she has some great views on the issues, but I also know that she is a politician (or at least she is trying to be one). But because I am contemplating becoming a firearms owner, I have researched the laws and I am still on the fence waiting to see what happens in the coming months both with the registry but also with my personal financial situation (ammo is not cheap).

Quote

I am allowed to own guns, but am not in the registry.

Do you have your PAL or RPAL? If yes then you are allowed to own firearms.

If no, then you must do the training first and then pass the appropriate exams before you are allowed to own firearms. So if what you say is true, you must have already done the training, passed your exams, completed the application form, completed any background checks the RCMP may have done on you and are now in possession a PAL and/or RPAL and you just have never bothered to purchase a firearm. Power to you if this is the case ...

I do not have a PAL/RPAL so currently I am not allowed to own firearms.

But the gun registry is still a joke. Criminals do not register their weapons.
Hopefully this is something we can agree on.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

So if what you say is true, you must have already done the training, passed your exams, completed the application form, completed any background checks the RCMP may have done on you and are now in possession a PAL and/or RPAL and you just have never bothered to purchase a firearm. Power to you if this is the case ...

This is still not accurate. The registry is not for all fire arms.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

This is still not accurate. The registry is not for all fire arms.

I am afraid you are incorrect.

Under the current laws, all firearms must be registered. Firearms fall under three categories "non-restricted", "restricted" and "prohibited" and their placement in these three categories often depends on the barrel length and/or whether they are automatic (all automatic firearms are prohibited in Canada). From the 22 caliber firearms on up, all hunting rifles, tactical rifles, shotguns and handguns fall under one of these three categories.

What the Federal Conservatives are proposing to change in the gun registry is doing away with the need to register "non-restricted" firearms (commonly referred to as long guns since their barrels are fairly long and they can not be concealed under clothing). People will still need to register their "restricted" firearms and.due to their size all handguns are to remain classified as "restricted".

Now if you are talking about BB guns or Air Rifles ...
well you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[CanuckInUSA 0]

There is an interesting video out there on YouTube (I can not access it right now) where a Sheriff from somewhere in the Western USA explains some of the tactics the anti-gun lobby groups use to scare the public on the big bad "Assault Rifles". I am sure all the regular DZ.COM gun folks know of this video and maybe they can post it if they like.

What is an Assault Rifle? It is basically a fully automatic military tactical weapon which uses a completely different firing action than your standard recreational semi-automatic rifle. Too prove his point in the video, this sheriff takes a normal semi-automatic hunting riffle (it's a normal looking hunting rifle that does not scare the public), he breaks it down and begins to reassemble it using some different cosmetic components to the rifle (things like stocks, magazine, bi-pods, scopes, etc, etc). Once finished, this previous rifle that looked like a hunting rifle all of a sudden looks like a military assault rifle. But it is not. It is all cosmetic. Functionally it is still the same semi-automatic hunting rifle.

So don't buy into everything you see as fact. I know if I ever do get my PAL and pick up a semi-automatic tactical rifle (no different than a hunting rifle), I will likely not want to show off the cosmetic looking 30 round magazine too much to non-gun people. These people might confuse this as a military assault rifle based on it's appearance where the laws here in Canada have pinned all magazines to carry only five rounds per magazine. In Canada you are breaking the law if your firearm is carrying more than five rounds at a time.

Firearms can be used to kill people. But it is not the firearm that is doing the killing. It is the human using the firearm. Criminals do not register their weapons, criminals do not follow the laws. Therefore the gun registry in Canada is a joke. Farmer Ted who uses his firearm to kill predators on his land is not the guy running around shooting drug dealing gang bangers in the major urban centers. But many of these politicians want the public to be scared. It allows the politicians to go above and beyond in their desire to have and maintain power.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[ryoder 1,590]

Omigod!

I just googled PAL/RPAL to see what the difference was, and found more than one site stating that the application requires you to name your romantic partners!

Hell, I didn't get questions that personal when I spent a whole afternoon being questioned by a Defense Dept official for a Secret Clearance!

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

We are pretty anal up here in Canuckistan.

Personally I think people would be much happier if the country split in two.

1) The leftists and marxists can go form their socialist utopian society where all corporations are outlawed and governments manage every aspect of your life. This is what the leftists and marxists want and they will never be happy until they get it.

2) People who want to live in a free market society can have the other half. There will be winners and losers as any capitalistic society produces. But at least people will still have their personal sovereignty and freedom from the state being in your bedroom.

But the leftists and marxist will never accept this. They want 100% control of everyone's lives hence the reason why you need to tell them who your lovers are when applying for a PAL/RPAL.

I still say parts of Western Canada and Western USA should break away to get away from the fools from Washington DC and Ottawa. haha

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[ryoder 1,590]

I've heard worse ideas, however the US doesn't really split politically East/West.
For example New Hampshire is probably the most politically independent-minded state in the Union, with Vermont not far behind.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

I've heard worse ideas, however the US doesn't really split politically East/West.
For example New Hampshire is probably the most politically independent-minded state in the Union, with Vermont not far behind.

Damn, so the Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and Hawaii deal is off? Hmmm ... okay you play hard ball Robert. We will take Palin, I am confident Danielle Smith could whip Sarah Palin in a muddle wrestling match any day. The hockey mom contest will have to wait though. To my knowledge Ms Smith has not produced any off spring yet.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over