From owner-cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mon Mar 23 15:39:23 1998 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 15:14:22 -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 #279 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Content-Length: 22588 X-Lines: 551 Status: RO Cdn-Firearms Digest Monday, March 23 1998 Volume 02 : Number 279 In this issue: Hunting Game fo your PC Re: More UPS FN-FAL parts wanted Re: Number of Offences Re: Shooting on your own land? Property rights worth fight Politics Canada Take A Long Look At This (Part 1 of 2) paranoid? Words Re: Violent Percent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 07:24:48 -0600 From: Larry Subject: Hunting Game fo your PC This is something that I found at a local software store and wish to pass on. Cabelas in conjunction Head Games have produced a pc game called Cabela's Big Game Hunter. While not perfect it still provides hours of enjoyment. You can track and hunt up to 16 species of animals, using a variety of rifles and bows. Plus you must follow all the local laws in the area you wish to hunt in and practice hunter safety. For detailed information check Larry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 07:24:50 -0600 From: "H. Roy Stephens" Subject: Re: More UPS I just read in the April issue of "Home Office Computing" that for several years UPS has had different costs for commercial and residential deliveries. It seems that they now bill customers the difference, at least in the U.S. In their wisdom the criteria for a residential delivery is based on whether or not people sleep there. Hence nursing homes and home businesses get charged more for their deliveries. Mercenary is the polite adjective that comes to mind. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 07:24:46 -0600 From: Jim Davies Subject: FN-FAL parts wanted Anyone with FN parts for sale may want to send email to Agincourt. - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 21:10:26 -0600 From: Agincourt To: Jim Davies Subject: FN Parts Looking for: Inch pattern, bolts and operating rods, internal parts. Receivers would be nice, but I'm dreaming! Agincourt ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 11:39:09 -0600 From: "Alfred.Hovdestad@usask.ca" Subject: Re: Number of Offences > Looking at the above Figures they did not look right so I did some > calculations and I believe it should read. > > > "The RCMP investigated 88,162 actual violent > crimes during 1993, where only 73 of these offences, or > 0.0008 which is less than 1 firearm per 1000 offences. 73 / 88162 = 0.000828 x 100 = 0.0828% or roughly 0.08% ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 11:39:12 -0600 From: "Frederick Wm. Guse" Subject: Re: Shooting on your own land? I live in Dundas County (Eastern Ontario), and am one of the "Lucky Farmers" referred to above!! I shoot regularly on my own farm, and am planning to build a pistol range this spring, for my own and friends use. I have asked the Local OPP Firearms Registrar what I have to do so that this is lawful; his response was that I can do anything I want on my own property as long as I don't do anything that would endanger my neighbours. He also suggested that I refrain from shooting at odd hours so that my neighbours don't get upset about loosing sleep!! (Sensible, I thought ;-) ) I have had a friend from the EOHC teach myself and my family a basic Handgun Safety course here on the farm. This was to comply with the rules of another local Fish & Game Club that we have recently joined. He had no trouble obtaining the Permits to Transport to bring a number of his own handguns to our farm for the day to use on the course, which included an afternoon of live fire. Regards Frederick Wm. Guse Siebenfeld Equestrian Centre, Ltd. "Training & Education for the Horse & Rider" http://www.siebenfeld.on.ca/7f/sec.html http://www.siebenfeld.on.ca/7f/eoeqweb.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 12:32:34 -0600 From: "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Subject: Property rights worth fight Think this applies to firearm confiscation? March 22, 1998 Property rights worth fight At any time, the government can seize your land and you have virtually no recourse LICIA CORBELLA -- Calgary Sun The wrestling match between the Hart family and the City of Calgary sheds light on something most Canadians know little about -- property rights. Or rather, the utter lack of such rights in Canada. The legendary wrestling family is currently in their toughest fight ever as they strive to get fair market value for a 3.6-acre parcel of land Stu and Helen Hart own adjacent to Edworthy Park. The Harts have been offered $700,000 by a developer for their prime piece of land, if the land can be rezoned to build 15 homes on it. The city, on the other hand, wants to keep the land free of development, and has offered the Harts a laughable $25,000 per acre. Now, that's not to say that the rezoning the Harts are seeking is necessarily reasonable. Perhaps only five houses should be built on the land. Who knows? But that's getting into specifics. The broader issue here is, that at any time , the government -- city, provincial or federal -- can seize your land or a piece of your property and you have virtually no recourse for fair compensation. In Alberta, the province has made a virtual sport out of placing a caveat on a piece of private property and then tormenting the rightful landowner by refusing to adequately compensate them for what is -- under natural law -- theirs. One of the best -- or rather worst -- cases of property abuse, has gone on for 24 years right here in Calgary to a morally courageous couple, Hector and Helen McElroy. On June 1, 1974 Hector and Helen bought 9.8 acres of land which included a lovely little house in northeast Calgary. Just 27 days later the Alberta Government slapped a caveat and notice on that land, designating his property as part of a Restricted Development Area (RDA). What that did essentially was render their land worthless, but not so worthless that the McElroys didn't have to continue paying taxes on it! Now, why the government didn't buy the land when it was up for sale just 27 days earlier is still a mystery. What's particularly diabolical about this case, however, is the government never informed the McElroys about its action. It wasn't until the real-estate boom in the early '80s, when Hector looked into selling his land, was he told about the Notice and advised that his property could not be sold. As a result, Hector could not arrange financing, or sell or improve his property. His estate -- which he planned to leave to his large family, which includes 21 grandchildren, two adopted daughters and three sons -- was virtually worthless. A lifetime of hardwork down the drain. "I could write volumes describing the hell we have endured standing against this unjust swindling that the government has used on us because they had the power to do so," says Hector, a 78-year-old Second World War veteran. After a considerable amount of haggling, the McElroys were given a 30-year undisturbed lease. The only allowed disruption to that lease was the development of a transportation corridor, at which time the McElroys were supposed to be given a one-year written notice. However, in 1993, a man knocked on the McElroy's door and told them he had bought a piece of land and found out they had a lease on it. Hector says he felt as though he had been kicked in the gut. His land was sold out from under him not to build a transportation corridor, as previously stated, but to a developer. But what's really astonishing is the province forced Hector to continue to pay the taxes for the piece of property it sneakily sold. Yesterday, the Canadian Property Rights Research Institute of Calgary held a conference at the Palliser Hotel called: The Importance of Property Rights. The McElroys and the Harts are living proof of the significance of this conference. Sadly, they are just the tip of the iceberg. Indeed, you could be living on an acreage right now and not even know that your land is virtually worthless because of a government caveat. Obviously, if a society is to function at all, governments must have the right to expropriate land for the greater public good in order to build roads, expand parks, build dams, etc. Fine, then let the expropriation be clear cut and let the property owner be fairly compensated. It's time Canadians fight for their right to their property. Otherwise, one day one of us could wake up to find that everything we worked so hard for got swallowed up by an indifferent government. Licia Corbella, editor of the Calgary Sun, can be reached at 403-250-4129 or by e-mail at lcorbell@sunpub.com Her columns appear Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. Letters to the editor should be sent to callet@sunpub.com source: http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/corbella.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 12:57:25 -0600 From: "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Subject: Politics Canada got to www.PoliticsCanada.com for you chance to vote on any MP, including the leaders of the parties. Try going to http://www.politicscanada.com/CanadaVotes ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 15:13:46 -0600 From: Rick Lowe Subject: Take A Long Look At This (Part 1 of 2) Dave Tomlinson said: > FOCUS: Never hit the enemy where he EXPECTS to be hit. Exactly. I am about to suggest a strategy that will have some of you screaming I am an agent of the government, others that I am an appeaser, and perhaps some will even claim I am the anti-Christ or something similar. All I can ask you to do is read it, take a deep breath, read it again, and then think a bit before starting the flaming and cries of outrage. I have spent the last twenty five or so years of my life, excluding some university years, working within the RCMP, Customs, and the Canadian Forces. Which departments actually doesn't matter; what does matter is that I have learned from those years how federal governments work. And from that I have learned that you don't beat bureaucracies by trying to get them to debate issues reasonably, fight by your rules, or even fight fair. You beat bureaucracies by strangling them with thirty yards of their own guts. Dave's "dancing on a pin" ideas to date just hint at what is possible. The firearms control bureaucracy does indeed have a weak spot, and if we have the guts to exploit it we can indeed strangle them with their own mechanism. So, hold your breath folks... here's what I think we should do. We should register every single firearm we possibly can on the first day that registration comes into effect, or as soon thereafter. Okay, everybody back to your seats, put that rope down, gimme a second here. Why should we do this? First, by NOT registering, or registering as late as possible, we play into the best interests of the government. I don't believe for a minute that Rock, Chretien, Annie, or any of that bunch believe for a minute that registration will have the slightest effect. It is a political ploy to give the government the illusion of "doing something" - garnering favour with the media and special interest groups and diverting attention from the real problems within our justice system. Why do you think Allan Rock wrote so much delay into C-68 when he rammed this through - wouldn't all that delay cost more lives if it really were effective? The delay was laid in there because Rock didn't want to be anywhere near this turkey when the bill came due for his $87 million sure cure for crime. For Rock, that has pretty much worked out although it is still fresh enough in people's minds that it is his bill. But the longer you let it play out, the more facts dim in people's minds. Hell, it might even be a different government in power when people start looking at the results and then they can take the heat, not the Liberals. When we resist registration to the last minute - or don't register at all - we help the government, not ourselves. To begin with, while we aren't registering, new sales will be. And that allows the government a nice leisurely startup curve to get this shaky registration system and related software up to speed, the bugs out, etc. When the rush does come at the end, they will have a debugged system ready for it, staffed by experienced personnel. Next, the government can raise the price for registration as the price skyrockets and hit gun owners in the pockets as much as possible rather than forcing ALL Canadians to pay for this scheme. Again, a clear win for the feds. Delayed registration also means that, when media or others demand that the Minister of Justice show where registration is working, he can shrug his shoulders and say that the reason it isn't working is because them nasty ol' gun owners are not registering their guns and the system can't work unless the registration is complete. Another government win - yet again it is the unreasonable gun owners' fault and the system would work if gun owners would simply do what is required for it to work. Finally, a gun not registered is one that doesn't cost the government money to register - remember how we are always harping at how much it costs to register a firearm. So it keeps their costs down. Keep this in mind and then ask yourself what happens if everybody registers as many firearms as possible as soon as possible after registration begins. Here's what happens: 1. Gun owners can only be seen as scrupulously law abiding citizens and the tar and feathers approach of Wendy, Heidi, and company is largely negated. We are no longer radicals, crazies, or anything else. We are law abiding citizens who do everything legally required of us, cooperate, but disagree and say it will not work - and that will be proved soon enough. 2. A shaky system with a small amount of staff gets no startup grace period, no learning period, no debugging period. It has to work RIGHT NOW. We like to claim there are around twenty million unregistered firearms in this country. How long is it going to take to do twenty million entries with the staff and software they presently have? Are they even going to have time to do the OTHER, normal duties that those departments are responsible for. What happens when things break down? How much does it cost? When do the normal duties get done? Who pays for the overtime or temporary staff? How many man hours from start to finish will those twenty million registrations immediately consume (or demand be consumed) within a month or two? 3. At the "freebee" initial registration costs, the government loses the ability to raise registration fees later on (as has been done elsewhere) to try and cover the costs of the $87 million boondoggle. People argue what the cost of registering a firearm really will be, but if 20,000,000 firearms were registered at a cost of $50/each, that comes to one BILLION dollars. An expense that would be incurred within a matter of weeks, ignoring associated additional costs from the absolute chaos. The registration fees collected under the initial rates would amount to chicken feed. The end result is that the government eats the bill, not gunowners. What do you think Paul Martin is going to say when Annie comes calling saying she needs nearly an additional billion dollars to cover Al's cool plan? What do you think the Canadian public (who to this point largely don't give a damn if they don't own firearms as it supposedly isn't costing them a dime) is going to think when they learn they are going to have to pay this kind of money right off the bat for a program that was supposed to cost only $87 million and that paid primarily by gun owners? People tend to ignore things that cost other people money. They will accept just about any promise of reducing crime if it only affects the other guy - what the hell, it isn't costing them anything so let's try it. When the money is coming out of THEIR pockets, THEN they start paying attention. 4. The government loses any ability to not deal with the non effectiveness of registration or blame its' failings on gun owners not cooperating and/or refusing to register. If all firearms are registered within a matter of months, then we should see the positive results of that registration in crime statistics within a year or two at the most, shouldn't we? When that decrease in crime doesn't happen - as we keep claiming it won't - then the public is left looking at a Draconian system that obviously doesn't work and that THEY are paying for to the tune of millions of taxpayer dollars. And the government in power that caused all this is still there while memories are still fresh. Will Canadians accept or forgive a government spending hundreds of millions of their dollars on a system that has no effect whatsoever on reducing crimes which are a pittance to begin with while health care and other social programs are bleeding to death? Probably not. [continute in part 2 of 2] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 15:14:12 -0600 From: "Skeeter Abell-Smith" Subject: paranoid? } I am curious, and a bit paranoid about asking for info from the Govt. I } cannot find a site here in B.C. to ask what is being done here. First, I } got an E mail from a Kathleen Roussel, communications group Canadain } Firearms Center. Is it a wise thing to be sending my address to the Govt. } or am I just a little over paraniod? Thanks for your help. You're over-paranoid. =-] They know who you are and where you live already. E-mail will not change things. It's better if we do it all out in the open. The "gay rights" movement has only been helped by saying "we're here, we're queer, DEAL WITH IT". Other groups have made gains by being very public. People who belong to the gun culture -- that's most of us here -- are hurting because we tend to have "live and let live" attitudes. We just want to be left alone in return. This have resulted in many of us trying to appease the gun grabbers, selling off a little at a time just to be left alone and "not make waves". That approach is what has helped us get boxed into such a tight corner. I decided nearly four years ago to "come out of the gun cabinet" and speak my mind publicly. I wrote letters and appeared on TV and radio. I started this mailing list. 1260+ issues later we are still here, only now the Dept. of Justice is actually paying attention! =-] People asked me if I was worried. There I was publicly advocating -- among other things -- Carry Concealed Weapon permits and legal ownership of machine guns by qualified citizens. Well, everyone knows where I live, and for suggesting that provisions already in Canadian law be enforced and properly regulated I haven't gotten so much as my windows soaped on Hallowe'en. Just the opposite. People sometimes disagree, politely, but mostly I've received only compliments and offers to help. If more of us "came out", we'd be even stronger than we already are. We've seen three of the four federal political parties court us with promises to change our anti-gun laws. We had four provinces and 2 territories go to bat for us in the courts against C-68. We've helped get the implementation dates nearly 3 years while we also help the CFC and DoJ embarrass themselves. We have won many court cases. We should all take a moment to celebrate these little victories before we bear down to fight some more. Keep reading and writing and fighting. Most of the public still don't know the facts. Each one of us can help them understand and learn. If each of us talk to just three others, we'll contact over 10,000 persons. If one of those of those three then spreads the word to three others, we'll have made 20,000 new friends, and so on. Visit the web sites. Print out the best stuff from this list and make copies for friends. Help get a friend connected to the internet and get her connected to this list! It took 30 years for things to get this bad. We aren't going to completely change the system overnight. We've done well in the last four years. Please don't quit now. Set and example for other shooters and work to change the system. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 15:14:02 -0600 From: Dan MacInnis/Louise Leblanc Subject: Words Quite a few of us use the term "Pro-Gun Control". The opposite of this would be "anti-gun control" My opinion is most firearms owners would be and are in favour of "not everyone should be able to enter a sporting goods store, choosing and walking out with a firearm unless that person is trained in it's use, is responsible and not a criminal". Therefore, we all want some form of "gun control", and the FAC program fills that requirement. I do not hear too many people arguing against the FAC requirement, perhaps some glitches, but generally. So we are "pro-gun control". In some form. "Effective" gun control is another issue. Canada has registered handguns for a long time now, yet as recently as last week a Policeman was wounded by what will turn out to be an illegal handgun. Enough has been written here that expounding on that issue would be redundant. My concern is the usage of "words" to describe what we are. If we give the impression we are "anti-gun control", the listener hears "anti everything" to do with regulating who may purchase them, and get's on the defensive. Words are everything. I am at a loss to advise what our terminology should be, at least at this time. I do respectfully suggest we do not use "pro-gun control" to describe the proponents of C68. Respectfully, Dan [Moderator: How about calling proponents of C-68 "pro-bureaucracy" HTB] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 15:14:08 -0600 From: Robin Leech Subject: Re: Violent Percent In answer to John Backhouse at JUMBO@OZEMAIL.COM.AU: Regarding the 73 gun-related violent crimes as part of the total of 88,162 violent crimes. divide 88,162 into 73 and the answer is 0.00082. But, this is NOT per cent. To find the percentage, multiply 0.00082 times 100 and the answer is 0.08%, which is what was reported. Robin Leech ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #279 **********************************