From owner-cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Fri Aug 29 06:58:15 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 #969 Content-Length: 24202 X-Lines: 601 Status: RO Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, August 29 1997 Volume 01 : Number 969 In this issue: News from Nova Scotia Followup to two articles on "study proves need for gun registry" Reloading questions Bears and 800 numbers Registration A Court Case Of Consequence: "Trail Specials" note on "CBC (Reseau de l'Information) comment on guns" in CFD Militarization of police Re: Second of two articles on "study proves need for gun registry" Re: First of two articles on "study proves need for gun registry" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:11:54 -0600 From: Rick Young Subject: News from Nova Scotia While Chief Cassel and his Band of Renown were reciting their favourite lyrics in Fredericton, just outside Halifax yesterday, in Sackville, a masked intruder entered a home via the patio door and bound/gagged an octagenarian grandmother and her, I believe, six year old granddaughter. he then proceeded directly to a gun collection in the basement and made off with a dozen handguns and longarms. RCMP responded forthwith and, being most concerned about guns on the loose, brought in a tracking dog which led them straight to a suspect, where all firearms were recovered. Said perpetrator was to be arraigned today. While, as expected, the media mostly reported this as if a 45 gallon drum of Ebola virus with a plutonium detonator had been loosed on an unsuspecting public, I anxiously await the answer to several questions: 1) Given the boldness of waltzing into a suburban home in broad daylight and tying up an elderly lady and a child, what charges/sentence will this dink incur? 2) How the hell did he know exactly where to go and when to try and "collect" a few firearms? Maybe, since some were restricted, he had some "inside" information, like a way into the FRAS database? That possibility sure as hell peaks my interest. 3) I wonder what new cries for a ban on the public ownership of firearms this will bring? Amazing, how quick the public forgets about things like the RCMP officer's gun and briefcase stolen from the trunk of his car in a Sackville mall parking lot about a year ago. (Hey, Sackville's really not that bad - trust me; I've been there for 8 years now!) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:33:26 -0600 (CST) From: "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Subject: Followup to two articles on "study proves need for gun registry" People, this latest attack by some of the police chiefs and The Canadian Press must not go answered. We must all write about this sort of libel and slander, and insist that those who say they support us -- Reform MPs, provincial politicians and local police and police chief (where applicable) -- raise their voices now and support us as they claim to. We have been dormant since the election. It is now time to become active after having the summer off. We must fight back against every incident like this _just_to_hold_the_ground_we_have_gained in this battle. Many more of us must also become pro-active in order to make real gains. Here is what I propose: IMMEDIATE ACTION . for MB residents: do what you can to speak out against Winnipeg police chief David Cassels and his constant anti-firearm-owner rhetoric. . write letters to the Canadian Press (CP) and your local paper (if the CP article appeared in your paper) complaining about the libelous statements made in the article ("Where and when were these violent protests he wrote about?") . write letters to Reform MPs, _provincial_politicians_ and local police (where applicable) and ask them to speak up against this attack. Not all police chiefs are on-side -- most police chiefs in SK oppose Bill C-68 (Chapter 39, 1995) and universal registration -- so we can show the opinion in the CACP is split. Many police associations _including_the_SK_ _Fed_and_the_OPPA_ also oppose the new laws. . phone local media outlet -- if the story was given any coverage at all -- and point out all the errors . get your local RM and/or rural organisation to speak out against this abuse LONG-TERM ACTION . encourage others to take up a shooting sport or collecting . take a friend, relative or co-worker out shooting or hunting . encourages involvement . reduces fear of firearms by making it concrete and less emotional . get involved with a shooting competition like IPSC or the N.F.A. patches program . teach a firearm safety class . educate yourself by researching the issue . write a letter . phone a talk show . make regular donations to "pro-firearm" organisations that has worked to protect your rights and property, such as the N.F.A. and the A.F.G.A. The police chiefs are also asking for a sex offender registry. Here's something to include in your letters: "It seems some of the police chiefs wish to equate responsible firearm owners with rapists and child molesters, because they want to register both!" (Firearm owners will all be registered via the new firearm licence.) NEVER GIVE UP! NEVER GIVE IN! Spread this message as far and wide as you can. More of us must become pro-active or lose everything. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:41:45 -0600 From: "Carlo Robazza" Subject: Reloading questions Hi everyone, I am considering getting to reloading but I have a few questions that I was hoping someone might be able to answer for me. 1. I was told that I should not try to change calibers with a Lee Progressive 1000 because it comes from the factory tuned for a particular caliber. I was also told that there are too many extra parts to bother switching between, say, .45 ACP, 9mm and .223. Is there any truth to this? 2. I have a bunch of 9mm Steyr brass that is Berdan primed and I would like to reload it since it is so hard to find ammo for it here in Canada. Is it possible to use Boxer primers to reload them? Is it possible to reload them at all? 3. What is the approximate cost savings reloading 9mm, .45 ACP and .223 if you already have the brass? 4. It has been suggested that I should look into getting a powder scale, etc. but if I am just shooting for fun and not competition (i.e. my skill at the moment is the limiting factor to my accuracy) would I need any more equipment other than the reloader and perhaps a case tumbler? Thanks for your help, Carlo. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:41:52 -0600 From: Jim Davies Subject: Bears and 800 numbers > Subject: Have you had enough of those bear huggers too??? > > Imagine...hypothetically of course...if everyone who read the digest > would call Bearwatch's 1-800 number, (which by the way is > 1-800-836-5501), just once and reached their answering machine... My > calculations > tell me that this could put a serious dent in their granola supply while > they're harassing us law-abiding hunters this season. > > I don't know if this is illegal or not, but they'd have a helluva time > prosecuting someone for getting a 'wrong number'. <;) > > I wonder if Wendy and her Coalition for gun confiscation have a 1-800 > number as well. > Calling Kookies 1-800 number (if one exists) will only increase our taxes, considering where her "donations" come from... Jim Davies ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:41:56 -0600 From: Karl Schrader Subject: Registration Re.: registration - ---------------------------- If someone really registers his cherished hunting implements and then a few months later discovers that he made a mistake on the postcard registration (openly mailed, I suppose or by "registered mail"???) . He then writes to the registration centre and informs it that there has been a mistake in his first mailing. This will mean that the registration people will have to pull his file again to correct it. And then a few months later he dicovers yet another mistake. He writes to them again to explain that second mistake...... etc. x 7,000 000 = 21,000 000 handlings of the registration procedure ????? Very cost-effective ... eh. The only regrettable trouble is that we as the taxpayers will have to pay for these errors. One small consolation is that ALL CANADIAN TAXPAYERS WILL HAVE TO FOOT THE BILL, NOT ONLY THE HARASSED GUN-OWNERS. Also in my humble opinion, there should be a space provided on the registration form to insert the pre-C-68 value of the firearms involved. Would that not make sense if a class-action suit is later filed against the confiscation without compensation ( as the Sheriff of Nottingham stated, will be the intention of the "Government" ??? ). Furthermore, if a registration form is mailed in, the registrant should clearly mark on that form: "Not responsible for any errors or omissions !!! ". This remark is quite common in business practice to protect the issuer of a statement or invoice. Are we ever in trouble here in Canada and I figured by leaving East-Germany 40 years ago, things would be better for me here. Canada was quite alright up until now, but quite unbelievable,did that change. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:41:48 -0600 From: "David A. Tomlinson" Subject: A Court Case Of Consequence: R v. James Franklin Morrow, File No. 94-12031 Ontario Court (General Division), at the Elgin St Court House, Ottawa ON, 25 Jun 97: Mr Morrow was charged under CC s. 220 with "causing death by criminal negligence and under s. 85(1) with using "a firearm" while committing "an indictable offence." Mr Justice C McKinnon ruled: "First of all, [Morrow] is in peaceable possession of his own property. He has told the individuals who seek entry into his house that he does not wish them to enter his house. The individuals forcefully kick their way through the entrance doorway [of the apartment block], come up to his apartment and demand entry, at one point indicating through a physical motion, that they may be armed, that Chico himself [the deceased] may be armed. Chico was screaming, demanding entry, saying that he is going to shoot the accused through the door, saying he is going to blow his head off. The accused says he is going to phone the police, which is the only appropriate and responsible thing to do, which the accused then does." (1) [Fortunately, Morrow put the phone down after contacting 911, but did not hang it up. The record on the 911 tape was very useful to the defence. -- DAT] "On listening to the 911 tape, one can hear the yelling, can hear the door being attacked." (1) "Even assuming that the accused was armed throughout, and there is certainly no evidence of that -- there is certainly the evidence of the capability of being armed, and there was time enough to get a revolver, I find it would make no difference on this set of facts -- then he phones, as he informed the intruders he would, he phones 911."(1-2) [The judge comments on items from the 911 tape:] "...the accused's voice throughout that he is extremely nervous. He is obviously feeling that he is being treatened and [is] in a completely dangerous situation, and says: 'I've got a couple of wackos who are trying to break...they're breaking the door down.' 911 says: 'They're trying to break into your house?' 'Yes, yes.' 911: 'Do you know these people?' 'I know they're Outlaws' associates.' "That is clear from the clothing. 'Support your local Outlaws' was on the hat of the deceased." 'They're breaking in.' "And then, immediately thereafter, four shots: two and two, within seconds. And the accused comes back on: 'I can't believe what happened. Someone smashed my door in. A couple of people rushed in. I couldn't see. They were reaching inside their coats.' "When he says that, 'they were reaching inside their coats,' to me, that means that the accused did see Chico doing what Duggan said Chico was doing, namely reaching inside his coat indicating he had a gun and at the same time making a threat that he was going to blow the accused's head off." 'I fired.' says the accused. "In my mind, tragic as this death is, the accused acted reasonably and with justification IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES [emphasis added -- DAT]. It cannot be characterized otherwise. In my view, a reasonable jury properly instructed on these facts could not convict the accussed, and if a jury did convict the accused, to my mind it would constitute a miscarriage of justice. "The motion to dismiss for no evidence is granted. The accused is free to go." (2-4) Dave Tomlinson, NFA FOCUS: Self-defence is very dangerous because you are LIKELY to be charged. The danger can be eased somewhat if the FIRST words out of your mouth are, "You are under arrest." You have the authority to arrest anyone whom you find committing an indictable offence ANYWHERE, or committing ANY crime on your poperty or in relation to your property [CC s. 494(1) and (2)]. IF you say, "You are under arrest," that triggers CC s. 25(1), which offers protection for you. Mainly intended to protect police officers, that protection is quite broad -- and well worth having. In addition, the situation in a courtroom is considerably changed when the "victim" was actively RESISTING ARREST. That makes a big difference. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:41:50 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: "Trail Specials" In response to the question "is Trail Firearms still in business?". Yes it is..... (thriving in fact, and they are excellent competition). They don't have any of the "Trail Specials" left, but if you call Blair at Klondike Arms, (403) 425 4444, he may offer to sell you some good qualifying items..... I will be dropping off two short barreled Remington semi auto's, (one in .32 and one in .380 ACP) for sale there, with the proceeds going to the NFA Legal Defence Fund. They are the Remington Model 51's, and are the only semi auto pocket pistols ever made by Remington. (If you buy both,you will be an instant collector, as they were only ever offered in the above two calibers). The barrels are shorter than mandated by "our masters in Ottawa" so would instantly elevate you to the status of "pain in the ass"...... (An uncharitable person may say screw them anyhow). By the way, there is another wrinkle to this short barreled pistol thing, and I recently discussed it with Dave Tomlinson. If the absolute worst happened and the "gendarmerie" attempted to seize these little beauties, all you would need to do is "dispose" of the barrels and reregister them as .....calibre.....none, barrel length......none, shots....none. There is no way that the feds could refuse to register a frame......... and a devious or unscrupulous person could surmise that by doing something like this it would help derail the seizure and the registration process, and make it impractical to go after the existing stuff.... I am right now registering an AR-15 receiver, as detailed above, so that if the feds ever decide to mandate barrel length or calibre, it will make their jobs much more interesting. There is a potential for multi top end combinations, and calibres...... Currently available, everything from 10" barreled uppers, to 7.62 x 39, 300 Whisper and 6mm PPC combinations...... There are even 6" and 7" barrels...... Well the feds were the ones who decided to treat those nice little black Varmint guns as assault rifles and restrict them like handguns!! Remember brethren, only the registered part counts.......... And you don't have to stop there....... What would happen if thousands of those cute mail in registrations for long guns only had receiver and serial number inscribed on them.......chaos...utter chaos...... Peter Kearns http://www.firearms.ab.ca "I don't have to be elevated to "pain in the ass" status. I am there already, and extremely smug about it". ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:46:02 -0600 From: jf_avon@citenet.net Subject: note on "CBC (Reseau de l'Information) comment on guns" in CFD On 28 Aug 97 at 11:20, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Subject: CBC (Reseau de l'Information) comment on guns This letter was originally wrongfully sent to branche@src-mtl.com and Cc'ed to the CFD. After the reply from branche@... I forwarded it to: auditoire@montreal.src.ca french CBC public relations rdi@montreal.src.ca Reseau de l'Information ombudsrc@montreal.src.ca CBC ombudsman jfa ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 18:46:05 -0600 From: jean hogue Subject: Militarization of police >"PPUs have an array of 'less-than-lethal' technology for conducting 'dynamic >entries.' These include percussion grenades, stinger grenades, and >shotgun-launched 'bean bag systems... Percussion grenades, actually concussion grenades, are designed to shatter eardrums to stun the enemy into temporary incapacitation ... and permanent hearing damage. Shotgun launched bean bags : one instance where it was used in Montreal some years ago against an old man holding a knife in his own home. Death caused by heart attack. "less-than-lethal": big deal! ____________________________________________________________ "A firearm is a firearm, even a replica" Heidi Rathjen, Coalition for Gun Control The Montreal Gazette, August 6, 1997, p. A7 ____________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 06:45:41 -0600 From: griffith@comnet.ca Subject: Re: Second of two articles on "study proves need for gun registry" ** Reply to note from "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Thu, 28 Aug 1997 13:13:07 -0600 (CST) > Most guns recovered at crime scenes are legal, unrestricted weapons, > suggests the study that gives police new ammunition in the ongoing debate > over firearms control. "Legal" in what sense? If they weren't legallly acquired, most people wouldn't call them "legal" guns. Did all these criminals have FAC's? If so, who issued them? > > "The findings support the view that unrestricted rifles and shotguns pose > a much greater risk to public safety than handguns and other prohibited > weapons," said Winnipeg police Chief David Cassels, who released the > study. An interesting turn of phrase. "Handguns and other prohibited weapons". o we have here a chief of police of a large urban centre who isn't capable of making a distinction between resricted and prohibited, or a blabbermouth who has just let the cat out of the bag? > A total of 831 firearms were seized in those cities during 1995. Fifty-two > per cent of recovered guns used in crimes were rifles and shotguns; 21 per > cent were handguns. > > [But they included "air guns" (20.6%) and...] I was wondering about that. When I first saw those figures I thought 21 plus 52 is 73, not 100 percent; must be an error due to rounding. I was even wondering with the handgun figure, did he have to drop his pants to count up to 21? > > Long guns were the favoured weapon in 74 per cent of all suicides and > attempted suicides. > > [...suicides! They included suicides in "crimes" because they are talking > about all seized firearms! They also neglect to mention that over 66% of > suicides involve _no_ firearm.] Is suicide even a crime? I have never known anyone who committed suicide to be convicted, or even charged. > Cassels said the preponderance of rifles and shotguns recovered in > criminal and non-criminal incidents supports the need for universal > firearm registration. > > ``I find it alarming that we have so many legally acquired long guns that > are used illegally,'' the Winnipeg chief said. > Yep, if they're unrestricted they must have been legally acquired. There is a man who's studied logic. Every firearm siezed from a criminal, at a crime scene, was "legally acquired". Is everyone as touched as I am by this man's faith in the honesty of our criminal element? > > Gun control legislation passed in 1991 classified weapons in three broad > categories -- unrestricted, restricted and banned -- and set conditions > for owning them. > > There are no restrictions on ownership of shotguns and rifles, Not quite so. Since 1979, anyone acquiring one of these firearms requires a valid FAC, which is issued subsequent to an investigation by the police. Most people would call that a restriction. So if there are "no restrictions" in his jurisdiction, shouldn't he be looking to see who isn't doing his job? > Firearms registration was the cornerstone of a new law passed in 1995. Gun > owners must register all their estimated seven million firearms by 2003. > Twenty-three million, unless that's their estimate of the number that will actually be registered. > > The government and police say surveys show most Canadians support gun > restrictions. > > [But they don't support C-68 and spending hundreds of millions on > registration, which the majority see as not reducing crime.] > > But there has been strong resistance and sometimes violent protest by gun > owners who believe the government is punishing law-abiding citizens with > controls that have little effect on criminals. > > [WHEN HAS THERE BEEN VIOLENT PROTEST BY FIREARM OWNERS?! THIS IS LIBELOUS > TREATMENT OF A GROUP THAT HAS BEEN PROTESTING PEACEFULLY!!] > Well, up here in the Valley, a few of us did considerable violence to the ego of our local MP. Do you suppose that's what they meant? > > Windsor police chief John Kousik said it's all a matter of attitude. > > "I'll give you an example from Windsor and Detroit," Kousik said. > > "We've had three murders this year; they've had about 600. You cross the > border from Detroit to Windsor and you feel the difference in the safety. > It's a different sort of attitude. This is Canada and we value our > people." > Anyone can see how that would lead him to believe that Canadians need to be more closely regulated. > > Kousik admitted criminals always get the weapons they need, but he and > Cassels believe registration will reduce criminal access to legal guns. > But they didn't say how it will do that, did they? Or even how they think it will do that? Or what the Hell ever gave them that idea in the first place? > > The study was financed by the Canadian Firearms Centre, a division of the > federal Justice Department, and carried out by Daniel Antonowicz > Consulting. > Your tax dollars at work. And probably enough of them to buy every gun covered by the survey five times over. > It's objective was "to inform and support the development of firearms > policy and programs by providing firearm-related information to law > enforcement officials and policy makers." > Is that just bad grammar, or does it really not mean anything? Gerald Griffith " The easiest thing in the world to achieve is the effective disapproval of any sort of uncritically vested authority. " < Alexander King > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 06:45:44 -0600 From: "John E. Stevens" Subject: Re: First of two articles on "study proves need for gun registry" > The two sides of the gun control battle came to an odd agreement > yesterday -- both groups claim the same Department of Justice study on > weapons supports their cause. ANOTHER DoJ study. They just keep doing it til they get the answer they want. Our tax dollars at work. Wouldn't it be nice if they made all of them as public as quickly. And look at the cities; Saint John, Hull, Windsor, Thunder Bay and Regina. All major crime centres? One wonders about the effect of volume on the numbers. Do they indicate if the guns were used in the "crime" or were they simply at a scene where someone complained about a noisy party? How distorted is the report? ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #969 **********************************