I appreciate that feedback. Thank you.
Moving on to the handgun freeze, you did say that the CACP is in favour of a national approach to managing the issue of handguns in Canada. You believe that a handgun freeze is one method of reducing these types of firearms, but what struck me in the second part of your statement is you said, “while allowing existing law-abiding handgun owners to practice their sport.”
I know that to be authorized to have a restricted firearm such as a handgun, you have to have proof that you practise or compete at an approved shooting club or range. There are exemptions carved out in Bill C-21 for Olympic-level and Paralympic-level shooters, but other shooting disciplines have raised concerns that they might be edged out because of how Bill C-21 is currently written.
CACP has said that it wants existing law-abiding handgun owners to be able to practise their sport. Do you believe a middle ground to this would be to require people in those other disciplines to provide more proof that they are actively engaged in their sport? In other words, should they provide actual proof that they have a demonstrated need to own a handgun?