New Paragraph

The expansion of the federal firearms ban
December 6, 2024

Here we go again….

Thursday’s announcement by the Liberal government to expand their 2020 list of banned firearms has not resulted in gangsters and mass shooters heading for the hills. Firearms legislation never will.

What it has done however is further penalize lawful gun owners in Canada, who have been background checked, trained and licensed to possess these weapons.


It makes me crazy that federal Ministers and spokespersons continue to use taglines like “weapons of war belong on the battlefield”; “AR-15-type rifles” and my personal favorite, “Assault-style firearms”. They also tied the announcement to the 35th anniversary of the horrific École Polytechnique gender-based massacre of 14 innocent and promising young women, which is politically wise timing, but flawed public policy in my view.


To be clear, real assault rifles and other fully automatic firearms have been totally banned in Canada for years, as have large capacity magazines. To possess any of them is clearly against the law. This new list contains rifles that look like military weapons, but they aren’t. They are semi-automatic rifles, that by law can only have a magazine of 5 rounds or less, but they are largely black in colour and have some of the physical characteristics of classic military assault rifles, but that’s where it ends. They are no more capable of killing than any typical hunting rifle. In fact, some of them are .22 calibre and the only war that could be waged with them would be against squirrels, groundhogs and tin cans. Looking scary and actually being a greater threat to public safety than normal hunting rifles that are in homes all over Canada, are 2 different things.


But my question is: “Will a deranged individual consider the ramification of firearms legislation when he or she wants to go on a killing spree?”


The Nova Scotia shooter had the Mini Ruger 14 rifle in his arsenal in 2020, which was banned in the years following its use by the École Polytechnique killer in 1989. It was totally illegal for him to possess it or any of the other weapons he had. It was also illegal for him to murder 22 innocent people, which is a far more serious criminal offence. Sadly, neither of these mass killers feared any Canadian law, so banning this rifle between atrocities did not save a single life. Neither past nor new laws would have stopped these horrendous acts of violence.  


The Toronto Van Attack that killed 11 and injured 15 people on Yonge Street in 2018 was perpetrated with a rental van. I do not mean to make light of that tragedy at all, I attended the scene, and it was awful, but the “ban it and all will be saved” premise espoused in this latest firearms legislation is akin to banning white vans. It would not have prevented the Yonge Street attack.


The “buy back” program that came with the 2020 ban and continues with the latest additions to it, will solve nothing. The lawful owners of these now banned guns have not been coming forward so far, but if they did, it would only mean that lawful/trained/licensed owners will not commit a murder with the guns turned in. It’s a flawed program that I liken to the various “firearms amnesty” calls we’ve seen in past years. A few rusty old rifles that someone found in their dead grandpa’s garage get turned in and that’s great, but the bad guys that already possess guns illegally for criminal purposes aren’t likely to suddenly start obeying the law. To think otherwise is laughable.


With isolated exceptions, long guns of any type in the hands of Canada’s lawful owners under our strict legislative framework are not a significant threat to public safety in this country. On the other hand, smuggled handguns from the U.S.A., are.


Street gang members are committing violent crimes with smuggled handguns every day in Canada. The laws governing that are quite plain. Police services are investigating these crimes after the fact 24/7, with great success but at great risk, however at that point someone is already wounded or dead. When arrests are made, a flawed judicial system too often allows these dangerous offenders to be released, again, again and again.


Can you imagine the frustration felt by officers who risk their lives to attend these shootings and then apprehend the criminals responsible just to see them freed and continuing to be a threat to them and the public, over and over? “Catch and release” should be words used by fly fishermen, not by police officers.


The federal government needs to put their money and their mouths on stemming the non-stop flow of handguns into Canada from the south. We are an international embarrassment on that front. A huge investment is required to fix this, rather than investing in going after guns that up until now were legal to own and are in the hands of law-abiding citizens. If those folks do break the law or become a threat, police have the legal ability to seize their weapons through due legal authorities on a case-by-case basis.


As that unfolds, our federal government needs to immediately bring our revolving door bail system to a halt and keep violent recidivism to a minimum before more innocent Canadians and police officers die in our streets.


Let’s get our public safety priorities and investments in an order that aims to save lives, not votes.

The worst boss: Nightmare for some, reality for many

By Chris Lewis • June 21, 2025
Image: new-manager-training.com Imagine this scenario if you will, getting the worst boss on earth – a person who is the total antithesis of leadership. Your new “Boss” replaces a leader that wasn’t always right and was getting too old to meet the mental and physical demands of the job, but at the same time treated all those around him with respect. He tried to select people for key positions based on their experience base and his confidence that they may not always agree but the individuals picked would be honest with him, other employees and the client base. He undoubtedly made mistakes here and there and did have some flaws but would readily admit to most of them. This boss comes back to the organization having committed a list of publicly confirmed misdeeds and illegal acts – many of which would have singularly been a good reason to not hire even the lowest level of employee, and justification for imprisonment for others. However, he was chosen for the top job despite all that baggage. Conversely, he brings not one redeeming quality to the top position. From day one, it’s obvious that the new Boss is truly a “boss” and not a “leader.” He has old personal scores to settle and wreaks revenge on many employees that he doesn’t like. Not because they were dishonest, incapable or lazy, but because he perceives that they didn’t want him to return or didn’t always agree with his philosophies and rash actions during past affiliations. This activity causes panic among all employees who know they have no choice but to get aboard his out-of-control train or perish beneath it. Then – without any deep evaluation or thought, he makes tremendous cuts to many organizational programs – leaving thousands without work and lacking any strategy to provide much needed services to a vast array of client groups. He viciously cuts through the organization like a chainsaw through softwood. Why? Because he can. Some of these decisions may have had some degree of validity following a proper assessment, while others not, but that analysis never occurred. Most previous positive relationships with partner agencies and the majority of client groups are immediately scuttled by the new boss. He publicly demeans and taunts longtime allies with irrational statements and outright falsehoods. Never in the many decades of history of the organization has such broad-ranging international indignation been felt, largely as a result of his childish behavior. Very few productive relationships remain and although some new ones are developed, they are only with organizations that are poorly considered by clients and upstanding industry players. His decisions continually fly in the face of the needs of the immense client group but more align with the personal business interests of only the Boss and his business associates – some of whom are either known despots or of questionable character. Company stocks continue to plummet as a result of his silliness. That also has a significant negative impact on the fiscal picture of partner organizations around the world. Anyone that respectfully expresses disagreement or suggests alternative decisions to the Boss, are sidelined or fired, then are ridiculed and until they become unemployable. Gas-lighting, exaggerations, denials, the passing of blame and blatant lies are his norm. He seldom speaks the truth about anyone or any situation. The sycophants he has positioned to assist in his destruction of the organization, publicly praise him for his leadership and courageous decision-making, when the majority of employees and clients know it is just flagrant butt-kissing on their part. He constantly seeks and demands praise, even for things he didn’t do, then sulks and whines when he doesn’t receive it. He falsely takes credit for the few good things that do happen but quickly passes blame when things that have his fingerprints all over them, go horribly wrong. His God-complex is resounding and worsens with each passing day. His public claims of success – before and since becoming the Boss, and assertions of being the “Greatest Boss in history”, fall flat with anyone that truly knows him. He aggressively takes advantage of anyone he can but then turns on them at the flip of a switch. No one is beyond being found at the pointy end of his meanness stick. When caught making an error, he’ll blame everyone on his “team” before accepting any criticism. In fact, he’d turn on his own children if he felt it would make him look brave or heroic, or if it would prevent him from public humiliation. He states his 24/7 lies over and over so often to make his base of lemming followers believe him, that he seemingly believes them to be factual himself. Even when he is confronted with witness testimony or audio/video of his brazen lies, he blames others for being out to get him. Being accountable when things go wrong and letting the light shine on others when they go well, is beyond his comprehension. (Can you spell “narcissistic”?) Although he doesn’t understand the business, he refuses to surround himself with people that do, given that he thinks he knows more than any of them and possibly more than anybody, anywhere, ever, since the dawn of time. Public statements he makes are often completely ridiculous and childish, causing all those around him to force plastic smiles, offer him undeserved praise and nod like pre-programmed bobbleheads. People and even affiliated organizations live in such fear of his thirst for retribution that they either cow-tow to his insanity or prepare for annihilation. He is an embarrassment internally and externally, on an international scale. No past executive has even been so blatantly self-centered, mean spirited and/or inept, nor have they ever had such a negative impact on the organization and its people. It may take decades to repair all the damage he has done. Thankfully, his employment contract is only for four years, so there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. Most of those within and those reliant on the organization, as well as friends, associates, allies internationally pray that this nightmare will end at that time. If it’s not too late, that is. Just a bad dream for some or a reality for millions of us?

What did the PM’s most recent announcement on border security really mean?

By Chris Lewis • February 4, 2025
Is there any meat to this or is it more of the same?

What police don’t need during a crisis

By Chris Lewis • January 4, 2025
Police know how to conduct major investigations and find bad guys. Although several specific factors change from case to case, their general investigative playbook remains the same. Once some ungodly multi-victim attack occurs, in very simplistic terms: the scene is protected, and the health of the living victims is looked after. Forensic experts begin processing the crime scene. Witnesses are located and interviewed. Physical evidence is gathered. Area and witness video recordings are collected and analyzed. Victims are identified. An off-site reunification centre is established where there are multiple victims. Next of kin notifications begin. At any point – if a suspect or suspects become known, their background is gathered, and the hunt begins. They need to be apprehended before anyone else is hurt. Area law enforcement officers need to know suspect details ASAP. “Motive” is at top of mind as investigators are synthesizing all this information, whether the suspect is identified or not. Of course, establishing motive often leads to identifying the suspect, but at other times identifying the suspect helps fill in the blanks on motive. What was the initial basis of what became a murder? Was it a robbery? Could it have been a street fight gone bad? Was it simply a want or need to kill someone specific or maybe anyone at all? That’s for investigators to sort out. There is an onus to warn the public or at least tell them something, i.e. “ongoing threat”, “stay indoors”, or “no threat to public safety”. There are reporting protocols to follow. Senior officers need to be advised up the food chain as do their political masters, so everyone knows what is happening. None of that should detract investigators from doing what they do best – catching killers. But that’s when the ravenous “thirst for knowledge” and political grandstanding often take over and completely interfere with police work. The only knowledge the investigators are thirsty for in those early hours is evidence and then identifying, locating and capturing bad people. They do not need politics monopolizing their time or efforts. The New Years Day massacre in New Orleans was big. Fourteen innocent party goers were killed and dozens injured. The world wanted to know what happened and the community wanted to know if they were in danger. I absolutely get that. However, what sometimes comes with such tragedies is everyone wanting to know everything. We see it in most mass murder cases, but this was an exceptional example of the insanity surrounding such a high-profile incident. Whatever blanks weren’t immediately filled in by police officials and verified mainstream media reports, were filled in by social media. In such cases police totally lose control of the narrative as rumours, theories, falsities, conspiracy theories and “hey look at me” games take over. The political party and individual positioning in this case was nauseating. In any multi-agency response, having the leaders of those agencies at press conferences in a united front makes sense. The public needs to have confidence that the situation is in the best of hands. But where did these massive press conferences where police officials are flanked by numerous politicians come from? I can see some elected leaders being present when a new program is launched or government funding is being announced, but it should never be in the early hours of a mass murder. Having a bunch of partisan wonks peacocking on stage and in follow-up interviews, helps no one at the operational level. As some of them were speaking, I was responding to their dumb questions in my mind: Was it a terror attack? Maybe, but let the experts figure that out. In the meantime, it’s a mass murder. Was the killer an illegal immigrant? Let’s worry about that when the dust settles. What political party is to blame for allowing him into the country? We don’t care. Maybe he was born here. Let’s sort that out if he turns out to be an illegal immigrant. Why wasn’t the area more secure? Good question for a future debrief. We need to get the FBI and HSI leaders before a government committee right away so we can find out who failed! Shut up. We have police work to do. There are always enough social media theories, private citizens’ investigations into suspects, outright lies and misinformation being spread to the public, without silly partisan games sidetracking investigators who are fighting to stay ahead of legitimate theories and tips. In the early hours of a mass murder case investigators are probably the busiest they have ever been, and don’t need any of this interference. Controlling the social media fever is next to impossible. It would take a sudden level of maturity across the populace that may be unattainable. But politicians at all levels need to get the message that they are not welcome on stage at operational press conferences and their comments to the media – if asked for them – aside from expressing sadness, thoughts, prayers and confidence in the police, should be “Our law enforcement agencies are investigating, and we need to let them do what they do.” Adding any theories, raising questions or passing blame is totally wrong. If elected officials truly care about their electorate and feel the need to say more, they should have some prior dialogue with the police leaders or their Public Information Officers to ensure that what they say is helpful as opposed to harmful. Otherwise, be quiet.