Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 76-82 of 82
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Public Safety committee  One at a time is correct, but still, it would not cause the pool to diminish over time, which is the intent of Bill C-71.

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Randall Koops

Public Safety committee  I think that if we've understood it correctly, as we read it for the first time, it would propose to extend the grandfathering regime to the heritors or estate of a grandfathered owner. Currently what's proposed in Bill C-71 for the firearms in question is that this class of gra

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Randall Koops

Public Safety committee  Parliament to date has only enacted one situation where the ownership of prohibited firearms passes from one generation to another, and that is in the pre-1946 handguns, the so-called war trophy exemption. The intent in Bill C-71 is that, in the firearms affected by this bill, li

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Randall Koops

Public Safety committee  My justice colleagues have just reminded me as well that it might be helpful to bring to your attention section 11 of the Firearms Act. Under the provision of special cases it also deals with prohibited firearms, weapons, devices, and ammunition for businesses. There are, as Rob

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Randall Koops

Public Safety committee  I would just point out that clause 2 as drafted deals only with eligibility for grandfathering for individuals. As your colleague pointed out, the regime for businesses is separate and is dealt with under the firearms licences regulations, in section 22. It's a separate regime fo

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Randall Koops

Public Safety committee  Proposed subsection 5(2) includes certain offences already that must be taken into consideration. The amendment would add additional offences to the class of those that must be taken into consideration.

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Randall Koops

Public Safety committee  I think there's nothing in the act that would change the provisions that elected officials remain in control of the regulations. I think the question, as your colleague has suggested, is that perhaps since section 84 already includes the definition of regulations, this provision

June 5th, 2018Committee meeting

Randall Koops