[Image] NFA PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO COPY AND DISTRIBUTE THESE PAGES VOLUME XII, NUMBER 4 1995, APRIL EDITORIAL TELEPHONE POLL: Courtesy a worker in Maritimes we have initiated another 900 number poll. We learned from the mistakes in the last one so this should go much smoother. The prime purpose is to counter much of what Rock has been claiming from his poll. To do this we need, literally, thousands of you to respond. Pass the word out every way possible - clubs, ranges, businesses and in local papers. Following is a sample ad which, for legal reasons, must be followed. The poll is open right now so call. 3 questions, 3 answers one price $1.99. If there is a profit 60% will go to the NFA legal fund to fight C-68 in the courts. The questions are: 1. Do you support the Government's proposed new gun control bill? 2. Would you like to see a FREE vote on the Gun Control Bill? 3. Would you like to see the bill broken down into (a) crime control (b) gun control and treated as two separate bills? Arrangements have been made to have the results presented in Parliament. RUMOUR OF THE DAY: As most rumours, this one is not confirmed but appears to be fully creditable. It says that the RCMP study into setting up THEIR computer to carry out C-68 is estimated to cost over $70 million. Recognizing the accuracy of everything that Rock says that leaves 15 million for all software, multi hundreds of terminals and training for all users. Boy that man is good. C-68 INFORMATION: We have put together a package to help you here. It includes the English version of C-68, the NFA analysis of it, Rock's own "Review of Firearms Registration TR1994-9e" and the NFA analysis of it also. The total cost will be $10 mailed to you, and we do recommend you have the whole related package. WHO NEEDS THE WAR MEASURES ACT? Termination of Civil Rights and Provincial Jurisdiction The Firearms Act (FA) contains some interesting modifications to the guarantees into the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and to our Constitutional federal-provlnclal jurisdiction split. SEARCH AND SEIZURE: FA s. 99 authorize any person "designated by the provincial Minister" (s. 98)to "enter and inspect any place" where he "believes... there is a firearm,... ammunition,... or a record (of) any of those things." While inside, he may "open any container", "examine any firearm and ... any other thing and take samples (which he may dispose of in any manner that he considers appropriate)", "conduct any tests or analysis", and "require any person to produce... any records." He may also "use any data processing system at the place to examine any data, available to the system (say, through the Internet? NFA], reproduce any record, and remove it, and copy any record... or other document." True, s. 101 says he may not enter a dwelling house - unless he gets a warrant under s. 99's terms. That means that he must tell a justice that he "believes... there is a firearm,... ammunition,... or a record (of) any of those things" in the private home he wants to ransack. And that he has some reason to believe that the owner objects to his idea. Easy enough, no? Note that he does NOT have to swear that he knows or even suspects that any crime is involved. The sections authorize him to get a warrant and ransack the home of any person in Canada who has a firearm, a cartridge, or a record of eIther. FA s. 100 then provides that "The owner or person in charge of a place that is inspected "with or without a warrant" and every person found in the place shall give" the inspecting person (a) "all reasonable assistance to enable him or her to... exercIse any power conferred by section 99"; and (b) provide the inspecting person "with any information relevant to the enforcement of this Act or the regulations [made under s. 110 (a) to (v) inclusive or Part III of the Criminal Code that he or she may reasonably require." s.107 sends you to prison if you don't "comply." My. Whatever happened to a Canadian's right to remain silent until competent legal advice is available? What happened to our Charter right to freedom from unreasonable search or seizure? REMOVAL OF PROVINCIAL JURISDICTION: FA s. 109 says: 109. Any proceedings In respect of an offence under this Act may be commenced at the instance of the Government of Canada and conducted by or on behalf of that government. That apparently means that the federal government will be handling all prosecutions under the Firearms Act, much as It currently handles all prosecutions under the Narcotics act. If a province wishes to conserve its scarce and costly police resources, it would probably be wise to drop out of the expensive and ineffective firearms control system entirely. Each province could recover millions of dollars worth of police equipment, building spaces, personnel and other assets currently devoted to firearms control - by letting the federal government do it all. It is apparent that Alan Rock's Liberal Party is trying to construct a huge bureaucracy - which Canada cannot afford - in order to attract favorable publicity and praise from those who do not understand that it is all smoke and mirrors. Fighting Alan flock's Liberal government is rather like fighting an elephant: Don't stand in front of it and scream, "No, no!" Step deftly to one side, then kick it In the rump as it thunders by - and watch it go end over end. The Liberals are trying to sucker the provinces into running the system, so the provinces should bow out. They should tell the feds to hire the staff, rent the offices, buy the equipment, and do all enforcement themselves. They could refuse to spend one thin dime of provincial tax money on a scheme that so blatantly lacks cost effectiveness. that will cost billions to operate, and that will turn the biggest bloc of voters in Canada - the firearms owners - against any political Party that helps Alan Rock's Liberal Party inflict this on Canadians. OFFENCIES: FA s. 105 is worth quoting: 105, Every person who... contravenes a regulation made (by Order In Council (OlC)] under paragraph 110(d), (e), (f), (g), (I), (I), (I), (m) or (n) the contraventIon of which has been made an offence under paragraph 110(0) (by OlC). (a)is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years... The FA s. 110 (a) "offences" include any violation of a regulation about target shooting clubs, gun collections, gun shows, anything to do with handguns or other "restricted" firearms, keeping of records about firearms, or keeping business records. In order to know what offences have been created by s. 110 (o), you must subscribe to the Canada Gazette and read it faithfully. If you don't, you may miss one and go to prison for two years. THIS IS NOT A CRIME CONTROL ISSUE - THIS IS A POLITICAL ISSUE. WANT A FREE TRIP TO OTTAWA? Standing Committee Hearings on C-68 and People: RECOMMENDED ACTIONS, ALL CLUBS AND ASSOCIATIONS: They expect a few clubs to apply to attend - so urge every club - no matter how small - to request an invitation to attend. Don't worry, you won't have to go; only national bodies will be invited. And if you are invited, the government pays your air fare, hotel and meal expenses. The government is not expecting the sort of Iaw knowledge material the NFA has been sending you to appear in submissions from small clubs and associations. If you can't afford to spread all of it around, copy all the 2-pagers and send one or two to each club so each becomes somewhat sophisticated. The NFA sent you that material so that it will appear In their submissions, and make MPs very nervous: `The peasants understand more than we expected!" Please spread it as widely as you can. They expect written submissions from a few clubs. Therefore, please urge everyone to submit written arguments against Bill C-68 - after they get the government refusal to invite them. Ottawa will refuse most who ask to be invited then all who are refused should complaIn bitterly to local media about the lack of democratic input. In particular, any organIzation with over 5000 members should complain that "The 5000-member Coalition For Gun Control was invited, why weren't we? We know more than the CGC!" RULE: Ask for an invitation; when refused, send a submission. Send applications for an invitation (and submissions) to: Richard Dupuis, Clerk Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs 180 Wellington St. #622 OTTAWA, ON KIA 0A6 Phone: (613) 996-1553 Fax: (613) 992-9069 or (613) 996-1626 Two themes should be stressed: 1.We don't want Bill C-68 changed; we want it killed. 2.We take any attack on any unit of the recrational firearms community as an attack on the entire recreational firearms community by the Party in power. 3.We're mad; Bill C-68 has made us all join Political Parties. Return to Point Blank Index ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This article is reproduced from the April 1995 edition of the National Firearms Association's Point Blank newsletter. This has been reproduced as a public service, and may contain minor inaccuracies. Therefore, this information should not neccessarily be considered as the Official Positions of the National Firearms Association. For further information, please contact Remington Nevin. Remington Nevin remnevin@interlog.com August 25, 1995