From owner-cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Fri Aug 29 19:33:47 1997 Received: from broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (majordomo@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca [198.169.128.1]) by skatter.USask.Ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA15653; Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:33:42 -0600 (CST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (8.7.6/8.7.3) id TAA11384 for cdn-firearms-digest-out; Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:26 -0600 Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:26 -0600 Message-Id: <199708300114.TAA11384@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca> X-Authentication-Warning: broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca: majordomo set sender to owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca using -f 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 #970 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Errors-To: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Status: RO Content-Length: 26010 X-Lines: 601 Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, August 29 1997 Volume 01 : Number 970 In this issue: Re: CACP Using Phony Statistics Again Defensive use of firearms.... news release from MP Garry Breitkreuz A couple of questions letter to the editor Re: YOUR ARTICLE CDN DIGEST # 966 Re: New Exam required when renewing ?? followup to Rick's news of Sackville home invasion Cdn Assoc. of Chief of Police (CACP) CP article Re: Reloading questions, CDN-FA Digest #969 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 06:45:43 -0600 From: griffith@comnet.ca Subject: Re: CACP Using Phony Statistics Again ** Reply to note from "David A. Tomlinson" Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:20:46 -0600 > 2. if the firearm was reported stolen, you are supposed to return it to > the owner. > > Police do not want to bother returning stolen firearms to their owners. So > it is easier not to ask, because then it can just be destroyed. > I would think that as a control measure, records of firearms destroyed would have to end up in some central bureaucracy. If some public-spirited citizen were to obtain these records through Access to Information, I'm sure we'd all be happy to help circulate the list, with a notation that these items have been recovered, and the rightful owners should contact the indicated police department to arrange for the return of their property. Might even make a neat web site. One could even include a form for making a demand under, let's see, was it section 39? How many years was that one good for if they don't pony up? Of course, since he went and busted up your gun, you could always offer to settle for the one in his holster...... >FOCUS: Some say the NFA is cynical. They are correct -- if you use >Ambrose Bierce's definition, "CYNIC: One who sees things as they are, and >not as they ought to be." The world would be a better place with more >Bierce cynics in it. Personally, I always preferred the definition by Anonymous; "A cynic is a man who can enjoy his fellow men." 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 07:07:44 -0600 From: "Marauder (D. Kratky)" Subject: Defensive use of firearms.... > Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 06:23:52 -0600 > From: Joseph Widdup > Subject: Re: response to Discover Channel program in CFD #964 > > I recall one, perhaps two, stories that dealt with guns being helpful. > > The rest [and they outnumbered the one or two pro-gun stories] dealt with > > criminals using guns to injure or kill. One other story was kind of a > And why should there be more good gun stories that bad ones? I would > bet that in the US there are more people going 'postal' than the few > people that rightfully defend themselves with guns. Good lord man! I believe the lastest stats, even from the Justice Stats people show it's at least 700,000 cases a year... FOR THE DEFENSIVE SIDE. Some put it as high as 2,000,000. I believe in Canada it averages around 16,000/year on average. - -- Dave Kratky O/O VAM Computers: (519) 925-3583 Ontario NFA Member Sysop, AOU BBS: (519) 928-2369 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 08:33:16 -0600 (CST) From: "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Subject: news release from MP Garry Breitkreuz August 29, 1997 For Immediate Release MORE POLICE ON THE STREET WILL IMPROVE PUBLIC SAFETY "If gun registration reduces crime, why are handgun homicides increasing?" Yorkton -- Opposition Solicitor General Critic, Garry Breitkreuz, says that a government report released this week in Fredericton to the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police does not justify the need for registration of 20 million legally-owned rifles and shotguns in Canada. "The report was paid for by the Department of Justice and has everything to do with bureaucrats trying to justify their own positions and nothing to do with improving public safety," said Breitkreuz. The report says that a universal firearms registration system is needed because 52% of guns recovered from crime scenes (including suicides] in five cities in 1995 were rifles and shotguns while only 21% were handguns. However, the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics issued another report which seems to prove gun registration doesn't work. The Statistics Canada report said in 1995, only 2% of violent crime victims encountered firearms, approximately one-third of homicides involve a firearm [Note: more people are stabbed to death than are shot]. And, since 1991 the use of handguns has increased, accounting for one-half of all firearm homicides. The Justice reports fail to explain why the use of handguns is increasing when all legally-owned handguns have been registered in Canada since 1934. "The answer is simple," explained Breitkreuz. "Criminals don't register their handguns, nor will they register their rifles and shotguns." "Independent surveys show police-on-the-street do not support gun registration. They know there are better ways to spend scarce tax dollars to reduce violent crime than wasting hundreds of millions on an ineffective gun registration system. As well, the Justice Ministers in Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Yukon and the NWT have all opted out of the administration of the gun registration scheme and are challenging the constitutionality of the law in court." "All Canadians should be asking the government what they're doing about the other 98% of the victims of violent crime who don't encounter firearms," said Breitkreuz. "Last year, Statistics Canada issued another report which showed that the number of police officers on our streets is at the lowest level since 1972. Put the money where it will do the most good - more police on the street will reduce crime, improve public safety and save lives." -30- For more information, please call: Yorkton: (306) 782-3309 Ottawa: (613) 992-4394 source: http://cdn-firearms.ml.org/cdn-firearms/Reform/19970829.txt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:10:14 -0600 From: Bruce Mills Subject: A couple of questions When was the FRAS set up? What is the best-guess on how much C-68 has already cost to implement? Many thanks, Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 13:40:39 -0600 (CST) From: "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Subject: letter to the editor sent to: city_desk@freepress.mb.ca Police Chief Cassels seems to believe the Manitoba government is being `driven' to `resist' the new anti-gun laws by "the arms trade" and "sometimes violent protest by gun owners". ["AMMO FOR GUN CONTROL" Page B1 -- Canada and World, Winnipeg Free Press, THURSDAY, AUGUST 28, 1997] I have not witnessed anything but peaceful but well-organised protest, and it seems the Manitoba government in simply bending to the will of the people. Where does Chris Morris of The Canadian Press get his information, and why did the Free Press print it? Such potentially libelous statements must be substantiated. Now, it's already against the law to get a firearm without an FAC (Firearm Acquisition Certificate), and criminals aren't supposed to be able to get FACs. However, Cassels believes criminals always get the weapons they need, but that registration will reduce criminal access to legal guns. I guess Cassels thinks it's okay for criminals to have guns, as long as they are illegal. Of many millions of firearms, police recovered just 643 firearms (excluding 171 _air_ _guns_, 10 "unknown/other" and 7 "immitation"). That's not very many, and yet it includes those involved in suicides! Alas, suicide is not a crime, so why were those firearms thrown in with the others? Recent StatCan figures reveal that 67% of suicides do _not_ involve a firearm, that only 2% of violent crimes involve a firearm, and that knives are more often used in Canadian murders than firearms. Now that Winnipeg has become Canada's murder capital, maybe Police Chief Cassels should consider abandoning his anti-gun agenda in favour of something that will work. Since 2 of every 3 murders is committed by someone with a criminal record, maybe Cassels should try controlling criminals instead of legal firearms. Skeeter Abell-Smith Saskatoon SK ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:02 -0600 From: "David A. Tomlinson" Subject: Re: YOUR ARTICLE CDN DIGEST # 966 >Dear Dave, >Your have an extraordinary way of touching the very matters I am vitally >interested in! >My Honours studies include research of the relationship between the >government and the police. I was not aware, and neither were my lecturers >at Monash University that such a development had taken place with the RCMP. >The concerns expressed are very real. Such an appointment [RCMP >Commissioner made a Deputy Minister, putting him IN government -- DAT] directly >alienates the police from the independence of their office as laid down by >the High Court of England. We have had a series of incidents involving >confrontations between the police commissioners and the government where >the independence of the office holder was challenged. Any library of >standing will have a copy of the work "Police & Government: Histories of >Policing in Australia" by M.Finnane, Oxford University Press, Toronto,1994. >If it is not available I will photocopy the relevant pages and send them to >you. >This work contains a detailed account of this problem. Commissioner >WHITROD of the Queensland Police and, before that the Commonwealth Police, >was personally known to me. His problems in this regard resulted in his >resignation as Queensland Police Commissioner. He refused to be overrun by >the Premier of that State and with honour, decided that he would depart >rather than suffer political interference in his office. >If you have a copy of that article or a report on the subject I would >appreciate it. My fax is the same as my telephone number: 95575850 or any >other method you decide. >You should be receiving my correspondence any day now. On the matter of >the offer from the Canadian High Commission I would be interested in your >views. >Thanks again Dave, my interest grows in your problem at the same pace as my >concern for ours. The visit of an Australian Police Officer, I presume >AFP, only shows how close the Canadian and Australian political scene is. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:05 -0600 From: "David A. Tomlinson" Subject: Re: New Exam required when renewing ?? >Dear Dave, could you please clarify your remarks quoted by Genn >Springer in CFD 965 about the requirement anticipated that >hunters who have a valid FAC now will have to go through another >course and exam when they renew the next time ?? Which would >mean another expense and waste of time. This entire area is a mess -- not an unusual situation with our witless firearms control laws and the untrained people who operate the system. 1. To get an FAC, you must take the Canadian Firearms Safety Course. 2. The government's theory is that if you have an FAC that you got without taking that course, you must take the course before being granted a renewal. (NOTE WELL: If you allow your FAC to LAPSE, then you are subject to the rules for first issuance all over again. You must renew BEFORE the old FAC expires, or comply with the rules as they NOW stand.) 3. However, the issuer is not authorized by the law to refuse to RENEW -- he is only authorized to refuse to ISSUE on FIRST application. Renewal is very different from first issuance. The applicant is required to jump through hoops to get first issuance, and that makes sense. Once the applicant has a "licensing" document, renewal is a minor formality, not an opportunity to refuse. For example: A issues a dealer's permit to B in October, B having met all the requirements for issuance. B buys a building, buys a large stock of sporting goods including firearms and ammunition, and opens for business on 10 Dec. C, who has replaced A as the local issuer, refuses to renew B's license, which expired at the end of the calendar year (that expiry date is normal, regardless of issuance date). B is financially ruined. B takes C to court, sues him (probably with both the provincial and federal governments as co-defenders), and wins -- because C, completely untrained in administrative law, is unaware that he has no authority to refuse to renew. Now C is ruined, unless government pays for his unlawful behavior. I have used the dealer's permit in the above example to illustrate the problem clearly, but the administrative law PRINCIPLES I am illustrating above apply equally to ALL "licensing" documents. Refusal to RENEW is illegal, and refusal to ISSUE is legal only if the reasons for refusal are reasons authorized in the legislation. The illustrated principles of administrative law have been almost completely ignored by all levels of government and by all issuers since the firearms control system came into existence. They have gotten away with it because few of the people who have been abused have had the knowledge or funds to take the abuser to court. A change in the requirements for FIRST issuance cannot legally be made a condition for RENEWAL. That is also a principle of administrative law, one designed to protect license holders from abuse. It is appalling that issuers are NOT trained in the fundamentals of administrative law when they are first appointed. They are, almost universally, blissfully unaware of the limitations and conditions imposed on them by the legislation. The Canadian Firearms Centre has NOT done its job. It has NOT put out any training material for the people who are given the power to issue, refuse to issue and revoke "licensing" documents. And that is wrong. They NEED it. They are VULNERABLE. Most people who are "issuers" are low-ranking police officers -- or retired police officers serving as Chief Provincial Firearms Officer. Their understanding of the PRINCIPLES of administrative law is usually defective to non-existent, because, as police officers, their contact with ADMINISTRATIVE law was minimal -- and they received NO training on that subject when they became ADMINISTRATORS. Their understanding of the limits of their powers is also usually defective to non-existent. That is the fault of the Minister of Justice, the Canadian Firearms Centre, and the provincial Minister -- because they ALL failed to provide either appropriate training or a manual to tell issuers CLEARLY what they can and cannot legally do in administering firearms control legislation when issuing, refusing to issue and revoking "licensing" documents. The CFC should IMMEDIATELY put out a short pamphlet quoting the law where it vests an issuer with the power to issue, where it vests him with the power to refuse to issue, and where it vests him with the power to revoke. They may be in one area -- or widely scattered. (The firearms control legislation is laid out very messily.) The pamphlet should point out PRECISELY what limitations are imposed on the ISSUER when he is using his opinion judgement to decide whether to issue or to refuse to issue the particular "licensing" document, or whether or not to revoke one.. Further, it should point out PRECISELY what limitations are imposed on him when he is using his opinion judgement to make decisions regarding "attached conditions" on each particular "licensing" document. Those limitations -- in the legislation -- are NOT the same for all "licensing" documents, nor for all "attached conditions" that may be imposed by writing them on the "licensing" document. They must all be spelled out for EACH "licensing" document separately. Today, probably HALF OR MORE of all "attached conditions" on firearms control system "licensing" documents are illegal. That area is a scandal -- and one neither the Minister or the CFC appear to be doing anything about. The abuse continues. It should be made crystal clear to each issuer that the law does not authorize him to issue, refuse to issue, or revoke because the applicant for or holder of the permit is black, Jewish, or wears a baseball cap. The factors that he can take into account are PRECISELY spelled out in the current legislation, and they should be pointed out to every person who is appointed as an issuer. It should be made crystal clear to each issuer that the law does not authorize him to refuse to RENEW a "licensing" document. Dave Tomlinson, NFA FOCUS: Tyranny begins by convincing the tyrannized that they do not have rights. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:08 -0600 From: Rod Regier Subject: followup to Rick's news of Sackville home invasion In a later news report, the suspects were apparently not going to be charged with any firearms offenses, but just offenses as though they had hauled away innocuous household effects. However, the every dilligent law enforcement 'droids are investigating the possibility of laying unsafe storage charges. Sure would be nice to get NFA's safe storage package into the collector's hands! He was absent from the home when the invasion occurred. - -- Rod Regier, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 x108 Dymaxion Research Ltd., 5515 Cogswell St., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3J 1R2 Canada email: RRegier@dymaxion.ca corporate url: http://www.dymaxion.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:10 -0600 From: Larry Whitmore Subject: Cdn Assoc. of Chief of Police (CACP) In respose to the press release from the Canadian Association of Chief of Police, the OHA sent the following response to all the major newspapers in Ontario and Alberta: Dear Sir/Madam, It is hardly coincidence that just one week before a panel of judges in Albera will decide the fate of Ottawa's 'gun control' Bill, C-68, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and the federal Justice Department release a study claiming that more than one-half of all 'crime guns' in Canada are rifles and shotguns. This is nonsense. The sudy done by the Justice Department is bsed on a select sampe of 831 'recovered' firearms. This study methodology has severe limitations and has been criticized by researchers as unrepresentative and open to serious bias, particularly since the overwhelming majority of firearms used in crime are not recovered. As a result, the CACP's statement that rifles and shotguns "...pose a much greater threat to public safety than handguns and other prohibited weapons," is unsubstantiated. Robbery is the most common violent crime in Canada involving guns, but in the vast majority of these incidents the criminal and the firearm is never apprehended (Canadian Crime Statistics 1995: 10), and nearly 80% of them were committed with illegal handguns (Canadian Crime Statistics 1995: 47: Axon, Moyer 1994: 39-44). As usual, firearms are involved in only 2% of all the violent crimes in Canada (Juristate June 1997: 1), but account for 98% of the rhetoric. Ironically, the CACP maintains that Canadians must spend over half a billion dollars for a gun registration/licensing program that it described in 1976 as "...unrealistic and administratively unworkable," and that will "... not act[as] a deterrent to violence and will not necessarily indentify the person perpetrating the crime." Perhaps one day the CACP and our legislators will recognize that public safety in Canada isn't compromised because people commit crimes with guns, it is compromised because people commit crimes. Unfortunately, that day appears to be a long way away. Larry Whitmore Executive Manager Ontario Handgun Association ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:11 -0600 From: quocp@ilx.com Subject: CP article Skeeter wrote: >The following test was compiled from > "Criminals using legal guns: study" > By Chris Morris of The Canadian Press > The StarPhoenix, Thursday, August 28, 1997 >and > "AMMO FOR GUN CONTROL" Page B1 -- Canada and World > Winnipeg Free Press, THURSDAY, AUGUST 28, 1997 ..... >"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."\ Is Chris Morris of The Canadian Press the author of the above libelous statement? I propose that everyone send a complaint IMMEDIATELY to: Scott White (swhite@canpress.ca) General News Editor and/or Eric Morrison President The Canadian Press 36 King St. E Toronto, ONT M5C 1E6 Phone Number: 416-594-5102 Fax: 416-354-0207 Since this is a CP Story, I'm not sure if it is possible to file a complain with the provincial press councils against any newspaper carrying this article. In Ontario, there is the Ontario Press Council. Is there an equivalent Canadian Press Council? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:14:14 -0600 From: Ben Timms Subject: Re: Reloading questions, CDN-FA Digest #969 Carlo Robazza writes: 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? I'm not familiar with the Lee Progressive 1000, except that it is inexpensive and fairly reliable. Your statement implies that you have not made any purchases, if that is the case, look at the Dillon 550 series. I have used RCBS single stage and progressive reloaders as well as the Dillon, and I find the Dillon to be much better, with a far superior primer seating mechanism than RCBS. Believe me, there is nothing more frustrating than completing a round in a progressive reloader, only to find a flipped primer. The drawbacks are that Dillon has their own line of dies, which makes the transition from standard two or three die sets from other manufacturers to Dillon troublesome. Since you are just starting reloading, that might not be a problem. All reloaders require changing of parts. Some are more of a hassle than others, but if you reload larger quantities at one time, the changing from one caliber to another is acceptable. All calibers must be "calibrated" to the load, either for powder weight, bullet type or case length. Comes with the territory. Changing between the calibers you mentioned will require 1 primer feed change, at least three powder changes, shell plate, die depth and bullet depth changes. 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? Can't use Boxer primers with Berdan pockets and vice-versa.The primers have different profiles and anvil configurations. Be careful about trying to de-cap Berdan primers with a boxer primer reloader, you withh break or bend the decapping pin. Repriming Berdan cartridges can be done, it takes a lot of work and extra equipment. I'm aware of the import hassles you Canadians go through (yes, I'm from the US), but if you can import brass, check out the Old Western Scrounger, or other supply shops. 3. What is the approximate cost savings reloading 9mm, .45 ACP and .223 if you already have the brass? Figure $0.01 per primer, $15.00 per pound of powder, and $10 per hundred rifle bullets. a .223 will take about (guess) 20 Gr powder ($0.042/charge), yields about $0.15 per round of .223 or $3.05 per box of 20. Compare that to $12.00 for a box of good .223 ammo, quite a cost savings. Buying bulk bullets drops the price even further. For the pistol calibers the cost is even less, 3 to 7 cents per bullet, 8/10 cent for powder. 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? First, get a set of good reloading manuals. I recommend Sierra, Hornady, Nosler in that order for educational content, and read carefully. When you settle on a reloader, try to get a package deal with the die sets you need, powder scale (a must), case lube pad and lube, powder funnel, calipers for measuring case length. Get a reference book on cartridge and chamber dimensions and a go/no-go case gauge for the 45ACP and 9mm.. A sturdy table or workbench is necessary because of the force exerted on the cases by the press. Store your powder and primers separately, and approach maximum charges with care. Above all, keep it neat, clean and organized. Buy bulk bullets if you are shooting for fun, betcha you won't be able to resist a box or two of match grade bullets for your .223, though. Thanks for your help, Carlo. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V1 #970 **********************************