From owner-cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sat Apr 26 13:44:07 1997 From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #822 Content-Length: 25621 X-Lines: 673 Status: RO Cdn-Firearms Digest Saturday, April 26 1997 Volume 01 : Number 822 In this issue: RE: Wal-Mart recording of ammuntion purchases Private Member's Bill C-399 Re: CAW Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #821 Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #821 Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #821 [none] Re: Wal-Mart recording of ammuntion purchases Re:Color of Govt. by-laws of the Coalition for Gun Control (Making Plans) letters SPELLING & GRAMMAR in Submissions to CFD and Elsewhere Three years and still going strong! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 12:24:27 -0600 From: "Fred Davis" Subject: RE: Wal-Mart recording of ammuntion purchases >-----Original Message----- >From: Glasgow, Barry (COCOS:QUAL:7A32) >Sent: Friday, April 25, 1997 11:59 AM >Subject: Wal-Mart recording of ammuntion purchases > >[big snip] > >> By the way, the law was rammed through by the same Ontario Liberals >> who wanted to establish "gun free zones" here. >> The beauty of that kind of thinking is that it helped them >> get turfed in the following election. > > >[FD] >The law is currently under review and is up >for amendment. It will not be done away with >altogether, but a simple ID check to determine >legal age will replace the present BS system >foisted upon us by the previous socialist gov't. > >Fred Fred M. Davis (fmdavis@nortel.com) Test Manufacturing Eng'g Nortel North America ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 14:59:01 -0600 From: "Larry J. Going" Subject: Private Member's Bill C-399 I received a letter to-day from Mr. Darrel Stinson, Reform MP for Okanagan Shuswap. In it, he informs me of his private member's Bill C-339. This bill repeals Bill C-68, and asks for severe sentences for anyone using a firearm in the commission of a criminal offence-- a maximum of 14 years, minimum of 5 for using the firearm; a maximum of 14 years, and a minimum of ten if the firearm is discharged (even if it isn't pointed at anyone). Following is my reply. Dear Sir: Although I applaud your efforts on behalf of firearms owners, I can agree only to the elimination of Bill C-68. Bill C-17 poses many problems for firearms owners. It has banned thousands of firearms, and made many firearms collections worthless. It has also criminalized many firearms owners with its safe storage provisions. Mr. Merlen Fordice of Maple Creek Sask. was charged with unsafe storage. He was out inspecting pasture, and left an unloaded rifle in his locked truck. He had removed the bolt of his rifle and taken it with him. However, the law requires that the firearm be out of sight. Mr. Fordice was not aware of that provision. RCMP officers were waiting for him when he returned to the truck, and charged him. Mr. Fordice faces up to two years in jail, a fine of up to $5,000 and seizure of all his firearms. In addition, he faces a firearms ban for up to 10 years. All this-- and yet Mr. Fordice had no criminal intent, and thought he was complying with the law. I can quote you many more similar cases in Saskatchewan. I also take exception to the severe penalties you recommend for the criminal use of a firearm. What makes the use of a firearm worse than that of a knife, a baseball bat, or any other weapon? The penalties should be the same for the criminal use of any weapon. Yours truly, - -- Larry J. Going Sask. Pres., NFA Phone: 306-694-4168 Fax: 306-691-0271 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 17:41:35 -0600 From: theshack@niagara.com Subject: Re: CAW My husband is a member of the CAW, and he was not aware of the union's support of the Coalition for Gun Control. He has yet to find a fellow member who was aware of this. Since we have been fighting against Bill C-68 all this time, it was more than a little disheartening to discover that we have been unwitting supporters of our enemies in this arena. At this time, the membership is being notified and the situation will be addressed as soon as possible. I will post any developments. Kindest regards, Helen ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 18:15:21 -0600 From: John Fowler Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #821 At 12:24 PM 25-04-97 -0600, you wrote: > >Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, April 25 1997 Volume 01 : Number 821 > >Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:27:06 -0600 >From: Anonymous >Subject: Purolator's web site > > Purolator's web site > >Information from Purolator's web site http://www.purolator.com/ > >Snip >> [RIGHT] >> Purolator Courier reserves the right to open and inspect any package >> tendered to it for transportation. >Snip > >This sums it up - Purolator thinks they can open packages. > >Business documents are not secure in the Purolator system and Purolator >can open confidential documents sent via purolator according to their web site. >This would include medical records, bids and tenders, accounting records... >what ever is carried by Purolator. > And remember, folks - this is an arm of your democratic government, via the "arm's length" (HAH!) relationship with Canada Post (owners of Purolator, no?) Walk softly and join the NFA The gun you save may be your own. John Fowler ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 18:15:23 -0600 From: John Fowler Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #821 At 12:24 PM 25-04-97 -0600, you wrote: > >Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, April 25 1997 Volume 01 : Number 821 > >Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 20:12:42 -0600 >From: bhagar@onlink.net >Subject: Re: CAW > >The CAW supported Bill C-68 at the executive level. There was resistance >from the rank and file, many of them firearms owners. > >But as is usual with the CAW, Chairman Buzz knows what's best. (For the >membership, for the country, for everybody.) > >Part of my workforce is unionized by the CAW. During the last round of >negotiations, their were numerous acts of sabotage on the property. >One of the executive said, of course, "We don't know who's doing >this!" Then he said, "Maybe if you supported our position, it would >stop." > >These people scare the daylights out of me. I wonder what Allan Rock's new anti-gang law will do for these guys. Or for any other group of five or more that he disagrees with? How do you spell Tianamen Square? Walk softly and join the NFA The gun you save may be your own. John Fowler ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 18:15:26 -0600 From: John Fowler Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #821 At 12:24 PM 25-04-97 -0600, you wrote: > >Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, April 25 1997 Volume 01 : Number 821 > > >Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:58:34 -0600 >From: "Barry Glasgow" >Subject: Wal-Mart recording of ammuntion purchases > >In message "Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #820", > >It really bugs the hell out of customers lined up behind me to >have to wait while a 40-odd-year-old man watches some clerk copy >his drivers license info and details of the ammunition onto >something that will eventually get thrown away. >Apparently, we're to believe that these records would be used >to solve crimes. > >The irony is that the Ontario law is the result of some young >pukes stealing a car, rifle and ammunition to do a drive-by on >some innocent bystander. Makes sense. eh ? >How many stickup artists with black market guns do you think >are going to stand in line to have some Wal-Mart clerk record >their personal information in a book ? > >By the way, the law was rammed through by the same Ontario Liberals >who wanted to establish "gun free zones" here. >The beauty of that kind of thinking is that it helped them >get turfed in the following election. > >Barry Glasgow >Woodlawn, Ont. > Small correction here, Barry. The law was NOT "rammed through" by the Liberals - it was passed after a secret, all-party agreement made on a Thursday night before the Friday morning that the law received three readings (I believe) and passed unanimously in minutes - just before the Ontario Legislature closed down for a long time. Just a day or so before I (unwittingly) had a long chat with the senior executive assistant of my MPP (Conservative) and received extensive assurances of how evil and abhorrent the law was, and how Conservatives could never support any such oppressive trampling of individual rights in Ontario. (That was prolly *your* MPP, as well.) I call it democracy in action, Ontario style. Of course, the Ontario PCs had no idea how volatile an issue this was, and how quickly hunters/sportspeople would turn the election poll tables on the Liberals the morning after what's-her-name promised us gun free zones in all Ontario cities. Bye-bye Liberals - and don't you think Mike Harris hasn't learned his lesson from that experience. For further demonstration, check out last night's "fact-finding" meeting held by Ontario MPP Gerry (Gary?) Ouelette - 600 people, standing room only, and clear instructions to Queens Park to opt out of administering C-68. These are interesting times indeed - and a fun time to be a political activist enjoying a federal election. BTW Barry, Darrel's talking to local F&G Assoc Tuesday - email me if you want details. Walk softly and join the NFA The gun you save may be your own. John Fowler ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 18:15:28 -0600 From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: [none] From: "Quoc Pham" Subject: Re: Mr. Anderson's call to action > I just have this weird idea that if there are are oh, say, 2 million hunters > across Canada, what would happen if we were able to contact each of them > directly? > Contacting even one person like this starts > it off. One person that I know who campaigned for Mack Harb has > agreed > that she cannot now vote Liberal. Go get one Liberal vote! Point out > enough problems with the liberals that they will vote for anyone > > but. > They are on thin ice on the issue of crime. I have an idea. Why don't we come up with a PYRAMID SCHEME? Every firearm owner will contact at least 5 other firearms owners, informs them of the consequences of C-68 (e.g. the financial cost to individuals to register their firearms and become licenced, confiscations similar to those in Australia and England are coming), convince them not to vote Liberal (better yet, vote Reform) and make sure each of them will do the same for another 5 people they know. If this cycle is repeated only 10 times, we'll spread the words out to 10 million people which should be more than enough :-) Maybe the NFA can come up with a small and to-the-point list of the consequences and sponsor this campaign. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 19:23:41 -0600 From: rmcreat@istar.ca (BC NFA) Subject: Re: Wal-Mart recording of ammuntion purchases (SNIP) >Ask Ms. Henderson how recording the sale of ammunition to adults >protects juveniles. > >I have no problem with the ID check but forcing employees to waste >time writing down a bunch of useless information is pedantic. >I asked LeBaron's here in Ottawa what they did with all that info >and they said they toss it after a year (something like 5 binders >worth). >Barry Glasgow >Woodlawn, Ont. (SNIP) Thus to be picked up by someone passing by the garbage bin behind the store; giving the 'criminal element' just the information they need for what ever purpose. In BC, even the government hasn't had any practiced safety measures to protect court documents let alone store records of any kind. A few months ago it was reported that whole court case documents had been given to the recyclers _unshredded_ and complete with victims detailed statements and identification. Does this sound like the begining a self fulfilling prophecy? Michelle Traver NFA-BC ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 19:23:48 -0600 From: rmcreat@istar.ca (BC NFA) Subject: Re:Color of Govt. >> >>Deep shade of pink, almost crimson. >>Michelle Traver > >With Yellow trimmings. The yellow you see is greater than just trimmings, it's apathy and lack of knowledge along with a great deal of fear. We have community officials just now asking what C-17 is. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE! My sympathies to those who have been wondering what BC is doing to help the fight, other than sitting on its rear-end, from the beginning of this office we have been struggling to get to ground zero. There has been the belief that NFA really doesn't care about BC, thus we have been received with skepticism at best and labels of "paranoid" at worst. Now, at the last minute, when it is literally days away from election, we're asked what C-17 is all about. There has been an NFA office here in BC for about two years; we have been trying to get info out and it has been just the past two months that we have had people coming to ask more about C-68 and then ask about C-17. Consistently we see the "something for nothing" attitude until the individual has an unpleasant experience imposed on them by the current laws. According to a few lawyers (not just Guy Bertrand) we may not have a Canada long after this election. Gee, do you think the 'ConLibs' planned it that way? I know, I'm venting again, what can I say the frustration level is high. For those who are tired of hearing a negative attitude my apologies for a second time (now I feel better). Michelle Traver NFA-BC ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 22:34:53 -0600 From: Anonymous Subject: by-laws of the Coalition for Gun Control Just read the by-laws of the Coalition for Gun Control. (strange that the Coalition by-laws are available on an opposition website, 'til you read the by-laws). >To help us all better understand how the CGC is set up and >supposed to function, the bylaws of the organisation are >available at >http://cdn-firearms.ml.org/cdn-firearms/Misc/bylaws.cgc > There is no memberhip fee and no way to prove membership, a possible way to join. Members are "approved" by the executive. >8. The property and business of the Corporation shall be >managed by a board of 3-10 directors of whom a majority of the >directors then in office shall constitute a quorum. Directors must >be individuals, 18 years of age, with power under law to contract. > 34. At every annual meeting, in addition to any other business > that ... snip >... The board of directors shall call a special general meeting of >members on written requisition of members carrying not less than ten >per cent (10%) of the voting rights. Two (2) members present in >person at a meeting thereof shall constitute a quorum. There is no way to buy a membership and vote out the executive. A member is only a member if the executive (as few as 3 individuals) says they are a member. People who contribute money are "supporters", not members and have no right to vote. If you disagree with the executive, you can be deemed "not a member" and have no right to vote. What a sham of democracy! "The institution is run for the benefit of those who control the institution" Spiro T. Agnew After reading this set of by-laws, all I can say is WOW! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 22:34:52 -0600 From: Ron McCutcheon Subject: (Making Plans) >What WILL you do if the Liberal Party of Canada wins this year's federal >election? Start making plans to move to the USA. Ron McCutcheon P. Eng mccutcrg@mail.rose.com Good gun control is a keen eye and a steady hand. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 22:37:35 -0600 From: kdesolla@cyberus.ca (Keith P. de Solla) Subject: letters I sent the following to the Ottawa Sun and it was printed (97/04/25) with the comment "We hear you're a hard marker, K.P." - -keith > > >Editor, >Ottawa Sun > > >RE: Liberal report card. > >Robert Fife and Sean Durkan get A's for seeing through the Liberal >propaganda and exposing the reality of their "soft on crime" >attitude, and their attempts to buy votes with last-minute >legislation. Ron Corbett gets a B- as his normally solid average is >lowered by the F for failing to see the facts in the gun control >issue. > > >K.P. de Solla, P.Eng >Nepean Keith P. de Solla, P.Eng - NFA Field Officer kdesolla@cyberus.ca http://www.cyberus.ca/~kdesolla/eohc.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 09:21:25 -0600 From: "Charles Stansfield" Subject: SPELLING & GRAMMAR in Submissions to CFD and Elsewhere Let me say right away that I intend no disrespect to anybody regarding the following; however, as in anything that is created for public appreciation, that thing is judged on its appearance. We all know the saying, "clothes make the man". As much as we want to believe that "it's what's inside that counts", the majority of people will pay more attention to someone who is dressed well, than to some fellow who has his rear hanging out of his jeans -- even though the guy in the jeans may be a Saint, and the guy in the suit may be the devil himself. It's the same way, like it or not, with spelling and grammar. Less-than-perfect written communications, especially in the supercharged arena of firearms debate, do give ammunition to those in government and the media (who are well-trained not only in language usage, but in how to "spin" it to advantage) when they look for a fast way to discredit any grass-root movement, like ours. They try to make connections among "proper English", "intelligence", and "morality" in the minds of those whom they are trying to propagandize -- in this instance, the Canadian Public. Just as most average folks believe that someone is guilty, simply because that person's name has been published in the news in association with an alleged crime, people make judgements about intelligence and morality based on the way each of us communicates. If I say the word, "Ozarks", many people start thinking about "Li'l Abner" and the intermarriage of cousins and closer relatives, as well as liberties taken with common barnyard critters. None of you will imagine a cultured British accent in this scenario, or an education much higher than Grade Three. How many of you just laughed or snickered? We love to make fun of others to whom we feel superior -- it's a natural human trait. It's also how we identify and denigrate our enemies in times of conflict; we pick on their accents, their skin colour, their culture, the odd foods they eat, and so on. During World War Two, our government encouraged us to hate the German and Japanese peoples on the bases of race and language; for example, slitty little eyes and square heads were featured in propaganda posters. We all laughed at these "subhumans" -- and the attitudes that government was able to sell to us helped to defeat our enemies of the day. Now the Firearms Community is government's "enemy of the day". In Canada, the U.S., the U.K., South Africa and Australia, those governments are portraying gun-owners and firearms enthusiasts as cretinous, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals with no sense of morality; the left-of-centre-staffed Media gleefully cooperates, because they want to sell their products to Mr. and Mrs. Average, who love to laugh and to be scandalized by what they hear and read. Consequently, most Canadians who don't own or have never operated a firearm are turned against the Recreational Firearms Community item-by-item. They feel "superior" to us, and most honestly believe that they are helping to make the world a "kinder and gentler place". Mr. and Mrs. Average, and their 2.2 children, are victims of government propaganda. It is by their uninformed, prejudiced votes that the Liberal/Conservative two-headed cyclops retains power. Government cannot be effective against the REAL enemy of Crime, so it creates a "diversion" to mask its failure -- it targets law-abiding groups whose interests Government consciously turns the fear-ridden urban populations against. The "logic" goes something like this: "Criminals sometimes use firearms in their illegal activities. The Recreational Firearms Community uses firearms as a sporting activity. We can't control the criminals with guns, so we will legislate against the law-abiding owners of legal firearms, until no one can own a firearm. In this way, we will be seen over a period of years to "be doing something" to promote a false feeling of security-of-person in the minds of city-dwellers." It promotes and indirectly funds the activities of "straw-men" groups with miniscule membership to help perpetuate the pseudo-urgency of "the gun problem". It employs "psychologically-extravagant" language (a cardinal sign of sociopathy) to describe hated firearms: the ubiquitous "high-powered", "automatic", and "high-capacity" tags that newscasters love to wrap their tongues around, for instance. It celebrates "victimhood", especially when the victims are of a minority culture, a young age or the female sex. The Ecole Polytechnique tragedy was perfect propaganda because the victims were all young and women. Never mind that the perpetrator was insane and a woman-hater, it was the quintessential photo-op for the likes of the propped-up Wendy Cukier and radical feminists. "Guns + men = violence against women" was/is the official equation. The incident is dusted off at least once a year in order to squeeze out the last drop of propaganda-value; that is why it is so important that organizations such as Canadian Women Against Gun Control be promoted from the RFC side of the street -- it shatters the carefully-constructed mirage of the "woman-as-worst-victim". You will note that CWAFC does not attract much Media interest or government funding. All the foregoing is to illustrate that PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING. Clothes DO "make the man". If the Recreational Firearms Community gives its opponents the slightest opening, they will pounce upon it and blow it up out of all proportion. That is why everyone who writes on behalf of our legitimate position must take great pains to present arguments in a clear manner, paying particular attention to spelling and grammar. The public get their information through "the Media". The Media distorts things that it likes or dislikes through use of body-language, eye-rolling, tone-of-voice, and incomplete voice/video clips. It packages Bias-Info for public consumption, and the public is too lazy to do its OWN research. Unfortunately, we are playing on Media's "home turf", and must perform accordingly. No, "correct spelling and grammar" is NOT the definitive mark of the intelligent, thinking person, any more than "mechanical ability" is. In the Shop, the guy who doesn't know his rear from a left-handed monkey wrench is branded as unintelligent, clumsy, and ignorant -- it all depends on what Shop we're in. Use your spell-checker before submitting any articles or opinions. If you don't have a computer, I and others would be happy to do the "proof-reading" for you. I hope this is taken in the spirit in which it is offered, with no "put-downs" implied. Sincerely, Charles Stansfield ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 13:31:14 -0600 (CST) From: "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Subject: Three years and still going strong! It's three years ago this week that I started the cdn-firearms mailing list. Some of you have been here from the beginning. I've written before that I never imagined it would take-off the way it did. I also never thought about it still going three years and eight _hundred_ digests later. When I first began the list, the intent was to exchange information with others who had the same concerns I did, without all the "noise" of a discussion group (like the ones on Usenet). However, in advertising the list, I found many people who just wanted to know what was going on. The list was quickly broadened to inform the general public. Even with roughly 1000 direct subscribers and an estimated 4000 readers, we are only reaching a tiny portion of the public. Most Canadian don't even have direct internet access. It is the responsibility of the readers to take the information further so others may benefit. I'd like to thank every person who has ever passed on anything from here. I'd also like to thank the hundreds of contributors and especially the people who have helped me moderate the list the last few months. I never could have done this without you. Never forget that. We got this far because of _us_. We have accomplished these things and created this forum and database of information because we worked as a team. We are always stronger working together than fighting amoungst ourselves. We aren't always going to agree on the details, but I'm sure we can all agree that Canada's laws need to be overhauled and improved. Let's continue to work together to achieve that goal. I really believe that you only have a right to complain if you are actively working to improve the system. So, what are you going to do today? Skeeter ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #822 **********************************