From owner-cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Tue Aug 19 19:05:06 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 #954 Content-Length: 23989 X-Lines: 565 Status: RO Cdn-Firearms Digest Tuesday, August 19 1997 Volume 01 : Number 954 In this issue: The place of the NFA The place of the police Re: Membership question (Part 2 of 2) Freeloaders Dave's Comments, devide and conquer, the big picture Ontario will boycott gun registry Re: Campers killed by bear Bill C-68 Propaganda This Fall Pellet/BB guns Re: Campers killed by bear freeloaders non toxic shot Information Search lead in gasoline ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 12:46:13 -0600 From: Roger Walker Subject: The place of the NFA I might have been one of the first members of the NFA, many years ago. However, I let my membership lapse and have been out of the shooting game (no longer own any firearms) for many years. The NFA was very controversial from the beginning. The organization, through DAT, was very outspoken and hard line. This rubbed many people the wrong way, even some of those the NFA were trying to help. Some things never change. One of those things is that the goal of the NFA is to unite the firearms community in a hardline stand against the erosion of our rights, particularly where firearms are concerned. Other methods and attitudes have consistently failed. The NFA and DAT have done more for the firearms community than any other organization or person. While many of us can still think for ourselves, even some whose hearts are in the right place need an occasional slap in the face to bring them to reality, hence DAT's periodic rant (as opposed to his more prolific 'informational' posts). Every step of the way the NFA and DAT have been able to say "I told you so." Yet, in the face of this evidence there are still people who can't see what's right in front of them. There are still people who are more worried about semantics than the real issues. There are still people who are more worried about the details than the big picture. Well, as a Christian, I am constantly on the lookout for appropriate places for my Tithe. Granted, some goes to churches, although I belong to none, and I do have my favorite charities, for various reasons. However, lately I have been finding signs and confirmations that the NFA should be on that list. Frankly, I can't think of any other organization that can use funds to the benefit of more people (since the issue is not just "guns" but control, it affects everyone). Just like many others, I have made contributions to the cause in terms of time and effort, but many things require money, period. Even the local food bank would cease to function with only food donations... Come on, people. As soon as you lose sight of your cause for all the petty stuff, you *lose* your cause. Let's work together and get a victory. If I can do it as a non-owner of firearms, surely you can do it just for self-preservation. - --- Roger Walker, Director Pager (403) 470-1808, Fax (403) 440-2685 ROSCO Associates Technology Staffing Ltd. (RATS!) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 12:46:09 -0600 From: Roger Walker Subject: The place of the police I left the R.C.M.P. many years ago, on principles. While I'm certainly not the only one to have done so, I expect the number to remain small. I was tired of how clique-y various groups were. I was tired of watching good cops coming out of Depot, only to see them turn into cynical malcontents who complained that they didn't make as much as the city cops. I was tired of cops who were on a power trip. I was tired of higher ranks who were more willing to cover up incidents than to sulley the name of the R.C.M.P. (or maybe their own). I was tired of cops who were willing to lie and who thought nothing of beating a kid for a confession. I was tired of other cops who looked the other way. I was tired of cops who changed records and other documents. Please don't get me wrong. What I saw in my four years does not necessarily happen everywhere. Undoubtedly, there are many good cops, and I am happy to say that I knew some of them. However, make no mistake: Cops are people, too, who have to feed their families, and who will follow orders no matter what the legality or morality (despite war crimes prescedents that make themselves accountable when they get their due). While a sad state of affairs, it is true that, as an instrument of our misguided government, they are still the enemy where "gun control" is concerned. No matter how good a person a cop may be, it is nearly 100% that if he is wearing a uniform, he will still follow his orders (remember: whatever the legality or morality). My advice is to support the police in all matters other than "gun control." (Note: That statement is not intended as advice to break the law.) If you know a cop very well and trust him, feel free to discuss your personal firearms views and situation with him; do not discuss those of others, though, as you may, however innocently, be writing the warrants for those others. If you do not know and trust a particular cop very well, let them get their own leads/dirt. I do not believe there is middle ground, here. If someone is not for responsibility and freedom, he is against it. If the police enforce these bad laws, knowing full well that they are both illegal and unconstitutional, not to mention immoral, then it is obvious that they are not on our side. - --- Roger Walker, Director Pager (403) 470-1808, Fax (403) 440-2685 ROSCO Associates Technology Staffing Ltd. (RATS!) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 12:46:18 -0600 From: "David A. Tomlinson" Subject: Re: Membership question (Part 2 of 2) >If you can alleviate my fears/concerns, it would probably be a good thing >to post the reply to the CFD as well, for the benefit of others in the >same situation. That is what I am doing. "It is better to be a live jackal than a dead lion" -- but we say it is better still to be a live lion, and usually easier. Every person who stands up and proudly proclaims to the world that he or she is a member of the firearms community -- ready and willing to take on our foolish government in elections, in the courts, inside a political Party -- a full citizen, ACTIVE in the political, legal and social life of the nation - -- is a person the government respects. That is not true of people who dig holes and plan to stay in them, awaiting the outcome of the battles raging overhead. That may be an example of my famous lack of tact, but it is the situation as I see it -- and as our government sees it. For many years, before the NFA came on the scene, firearms community organizations protested new anti-firearms legislation quietly in committee hearings -- then obeyed the new laws after they had been rammed through without significant alterations. You can call that what you like; I call it a series of lost battles that we did not have to lose. The NFA began gathering forces to bring the issues out in public, to air the alternatives, and to offer better forms of firearms control legislation -- in 1984. At first, the NFA was vilified by both government and the majority of the firearms community, denounced as "radical" and "dangerous." The major firearms organizations continually pushed their "non-political" stance, under the impression that politicians respond to minor pressures that come from OUTSIDE the politically-active core of Canadians, from groups that do not even try to affect the outcome of elections. Politicians care about what political activists do, not about what the politically inert do. Their LIFE is politics, and that is what is important to them. Affect his chance of election, and you have a politician's FULL attention. Today the NFA is widely respected for its expertise in law, its willingness to help anyone in trouble, and the intelligence of its proposed firearms control systems. It is seen by politicians as a POLITICAL force, capable of affecting elections. The NFA's efforts to weld the entire firearms community into a single massive voting bloc are starting to pay off. In the last election, three out of the four national Parties were courting the firearms community vote in letters signed by the Party Leader. Alexa McDonough offered to do an independent study of Bill C-68, and make major changes if they were required. Jean Charest offered to repeal Bill C-68. And Preston Manning offered to repeal Bill C-68, scrap the entire firearms control setup, and enact new legislation that makes sense. The NFA evaluated the NDP and Conservative offers as untrustworthy -- based on Party histories, their proven reliability regarding the keeping of election promises, and on their electability. Three out of four ain't bad. Especially when the fourth -- the Liberals -- lost so many seats, and wound up a rump Party from Ontario. Now smart politicians are looking at what the firearms community might -- can -- do in the NEXT federal election, which might be upon us within two years. If another Quebec crisis arises, it COULD force another federal election. Prepare for that. It can happen. Dave Tomlinson, NFA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:05 -0600 From: conrad@upanet.cc.uleth.ca (John Conrad) Subject: Freeloaders Hi Fellow Eccentrics, This is my first letter to this list. I found that Dave's letter on freeloaders made me uncomfortable. I think it was a case of "the truth hurts". I have been telling myself that others could support the NFA since I don't have the disposable income that I had some years ago. I think that at least I could cough up the $1 per gun that someone has suggested.(might have to get a loan at the bank ) :=) I really appreciate what Dave is trying to do . He has an unfortunately rare combination of knowledge, dedication, intelligence and courage that is being used for the benefit of this country. If tact is not one of his strongest points I can live with that and will try to swallow the sour medicine when I know I need it. Keep up the fight Dave, we would be a lot weaker without you. John Conrad (soon to be NFA member) - --- John and Ellen Conrad e-mail: CONRAD@upanet.uleth.ca Public Access Internet The University of Lethbridge ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:08 -0600 From: rmcreat@istar.ca (BC NFA) Subject: Dave's Comments, devide and conquer, the big picture Some have said that Dave lacks tact; some have said he had a moment of frustration. I honestly think that he has demonstrated restraint in his postings. He has been at this for thirteen years, at least, in the position of president of the NFA and in that time has only seen membership grow to one hundred thousand members approximately. From all the information I have been given, most of the expertise in this country has come from those in the NFA. Organizations have come and gone but the NFA is still there, complete with a library of successful court cases to draw from. I stand to be proven wrong, however if one did an honest background research, one would find the NFA at the basic level of the information gathered; even if the source appeared to be the government itself - because of the court case precedence the NFA has been involved in. We, as a country, can no longer afford the luxury of denying the global issue at hand. The posting of what Japan is doing on behalf of the UN is a real issue and can not be ignored. It effects everyone of us on a personal basic level. The 'something for nothing' attitude is long sense obsolete. Dave has scolded me in past about referring to the global issue because NFA is to 'officially' concentrate on Canadian issues. To those who have had their feelings bruised - why? If you have been contributing to the best of your ability he was not referring to you. As others have stated, if you volunteer in some fashion you have contributed more than monetary resources. Let us stop the devide and conquer mentality; stop doing the governments wishes and focus forward - together. As for Dave, let us commend him for only one emotional outburst in the past six years ( that I am aware of ), I was beginning to think he had some kind of supernatural ability to eliminate the frustration of all this political insanity. Personal comments Michelle Traver ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:06 -0600 From: John Fowler Subject: Ontario will boycott gun registry In a story by Jane Armstrong, Queen's Park Representative, Toronto Star, Ontario Solicitor General Bob Runciman is reported to have said in a statement that Ontario will boycott a mandatory national gun registry program because it is too expensive and won't reduce crime. "The imposition of a universal firearms registry won't get guns off the street and out of the hands of criminals," Runciman was quoted as saying. "It will only divert police resources from where they're needed most - front-line law enforcement." (WOW! You mean I can be friends with the OPP again, Bob?) Walk softly and join Reform The Canada you save may be your own. John Fowler http://www2.magma.ca/~jfowler/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:05 -0600 From: Karen & Jerrold Lundgard Subject: Re: Campers killed by bear > >Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 20:33:47 -0600 >From: SBKracer >Subject: > >> >Hmmmmmmmm........If campers carried guns they wouldn't get killed by >> >bears. Like Wendy says "If it saves only one life!" >> > >> >Now there is irony for you two lives lost because they didn't have a gun! >> >What does the CFGC think of that? >> >> In one story of this incident I read, some camper DID have a gun, shot the >> bear and perhaps did save one more life. > > The last Federal Park I was in had a huge sign at the entrance >specfically banning even the possesion of firearms. Now how did a camper >come to have a rifle in a park? And will he be charged by the police? >I'm sure the CFGC would like to see him sent to jail for saving people's >lives. > > >Peter Cronhelm I believe this was in the Liard River campsite which is a provincial campsite, I can not remember if it is a provincial park. There are prohibitions on firing a gun in campsites but no prohibitions on having a gun, and the criminal code does allow for defense of life. I personally know several people who are alive today because a firearm was available when a bear was threatening them. Bears are unpredictable at best and I have noticed a change in the behavior of some since the 1960s. They seem to be less afraid of humans. Steve Herrero (I think I spelled it right) has an excellent book on bears and bear attacks, every hiker and camper should read it before going into an area where there may be a bear. Bear attacks and threats are more common than people let on. If there is a gun present, the bear dies and it goes unreported. Only if there is an injury or death does it sometimes get reported. One of the girls I went to school with was killed and eaten by a bear while berry picking. The cause of death was not released and it was several months before anyone knew what happened. Jerrold Peace River, Alberta, Canada ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:12 -0600 From: "Ted Carron" Subject: Bill C-68 Propaganda This Fall Ladies and Gentlemen, I was reading the advertisements for the "Valley Sportsmen & Gun Show" being held this Spetember 12 to 14 in the Carp arena just outside Ottawa. Normally, this is just a "sportsmen's show", however this year, they are tacking on a gun show portion as well. Now to the bit I am interested in. There is going to be a seminar on the "Proposed Fireaarms Regulations" where representatives from the Ministry of Justice will explain how bill C-68 will affect you and what you need to know at 1930HRS 12 September. I imagine that the DoJ is going to try this at just about every country fair and show this fall, hoping to sweet talk the country folk etc. into accepting the regulations. I want to go out and pose some real life questions to them. I want these questions to be such that no matter how they weasel word their response, anyone listening will know the ugly truths. This way, rather than "sweet talking" a lot of people who do not have access to full information, their true colours will be clear. I also want to hand out information, such as DAT's bit on filling out any future registration with "unknown" as well. 1 - Is there a list of good questions like this available already on the net ? 2 - Is there an "information" packet that I can download, copy and handout that is a reasonable size, and worded to wake people up ? 2 - Is anyone else ( NFA reps?) in the Carp area planning to go and hand out information at this show ? 3 - EVERYONE should keep their eyes open at their local fairs and shows, and hand out information to counter any DoJ propaganda this fall. Regards Ted PS; Anyone have a guess at what the going price for a .455 Webley MKVI with about 60% bluing left, shootable condition, should be ? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:15 -0600 From: lhonke@mb.sympatico.ca Subject: Pellet/BB guns Can the comment below on airguns be verified by someone out there? "Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 12:45:51 -0600 From: "Marauder (D. Kratky)" Subject: Customs Morons As a side note: Anyone heard more about the bill that was in front of the house to outright prohibit ownership of BB/Pellet guns? Hopefully it died swiftly. I'm also wondering what's going to happen to the sport of paintball, with all this BS going on..... Especially considering that every single paintball gun I've seen is VERY politically incorrect looking." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:18 -0600 From: "Jim B. Powlesland" Subject: Re: Campers killed by bear On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, SBKracer wrote: > The last Federal Park I was in had a huge sign at the entrance > specfically banning even the possesion of firearms. Now how did a camper > come to have a rifle in a park? And will he be charged by the police? The incident occurred in a provincial park (Liard Hot Springs Provincial Park, 310 kilometres northwest of Fort Nelson B.C.), not a federal park. BTW, you can possess firearms in a federal park as long as the gun is disabled from shooting. When I worked in a federal park, many residents and co-workers that I knew had firearms in their homes. As for being charged, the shooter is actually considered a hero. He shot the bear while it was mauling one of the victims that lived. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:18 -0600 From: Peter Beckett Subject: freeloaders >From: >Subject: Yup, I'm a freeloader >Dave's posting was appropriate and necessary. I have been a freeloader >for close to a year now, not any more. Dave just gave all of us >freeloaders a kick in the ass. Me too, I'm a goldstar freeloader and Dave's post hit the mark at my house. Cheque is in the mail (really!). Peter Beckett ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:38:20 -0600 From: Dale Hainer Subject: non toxic shot Youy wrote: "I heard on a TV programme this weekend that the reason for extending" "the ban on lead shot to the whole country rather than just hot spots was" "because we got "lead out of paint and gasoline" and it's an "environmental" "pollutant". There it is." I can assure you as an outdoor writer that the lead ban in all of Canada had nothing to do with lead contamination. There were a few hot zones identified. CWS personell did spring sweeps and found some lead poisoned waterfowl. In the Lake St Clair region of Ontario, the abundance (amount) of lead shot on the bottoms of marshes and lakes was not a problem either. In that region, the problem was the lack of granular pebbles vs the presence of shot. The fowl would scrape the bottom and find silt, silt, silt and shot. The shot was picked up to help with their food digestion in lieu of any other pebbled material. My contacts in the CWS (who were on the threshold of retirement) were very vocal against the steel shot sweep. Waterfowl use most Canadian lands and waters very little during thier life cycle. They breed in Canada, raise their young and as soon as the youngin's are flyable, they begin leaving for the sunny south. The bulk of a warterfowls life is spent in US and Mexican waters. Aside from a few key areas including the St Clair region, a steel sweep wasn't going to accomplish anything.... except votes. Oh yes, those make look good "green" movements that help put governments in place. Politics takes the practicality out of everything... as we are seeing more and more this past decade. Also, there may have been a little pressure from the US giant to the south. Continental USofA went steel back in early 90's. A tri-partite agreement exists between Canada, US and Mexico to co manage North American waterfowl populations. I figure the Canadian government give up the lead during some of the free-trade talks... what's good for the goose is good for the ??? Change if you must but never quit!!!!! Dale Hainer shooter@mnsi.net PS: I signed up to the NFA through info gained on the CFD. I welcome them here. Comment if they must. Quit bickering.... the anti groups love it! Divide and Conquer ya know! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 18:54:16 -0600 From: JBachyn797@aol.com Subject: Information Search I am looking for information on German Sniper rifles and in particular the ZF4 scope. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 18:54:19 -0600 From: "Brad Hengen" Subject: lead in gasoline - -- kdesolla@cyberus.ca (Keith P. de Solla) wrote: - -- I heard on a TV programme this weekend that the reason for - --extending the ban on lead shot to the whole country rather than - --just hot spots was because we got "lead out of paint and gasoline" - --and it's an "environmental pollutant". There it is. The camel is - --putting it's nose in the tent again. I work in the aviation industry, and I just asked a pilot whether there was still lead in "aviation fuel" and he advised me that the original fuel, now generally not used in canada, called 80/87(similar to car gas) was a leaded fuel, but the lead had been removed slowly and additives put in. But 100LL Avgas is still a leaded fuel and it was his understanding that there is still four times the amount of lead in it than in the original 80/87, due to the requirement of much needed lubrication in the engines running higher octane fuels. (especially the larger radial engines.) Vaporized lead is surely more toxic than the solid form, unless the solid form is moving along at 1600fps!!! And I'm sure there is more lead being pumped into the atmosphere due aviation each day than the amount of lead being spread out in solid form in a years worth of hunting! These types of statements are misrepresenting the truth. BTW: Jet fuel contains no lead, as a turbine engine does not require the lubrication of the internals.. only the bearings... Brad ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #954 **********************************