From owner-cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Wed Mar 4 09:18:09 1998 Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 08:59:02 -0600 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 V2 #243 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Content-Length: 24184 X-Lines: 549 Status: RO Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, March 4 1998 Volume 02 : Number 243 In this issue: Day in court Re: FAC Procedures Re: Green Slips/Waiting Time. Re: Cdn troops' arms. Queensland may drop gun cool off period Jean Chretien/Charest Beazley supports unworkable gun laws Property Rights Book Review CCW Re: Parliament Hill Sex Scandal? Re: CCW -- For a Bearbaiter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 23:28:26 -0600 From: Malcolm Baron Subject: Day in court I spent the day in court in Sudbury today. I was charged with possession of a prohibited weapon (Styer A.U.G. "assault rifle). Technically I was guilty. I didn't pay as much attention to these issues a few years ago as I do now, and I thought I still had time to get it registered (this whole thing started in 1993). The crown offered to withdraw the charges if I surrendered my property. I might have won if I had fought it, but I might have lost, and the penalty for loosing being what it is, and the cost of fighting it being what it would be, I caved in and took the crowns offer. I hate myself for doing it, but given my options I took the easy way out. I am sure that this is what they are counting on everyone doing. I was only charged for the Styer, but they also kept my SKS, my AG 42, a whole pile of ammo, cleaning kits, mag pouches. (and according to the crown I they had an "SKS replica" that belonged to me - I have no idea where that statement came from) Before I went into the court I was thinking that if they took my Styer, I was going to tell them that they could only have the "frame or receiver", but I was going to keep all the "spare parts", but I didn't get a chance. I wonder how long it will be before some bike gang, or SWAT team has a nice second hand, gently used AUG to add to their arsenal? On the bright side, I still have my FAC, so as soon as I have paid my lawyer I'm going to be looking for a new rifle. Anyone got a Springfield Armouries M1A, or a Remington 700 going cheap? Malcolm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 23:28:34 -0600 From: Bill Farion Subject: Re: FAC Procedures The local detachment in Ft. Nelson has decided that FAC applicants should come in to the detachment on Thursday from 2 to 6 pm for an "interview" about our applications. Can this procedure be challenged? I think it is a waste of time for ther RCMP or an excuse for one of the members to do nothing for the afternoon! Any other towns in BC have this foisted on them??? Thks Bill (;-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 23:28:59 -0600 From: "David A. Tomlinson, NFA" Subject: Re: Green Slips/Waiting Time. >I purchased 3 Revolvers 4" Brl`s Oct:16th. 1997. I took them into Metro >Toronto Firearms. These were to be used in my Lawful Occupation, hence a >little urgency. Over the next 4 months I attended that Unit 5 times, and >called the RCMP in Ottawa 6 times!! I get on very well with the Guys in >Ottawa and anybody I have ever dealt with in Metro Firearms, going back 30 >years!! But it still took 4 months to get my Firearms. Question for Dave, >can I legally bypass this holding of Guns I need for Business. There is no requirement in the law for the Local Registrar to hold firearms pending the arrival of the green C-306 registration certificates. What should happen is this: 1. Buy firearm, get Bill of Sale, take it to Local Registrar. 2. Local Registrar issues Permit to Convey (printed on same form as the Application to Register). 3. You go and get firearm, bring it to Local Registrar. 4. Local Registrar completes Application to Register, and you sign it. 5. Local Registrar forwards Application to Register to CFR/FRAS Ottawa. 6. Local Registrar issues you a Permit to Transport to take your firearm home, and sets the "expiry date" as the date of arrival of the green C-306 Registration Certificate. CC s. 91(1) makes it a criminal offence for you to be in possession if you do not have a green C-306 Registration Certificate. CC s. 91(4) then destroys that charge in these words: 91. (4) Subsection (1) does not apply to a person (a) in respect of a restricted weapon, where a permit relating to the restricted weapon has been issued under subsection 110(1) [Permit to Carry], (2.1) [Permit to Carry for non-residents] or (3.1) [Temporary Storage Permit]...; (b) to whom a permit relating to a restricted weapon has been issued under subsections 110(3) [Permit to Transport] or (4) [Permit to Convey to Local Registrar for registration]... Any Local Registrar who holds firearms pending the arrival of the green C-306 Registration Certificate is merely being obstructive, destructive and stupid. The Local Registrar is the sole deciding authority as to whether or not he will behave sensibly or like a particularly stupid mule. Local Registrars are OUR EMPLOYEES. Our taxes pay their wages. If they are behaving badly, and obstructing ordinary operations without good cause -- because they are too lazy to find out what they are SUPPOSED to do -- then they do not deserve respect or courteous treatment. There are many, many jurisdictions in Canada where the Local Registrars are NOT holding firearms pending the arrival of green C-306 Registration Certificates. If it was a requirement in law, ALL would be -- and they are not. Dave Tomlinson, NFA [Moderator: In Quebec the SQ takes the position that they "only recommend" that a permit be issued, and you can not have the gun until "Ottawa" decides you can by issuing a registration. This policy was instituted after some criticism of the SQ for ignoring (for six weeks) letters pleading that Fabrikant not be issued a permit. The Fabrikant incident and the policy change did not really have anything in common, Fabrikant already had one gun and two others (that he used) were approved in his wife's name, but it was a convenient way to appear to be "doing something." It also has the benefit that if someone misuses a gun it is "Ottawa's fault." HTB] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 23:29:01 -0600 From: Rick Lowe Subject: Re: Cdn troops' arms. Alan said: > I got my information about the arms and readiness from the CBC (sheepish That was a mistake. Want to hear about Canadian reporters shooting "frontline" footage in front of the hotel where they were staying and asking guys if they'd mind driving their carriers through the background behind them? How about their view on guns and gun control. > I apologize to anyone who was offended by my remarks about poor > preparation on the part of Canadian troops. I wasn't offended; no apology required. But when a post has erroneous information, people dismiss the whole post and its' arguments, not just the one error. That's a waste if there are accurate and valuable points to be made in the remainder of the post. Aside from that, very few people in Canada have a clue about what went on in Yugo - or in our Forces within Canada or anywhere else. They aren't going to hear it in the media, and they sure as hell aren't going to hear it from the CDS. > I am glad that our troops are ready and able to defend themselves. All is not roses in the Forces. I think my comments soley addressed the assumption that Canadian troops were poorly trained and armed and were being ordered not to load weapons. And that we were between two armed camps. Those specific assumptions were incorrect. Beyond that, there are all kinds of problems in the Forces. Most of those problems involve pathetic leadership, particularly at the higher ranks, and the breakdown of the spirit of the regimental system because of it. It would take a book, I only know a tiny part of it, and this isn't the forum for it. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 23:29:05 -0600 From: ALERT (by way of DAT) Subject: Queensland may drop gun cool off period Without a clear and comprehensive alternative complete firearms control system to offer, the battles become battles over details, with little hope of achieving an overall good system. Study what is going on below, and see why the NFA has been locked into the "Practical Firearms Control System" for so many years. Dave Tomlinson, NFA FOCUS: It is not enough to win a minor battle, if the minor battle is not a step toward victory, dammit, VICTORY. ____________________________________________ QUEENSLAND may join Victoria and drop the 28-day cooling off period for existing gun owners wanting to buy new high powered weapons, a spokesman for the state's Police Minister Russell Cooper said yesterday. "At last year's national gun conference in Adelaide, Queensland and Victoria spoke against the cooling off period," the spokesman said. "It has always been the minister's view that there should not be that requirement," he said. The states agreed to the cooling-off period after Prime Minister John Howard introduced strict national gun laws following the Port Arthur massacre in 1996. All police ministers agreed to enforce a cooling-off period for every new permit to give police time to check if the applicant had committed an offence since the original permit was issued. Queensland farmers have argued strongly for the right to own high powered weapons to control wild pigs and buffalo. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 23:29:07 -0600 From: Jim Davies Subject: Jean Chretien/Charest On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Subject: Charest as leader of Quebec Liberals > > between federal and provincial politics. But, last week Charest was a > Conservative, next week Charest might be a Liberal. Is Charest a > liberal or a conservative? Is he going to change his personal > political philosophy overnight? The ConLibs have been identical and interchangeable for years, only mouthing timeworn slogans from time to time to give the impression that the marriage did not occur. As their political "philosophy" is identical, there is no problem for them there. There is a spin problem, of course, but one thing the government does well [besides RevCan] is spin doctoring. So, no problem that [tax] money cannot solve...and of course Charest will become a senator in due course. Jim Davies ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 23:29:09 -0600 From: ALERT (by way of DAT) Subject: Beazley supports unworkable gun laws When the firearms community becomes a huge voting bloc, SMART politicians begin to abandon attacks on them. Stupid politicians keep on attacking -- just like those waves of troops kept marching into the machine-gun fire in WW I, firm in their determination to conquer through sheer willpower. [Moderator: I think it was the Generals who had faith in willpower. The troops just died. HTB] In what follows, you can see the split -- intelligent politicians beginning to COURT the firearms community, while unintelligent ones continue to believe in their divine right to rule -- regardless of what the voters actually want. In their own superior wisdom -- regardless of indications of their stupidity. In their own future... Mark Twain said it all, long ago. A visiting foreigner suggested to Mr. Twain that the US was a marvellous country, because ANYONE could become President -- "even that fellow sweeping the street over there!" Twain dryly pointed out that the sweeper could never become President. He was sweeping against the wind. Dave Tomlinson, NFA ______________________________________________ PRIME Minister John Howard would get complete support from Labor to maintain tougher gun laws even if this meant a referendum on the issue, Opposition leader Kim Beazley said today. Mr Beazley's pledge follows moves by Victoria to water down the national laws, introduced after the April 1996 Port Arthur massacre, by removing the 28-day cooling off period for purchase of second and subsequent guns. Queensland also has indicated it could consider abolishing the cooling-off period for existing gun owners in the wake of the Victorian decision. Asked on Network Nine's Today program if he would back Mr Howard to the hilt, even if he had to go to a referendum, to prevent a watering down of the gun laws, Mr Beazley said: "Absolutely". "We went through that exercise to obtain uniform gun laws a couple of years ago now in the most tragic of circumstances," he said. "There was a great level of national will behind the notion of uniform gun laws and all the states signed up to it. We endorsed it. Indeed many of the measures that went through were ones that we have been trying to get the states to adopt for some considerable time. "Now if there is a breakout by any one of the states the spirit of that is very much depleted and that is a substantial challenge, that challenge that has emerged from Victoria." Mr Beazley also did not see a need to change the system. "If there is a case for any modification of the laws then that case would have to be pout within the framework of a national agreement. We don't see that case and we certainly don't see anything national emerging from this set of circumstances." Yesterday National Coalition for Gun Control chair Roland Browne said Prime Minister John Howard should use the threat of a referendum to force Victoria to stick to the uniform national gun laws. Federal Justice Minister Amanda Vanstone said she stood by the national gun laws but said it was open to states to fine-tune their own legislation. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 06:00:41 -0600 From: "Robert Boswell" Subject: Property Rights Does anyone know of the outcome of the vote regarding Jim Pankiws motion put forward in the HOC Feb 23 98. regarding property rights. Cheers Bob Boswell ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 06:01:00 -0600 From: mtoma Subject: Book Review 101 Things To Do Til The Revolution By Claire Wolf Book Review by Mike Toma At first glance one is apt to suggest that you read this book tongue in cheek, perhaps with a shaker of salt. After you have read this little tome fully, other thoughts will come to mind; like I wish I'd read this years ago or why is this not required reading in our schools? Ms. Wolfe has a light, easy going writing style that suggests mischief and entertains you with humor and information found almost no where else. Well nowhere else in one place that's for sure. Ms. Wolfe offers some very practical advice on living and dealing with the present political climate. Stating that "its too late to change the system from within and too early to shoot the bastards", there are ways to live with your pride and honor intact in our present age and still be subversive as hell. Indeed the second part of the title is "Ideas and resources for self-liberation, monkey wrenching and preparedness". Ms. Wolfe is a Libertarian and if you are at all familiar with that group you know they stand for freedom of the individual and not at all for big brother. To further your ideas on self liberation and freedom, Ms. Wolfe details a list of excellent books and in this age of the computer a large number of websites that are sure to keep you busy. Throughout the book are quotes from history and present day that are simply inspiring, not to mention thought provoking. For example; "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves". William Pitt the Younger, British PM. There are many more. Monkey wrench shenanigans listed in this book will definitely keep you thinking of ways to lessen big brother's influence and perhaps a little revenge. Careful, some things listed here may border on the illegal, use at your own risk. Ms. Wolfe reads Heinlein (she is okay in my book), and gives a list of 'Simon Jester' stickers you can print on your computer and leave in public places. For example; 'Work harder: millions on welfare are depending on you', 'Support the Chinese Underground: buy an SKS and bury it', 'Armed women equals polite men', 'I don't trust a government I can't shoot back at', 'Taxes: the politicians way of saying Pluck You'. You get the idea. What kind of credit cards are hard to trace? How do you hide money offshore? The answers to these questions will be found inside. The only drawback I could find in this volume is that it is definitely American. This really doesn't matter too much as all of the material is quite adaptable to Canada and our present state of affairs. Practical advice and entertaining as well, what more could you want in a book. 101 Things To Do Til The Revolution is available from Paladin Press ISBN 1-55950-157-X Web Site: 1-800-392-2400 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 06:01:13 -0600 From: kdesolla@cyberus.ca (Keith P. de Solla) Subject: CCW well, with bear season fast approaching, I revisit the issue of "what can I carry for self-defence in Ontario while setting up bait sights?" I don't want to spend $160 on the Wilderness carry course (designed for prospectors & geologists, anyway), so why not a C302 "to protect life" under section 110 (2) of the Criminal Code. While the authorities will likely fight this, it would make more sense to carry a revolver rather than a shotgun for this activity. And there would be no question as to whether I was hunting or not. Anybody know how I would go about applying for a Permit to Carry to protect life? Is there a form? Do I go to the local police, or directly to the CPFO? - -keith Keith P. de Solla, P.Eng - NFA Field Officer kdesolla@cyberus.ca http://www.cyberus.ca/~kdesolla/eohc.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 06:01:16 -0600 From: "H. Roy Stephens" Subject: Re: Parliament Hill Sex Scandal? On Pierre Bourque's web site over the past week there has been a story hinting that there is a major sex scandal brewing that involves a Cabinet Minister. Check it out at: Oh please, please let it be _ _ _ _ . R:-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 08:58:50 -0600 From: "David A. Tomlinson, NFA" Subject: Re: CCW -- For a Bearbaiter >While the authorities will likely fight this, it would make more sense to >carry a revolver rather than a shotgun for this activity. And there would >be no question as to whether I was hunting or not. >Anybody know how I would go about applying for a Permit to Carry to protect >life? Is there a form? Do I go to the local police, or directly to the >CPFO? The issuers are VERY reluctant to issue a Permit to Carry "to protect life." This is a "CYA syndrome," and it exists for two reasons. A police officer (and the issuers are almost all police officers) usually is firm in his or her belief that no one but a police officer can be trusted to carry "to protect life." That belief is unjustified in many cases, and the issuer has no good way to judge who is trustworthy and who is not. An issuer (note that subtle distinction) is afraid that if the person to whom the Permit to Carry has been issued does something wrong, blame will go to the issuer -- and to the issuer's police force -- with news media crucifixion of both. The issuer has no good way to judge whether or not the applicant will do something wrong. Those fears are NOT unrealistic. Those inabilities to judge are NOT a MINOR problem. The evidence presented to the issuer on application is badly designed and inadequate. That is particularly true when one looks at the consequences to the issuer and the issuer's police force if the Permit holder does something wrong -- like drunkenly shooting up a bar or a family. The Ontario police stopped issuing wilderness carry permits for those reasons. They did NOT expect the storm of protest and POLITICAL activity that resulted. They did NOT expect that carriers would, following NFA advice, take their anger to politicians and tell the politicians that THEY were being blamed for POLITICAL refusal of carry permits. (Tell a politician that you hold HIM and HIS PARTY responsible for something that is bugging you, AND THAT IT AFFECTS THE WAY YOU VOTE, THE WAY ALL YOUR CLUB MEMBERS VOTE, AND THE WAY YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS VOTE -- THEN you have his full attention. The way large groups vote is HIS self-interest -- and his own self-interests are FAR more important to him than YOUR self-interests will ever be. Hey -- that's human nature!) The police, being bombarded by politicians, began looking for a way out of the swamp they had fallen into. The Ontario firearms safety Instructors organization then created their "wilderness carry course." That largely ended the problem. How? If you take and pass the "wilderness carry course," you get a certificate that you have been properly trained, have absorbed the training, and are now QUALIFIED to carry without anyone worrying about you. The issuer is no longer afraid to issue -- because the issuer is NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR JUDGING THE APPLICANT. The issuer can and does issue with the assurance that an Instructor has watched the applicant handle loaded firearms for some time, trained the appliccant, and is satisfied that it is safe FOR THE INSTRUCTOR if the applicant has a carry permit and can carry IN THE SAME WOODS AS THE INSTRUCTOR. Instructors do NOT certify applicants who cannot be made safe. If the new holder DOES do something wrong, then the issuer is OFF THE HOOK -- because he or she issued on the basis of a certificate and a clean criminal record (the one check that the issuer still makes.) The old structure DID NOT WORK. It SHUT DOWN. The new structure DOES work - -- and, above, you can see WHY it works. The NFA's "Practical Firearms Control System" is BASED on that structure -- transferring the JUDGEMENT part of issuance to the Instructor, and leaving the criminal record check to the police. The NFA system goes one step farther, to stop the current heavy wastage of scarce and costly police resources -- it requires the police to do the criminal record check, but NOT to issue Permits or any other firearms control document. They merely issue a certification of clean record after doing the CPIC check and any "if-necessary" further check. It is, under the NFA system, the combination of certification of training level by an Instructor and certification of clean record by the police that causes the issuer to issue. The issuer has NO judgement calls to make -- and therefore, the issuing can be done by a clerk of the motor vehicles control branch of government, a low-paid clerk in an office full of sophisticated machinery designed to produce uncopyable licences. Therefore: I STRONGLY recommend that you DO take the wilderness carry course, and stop trying to avoid it. We are trying to reinforce the idea that this is the wave of the future, and the way all firearms control systems should operate -- with main control in the hands of Instructors, and police checks on criminal records ONLY. Hey -- nothing else WORKS. Dave Tomlinson, NFA FOCUS: We know you want firearms control eased. Do you want it eased to the point where a child, an untrained moron and a convicted violent-crime felon can all have legal unsupervised access to any type of firearm? Or would you prefer to have the MAIN judgement call made by a helpful firearms-community Instructor, or by a suspicious police officer who does not know anyhing about you or your training level? Would you prefer the INSTRUCTOR's judgement to be BINDING -- subject only to an override if the police check comes up with a bad criminal record? Think, people, THINK. This method of firearms control WORKS, and is SALEABLE. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #243 **********************************