The rationale is akin to what we call “the pins on the map” analogy, that the more places and the more broadly distributed those places are that one can have an authorization to transport a restricted firearm and the greater the geographic area in which one can be transporting that firearm, the less the police may be able to challenge the validity of the reason for which you purport to be in that place with that firearm at that point in time.
The best example that I would point to about a rationale for that would be in the submission made to this committee on this bill by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. They spoke about the usefulness of restricting ATTs to police officers in the conduct of their duties, particularly in the field, in vehicle stops, and also in the possibility of persons who are not law-abiding gun owners using the rationale of a broader authorization to transport in the context of a defence when an offence is committed.