Posts Tagged ‘canada’

Canada’s NFA Opposes UN ATT

Tuesday, April 2nd, 2013

Original Story Via:  NFA.CA

The UN General Assembly passed a flawed Arms Trade Treaty this morning in New York City with 3 no votes, 23 abstaining, and 154 voting in favour.  According to NFA President Sheldon Clare, “The Arms Trade Treaty will set a dangerous precedent as a bad international agreement that will do nothing to prevent the misuse of major weapons systems and much to limit access of firearms and ammunition to legitimate users.” He continued, “As we see it, this ATT will harm legitimate users. We expect that it will increase the cost of ammunition, firearms, parts, and accessories for normal civilian users.” Canada’s National Firearms Association has gone on record as opposing the inclusion of civilian small arms and light weapons in the Arms Trade Treaty. “Canada will now need to decide whether or not to ratify this treaty, and we strongly suggest that our government not ratify it.”

Clare pointed to several problems with the draft treaty, part of which calls on states to “…establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list, in order to implement the provisions of this Treaty.  The treaty is vague in many sections and in our view this vagueness opens doorways for many additional regulations and restrictions to be introduced in a treaty that we expect would be ever-expanding.”

Clare said, “We see this vague phrasing as having the potential to create a national registry which would be all the more offensive as it would be made public.”  He continued, “Several articles are about “end user” documentation, and the NFA submits that the end user of small arms and ammunition cannot be known in the absence of a heavily regulated registration and licensing program, which we vigorously oppose. The peer-reviewed evidence shows that neither licensing nor registration prevents criminal use of firearms. Furthermore, the ATT ignores personal defence as a legitimate form of firearm use.”

“Another significant problem is that parts of the draft treaty open the door to widespread corruption as well as to potential costly demands for real and necessary assistance. Our members hope that Canada will push for fiscal responsibility at the UN to ensure that funding is better monitored and controlled. Improved financial controls would save more lives than this Arms Trade Treaty ever would,” Clare stated. “Though we are disappointed that Canada voted for the treaty, we are pleased that Canada did not sponsor the treaty during the vote, and we hope that Canada will not ratify the Arms Trade Treaty. The Canadian government stood strongly in favour of civilian firearms owners during the treaty process to obtain some helpful preamble language, but the treaty remains a bad deal.  The present domestic burdens on Canadian firearms owners are already excessive, and the effect of this treaty would be to add more onerous and costly requirements for firearms ownership, as well as build further disrespect for firearms law. This treaty does not have the support of a significant proportion of the firearms owning public, and it appears to be in direct conflict with the stated aims of the Government in regards to not having any new burdens for firearms owners.”

Canada’s National Firearms Association is this country’s largest advocacy organization promoting the rights and freedoms of all responsible firearm owners and users.

Canada: Conservatives defy UN gun controls

Monday, November 5th, 2012
Original Story Via:

By Mark Dunn, Senior National Reporter

Rifle enthusiasts celebrating the destruction of most long-gun registry files last week have more to cheer about after the government again deferred a plan gun-control advocates say would combat illegal arms trafficking.

Opponents argue the United Nations protocol signed by a previous Liberal government would drive up the cost of guns by as much as $200 apiece, killing jobs and creating more red tape in an already overregulated industry.

Proponents argue ignoring the framework is a step backwards to trace traffickers of guns to civil wars and Third World conflicts – some of which end up in the hands of local criminals.

The protocol – on hold until December 2013 – would require all imported guns to be marked with the name of the country and year of import. It’s at least the fourth time the government has punted the regulation since taking office in 2006.

QMI Agency learned of the latest postponement after obtaining a briefing note to Conservative MPs from Public Safety Minister Vic Toews dated Nov. 2.

Toews said he is listening to sports-gun owners, retailers, distributors and importers who say the cost to engrave importation markings on new firearms would come after the manufacturing process and be passed down to buyers.

“We have heard the concerns and will not be moving forward until consultations have occurred,” caucus was told.

The Canadian National Firearms Association (NFA) welcomed the delay.

“There was significant concern in from both firearms businesses and members of the firearms community as well as many MPs about the need to go forward with a regulatory scheme brought in by a previous government when that scheme would add significant cost to products and damage the economy of an already over-regulated business,” said NFA president Sheldon Clare.

A spokesperson for the Coalition For Gun Control wouldn’t comment, but on its website the anti-gun lobby suggests the government has no intention of ever complying.

“After eliminating registration and records of sales, Canada has now eliminated yet another tracing mechanism for firearms and appears to have given up completely complying with the UN Firearms Protocol and with providing police with effective ways to trace guns found in crime and fight illegal gun trafficking.”

CANADA: National gun-owner database lives on despite registry repeal, angering some

Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012
Original Story Via:  CTV News
By Bruce Cheadle, The Canadian Press
Published Monday, Oct. 22, 2012 2:40PM CST
Last Updated Monday, Oct. 22, 2012 5:28PM CST

OTTAWA — Seven months after the federal long gun registry was repealed in every province but Quebec, a small but vocal faction of gun owners is feeling deeply betrayed by the Conservative government.

A registry of gun owners — if not their specific weapons — remains in force under federal licensing provisions that were part of the same 1995 Liberal gun control bill so loathed by the gun lobby. It’s a reality to which some sport shooting enthusiasts are just waking up.

Lloyd, a retiree in Uxbridge, Ont., said he was shocked to find a licence renewal form in his mail this summer after celebrating the official April 6 end of the federal registry.

He’s written to a Conservative MP and a cabinet minister seeking an explanation, and so far is without a response.

“I’m not planning to renew it,” said Lloyd, who asked that his full name not be published because he’s about to become an unlicensed gun owner.

“As far as I’m concerned, it’s not the law right now…. I know I’m not alone.”

Lloyd is indeed not alone — so much so that he perhaps need not fear disclosing his full name.

A Saskatoon-based organization called the Canadian Unlicensed Firearms Owners Association has been taking the fight straight to Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, whose portfolio includes the RCMP and the Canada Firearms Centre.

“Your duplicity in dealing with firearms owners seems to know no bounds,” Edward Hudson, the unlicensed group’s secretary, thundered in the opening line of a May 9 letter to Toews.

The letter, copied to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, ended several hundred words later with demands for Toews’s resignation.

Announcing oneself as a law-breaker while demanding the ouster of the public safety minister requires a certain chutzpah — especially since Toews was clearly on record describing the reality of the gun registry’s repeal.

“First and foremost, all individuals will still be required to be licensed to possess a firearm,” Toews told the House of Commons last Oct. 26 as the repeal bill was debated.

“We are committed to ensuring that only responsible and qualified individuals own firearms.”

His office did not respond to an interview request.

RCMP spokesman Sgt. Greg Cox confirmed in an email that “everyone who possesses or acquires a firearm must still be licensed to do so, whether the firearm falls into the non-restricted, restricted or prohibited class.”

“To be clear, licences for individuals must be renewed every five years, which requires that applicants for a new or renewed firearms licence be screened for criminal records, as well as provide personal references,” wrote Cox.

That information is then stored in a searchable database that police can use to help determine if weapons may be on a premise — one of many arguments used by police groups and the gun-control lobby to advocate for keeping the weapons-specific registry in place.

Gun owners must have a licence to legally buy ammunition, said Cox, and the Criminal Code includes a mandatory three-year minimum sentence for the “unlawful purchase” of ammunition.

As for any anti-licence protest movement by gun owners — whether wilfully or in the mistaken belief that licences have been repealed — Cox said there’s no evidence to date.

Citing 2011 figures, the RCMP put licence renewals at over 90 per cent “so the vast majority of firearms owners understand the difference between their firearms licence, which is a plastic photo ID card, and a registration certificate,” for firearms, said Cox.

In fact, it may still be too early to see what impact the gun registry’s repeal has had on licensing.

The most recent RCMP numbers available for this year — as of June — show 1,889,650 licensed gun owners in Canada.

That’s down more than 13,000 from December 2011, but it does not necessarily indicate a trend. In June 2011, for instance, there were 12,400 fewer licensed gun owners than in June 2012.

Gun enthusiasts complain they continue to get mixed messages from a Conservative government they’ve long felt was their champion.

Last month, Toews greeted a Quebec court ruling to preserve the registry information in Quebec with a blanket denunciation: “Our Conservative government will continue to fight against any measures that needlessly target law-abiding hunters, farmers and sport shooters.”

And so gun lobby groups continue to push the Conservatives to fully gut the licensing provisions.

Earlier this month, Sheldon Clare, the president of the Edmonton-based Canada’s National Firearms Association, or NFA, wrote Toews to “strongly recommend the repeal of the requirement to hold a firearms licence merely to own one’s own property and that limiting of access be done to those specific individuals who have been convicted of violence.”

Coupled with the well-documented unhappiness of gun control advocates at the registry’s repeal, both sides of the rancorous gun debate appear to be deeply dismayed.

Into this atmosphere of suspicion and uncertainty, a federal government that has budgeted at least $64 million for government advertising this year has committed none of it towards informing Canadians about the current reality of gun legislation.

“The RCMP has no advertising budget for the changes brought about by the recent legislation; however the RCMP (Canadian Firearms Program) website and online fact sheets have been updated accordingly,” wrote Sgt. Cox.

College Says No to Nintendo Guns (Canada)

Tuesday, October 9th, 2012

Original Story Via:

A Canadian university has stopped a college game club from putting up posters that featured an image of a pistol. Except that the pistol in question wasn’t even real, but a Nintendo weapon from the 1980s.

A game club at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, decided to hold a “game-themed social event”, according to a local student newspaper. Naturally, because it was a gaming party, they drew up a poster with images of a Nintendo game controller and the Zapper, a gray-and-red electronic pistol that came with the 1985 Nintendo Entertainment System. But Saint Mary’s must have feared it was a call for armed insurrection; when the poster was submitted to the university for approval, the gamers were told to get rid of the gun, which they replaced with a graphic of a Nintendo Power Glove. Presumably because a toy pistol that pots virtual ducks sends a dangerous message, while punching out assorted lifeforms with a Power Glove does not.

I’m all for campus safety, including banning real firearms on campus. Even toy and replica weapons can be mistaken for real ones in some situations. But a crude drawing on a poster? Last week, a Maine political candidate was vilified by her opponents because she plays World of Warcraft. Now college game clubs can’t mention guns, because the mere sight of a video game weapon might induce crazoid gamers to disembowel their fellow students with plastic lightsabers. I’m sure the good citizens of Halifax will sleep better tonight, knowing that they’ve been saved from the Nintendo Apocalypse.

Canada’s NFA to UN: ‘Self-defense is a natural right’

Thursday, August 30th, 2012

Original Story Via:

Canada’s National Firearms Association was the only Canadian pro-firearms group represented during the non-governmental organization presentations at the Second Review Conference of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons.  (PoA)

According to NFA President Sheldon Clare, “It was important for the NFA to be present at this conference for four main reasons.  First, the PoA is alive and potentially dangerous – this was a well-attended conference and vigilance is critical.  Second, it was necessary for us to make sure that there was no attempt to make this the Arms Trade Treaty consolation round, or in any way broaden the scope of the PoA.  Third, we needed to make our concerns known about the aims of some to include firearms components and ammunition, and to make it clear that we are speaking out strongly in support of civilian rights of self-defense – the only Canadian organization to do so.   The fourth reason we were there was to use our strong voice to support our friends.”

According to Clare, “The government seems to be headed in the right direction.  I was pleased to hear the concise and clear presentation by Senior Policy Advisor Kim Joslin of the Canadian Delegation which was in strong support of firearms owners.  In particular, Canada supported the US position which opposes including any aspect of components or ammunition being included in the PoA.  Government representatives Habib Massoud and Steve Torino will be attending the second week of the conference.    It was clear to me in listening to the speeches from delegates that it will be difficult to achieve consensus on several aspects of the PoA‘s implementation plan in the two weeks allotted”.

The NFA and other World Forum (WFSA) members, presented to the UN Conference during the NGO session on Wednesday, August 29 and the text of the speech given by NFA President Sheldon Clare is reproduced below:


Madame President, I am Sheldon Clare, President of Canada’s National Firearms Association.

The NFA is Canada’s largest advocacy organization representing the rights of Canadian firearms owners.  Our members are concerned that UN attempts to regulate small arms and light weapons are misdirected and will have an unjustifiably harmful effect upon the ability of free people to have access to firearms and ammunition for perfectly legitimate purposes. The NFA rejects as false that civilian access to small arms is the problem.

Canada’s National Firearms Association (NFA) recommends that controls on small arms and light weapons be limited solely to major crew-served weapon systems possessed or sold by nation states – not individually operated firearms owned or desired to be owned by civilians, also called non-state actors. The rights and property of Canadians, and our firearms businesses engaged in the lawful trade in firearms and ammunition, including surplus firearms and ammunition, must not be subject to UN edict or control.  Quite simply, firearms ownership and use are matters of national sovereignty, civil freedoms, property rights, and are related to national culture.  Also, control of ammunition, including marking beyond caliber, date, and manufacturer would be excessive; it is unreasonable, unnecessary, and fiscally impossible to uniquely mark ammunition.

Small arms in civilian hands allow people to defend themselves from aggression. Self-defense is a natural right of all individuals. This is especially important in the event of unrest and disorder, or in case of state-mandated crimes against humanity. Civilian ownership of arms is an important factor in preventing and limiting the effect of government-encouraged murders such as what occurred in Srebrenica and Rwanda. Disarmed in Srebrenica by UN peacekeepers and in Rwanda by their own government, these people were helpless in the face of organized aggression, especially when in both cases the UN was powerless to provide protection. While governments need to act against terrorism, disarming civilians violates fundamental democratic principles.  Perhaps Governments should deal with unrest by addressing the economic situations, political differences, and human rights issues that contribute to people agitating for change rather than engaging in one size fits all solutions affecting the rights of free people to own and use firearms.
Thank you for your consideration Madame President.”

Clare concluded: “Other matters to be watchful of are the UN International Small Arms Control Standards, (see and what happens with the Arms Trade Treaty talks (ATT) which broke up without consensus in July.  There will need to be a vote at the General Assembly if it is to come back next year, which may not be possible due to the UN’s two year budgetary cycle.  Simply put, there may not be much support to reopen the ATT so soon in the face of no consensus. Nonetheless, strange things happen at the UN and the NFA has been present to protect the civil and property rights of Canadian Firearms Owners.”

NFA Warns of Problems With UN Arms Trade Treaty

Wednesday, July 25th, 2012

NFA Warns of problems with UN Arms Trade Treaty

25 July 2012

A near final draft and the closing days of the UN Arms Trade Treaty talks could spell trouble for Canadian interests.  There is tremendous pressure to conclude a deal by July 27 and if the latest draft is any indication, the deal will not be a good one for Canadians.

“The draft treaty still affects civilian ownership of firearms and could cause trouble for Canadians travelling with firearms,” according to Sheldon Clare, President of Canada’s National Firearms Association who was present for part of the talks. “Even more significantly though, are clauses which would establish an expensive and intrusive Implementation Support Unit, a body which would be engaged in keeping firearms trade records.  The ISU would be a likely conduit for providing money to unscrupulous regimes from UN coffers partially funded by Canadian taxpayers.  That is certainly not something that Canadians want or need.”

Clare continued, “One of the most potentially dangerous clauses is the proposed amending formula which under Article 20 introduces a two-thirds majority requirement to amend the ATT.  Such a clause is a direct threat to national sovereignty in that it removes the traditional need for consensus in UN decision making.  It could easily lead to despots and dictators making amendments that would be binding on Europe and North America.  When combined with Article 23 which would mean that even countries that don’t sign it are subject to it, we have a clear step towards a dangerous system of world governance that would harm the interests of Canada and individual Canadians.“

“In addition, there are aspects of the draft treaty that could prevent Canada from providing aid to its needy allies, especially if such aid conflicted with the aims of countries opposed to Canadian values.  The recent draft of the Arms Trade Treaty is bad for Canada and Canadians, and our government should not sign it,” stated Mr. Clare.  “While governments need to act against terrorism, perhaps better ways to deal with unrest would be to address the economic situations, political differences, and human rights issues that contribute to people agitating for change.”

“A global ATT would only be in the interests of those who would seek economic advantage by limiting market opportunity and of regimes who would use such a treaty to disarm their citizens in order to rule through fear.”

In addition to its participation at the UN with the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities, Canada’s National Firearms Association is a founding member of The International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights (IAPCAR) which includes many national and international organizations promoting civilian ownership of firearms.  At over 62,000 members, Canada’s National Firearms Association is this country’s largest advocacy organization promoting the rights and freedoms of all responsible firearm owners and users.

For more information contact:

Blair Hagen, Executive VP Communications, 604-753-8682

Sheldon Clare, President, 250-981-1841

Canada’s NFA toll-free number – 1-877-818-0393

NFA Website:

VIDEO: NFA’s Sheldon Clare on the UN ATT

Friday, July 13th, 2012

Original Story Via:  Sun News Canada

Global Gun Grab: Sheldon Clare from the Canadian National Firearms Association (NFA) talks about the UN’s infatuation with getting it wrong when it comes to guns.

For more information on IAPCAR member NFA visit

[kml_flashembed publishmethod=”static” fversion=”8.0.0″ movie=”untitled.swf” width=”400″ height=”300″ targetclass=”flashmovie”] [/kml_flashembed]


Canada’s National Firearms Association Statement to UN on ATT

Wednesday, July 11th, 2012

Click here to read document: NFA UN Presentation on ATT July 2012

More information about IAPCAR member NFA of Canada is available at


Mr. President, I am Sheldon Clare, President of Canada’s National Firearms Association.  Our members are collectors of everything from cartridges to fully automatic firearms; they’re sports shooters and Olympic competitors, wholesalers and retailers, re-enactors, members of the movie industry, hunters, people who hand load ammunition, and those who own firearms for defence.  Our members are concerned that UN attempts to regulate trade in arms are misdirected and will have an unfair and unreasonable effect upon the ability of free people to have access to firearms and ammunition for perfectly legitimate purposes. It is a false premise that civilian access to small arms is the problem.

Canada’s National Firearms Association (NFA) recommends that controls on small arms and light weapons be limited solely to major weapon systems possessed or sold by nation states – not firearms owned or desired to be owned by civilians, also called non-state actors. The rights and property of Canadians, and our firearms businesses engaged in the lawful trade in firearms and ammunition, including surplus firearms and ammunition, must not be subject to UN edict or control.  Quite simply, these are matters of national sovereignty, civil freedoms and property rights, and are related to national culture.  Also, marking and accounting for ammunition would be exceptionally onerous and expensive for manufacturers and firearm owners alike. Control of ammunition would be unreasonable, unnecessary, and impossible.

The proposed Implementation Support Unit (ISU) could potentially serve as a form of promotional and enforcement agency for the ATT and thus interfere with national sovereignty over laws affecting firearms ownership and use. It could be used to operate a form of international registration system. Funds given to this body and other initiatives such as the Victims Assistance Fund could be directed to terrorist states. Supporting these potentially huge and inappropriate expenses is not in the best interests of Canadians.

Reducing arms in civilian hands can significantly limit the ability of people to defend themselves. This is especially important in the event of unrest and disorder, or in case of state-mandated crimes against humanity. Civilian ownership of arms is an important factor in preventing and limiting the effect of events such as what occurred in Sebrinica and Rwanda. While governments need to act against terrorism, perhaps better ways to deal with unrest would be to address the economic situations, political differences, and human rights issues that contribute to people agitating for change.

A global ATT would only be in the interests of those who would seek economic advantage by limiting market opportunity and of regimes who would use such a treaty to disarm their citizens in order to rule through fear.   Thank you for your consideration Mr. President.


VIDEO: Misfiring on Gun Safety (CANADA)

Monday, June 25th, 2012

[kml_flashembed publishmethod=”static” fversion=”8.0.0″ movie=”untitled.swf” width=”400″ height=”300″ targetclass=”flashmovie”]

Get Adobe Flash player


Jerry Agar looks at why criminals will continue breaking laws, so increased gun regulations are not the answer.

VIDEO: Global Gun Registry – Canada

Monday, June 4th, 2012

Original Story Via: Sun News Canada

If you thought the Canadian gun registry is bad, how do you feel about a global registry? Brian Lilley and Daniel Proussalidis discuss the UN’s latest brilliant idea.

[kml_flashembed publishmethod=”static” fversion=”8.0.0″ movie=”untitled.swf” width=”400″ height=”300″ targetclass=”flashmovie”] [/kml_flashembed]


Canada flip flops on UN arms trade treaty

Monday, June 4th, 2012

Original Story VIA:  CBC News

Canada has modified its controversial position on a United Nations arms control treaty.

In a new position paper submitted to the UN, the federal government has dropped its proposal to exclude all sporting and hunting firearms from the international Arms Trade Treaty, an agreement that seeks to regulate the import, export and transfer of all conventional weapons.

Last summer Canada surprised many and attracted heaps of scorn from countries such as Nigeria, Brazil, Mexico and Australia, when it changed its stance on the treaty and advocated for the exclusion of so-called “civilian” firearms.

In particular, the Mexicans said that in their experience, a great number of arms confiscated from its notorious gangs are sporting and hunting firearms that have been modified and transformed into assault weapons.

Some non-governmental observers predicted Canada’s new position could have helped derail the entire process.

The proposal to exclude those weapons is absent from Canada’s new position paper, submitted to the UN last month.

Instead, Canada recommends changes to the treaty’s preamble to underline that the agreement “acknowledges and respects responsible and accountable trans-national use of firearms for recreational purposes, such as sport shooting, hunting and other forms of similar lawful activities, whose legitimacy is recognized by the States Parties.”

Change welcomed

Project Ploughshares, which was among the non-governmental organizations that registered its opposition to the exclusion of hunting and sports firearms from the ATT, said it welcomed the changes, calling it a compromise.

“We’re pleased to see that Canada has toned down its call for exemptions on certain classes of firearms and is now calling for preamble language in the treaty that would recognize legitimate uses of firearms,” said Ken Epps, a senior program officers with the group.

Epps said the new document is helpful.

“In fact it will help to clarify that the treaty is not about domestic gun ownership or use or even transfers of firearms within states like Canada.”

Tony Bernardo, executive director of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, is also pleased with the changes.

“We would support this version of the Arms Trade Treaty document from Canada as it empowers independent nations to set their own discretionary policies regarding civilian-owned firearms within their borders.”

Bernardo said his take on the preamble is that Canada does not want “civilian” firearms included within the scope of the treaty.

In its position paper, Canada says it supports the inclusion of small arms, light weapons and ammunition within the ATT, “in keeping with the principle of national discretion.”

Epps said he feels that section needs tightening up, “because national discretion could be another term for states deciding whether or not to implement the treaty and that shouldn’t be up for different interpretations.”

CANADA: Quebec long-gun battle set for June

Monday, April 16th, 2012

Original Story VIA: Sun News Canada

MONTREAL – A Superior Court judge said he will decide next week on whether or not the federal government can begin destroying long-gun registry data related to Quebec gun owners.

Quebec brought the federal government to court in order to preserve the gun records kept on Quebecers. The province wants to create its own registry.

The trial between Quebec and the federal government begins in June. Quebec wants Judge Marc-Andre Blanchard to prevent the Conservatives from destroying long-gun data before June proceedings begin. The Conservatives want to start destroying the data immediately, regardless of the trial.

The House of Commons voted to destroy the registry – including the Quebec records – in February. The bill was given royal assent April 5.

CANADA: Tories disarm proposed new ammo rules

Monday, April 16th, 2012

Original Story VIA:  Sun News Network


OTTAWA – The Conservative MP who led the fight against the long-gun registry appears to have the backing of the prime minister in shooting down proposed changes to ammunition storage rules that have upset hunters and other firearms users.

“They’re not changing,” Candice Hoeppner told Sun News Network. “So I think law-abiding gun owners can rest assured the storage requirements that are currently in place will continue.”

The Prime Minister’s Office confirmed Hoeppner is right.
“Correct,” Andrew McDougall, the prime minister’s director of communications, said in an e-mail. “Our government will not make changes that unfairly target law-abiding citizens with unnecessary or arbitrary obligations.”

That seems to trump National Resources Minister Joe Oliver, whose ministry proposed the new ammunition storage rules as part of an update of decades-old explosives regulations.

Oliver has said the rules need to be updated “without unduly burdening gun owners.”

Firearms lawyer Solomon Friedman said gun owners need clarity because the regulations are unworkable for people who use firearms as tools – or who live far from police and may have to defend themselves against a home invader.

“We’re going to see a whole new set of traps for the unwary, which is really what these regulations will become,” Freidman said. “What this does is it creates a whole new class of paper criminals – people who’ve committed no wrong, who’ve actually not misused their firearm in any way, but simply because they may have transgressed an administrative regulation they face a
criminal charge. That’s unacceptable.”