Motz failed to clear up concerns about Bill C-71
By Letter to the Editor on April 20, 2018.
Re: Bill C-71 Amendments to the Canadian Firearms Act Glen Motz, our member of parliament, hosted a public meeting on April 12 to discuss this pending legislation. Several attendees are concerned that C-71 will compromise their property rights. There is nothing in the bill that even hints at such a thing. The B.C. Wildlife Federation and the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, both of which are vigorously opposed to C-71, list no objections to any issue concerning property rights. The attendees may be needlessly worried about section 17 of C-71 which proposes an amendment of subsection 115(1) of the Criminal Code. CC 115(1) presently reads, “Unless a prohibition order against a person specifies otherwise, everything the possession of which is prohibited by the order that, on the commencement of the order, is in the possession of the person is forfeited to Her Majesty.” C-71 amends only a few words of CC 115(1), existing legislation which has been the law since at least 1985. It also requires that a prohibition order only be granted after application to the courts. Motz let these concerns pass without comment. If he did not know about CC 115(1) after his career in law enforcement and his study of C-71 as a parliamentarian, then he is ignorant of law in which he has a duty to be well versed. If he is familiar with CC 115(1) and the amendments to it proposed by C-71 and failed to allay the attendees’ fears, he is guilty of promoting public ignorance in order to further his own agenda. Fred Lewis Medicine Hat 8-7
