Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 13:22:31 -0600 (CST) From: "David A. Tomlinson" Subject: III REGULATIONS, GUN SHOWS (part 1) Yawn. Schatzi dug me out of bed at 5:30 this morning -- something about a dire need for breakfast -- NOW! So -- as long as I'm up anyway, here is the story on Order in Council [OIC] JUS-97-480-01, "GUN SHOWS REGULATIONS": A "gun show" [GS] is defined as "an event or occasion that includes the display, offering for sale or sale of firearms, whether or not as part of a larger event or occasion, AND that is either a sales gun show [SGS] or a display gun show [DGS]." The class GS is to be divided into "display gun show" [DGS] and "sales gun show" [SGS]. At a DGS, no sales or trades are allowed. An event is an SGS if it includes having firearms present at the show and offered for sale. As usual, those definitions are muddleheaded English, running in circles. Look at them closely, and you will notice that a GS is defined as being either an SGS or a DGS -- while an SGS or a DGS is a particular type of GS! It is not possible to know what an SGS or a DGS are until you know what a GS is, but it is not possible to know what a GS is until you know what an SGS and a DGS are! Catch-22. With definitions that circular, no clarity is possible. For example, you are probably familiar with the habit of antique dealers gathering in malls for a day or weekend of business, and with their habit of having antique buy-sell-trade events in halls. The presence of even ONE firearm at such an event apparently triggers full enforcement of these regulations by turning the event into an SGS under these regulations. Is that intentional? Or just another display of incompetence? Regulation 2 says: "These regulations apply to (a) all sales gun shows; and (b) all display gun shows unless the chief firearms officer of the province...determines that the display gun show (i) is not the primary activity of the event...; and (ii) is held solely for instructional or educational purposes." Regulation 3 says: "No person may sponsor a gun show unless [he] (a) has been approved as the sponsor of the gun show by the chief firearms officer...; and (b) holds a firearms BUSINESS licence that authorizes only the sponsorship of gun shows and, in partidcular, of that gun show." Please note that the word "person" means either an individual (a human being) OR a corporation, such as a business or a club. Under that rule, no INDIVIDUAL who owns a firearm can sponsor a gun show. Firearms Act section [FA s.] 56(2) says clearly, "Only one licence may be issued to any one individual." Therefore, any individual who has a C-68 licence or an FAC that has been "grandfathered" as a C-68 licence cannot get ANOTHER "licence" to sponsor a gun show. The CFC is trying to get around FA s. 56(2) by ignoring it, but that is NOT going to work. FA s. 56(2) does NOT say, "Only one licence OF EACH TYPE can be..." It says "Only one LICENCE can be issued..." It is true that there are several TYPES of C-68 licence, but FA s. 56(2) is absolute. ONE licence per customer, regardless of what types are on offer. If you have a C-68 licence of one type, YOU CANNOT GET ANOTHER OF ANOTHER TYPE. FA s. 56(2) is probably another example of the Department of Justice's notorious lack of even elementary skill at drafting legislation, but -- IT IS THE LAW. If Parliament did not want that effect, Parliament should have amended Bill C-68. The NFA did point out the problem -- but either no one was listening, or the mess that 56(2) creates was intentionally included in the Act. Because of FA s. 56(2), for example, a dealer who is also an IPSC shooter and a full auto firearms collector MUST have all his firearms -- business AND personal -- licenced on ONE very complicated licence, unless he incorporates the business and gets another business licence -- one made out to the corporation. Awkward! Therefore, no corporation that holds a firearms business licence can sponsor a gun show, because that would require issuing a SECOND licence to the corporation. Therefore, only a club can sponsor a gun show -- and then only if the club does not hold any other type of C-68 licence. There is some question as to whether or not a non-profit club can take out a BUSINESS licence without jeapordizing its non-profit status. It may be that NO ONE can "sponsor" a gun show. There is also a question as to whether or not a "business" licence can be issued to a corporation that is NOT a "business" as defined by FA s. 2 "business" -- "means a person who carries on a business [WHY can they not get it through their thick heads that you NEVER use the word you are defining as PART OF THE DEFINITION?] that includes (a) the manufacture, assembly, possession, purchase, sale, importation, exportation, display, repair, restoration, maintenance, storage, alteration, taking in pawn, transportation, shipping, distribution or delivery of firearms, prohibited weapons, restricted weapons, prohibited devices, or prohibited ammunition, (b) the possession, purchase or sale of ammunition, or (c) the purchase of cross-bows, and includes a museum." Clearly, a club does NOT fit that definition. Regulation 4(1) says that the chief firearms has the authority to issue the required licence to the sponsor. It requires the "applicant" to submit the application "At least 60 days before a proposed gun show." The application must include: (a) the applicant's name, address, email address, and phone and fax numbers; (b) the show's location; (c) the dates and hours of show operation; (d) whether it is an SGS or a DGS; (e) description of proposed security measures; and (f) a preliminary list of exhibitors, divided into display and sales exhibitors. Regulation 4(2) says that the (nearly impossible) non-firearms-owning "individual" who sponsors a show must also supply evidence of Canadian citizenship or at least permanent residence. A sponsoring (also nearly impossible) non-firearms "business" must supply evidence that it carries on business in Canada. And a club must provide evidence that the majority of its officers are Canadian citizens or permanent residents of Canada. MORE insecure records. Regulation 5 forbids the chief firearms officer to issue a sponsor's licence unless the regulation 4 rules have been satisfied, and security of the building is ensured -- IN THE OPINION OF THE CFO. No objective standards are set to guide the CFO. He is given the power to rule like an absolute dictator -- by whim. The CFO must also determine that the applicant "is eligible...to hold a licence" under FA s. 5, 6 and/or 9. If the applicant already HAS some kind of a licence, however, no sponsoring licence can be issued without contravening FA s. 56(2). Therefore, this check is the FULL check made before issuing a business licence. No wonder they want the application "at least 60 days" early! Regulation 6(a) says that, at least 3 working days before the show, the applicant must supply the CFO with (i) a floor plan of the layout of the show, including names an numbers of each exhibitor's table; and "(ii) the FINAL list of all exhibitors and their addresses [emphasis added -- DAT]." Either they know nothing about how gun shows actually work -- or they intend to competely restructure everything that is now normal regarding gun shows, and make them impossible to hold. The latter seems more likely. Regulation 6(b) requires the applicant to notify the local police of the intention to hold the show, its dates and hours of operation, and location. Regulation 7(a) requires the sponsor to ensure the security of the building "AND OF THE FIREARMS THAT ARE DISPLAYED THERE." 7(b) requires the sponsor to "ensure that the firearms included in the gun show are stored, displayed and handled in accordance with the requirements of the Act and the regulations." Those requirements are clearly an attempt to force the sponsor to act as if the sponsor were a police officer. If a sponsor tries to obey the regulations, the sponsor goes far beyond the powers that the sponsor of a show ACTUALLY has. If the sponsor does NOT act as if he or she is a police officer, that would be a violation of the regulations. Catch-22. Regulation 7(2) requires the sponsor, "during the hours of operation of a gun show" to be "(a) ...present IN PERSON and ON DUTY...or to be represented there by an authorized delegate; and (b) to "ensure that each exhibitor's booth or table meets the requirement of paragraph 10(b)." There is no paragraph 10(b). Regulation 9(a) requires exhibitors to "at all times when...the exhibitor's firearms are present at the gun show's location, ensure the security of his or her table..." That is rather difficult for the exhibitor to ensure once the show closes for the night, because the exhibitor is no longer there. 9(b) requires the exhibitor to ensure constant supervision of his or her table during hours of show operation "by a person who [is 18 or over] and holds a licence to possess firearms." That eliminates anyone who legally owns firearms, but who has not yet gotten a C-68 licence, from supervising a gun show table at any time. In effect, it EXTENDS the C-68 licence, by making it also a licence to supervise a table at a gun show. 9(c) requires the exhibitor to "maintain a record of all transactions entered into at the gun show by the exhibitor in relation to the firearms brought by the exhibitor to the gun show LOCATION [whether displayed or not, brought into the building or not -- DAT], separaate from any records kept in accordance with paragraph 23(c) of the Firearms Licences Regulations." MORE insecure -- and pointless -- records. Regulation 10 deals with the validity and duration of sponsoring licences. Regulation 11 authorizes the CFO to revoke a sponsoring licence ONLY if the sponsor contravenes a regulation or if the show "could endanger the safety of any person." That regulation is illegal, because it contravenes the power vested in the CFO by the Firearms Act. An OIC cannot alter an Act. Regulation 12 says that "for the purpose of paragraph 117(o) of the [Firearms] Act, it is an offence to contravene section (3) or (8) [of OIC JUS-97-480-01]." Regulation 12 is saying that FA s. 117(o) authorizes the creation of new offences for violating new regulations which have been made under s. 117(g). FA s. 117(g) authorizes the making of regulations to "regulate gun shows." It is not clear what charge would be laid for violation of those regulations. Once this set or regulations has been "laid" before each House of Parliament -- REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THESE REGULATIONS EVER ACTUALLY COME INTO FORCE, no CHANGED VERSION of these regulations will ever have to be shown to either House of Parliament before it comes into force [FA s. 119(1)]. >From these regulations, it would appear that the NFA-CFC conference of 23-24 Jun 97 had at least one interesting effect. At that time, the CFC was intending to force every collector at a SGS to get a temporary dealer's licence for the show dates. That was apparently dropped because the NFA pointed out the tax implications. If it had gone ahead, every gun show expense -- tables, hotels, meals, travel, etc., etc. -- would have instantly become tax deductible! It seems possible that requiring the sponsoring club to get a "business licence" will make all of the expenses of every club member attending the show tax deductible. Any good tax experts reading this? Think about it. The ramifications -- if it does -- are rather breathtaking, when one starts thinking about joint action by many clubs. Dave Tomlinson, NFA FOCUS: Once again, this set of regulations is rich ground for court action. The NFA will be there -- providing legal assistance and expertise -- when the charges start being laid. If you have been charged -- with ANYTHING -- get in touch with the NFA. If you know of anyone who has been charged with a firearms offence -- find that person and tell them to get in touch with the NFA. A lot of this abusive legislation and regulation nonsense CAN be blown out of the water -- in COURT.