Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
It was clear the conversation wasn't over and Travis and Sean felt the topics discussed were too valuable to not record.
This is an addendum to the popular Silvercore Podcast 107 episode. Make sure to download if you haven't already.
In addition to his massive success in business, Sean Zubor is an aspiring pilot and trapper and seized the opportunity quiz Travis.
- How can a person get an authorization to carry a handgun in Canada?
- Can handguns still be purchased in Canada?
- Are hunters and firearms owners doing enough to advocate for themselves?
- What is the role of Canada's advocacy groups and how can we all work together?
Tune in for insight that hasn't been publicly discussed in the past.
https://zubor.ca/
https://www.instagram.com/seanzubor/
______
Silvercore Club - https://bit.ly/2RiREb4
Online Training - https://bit.ly/3nJKx7U
Other Training & Services - https://bit.ly/3vw6kSU
Merchandise - https://bit.ly/3ecyvk9
Blog Page - https://bit.ly/3nEHs8W
Host Instagram - @Bader.Trav https://www.instagram.com/bader.trav
Silvercore Instagram - @SilvercoreOutdoors https://www.instagram.com/silvercoreoutdoors
____
The Silvercore Podcast explores the mindset and skills that build capable people. Host Travis Bader speaks with hunters, adventurers, soldiers, athletes, craftsmen, and founders about competence, integrity, and the pursuit of mastery, in the wild and in daily life. Hit follow and step into conversations that sharpen your edge.
Kind: captions
Language: en-GB
Travis Bader: I'm Travis Bader,
and this is the Silvercore podcast.
Silvercore has been providing its
members with the skills and knowledge
necessary to be confident and proficient
in the outdoors for over 20 years.
And we make it easier for people to deepen
their connection to the natural world.
Very often when a podcast As
ends, the conversation continues.
That was the case here, and we decided
to press record on a candid conversation
where Sean asked me questions he
was curious about for the complete
conversation that led to this discussion.
Make sure to download episode 107
where Sean shares the secrets that led
to his success as an industry leader.
If you enjoy the Silver Core Podcast
and you'd like to see more, the biggest
thing that you can do to help us grow is
to like, comment and share with others.
It's a small effort, but it
makes a massive difference
to the growth of the show.
Thank you.
Sean Zubor: All right, brother,
I got a question for you.
Yeah.
Okay.
So why this, why this podcast?
Travis Bader: You know, it's one of
these things I, I looked at what was
happening in my sphere and my business,
and there, there was a hell of a lot
of negativity that you see, whether it
be on a social side from, uh, firearms
or hunting and people against that.
Uh, whether it be within the
industry itself, you know, you're
in the real estate industry.
And I'm sure there's all different
types of characters and there's
those that will strive hard to build
the biggest building and build a
community around them to build it up.
And there are also those that will try
and torch everybody else's building
so that there's looks the biggest.
And I was encountering
that numerous times.
And I thought, this is what I know.
This is what I do.
Do I want to just endeavor in a
different direction or do I want to
see if I can be the person to bring
some positivity and change into an
industry where I'm experiencing,
uh, difficulty and negativity?
So that, that was the advent
of the Silver Core Podcast.
It was specifically designed to
bring positivity into the industry
and to highlight people's passion
and share that passion with others.
Sean Zubor: What do you feel that,
let me rephrase, business or people,
people that are out there, like a very
similar question to what you've asked
me earlier is like, what are some of
the changes you feel that we need, we
need to be doing as a society to better.
You know, gun advocacy and all the other
kinds of things that you're involved in.
And we've been talking about.
Travis Bader: It's similar to what
you're talking about before, which is
to have an open mind, to separate the
individual from the idea, to realize
that a lot of us are all striving
to get to the exact same place.
We're just taking different
paths to get there and that
place that we're trying to get.
To if we can take a step back and look
at that and say, is that worthwhile?
Is that a place where we want to be?
And if so, are we able to be
tolerant of these other paths?
And in fact, is there a way we
can work together to get there?
And that one piece of the puzzle that
work together to get there is a one
piece of the puzzle that I found to be
lacking in so many areas, because the
person who wants to work together the
most will oftentimes find themselves
being the one who does the majority of
the work, who gets taken advantage of.
Or forgotten, uh, if, if things
start to get tough or difficult.
So I think it's a process of realizing
that's human nature and then surrounding
yourself with the right quality of person.
Sean Zubor: And so.
Right now, how we find ourselves,
um, let's just say in like the
whole firearms community and what's
happening, like I know there is
lawsuits between major organizations
and all these other kinds of things.
Are we cannibalizing ourselves?
What are, what are some of the
things that as a community, because
you're in this community more than
anybody I know, what are some of
the things that we should be doing?
To kind of, you know, help
to be that one foot forward.
Like how, how do we bring these people
together when you have people with
the exact same minds, one might just
be a little bit more extreme than
the other or whatever it is, right.
For lack of a better word.
But how, how do we bring
these communicated?
Cause I feel like if we're
bickering and fighting it, we're
definitely not moving forward.
Travis Bader: No, and you're not.
And then you, and if I'm to extrapolate
from lawsuits and community, you're
probably talking about different
advocacy groups that are out there.
And the power struggles
that have happened.
And really none of them are blameless.
There is no one single
white knight in all of this.
And some of them have weaponized
their, their followers in the
hopes of getting more followers
and to try and defeat others.
I think that that is one area that
has been so disheartening when
you look at it is the amount of.
Of infighting and you'll find that
at every level, at the high levels,
at the low levels, whether it's your
local club and they get in there
and says, well, I don't care that
about this law that's coming through.
Cause I'm not a pistol shooter.
I don't have restricted or
prohibited, or I'm only black powder.
And I think the biggest, uh, benefit
that this community in general,
whether it be the firearms community
or the hunting community can look
at is what is our guiding light?
Do we have an overarching goal
that we're looking to get towards?
Like if people say, nope,
for my cold, dead hands, and
they ain't getting just one.
Okay, that's one stance.
That's one way you can go towards it.
But you also realize you're
going to alienate a hell of a
lot of people in the process.
Um, but if you have that one guiding
light and then the resources for people
to be able to be essentially empower
themselves, because most people.
Have that ability already.
They just don't realize it.
So waking people up to the fact that
they have that ability and maybe just
providing them resources where you can
say, you don't need an organization
to go and do these things for you.
In fact, all of you individuals
are so much more powerful on your
own, that organization lean on
them and make them work, have them
provide you as individuals with the.
Uh, the tools so that you can go out
there and sing from the same song
sheet and approach in a similar way.
I think that would probably affect the
greatest amount of, of, uh, change and
compassion, be compassionate because
what you're looking at is something that
can negatively, some people have been
negatively affected by firearms and never
in a million years, am I going to try and
tell them that guns are a good thing or.
Try and endeavor in some sort of rational
argument on an emotional, uh, level.
It's, um, you're not doing them or
yourself or anybody, any favors, be
compassionate, realize that there
are different ways that people look
at these things and maybe you It's
surrounding ourselves with the right
community and then working together.
Sean Zubor: That's actually, I was
going to ask you that as well, cause
I'm, I'm in the community, like I'm
part of the wild sheep society and so
on and so forth, but, and I go, I'm a
member at the POCO gun range and mission
gun range and so on and so forth.
So I try to be around it as much
as I can, but I'm the first one to
say, like, I never go to general
meetings or do any of these things.
So,
Travis Bader: you know, I got, I got a.
Yeah, why would you?
They're boring, right?
There you go.
And is,
Sean Zubor: is there, is there a lack of
community that might help these things?
Cause like you said, and I've, I've
generally heard this and I've seen
these on these BC hunting forums and
all this other kind of stuff, like, oh,
I don't give a rat's ass if they don't.
If they take all pistols or black
guns away, they're only just machismo
guys trying to be cool anyways.
And, you know, I use my gun for hunting.
They'll never take that away.
And then sure enough, they take away,
you know, 10, 000 jewel or whatever.
You know what I mean?
And it does start affecting them.
Is that because we have
separated ourselves within
and created micro communities?
I think in general, most of these.
What's the best way to say
firearms owners or whatever.
I feel like a lot of us are very
independent individuals and I'm, I'm,
I'm somebody that goes in the woods.
I can take care of myself.
I don't need everybody kind of thing.
You know what I mean?
Um, so does that play in the fact of
why we haven't come to together and
been so cohesive in the movement?
Like, what are some of the things that,
You think we can do to bring this to, to
bring everybody together more or less, and
kind of bring us on the same page and have
that, that empathy and compassion for each
other's sports and firearms in general,
versus just like, this is mine and only
Travis Bader: mine.
I think it comes down to normalization.
And I think you talk about these
micro communities and they're there.
There's always going to be, doesn't
matter what activity people get
into, you're going to have golfers,
and then you're going to have people
that get right, right into it.
You know, it doesn't matter.
What group or organization
you're with, but.
I think that the firearms community has
been, and I'll put my air brackets up
here for the people that are listening,
under the gun for such a long period of
time that a lot of them have decided,
you know, if we're quiet, if we don't
poke our head up, we just do our thing.
We're not going to sit here
and try and convince other
people, uh, it'll all go away.
But there's, there's just a massive
machine behind the, uh, Whether
intentional or otherwise the anti
gun or anti hunting movements.
Some of it's very much intentional.
Some of it, maybe not so much, you know,
firearms are glorified in, in media.
Uh, people think of a police
officer and, you know, give me a
couple objects that a cop is, they
don't think of a pen and paper.
They don't think of, uh, Uh, all,
all the things that a cop is, they
think about that very small thing,
which is a gun on the hip, right?
Badge gun, right?
Firefighter is going
to be hose and bucket.
Right.
Um, the gun has been glorified and
in ways through media, and it's been
vilified in a way that, uh, I think
it's become a part of the argument.
As opposed to like, people
will say, well, I love my guns.
Yeah.
Right.
I, you're not going to take one and
I'm going to fight for every last gun.
And then the other side might
say, no, every gun should be gone.
But what are we actually talking about?
Like, what's the end goal?
Like if, if you ask any gun owner
out there, they'd say, yeah,
we don't want to see shootings.
We don't want to see gangsters out
there running around with them.
We don't want to see kids
taking them to school.
I don't know any gun owner in
the world that would say that.
And it's the same sentiment of what other,
uh, people who'd want to get rid of guns.
So, What is it we're actually
looking to work towards?
And if you can start identifying that
and maybe just take the gun out of
the equation for a second, just put
it on the side, say, not a problem.
We can talk about that and do our
best to take the emotion out of
it and say, well, you know, is
there such a thing as a bad gun?
Right.
And sure, we can talk about that, but.
What effect is that going to
have if we get rid of them?
Like what effect of
getting rid of drugs do?
Um, well, people still got drugs, prisons
are the easiest place to get them, right?
People are still having problems.
Are we looking at harm reduction?
Are we looking at something that'll
actually move our society to
the place where we're not seeing
these, these negative things that
are being spun out in the media?
Sean Zubor: Do you feel like it's maybe
a fact that, uh, the gun, and I don't
know if it's necessarily our place to
have to do this anyways, but the gun
advocacy groups, firearm advocacy groups
are not creating enough solutions for
the problems that may be out there.
And they're just sort of saying
like, Hey, not over my dead body.
Are you taking these guns away from me?
And what I mean by as an example is,
um, and just like you mentioned earlier.
If somebody is shot, let's say
you lose a son or a family member
or something from a firearm.
Right.
There's a lot of emotion attached
to that, obviously, right.
It's hardship and
everything attached to that.
And is it, did the firearm, like
any reasonable person is going
to know this, the fire would jump
off the table and shoot somebody.
No, there is somebody behind that, that
did that action and so on and so forth.
Right.
Um, but.
It is very easy for somebody to say,
well, if there were no guns, or if you
don't have a gun, then that wouldn't,
nobody would be able to grab that.
They don't necessarily think, well,
just like England, you can go get a
knife and stab somebody, or you can
grab a truck or, you know, if somebody
wants to kill you, unfortunately,
Travis Bader: that's.
And England's still got
guns and they're an Island.
And if you can't keep them off this
Island, how do you expect to keep
it out of, let's say Canada, which
is right next door to the largest
arms manufacturer in the world.
Exactly.
Sean Zubor: Right.
So.
Is it maybe that we are not coming up with
enough solutions as, um, as a movement
in whole, in whole, like, are we coming,
like, are, are we going out there and
just saying, Hey, listen, guns don't
kill people, kill people, kill people.
Okay.
It's the truth, right?
But by saying that you are also
not giving any, well, this is what
we should do and how it would be.
An effective harm reduction policy.
Does that make sense?
Travis Bader: Kind of like the old
book, uh, getting to yes, negotiating
agreement without giving in.
Yeah, exactly.
Here's my line in the sand and I'm
not going to go past it as opposed
to saying, well, okay, I've got this
line here, but I'm willing to move
that line for you if we get this.
Basically come into some sort
of a quarter and understanding.
Or, or
Sean Zubor: even, uh, I'll
give you an example, right?
I think one of the things that I
don't see any of our ag advocacy
groups, like whoever they may
be mentioning, you know, in, in.
In the United States, for example, all of
these mass shootings that you've had, I
saw the entire list of it, and I'm sure
you guys can all Google it and see it
yourself, but almost every single one, no,
not almost every single one of these kids
that did these mass shootings were all on
some kind of antidepressants, all on some
kind of drugs, all on some kind of mind
altering, not one of them wasn't right.
Um, And so do, do we, as advocacy
groups talk enough about the
preliminary causes and okay, no problem.
We can do background checks.
We can do it.
And the funny thing is, is, you
know, you give an inch and then
they ask for not even a mile in this
case, many times, 10, 20, 30 miles.
But, um, I think most.
Canadian firearm owners that I've met
are okay with background checks are
okay with some reasonable prejudice.
Just like you got to get a
driver's license for a car, right?
I think most of us are okay
with certain things, right?
Where it draws the line is, is
that we are getting everything
taken away without any reasonable.
Reason for it, right?
No mass murders with AR 15s, no nothing.
And then all of a sudden, all
these responsible owners that are
the most vetted Canadians, right?
Are getting all of their firearms and
personal property taken away from us.
And so obviously we're
rightfully angry, right?
Are we doing enough to, you know,
tell the world as an advocacy, as a
group, as an organization on the actual
causality of what is causing these
people, people to do these horrific
things, you know, the gun is the tool.
Obviously, and that's what
they keep bringing up.
But do you feel as a society, we're
doing enough to, you know, educate the
world on what is actually happening?
I just don't see a lot of that
Travis Bader: out there.
You know, the word reasonable is always
going to be a difficult one, right?
Surely you're open to some
reasonable restrictions.
You're open to some reasonable measures.
Oh yeah, I'm open to reasonable measures.
Right.
Well, where does that reason start to
begin with, if, if it is in fact that
all of these shooters in the States,
mass shooters were on some sort of
mind altering drug, wouldn't it be
reasonable to start there as opposed
to looking at, they also all wore blue
shoes, right, or whatever it might be.
Yeah.
Um, the firearms got the ability
to do some serious damage
in a short period of time.
And there's no.
Doubt about that.
I don't think that everybody should have
a God given right to have access to any
type of level of whatever it might be.
Nuclear, right?
You, what is that fake Latin saying?
Absolutum infinitum, right?
You just, you take the argument
to the absolute infinite.
Uh, does it make sense over there still?
If so, then maybe you've
got a good argument.
If it doesn't, like, why are we, where
are we drawing these arbitrary lines?
I think that the, um, uh, there's a lot
of very well meaning people out there.
Most of these people want
the exact same thing.
They don't want to see people get hurt.
People want to feel safe.
They don't want to be.
Feeling threatened in their communities.
And some people look at it as a
firearm, as a way to feel safe.
And other people look at getting rid
of the firearm as a way to feel safe.
But it also will be a very easy tool
because it's got such an emotional
attachment associated with it
to pull those emotional strings.
If you want to just manipulate or
control, or if I want to get votes
in a certain area, I'll say, well,
look at my opponent wants to make
it easier for you to get guns.
Right.
And vice versa.
You want to get votes in another area to
say my opponent wants to take away your,
your right to be able to protect yourself.
Yeah.
Well, neither of those
are really true, right?
The, the end result of that, but
it sure gets people fired up.
The minutiae of it can
get boring for people.
What you mean?
We have to actually talk to our children
and raise them in a certain way.
And there's some things that we can do
as a society and as family to be able to
look out for these pre fight indicators
or pre threat indicators, and we have to
start providing people, um, necessities.
Like a lot of times these
things are happening.
People are drawn to a life of crime,
typically not because they come from the
most affluent backgrounds and have all,
all the niceties in life would offer.
They might be drawn there because
they are at risk to begin with.
Should we be looking
at, at, at those areas?
It gets a little tougher and the
conversation isn't quite as easy to have.
So I think that's where.
The, the major disparity
happens between the two sides.
One, because it's such a polarizing topic.
It's two, because it's very emotional
three, because it's intentionally used by
both sides to be able to take them apart.
But are we doing enough to be able
to educate people on other reasons?
I think people have to be
open to hearing that first.
Sean Zubor: How do we know though,
if we're not saying it or are we
Travis Bader: saying it?
I'm just missing it.
I mean, the information is there.
Yeah.
If a person is a gun owner can find it, a
person is a non gun owner can find it too.
But what did Israeli say?
And I don't even think it was Israeli.
There's liars, damn
liars and statisticians.
Right.
Um, you know, people can make stats sing
to whatever, whatever way they wish it to.
To go, but there are some
underlying truths to things, right?
There are some things that they can
be able to extrapolate in a similar
way to what you're talking about
before of how you operate business and
you're doing your constant OODA loop.
Sean Zubor: So how do we, how do we go
ahead and, you know, tell the general
public this, because I think we're just,
just by being an outsider that's in the.
More along the firearms community as a
participant, not as a, you know, working
in it or whatever, have you, um, I, I
don't see, uh, unless for myself, like
I've, I've been able to bring a few
people into the community because I, I
show myself shooting on Instagram or,
you know, I'm, I'm like showing how
much I enjoy doing these activities.
Right.
Um, but do we, as a community, Are we
proactively putting it in commercials?
Are we proactively out there
trying to get this message across?
And I know it could be
a double edged sword.
Cause then all of a sudden, you know,
they're going to loop us into what's
in the States and you have the whole
NRA and whatever, you know, the, the,
the gun, most powerful committees,
whatever you want to call it.
The point is, is are we doing enough to
educate, or do you feel like that might?
Us going out there as a CCFR, for example,
going out there and putting these things
out there, that's going to all of a
sudden backfire and say, Hey, these gun
lobbies are just trying to brainwash
Travis Bader: you or whatever.
Well, anything could backfire or be
used in the, in the, uh, as a propaganda
tool to be used against a person.
I don't know if, uh, telling people.
Is necessarily the approach to take.
I really don't have an answer to
it, but I do know what I'm doing.
And it's similar to what you just said.
Even that's showing I'll show people, I
mean, through my social media, through
how I dress, how I comport myself to,
I'm not running around decked out,
head to toe and, and, uh, Vietnam era
camouflage with bandoliers of bullets.
And I loves me guns, right?
You know, I'm doing my best just to
be a normal individual who contributes
to the community and works really hard
to bring everybody else up around them
into a better place and to, uh, assist
those who are worth assisting and open
to assistance to, to, to be a better.
Better person for, for themselves
without making the gun or whatever
the cause be, the focus of the
attention, it just so happens to
be an ancillary by product of it.
And, you know, Shane Mahoney is
a, um, renowned conservationist
out of, uh, out of Newfoundland,
a very good orator, well spoken.
And he says, you know.
One thing for the hunting movement
is to find something that has the
public's attention, rather than saying
hunting's good, and this is why, and
here's all the stats on the animals.
And people like, they tune out.
They like, I just saw a picture of
a, of a wolf and it looks like my
dog and it was shot and I feel bad.
Right.
It says, well, why don't we look at
a movement that's gaining popularity
and has been for some time.
And that's just, you're eating local and
the hundred mile diet and all the rest.
And we'll just.
Emphasize that hunting also happens to
be a part of that, but, but we're not
trying to force it down somebody's throat.
I don't think that, uh, we exclude those
who want to forcibly try and stand up and
say, this is a way, like, I don't think
there's just one way, but I think for
the general population, the masses of.
If they just realize that, you know,
our doctors, our lawyers, our judges,
our, our, uh, police officers, our
professionals in our community,
teachers out there, they hunt, they have
firearms and they're productive members.
And I think that sort of
a, uh, approach would.
paint a different picture than what people
typically see, which is six o'clock news.
And here's, here's the
gangbanger out there.
Right.
Sean Zubor: So it's more, uh, of a
normalization of showing that like,
this is something that everybody does.
And it's funny that you
mentioned that because.
I don't want to tell you the exact,
cause I'd be lying the exact stats
on it, but Ohio and Idaho and all
these things in Utah, the amount of,
uh, tags that have gone, gone, uh,
or been applied for because of Joe
Rogan and because of Cameron Haynes
and because of all these guys saying
like, that's all I eat is elk now.
Right.
You know, like, and it's going, and
it's been this, instead of hunting.
It's lifestyle.
It's like, I only eat organic.
I train every day.
I do cold showers or cold baths.
I do this and I eat elk.
Travis Bader: Yeah.
Right.
And they're contributing members of the
society who are doing something that's
productive and they're an aspirational
figure that other people say, you know
what, if they can do it, I can do it too.
Sean Zubor: So maybe is that
one of the next steps then?
Is that something you're
saying that these people that.
Our normal contributing members
of society should be just a
little bit more outspoken.
Is that something that we could
Travis Bader: ask for or hope for?
Uh, perhaps I think the biggest thing
is just don't get baited into the
argument that you didn't want to have
to begin with, because there's, there's
a losing proposition on, on some of
these arguments and guns are bad.
Guns are good.
Well, guns are neither good nor
bad, but thinking makes it so right.
Yeah.
To, to misquote Shakespeare.
It's true.
Yeah, I think the argument has just
been wrong for a very long time, both.
Intentionally and unintentionally,
I think that people should, uh, they
don't have to force their opinions and
beliefs down people, but they also have
to realize that those who are trying to
force your opinions and beliefs, there
should be a check and balance in that
process and not get baited into being
the opposition of a certain thing,
but you're opposing someone's ability
to force their will or opinion on you
without the ability to have a reasonable.
Uh, retort back.
Sean Zubor: Right.
Well, that kind of leads to
a question I have for you.
Okay.
So.
I've been looking at
getting, um, a trapline.
I was looking at, I'm getting
my pilot's license and
hopefully my float designation.
How do I get an ATC?
Travis Bader: That's
an excellent question.
I'm glad you asked that one.
And, uh, yeah, float plane.
Awesome.
My, my son is working towards his
pilot license at the moment now,
and we're, we're, I know he's
going to want floats as well.
He said.
Where, where is he doing it?
Um, Charlie Zulu, bravo,
bravo here at Burnaby.
Yeah, or Boundary Bay, sorry.
Very cool.
Um, but yeah, he's, uh, done his
ground school a couple of times.
He's only 14 right now.
Oh, wow.
That's very cool.
Yes.
He's done ground school a few times.
He's just working up his hours now, done
his tests, got everything under his belt.
And he's just got to finish up his
hours and get himself through, but.
It's, it's such
Sean Zubor: an amazing experience.
There's, um, I've been
boating my whole life.
I have my motorcycle license, all
that kind of jazz, but flying.
A, I way underestimated
how much work it is.
It's a lot of work.
Holy cow.
And like what you have to memorize
and, and it makes sense, but I
just thought, I'm just trying to
like fly a Cessna with floats.
Right.
And what, what work do I have to do?
Travis Bader: And they're dead easy to
fly, like really when you're up there,
but there's a hell of a lot of work.
Well, and
Sean Zubor: the thing is what you have
to learn is basically 75 or 80% of what
the pilot does, because if you don't know
how to do that stuff, you're going to.
Drop the plate out of the sky, all
the stuff kind of goes in there.
So I way underestimated the amount of
work it would take, but, um, yeah, I,
what I'm looking to do is obviously go
hunting, uh, looking at guiding trap line.
Something is, you know, a down the line,
not to say retirement gig, but other gig.
Yeah.
Um.
Man, what do I do to get an ATC,
Travis Bader: man?
So ATC, authorization to carry, few
different ways you can get one in Canada.
One, you can be, uh, your
principal activity is a
transport of cash or negotiables.
So armored car guards, they get ATCs.
They don't have a Queen's
commission like the police have.
Police don't have firearms licenses
unless they go out personally and get one.
A little bit different rules there,
just like the, our army doesn't
need firearms licenses to go out.
And is
Sean Zubor: it sort of interrupt?
Is it true that, cause I've
heard this, I think like RCMP
can't carry outside of duty?
Yes and no.
Okay.
Depending, I guess, on what their
Travis Bader: role is
or something, I guess.
Technically they're not supposed
to be carrying outside of duty.
If they get authorization
from a supervisor, they can
now carry outside of duty.
Um, yeah.
So, uh, there, there's a yes and no,
and there's a bit of a gray area.
I think there is a, uh, When the,
the laws keep coming in and changing,
there's always going to be levels to
try and placate those who are going
to be enforcing the laws as well, too.
Right.
Sean Zubor: It was just weird to me that
a police officer that that's their job,
they walk around with a firearm, can't
conceal carry or something like that.
It's just.
One doesn't make sense for the other.
That's all.
But I, I guess
Travis Bader: it is what it is.
It's laws.
It's Canada.
There's a lot that might not make
sense, but yeah, so your principal
activity is to transport a cash
or negotiables, armor card guard.
You got to go through some training.
You got to realize that there's
going to be less violent means
available and how you can take them.
They don't really have intermediary taser.
They go from empty hand
defense to lethal force.
Right.
So they've, uh, they don't really have
the same force continuum that, uh, a
police officer would have, mind you,
their role is to leave, to run away.
Yeah.
So.
But a week long course, week to two
weeks, depending on who you're doing
the training with and the level of
training that they're getting, uh,
if your life is in danger, right?
If there's a legitimate threat on
your life and the keyword I think
is police protection isn't adequate.
Okay.
You can get yourself an ATC for that.
We've worked with some and
the final hurdle for some
individuals who had legitimate.
Threats on their life who were requiring
the ability to carry a firearm was, we
need you to get something from your local
chief of police, piece of paper saying
that their protection is not adequate.
Well, good luck finding that right.
Yes.
Sean Zubor: Could you give me an example
of like who would qualify for that?
Like not, obviously don't give me
exactly who they were, but like what
kind of position would that be in?
Is that like.
Cause obviously it's not going to
be like, Hey, you're a gangster.
So you can qualify
Travis Bader: yourself, right?
The law is not, it doesn't
qualify the individual.
They just say that there's going
to be some imminent risk to, uh,
death or grievous bodily harm and
police protection is inadequate.
So that could, could
be the gangster, right?
Technically, uh, under the law, typically
it's something that's going to be
given to, let's say a judge during a.
Period of time when they're
working on a trial and there's
been threats on their life.
And the police aren't, you know,
maybe they have a protective detail
on them, but, uh, they can't be
everywhere all the time for them.
Yeah.
So that that's generally been from my
understanding where the few and far
between on the protection of life,
uh, outside of Your cash negotiables
has been, uh, issued, but then there's
the one that you're talking about and
people call it a WATC or wilderness ATC.
So they keep changing rules on that.
And every time they change the rules,
we here at Silvercore have always
been the forefront of certifying
new individuals who qualify to
meet whatever the new rules are.
I think it was around 96, put person
through and 2000, they change the rules,
put them through and, and there's.
Essentially, it comes down to you're
working in a remote wilderness area
and you require a restricted firearm
or a pistol to protect yourself,
your life from predatory animals.
What's a remote wilderness area?
I don't know.
Right.
Uh, that's somebody
living in the city, maybe.
Went out a little bit into
the bush is remote wilderness.
If somebody lives well outside
of the city, maybe they feel
that's pretty populated.
So that that's pretty
open to interpretation.
Mind you, when we've had people come
through for the ATCs, we leave that
wide open, any area within BC, which
is considered remote wilderness,
uh, working is one, uh, that the.
Is it's sort of a key word.
And they, uh, the issuing body being the
Canadian Firearms Program looks at working
as actively employed or self employed.
It doesn't look at it as, Hey, I'm
working on the roof of my cabin, right?
They have to see some sort of employment.
So, uh, if you've got a trap
line, that would be okay,
that's what I'm doing for work.
They might ask you for municipal.
Authorizations saying, Hey,
you've got a business license.
And I know when I had to apply for one,
I had to get a letter from the city of
Delta saying, we have no authority over
remote wilderness areas throughout BC.
But, but that was one of the checks
and balances they had to go through.
And, uh, it has to be, you know, if
it's funny, because there is a desire
to not issue these wilderness ATCs.
And I talked to my American
friends and they're like,
this is absolutely ridiculous.
How can you not, uh, like Brad Brooks
out of Idaho, he is out in Alaska and
he's hunting and he's, um, Uh, he's
got his pistol in his hip because
he's got his, he's doing some archery.
He's like, how can you guys go
out there and not have something?
Right.
Sean Zubor: Well, it's crazy
that you mentioned that
actually, speaking of Alaska.
Yeah.
So I did the research.
I can literally drive to the Alaska
border and with my hunting license
that I purchased from Alaska.
Which is free.
Which is free.
I can.
Or no, it's 10.
Yeah.
No course.
More or less free.
Right.
I can just say that I'm hunting small
bird, which will allow me to bring
over my firearm and I can conceal
carry or open carry in Alaska.
Wait, there's another permit that I
have to apply for, but that is the
preliminary effect for that permit.
So I could literally conceal carry.
In Alaska and not
Travis Bader: in British Columbia.
Well, that was the, the, the
States have different rules.
They call it a CCW.
So concealed carry weapon.
And I remember Utah, they had a, when they
had reciprocity and a whole bunch of other
States, including Alaska and Washington.
And the, they had this guy
coming around and he was just
raking in the money, right.
He was going to all the local clubs
here in Canada and I'll put you through,
you're going to get your Utah license.
And I was one of them.
I went through and I got my Utah CCW.
And when I went in the States,
you were able to bring it across.
I had my Alaska license
and I went into Washington.
Okay.
I mean, fair enough.
You got your Alaska.
So you met all the protocol.
And, um, I went down there for a training
courses I was doing in the States, but,
uh, there's a lot of little workarounds.
I don't know if I would want to be
on the arguing end of a workaround
like this, if push came to shove.
Um, but for Canada, you're,
you're willing to say TC, they're
going to require you a, a.
That you do some sort
of proof of proficiency.
Okay.
Um.
Sean Zubor: And that you can take
the course through yourself, right?
There's a course that
Travis Bader: you do get.
You can do that through yourself.
I found it kind of funny because they
say, well, proof of proficiency, the
people who can sign off on you, if
they're a range officer or a firearm
safety course instructor, neither
of those people necessarily have
any background in, in being able to.
Provide proof of
proficiency or qual courses.
Right.
For individuals.
Maybe they're a range officer and
they're good at turning the light on and
off and calling the range safe or not,
or dealing with deactivated firearms
or disabled firearms in the safety
course, but that's where the process is.
So you have to show that you can shoot it.
You're supposed to be using
the same ammunition that
you'd be using on an animal.
So you can't use lighter loads.
Gotcha.
Uh, question on that is what
police officers do you know
that qualify on ammunition?
That's going to be the same as
what they're using and carrying.
And the answer is, well, probably close
to none because most of them are using
cheaper FMJs or frangibles on their,
uh, their ranges and not hollow points.
But, um, you meet that criteria,
prove that you're working and you
can do that with your trap line.
And then there's going to
be caliber restrictions.
They say that you want to have something
that's going to be, have enough power.
Sean Zubor: So just random questions, the
Glock 20, the 10 millimeter sufficient.
Cause I know a lot of guys up North are
Travis Bader: using those.
Yeah.
And I got one for a 40 Cal.
I think I was the first one to be issued
one for 40 Cal and I would argue nine
millimeter as well, because previously
they were saying, you know, uh, it has
to be a revolver, it's gotta be minimum.
Uh, I think it was minimum 357 Magnum.
I said, well, how does an animal go down?
It's not always going to be bears that
you're protecting yourself from, right?
There's other predatory
animals out there that.
Uh, or other dangers that you'd
be having a problem with and, you
know, a nice, powerful round does
nothing if you miss it, right?
If you have 10 rounds in your magazine,
you have more chances to hit it.
You have more chances.
You're either going to be disabling
an animal through an interruption
of the central nervous system, the
spine or brain, or through inducing
massive hypovolemic shock through
cardiopulmonary decompression.
And the.
Fastest way to do that is more holes.
Yeah.
So anyways, was successful
on all of those fronts.
I have seen people denied the ability
if they're out in their trap line, or if
they're out working at remote wilderness
area and they say, well, right now I'm
carrying my shotgun with me everywhere.
And they say, oh, well, you
don't need a handgun then.
Sean Zubor: And that's what I was
going to ask you, because I've, I've
heard of, I actually know two guides
that, um, guide out of Muncho Lake up
there and they applied for it and they
were denied because they were told.
That, well, you can carry a,
uh, a shotgun, you can carry,
um, a rifle or whatever it is.
Right.
But they, you know, they're not excuse,
but why they wanted one is the fact
that they're packing all the time.
They're doing this, how are they going
to be able to access that shotgun?
If the thing's attacking them
while they're packing meat
on the back of their horses.
Um, so I don't know if they've
successfully been able to reapply
or whatever the case has been
a while since I talked to them.
But so there is no specific, like
these are the jobs that you can do.
These are the, it's just, if it's a, and
that specific job, because like, that's
one of the things I've heard as well.
There's quite a few helicopter pilots that
have it out there because at the end of
the day, they're in forestry or whatever.
They're communicating quite and they
crash quite often, unfortunately, not.
It happens.
Yeah.
Not, not, uh, Lethal in
most cases, but it happens.
And, um, so that's, that's the only
way that they have no room to put a
shotgun or whatever it may be in there.
So they're carrying.
So there is no specific job requirement
Travis Bader: or anything.
Remote willingness area.
What is that?
That's up to you to define, um, working.
What is that?
Well, that's going to be a conversation.
They're going to want to have a talk
with you, which is a good opportunity
for them to say, well, now you've been
disqualified based off of our talk.
And I remember when I went through,
um, every time they change the rules
and they make it different, they
say, well, come on in, let's have
a little conversation about it.
I'm like, why don't you
send it to me in an email?
I'm more than happy to, because I
want to document the process, right.
Because I want to be
able to assist others.
So that they can go in the same route, not
to cheat the system, not to scam it, not
to find a workaround, but to know exactly
what it is that's required and what isn't.
I would think from a government
agency standpoint, they'd want
that level of systemization.
And so it finally reached a point
where they refused to do the, uh,
to provide the questions by email,
because they said it could be dynamic.
It could be changing.
I said, okay.
Not a problem.
I got you on phone now.
Yeah.
Let's do this.
You can ask me all the questions you want.
They said, okay, question number one.
I write it down.
I said, that's a really good question.
I'll get back to you by email.
What's the next question?
Went through the entire list.
It's like, come on guys,
quit playing this game.
Um, so anyways, got all the questions.
They now have a written form as well
that you'll answer and you'll put
out, uh, uh, your, your questions
do know that there are some firearms
officers out there that will try to
disqualify you based on your questions.
So the more succinct you can
be when you answer them to the
point, truthful, obviously.
Um, the, the less you're providing
for them to try and pick holes in.
Sean Zubor: And so now with this new, uh,
can't transfer cell by handguns, how has
this thrown a wrench into the whole thing?
Like, like, uh, fortunately
I do have a 357.
Fortunately I do have.
You know, 10 millimeter Glock.
Fortunately, I have all those things.
However, um, if I didn't and I needed
an ATC, how would I go about doing that?
Or is that just null and void now?
Travis Bader: Well, they keep
making provisions, right?
Um, is it null and void?
No, there's always a way like
for someone to deny you the
ability to protect your life.
And I think that's one of
the things that should.
An approach that an
individual should take.
I definitely, I would take is to
put that onus on the issuing party.
Rather than them putting the onus
on you and say, well, you didn't
meet the requirements, put the
onus on them to be able to say,
how are those requirements sound?
And now you're, if I get mauled and
killed out there based on you and my
inability to have anything else out
there, you're going to wear this, right?
Very few people want to wear that one.
They'll try and find
a way to pass it back.
Um, there are provisions for people who
are working for them to be able to get
handguns that are written in, but we've
also got an election apparently coming
up that's, uh, that's being rumored.
So we'll see what happens there.
Yeah.
Hopefully that changes a lot.
And you know, I guess the other
side would be too, for businesses,
there's nothing stopping an
individual from starting a business.
Right.
If you want to have all of the
there's, there's always a way for
people to be able to do things.
If somebody says, Oh man, I really want
to shoot full auto and I want to have
silences and I want to have, and they
go through the whole list of things that
they want to do a little bit of hard work.
You can set up a businesses.
There are businesses out there
that do all of those things,
and now you're able to do it.
Provided you're not just
doing it for your own.
Yeah.
Right.
And you, you can actually justifiably say
this is a business thing that I'm doing.
Go nuts.
I mean, the requirements for a
business are in some cases less
stringent than for an individual,
like for an individual, if you have
to, uh, lock up your firearms, right.
Your restricted firearms and trigger
lock and it locked box, right.
Separate from the ammunition or in a safe.
And for a business, this has got to
be, your firearms have to be separate.
In an area, not readily accessible to the
general public, every window and every
door has to have the ability to be locked.
Doesn't even say it has to be locked.
Right.
And, um, there has to
be an electronic alarm.
And like, what is that?
Is that one of those little motion
sensor frogs that ribbits when you go by?
Is it a monitored alarm?
Is it a siren?
I mean.
They don't stipulate, so it
gets a little, little silly.
There's a lot of generalizations in there.
There is.
Yeah.
Sean Zubor: Yeah, man.
Okay.
So I'm going to definitely
try to apply for my ATC.
I've got to figure out, I wonder
if I could, uh, open Stonehouse
in a remote location, but how
would I, how would I defend
Travis Bader: myself?
Would you be ever working as a real estate
agent in remote wilderness locations?
I actually do right now.
There you go.
That's working.
Sean Zubor: Do you think that
Travis Bader: would be approvable though?
It all comes down to the individual.
Yeah.
I mean, from the letter
of the law, absolutely.
And it comes down to the individual,
the circumstances, the firearms
officer that you're dealing with.
Cause keep in mind, you have to
make it easy for them to say yes.
Yeah.
Or hard for them to say no.
Right.
If you want to paint a person to the
corner and they got nowhere else to go.
I mean, you're, you're, you're not doing
yourself any favors, but if you paint them
into a corner and give them a door out.
Yeah.
Most civil servants don't want to
take that level of responsibility.
And if they can find a way to
pass it onto somebody else.
Yeah.
And still do their job and
do what they have to do.
Not a problem.
Sean Zubor: Fair enough.
So let me ask you this.
So with your ATC, could it, it's
not defined by a specific area, I
guess it would only be defined if
it's, um, like wilderness, I guess.
But, um, It's not to find like, because
what I've been told is that you can,
if you have a trapline and you're
applying it for your trapline, you
can only wear it on your trapline.
And I even read somewhere that it
has to be locked up while you're on
like the quad or something like that.
And that once you get off the quad, then
you can put it, and there's only a certain
type of holsters that you can wear.
You can't wear like I.
From what I've been told and read,
and obviously probably wrong,
but that there's a whole bunch of
stipulations, uh, attached to it.
But I guess maybe that's
just how the application was
Travis Bader: or.
I mean, if you want to put stipulations
on, you can, and if they ask you
to put stipulations on and you do,
they will gladly comply with that.
Yeah.
But it's similar to your
authorization to transport previously,
you had to apply for an ATT.
Yeah.
Then it was brought in as part of
your license, but they would ask you
a whole bunch of questions on there.
What range do you belong to?
What time do you think you're
going to be transporting it?
Um, what days would you
be transporting it on?
And people would fill it out
and like, well, geez, I'm.
I wouldn't go there on a weekday, maybe
in the evenings in the weekday, right.
But not through the day and Saturdays
and Sundays and, um, and on the forum,
it says, um, I think at the time it
was, uh, one, two or three year license.
What, what do you want
it for, for how long?
Like, why would I put, Oh, I just want
it for a year, I just need it for a week.
And so, uh, background 94, 95 put
out a forum and it said to all
approved gun clubs and ranges,
uh, from 2, 400 to 2, 400.
Every day of the week, I want it
for the maximum of three years.
Like the, I get the intention
behind some of these laws and rules.
They don't want to see gangbangers
run around with handguns and
without proper permission.
And it gives them another tool
so they can say, are you right?
Or are you wrong?
But.
As a licensed firearms owner, who's
gone through proper training and
criminal record checked and background
checked and reference checked, and now
that reference checks and all those
checks go for a person's lifetime.
What's the difference between them
carrying a rifle, which is far
more dangerous pistol or a shotgun.
So, you know, sometimes the logic kind
of goes out the window and I think
the firearms program looked at that.
They'll make forms sometimes
the only, the only.
Um, teeth that some of these laws
really have, or some of these rules
that are in place fall in place on
the form, because there's an order
prescribing forms and licenses, and
they'll say it's asked on the form.
And so you have to fill it out, but
there's nowhere in the law that says
you have to put these things out.
So it's, it's a very, it's a very, it's
a It's a very interesting sort of thing.
And it's, um, uh, I mean, we, we advocate
for people's ability to be able to use
things lawfully and safely, uh, not to
be cutting corners and skirting, skirting
the, uh, the rules here, but in the
same breath that there are rules that
you're supposed to be playing by, it's
important people know what they are.
Yeah.
Sean Zubor: So, um, so just to clarify
then, so let's say I get an ATC.
Yep.
You're on your trap line.
And I'm on my trap line and I
haven't specifically said that this
is going to be for my trap line.
This is going to be for, uh, trapping,
but not specifically for that area only.
Let's just put it that way.
Um, Now, does it have to be used in,
on the job per se, like only, or can
I, can I go hunting later on that day
with a bow and carry my handgun with me?
Travis Bader: I think if you look
at these things, there's two places
that I'd put myself in two positions.
Number one.
Um, CYA, can you articulate, right?
Can you articulate to a conservation
officer or a police officer or
whomever it might be that you are
complying with the conditions of
which your license was, uh, provided.
Right.
And number two, is this a position
that you'd want to defend in court?
Right.
Right.
So.
Uh, if the answer is yes to both
of those and then so be it, right.
But, uh, if you're a little hazy on some
of them, then I'd say I probably wouldn't
because the ends don't justify the means.
And is that really worth it for you?
Uh, for some of the people who
are getting their licenses,
they're going to be working.
BC, uh, or whatever province they're in.
And, uh, maybe they're, maybe they're
a free miner, they don't have a
set trap line, or maybe they're,
they're looking for new trap lines.
They're going to be setting up and
they need to explore these areas
just because you have a trap line and
that's your one doesn't mean you, it's
going to preclude you from looking in
other areas and staking places out.
So, uh, I would say.
Sean Zubor: But the letter of the
law basically says that it should
be during the job, I guess, or, uh.
It says working.
Working.
Okay.
So it's not just that I have to have that.
And once I have a job and I use it for
my job, I can use it for everything
Travis Bader: else too.
I mean, if your job's as a
guide, you might have a, uh,
have an argument there, right?
Right.
Um, if your job is, uh, scouting
as a guide, maybe you have
an argument there, right?
It's just, Uh, it's one of these things
where people tend to do things cause
that's how it's always been done.
Right.
And it's okay to ask questions
and to push back and sometimes
it just costs you your time.
Sometimes it costs your money, but
whatever you do, I would highly encourage
anybody if they have it and they
feel that they're in the right, make
sure they've got a way to be able to.
Articulate afterwards.
And what I like to do is I'll get
things in writing and oftentimes they
don't want to offer things in writing.
So maybe I'll just do the reverse
of that and I'll send them something
in writing and say, here's what I'm
planning on doing and reverse that onus.
If this is not within
the prescribed rules.
Please let me know, right.
Otherwise I will proceed like ABC
and here's a timeframe you can
get ahold of me and all the rest
and give it a reasonable time.
Yeah.
Awesome.
But I'm not a lawyer.
I can't give legal advice, but
I can talk about some of the
areas that we do operate in.
Cool.