Alberta Survey

 As of this date, the Alberta government has an online survey relating to the recent firearms ban and thoughts on the newly appointed - made in Alberta - CFO office.

On the question of the CFO office, I had this to say....

As a former military intelligence analyst and someone who works commercially in this field, there are several recommendations that would be supported by the public as well as would improve public safety:

1) The firearms act provides for inspection of storage of firearms.  Using this provision, inspections of restricted firearms will deter and catch straw purchasing.  Analytics would be used to determine the most likely targets to efficiently use our resources.

2) End the adversarial model currently employed by the Alberta CFO office.  Develop partnerships with business and cultivate human intelligence contacts in the industry. Speaking from experience, I run into people trying to circumvent the law or do shady stuff.  People in the industry like myself are reluctant to pass this information on because it draws attention to ourselves.  With the adversarial model currently employed, a lot of useful law enforcement intelligence is lost.

3) Require that all CFO employees have a firearms licence.  Although the police act exempts law enforcement, most people in the CFO office are not sworn law enforcement.  They provide a function without understanding the entire rigorous system.  This contributes to the adversarial nature.  The CFO should provide a measure of public safety by friendly co-operation with the public.  They should not be seen as a system of social control.

4) Terminate those who make insulting comments like "Soldiers shouldn't be allowed to own guns because they know how to use them."

An Open Letter to Students

You created these school shooters.

You viciously bullied people.

You tormented people with social media.

You used technology to share intimate pictures.

You consumed violent music and video games.

You ostracized people for being different.

You embraced a progressive culture devoid of morality.

And these school shooters?  They come from your peers; they are you.

The school violence is not inflicted by forces outside of your school, they all come from within.  They are the people who sit next to you, they are the people you tease and prank.  They are the people that you deliberately strip all human dignity from.

You want to find the source of gun violence?  I can promise you gun violence does not come from a gun.  It comes from you.  You can choose to fulfill the Millennial stereotype; be lazy and act like this is not your fault... blame the guns.  I have come to expect it from your generation.  Eating Tide pods and being lazy is your hallmark.

But the truth is, you are the ones making school shooters.  Stop being lazy morally and intellectually and realize that the power to change comes from you.  Look in the mirror kids, see the real perpetrator.

You want your victims disarmed so you don't have to change.  You want a situation in which you can bully people into committing suicide without the fear they will come back and take revenge.  You brats make me sick.

Election Sign Defaced with Swastika

Let's face it, under national socialism (Nazis), everything that those in power disagreed with, was violently outlawed with draconian laws.  Fast forward to modern day liberalism.  Now everything that does not fit the liberal party ideology is violently outlawed.

Now, when I saw violently outlawed, I mean that the punishment is far more severe then what a reasonable, moral person would rate. 

Case law says that if you kill someone* you are likely to get one month in jail or 8 months house arrest.  But if you don't lock your guns in a safe? 18 months and years of a firearms prohibition.  Arguably a punishment that lasts for years beyond the person who kills.

No one was hurt in the second example but in the first one, a person is dead and  a family is mourning.  But to a liberal (or a Nazi) social engineering is more important.  Morality is irrelevant and replaced with a fanatical ideology.

If I have an unregistered handgun, it is automatically 3 years minimum in jail.  This is spelled out in the criminal code.  If someone rapes a child, there is no minimum sentence and typically punishments average at about 2 years.  Again, one crime has no victim the other ruins lives forever. 

The Liberal party, much like the National Socialists (Nazi) are anti-gun.  Alan Rock said "I came to Ottawa with the firm belief that the only people who should have guns are the police and military".  Compare that to Heinrich Himmler (Hitler's right hand man and main driver in the 'Final Solution') who said "Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA, ordinary citizens don't need guns".

What about thought crimes?  The Liberals set up Human right Tribunals which are used to attack those who have a different perspective then the Liberal party.  The punishment?  Often severe to the extreme with punishments of around $5000.  The Nazi's would put you in a concentration camp for disagreeing with their ideology.  But really, who has $5000 lying around to pay that fine?  Non-payment is not an option so you probably would face wage garnishes and in extreme cases, jail time.  How is that different from the Nazis?

Liberals champion diversity as long as that diversity is exactly like them.  They are the most bigoted, myopic, hateful, violent people ever because they do what they do with the blessing of their own conscience.

Ayn Rand said "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."

The Nazi party hated the Jews. The leader of the Nazi party, Adolph Hitler, made no secret of this while the current leader of the Liberal Party, Justin Trudeau, has openly said that "Evangelical Christians are the worst Canadians".  Much like the Nazis made the lives of the Jews a nightmare, Justin's Human right tribunals are making it a nightmare to be a Christian who is vocal of his faith, ideals and morals.  It is not as bad as it was in Germany.... yet.

So, to sum up; does this person deserve a swastika on her sign? you are damn right she does because that is the ideology she supports.  It is the ideology of every liberal with their freedom hating, pretend- diversity, arrogant 'i-know-best' mentality.

* In Edmonton a drunk driver careened off the road killing a 2 year on the patio of a restaurant.  He got one month in jail as a punishment.

*In Manitoba, a drunk driver killed a pedestrian and got 8 months house arrest as a punishment.

Mental Health Issues and Firearms Ownership

Almost all mass shootings that have been committed in the USA over the last 2 years have largely been perpetrated by those with mental health issues.
On the gun debate, there are those who believe that better mental health screening is critical while others think this would be an infringement on their right to own and enjoy firearms.

This issue is polarizing; and if you understand the laws, you see that both sides have merit to their arguments.

Mental health is always evolving in its definition and that is where the fear lies.  30 years ago, an excitable little boy who did not want to sit in school would be classified as “a little boy”.  Today he is classified as mentally ill, “ADHD” and medicated.

Right now owning a gun is not considered a mental illness.  But fringe groups want it classified as such.  Public pressure, can change the opinion of science.  Prior to the 70’s homosexuality was considered a mental illness.  Science did not change that definition; pressure and politics did.  That same pressure can change the definition for gun owners.  Then wanting to own a gun is a mental illness which invalidates your ability to buy one.  After that, arguing that you need one is irrelevant: you have grocery stores so don’t need to hunt. You don’t need to be a competition shooter; join the reserves.  You don’t need self-defense, you have the police.

In Canada if you have been treated for a mental illness, it will almost certainly disqualify you for a firearms license.  So if you enjoy shooting but you want to see a medical practitioner for your depression or PTSD you will be denied your hobby.  We need people to seek help when they are not mentally well, while the current system encourages you not to get help.

So what is the solution?  Specificity.  Instead of using a blanket statement that uses a changing mental health system as the basis for definition, all reasons should be spelt out and codified in law so what we consider to be normal today will remain the same definition 20 years from now protecting us from politics and pressure.  Also, those who seek mental help should not be penalized.  In fact those who seek mental help should be exempt from even needing to report it.

The only mental cases that should be reported are those people who do not voluntarily seek help AND meet the codified definitions laid out in the law.  This would weed out those who are actually dangerous from those who are temporarily sick and want to get better.

Is inertia the only thing keeping the AR15 alive?

The single most popular rifle in North America is hands down the AR15 platform. Originally built as an Air Force PDF, its light weight and small rounds made the average infanteer able to carry more ammo.

In its day, the AR15 was considered a Space Age gun. It was the first rifle to use a lot plastic parts and it made a departure from steel to aluminum for its receiver. Like most things America did, it was developed from their own experiences in WW2. Early designs lacked a forward assist (something that the designer fought to keep out of the rifle) and lacked a brass deflector. That meant that weak people who “rode the action” while cocking the weapon would get a first round stoppage – the later addition of the forward assist fixed this. The brass deflector was a later addition to help left handed shooters.
Certainly the AR was a platform that was evolving.

The AR carbine (colloquially known as the M4) was designed for rear echelon troops but it found favour with SOG teams. The problem was, when the rifle was shortened, the chamber unlocked while the pressure was too high. This is a problem today as evidenced by the breakage rate, hard extractions and premature part wear reported by USSCOM.

But the AR Carbine found ways to overcome this as well. Pig tail gas tubes helped to slow down the unlock time by increasing the distance gas needed to travel to the bolt. Gas piston systems helped wear by keeping the weapon cooler and cleaner.

The great thing about the AR15 is its modularity which allows it to overcome any mechanical problem. It just needs some thought and innovation.

The AR15 also boasts as being a major driving force for the economy. Any gun manufacturer that wants into the US market has to admit that producing an AR clone is the way to go. Even Sig (who make superior battle rifles to the AR design) have finally come out with their own AR15. Small businesses have grown to world names because of the AR15. Troy Industries, Magpul.... the list goes on.
But warfighting is evolving and I wonder if the AR15 in its current form is the right rifle to lead the western armies into the future.

New doctrine says that the dominant hand does not leave the rifle to conduct manipulations. That means to conduct a stoppage drill or to manipulate the cocking handle, the support hand (the hand farthest away) has to move back to do these manipulations. I can’t speak for everyone but I have smacked my own lips while rapidly conducting a “tap, rack and go” because of the rear placement of the cocking handle.
Most modern operations are mechanized and it makes sense for a folding stock to be used. Most AR15s do not have this ability as their buffer is located in the rear. In fact I would go so far to say that the handful of “ARs” that have placed the recoil spring above the bolt are not really ARs at all.

I think that someone needs to make an evolutionary leap.... or a look back in time to firearm designs that had the cocking handle up by the support hand on the forestock. Weapons like the FAL, G3, MP5, ACR and SCAR make more sense to me.

I have no interest in entering the AR15 market. It is too competitive for a little guy like me to get involved but I think for the AR to overcome its inertia and become a top weapon platform again, it needs to find someone to re-engineer this flaw. Move the cocking handle to the side or forend. I am certain that in time, this lucrative market will bring about this next evolution and the AR15 will last well into the 22nd century like the Garand/M14 lived into the 21st.

Introduction

I am often sent Emails asking for advice about firearms, calibers, gear, training tips, optics and even politics and I try really hard to offer well thought out answers.  As my business is small I try hard to put the "Service" into customer service while trying to use my own life expirience to develop and bring new tactical products to market. 

What I seek to do here is offer some of my own ideas.  Agree or disagree, I hope to provoke ideas on the very things that people ask me about as well as my commentary on the pressing interests and concerns of the Canadian firearms community.

Until next time,
Chris