From owner-cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Wed Apr 29 22:19:41 1998 Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 22:00:27 -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 #368 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Content-Length: 24581 X-Lines: 634 Status: RO Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, April 29 1998 Volume 02 : Number 368 In this issue: Interview with John Lott Re: Verifiers Registration and Verifiers Re: Verifiers Re: Criminal Manufacture of Firearms. Definition of "Receiver" in airguns Re: Liability Insurance Re: UN Regime GONADS 1998 Auditor General's Report re: CILA report on "Verifiers" Re: Huntsville Ontario Gun and Trade Show re: AUSTRALIA: Politician wants ban on Olympic shooting events Re: Verifiers Re: Discharge of Firearms and Hunting Chauvin Gun Show Unable to get regs Huntsville Gun show Re: Verifiers, insurance and other matters Re: Verifiers, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 06:16:25 -0600 From: ALERT (via DAT) Subject: Interview with John Lott ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 06:39:47 -0600 From: "John E. Stevens" Subject: Re: Verifiers At 07:38 PM 4/28/98 -0600, CILA wrote: >I attended a meeting last week with representatives from the CFC and >gleaned the following information regarding verifiers: > [snip] > All in all, being a CFC verifier sounds like a lose-lose proposition to me. > It will personally expensive and earn you the derision of the firearms >community. What is really amazing is they honestly believe that firearms >owners will line up in flocks for an "opportunity" to provide this >"essential service" (their words, not mine). Of course we aren't going to do it. And justice must be bright enough to know that so what other possible reason can there be for them to go out of their way to make sure the firearms community won't "volunteer". After all, they could just make it manditory, kinda like being a juror. Hmmm. I wonder how many Wendy supporters may just see an opportunity here to cause unending grief? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:10:56 -0600 From: "Carlo Robazza" Subject: Registration and Verifiers To: CFC From: Carlo Robazza Hi there, I have a question regarding registration and verifiers. I will provide a hypothetical situation and then pose the question at the end. Scenario: It comes time to register my firearms. I have an old shotgun that my Great-grandfather brought with him from the "old country". I am not able to identify it so I put Make, Model and Serial number down as UNKNOWN. The CFC receives my registration card for the shotgun and informs me that I must take it to a verifier to have the make, model and serial number determined. The verifier determines that it is: Make: XYZ Model: ABCD Serial Number: 000~001 The shotgun registration gets updated and I go on my merry way. One year later, my house is broken into and the shotgun is stolen only to be retrieved shortly thereafter. I am called down to the police station to retrieve the shotgun. In the mean time it is checked to see if it is in the system. A different verifier determines that the Make is actually "QWERTY" and the registration is wrong. Questions: Will I be held responsible for the mistakes made by the first verifier? It is my understanding that wrong entries on a registration form can lead to a prison term. Is there some way for me to absolve myself of any responsibility when a verifier fills out my registration slip wrong? Is there any way of showing that a registration card was filled out by a verifier and not by the owner? Thanks, Carlo. P.S. I am still waiting for a reply to my question from March 24th, 1998 concerning "ammunition not commonly available". Do you have a time frame on an answer? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:10:59 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: Re: Verifiers John E. Stevens wrote: > Of course we aren't going to do it. And justice must be bright enough to > know that so what other possible reason can there be for them to go out of > their way to make sure the firearms community won't "volunteer". After all, > they could just make it manditory, kinda like being a juror. > > Hmmm. I wonder how many Wendy supporters may just see an opportunity here > to cause unending grief? Peter Kearns wrote: It is my belief there will be plenty of verifiers. Our local RCMP forensic lab was (apparently) luring unsuccessful applicants for a firearms tech position with the bone........ "If you work voluntarily for us as verifiers, it will help your chances of obtaining a permanent job"....... The poor chump they fed that line to repeated it to us five months ago! (He indicated he will accept their offer, as he wants a nice stable job. there are enough turncoats to amply fill the ranks of verifiers, and i believe they will have no trouble with the usual crop of police and military wannabe's. Of course there is another way........ Nothing says that you have to accept the verifiers judgement relating to registration details of your firearm. Under our law, you can insist that the verifier justify his re-registration of your property in front of a judge in court. I am certain that the NFA can make mincemeat of any verifier, and knowing David Tomlinson, I am sure he will do just that........ gleefully! Because these untrained and unqualified people attempt to make a judgement regarding property registered to you, it is your duty to be fully satisfied that they are making a correct determination. Remember, the owner of the firearm is liable if false or incorrect information appears on any registration certificate held by him / her........ Do you really want jail time for a decision made by some barely literate volunteer? All we have to do is to contest the verifiers judgements in every case. Cheap for us, but not for the DOJ..... regards, Peter " I think I shall change my name to Honey Badger". [Moderator: Sounds good to me, Honey Badger. HTB] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:11:04 -0600 From: lundgard@ccinet.ab.ca Subject: Re: Criminal Manufacture of Firearms. At 09:12 PM 4/27/98 -0600, you wrote: >Tom Cohoe. Stated that Criminals could make Firearms, I think he said >almost as good as legal manufacturing Companies. Making Firearms is not Several years ago there was a display by Corrections Canada in a Mall in Red Deer, Alberta. On display were a number of firearms, other weapons, and tools, manufactured in a nearby penal institution -all without the knowledge or blessing of those who controlled the institution. The ingenuity displayed was remarkable. Having seen what can be done in a restricted environment with limited access to tools and materials, these folks could produce quality products in any metal working shop with access to quality tools and metal. Jerrold ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:29 -0600 From: Eb Mueller Subject: Definition of "Receiver" in airguns The following response from CFC is regarding an enquiry about the "definition of the receiver" in airguns. This might be of interest to many of us who also enjoy airgun style "firearms." ............................. Thank you for replying to my comments with respect to airguns. Hopefully, the added information below will be of assistance to you. I contacted the Canadian Firearms Registry in order to get some further advice with respect to determining muzzle velocity and was assured that, where the manufacturer's advertised velocity is available, the Registry would be content with that to determine muzzle velocity, despite the possible variations from this due to factors such as pellet weight and lubricants. I would add that, although it is by no means a perfect solution to classify firearms by muzzle velocity, this has not caused any great difficulty in the past either to the police enforcing firearm laws, or to airguns or pellet gun owners. The frame of an airguns is that part of it on which other parts, such as the barrel, attach. Essentially, it is the skeleton. It may be, in some cases, that the compression tube fits this description. As it is possible to simply register a frame or receiver for a firearm, it would equally be possible to do so with an airguns. However, the registration regulations allow for spare barrels to be registered and make it mandatory to report any change to the firearm from its state at the time of registration. Canadian Firearms Centre ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:39 -0600 From: Bill Farion Subject: Re: Liability Insurance Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Professional liability insurance will be VERY necessary -- because any error > on the part of the "verifier" is likely to lead to confiscation of the > firearm and a lawsuit against the 'verifier' for that loss -- a big one for > a big loss, in court, but most will be in Small Claims Court. Expensive! Hi; My professional liability insurance for a single person working as a professional geologist in a sole proprietorship is $1500.00 per year. Very few geologists get sued for thier opinions. The fees for engineers, lawyers and doctors where the liability is higher (ie law suits) is quite a bit higher!!! So is a voulenteer working for the government going to pay this kind of money while not earning anything. I get $550 per day!!! plus exspenses! Cheers Bill (;-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:43 -0600 From: "Jim B. Powlesland" Subject: Re: UN Regime On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Kevin Watson wrote: > Any gun-confiscation theory espoused by the UN will be quickly and > thoroughly adopted by the liberal party in the spirit of universal > appeasement. Actually, the UN is following Canada's lead, not the other way around. It looks like Canada is the driving force behind the UN initative and is even funding part of it. According to a report at : "The workshops tooks as their starting point the United Nations International Study on Firearm Regulation, funded by Canada, Australia and Japan."... The study coordinator is "James Hayes of the Canadian Firearms Centre (Justice Department)". Also, "the Coalition for Gun Control (Canada) appeared at the Eurpean, African, and American workshops". Note that the workshops outcomes (declarations of principles on domestic gun controls) are remarkably similar to the regulations in C-68. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:47 -0600 From: Bob Lickacz Subject: GONADS [Moderator: In Africa there is an animal called the "Honey Badger." It looks, sort of, like a raccoon. Its one distinguishing characteristic is that when it attacks, it goes for the gonads. Maybe we should adopt this animal as a symbol, and put it on the "Canadian Firearms Owner's Crest." HTB] Nice concept Taylor, BUT, as per the Hepatitus C vote in the House of Commons yesterday it is painfully aparent that no one in the Liberal party HAS any gonads. This is further supported by the fact no one in the Liberal benches stood up when Reform MP Darryl Stinson asked if anyone had the gonads to repeat a certain comment that was made. Bob Lickacz NFA Edmonton [Moderator: The Liberal discipline on Hep-C was remarkable. Even Liberal Medical Doctors voted the party line, while sobbing. Most of the prostitutes I've ever met would have choked on it. HTB] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:51 -0600 From: Dave Hammond Subject: 1998 Auditor General's Report The auditor general's report can be found at: Let's have a close look at the accountability directives and press the AG to do further on-going investigation as to the cost/value of the firearms bureaucracy. D.Hammond (RFOA) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:51 -0600 From: "David J. Wiebe" Subject: re: CILA report on "Verifiers" >>8) The verifier reports to a Registrar who, according to the CFC, WILL >>NOT accept liability on behalf of the verifier. >Two ignorant people cannot consult and come up with the right answer. If the verifier is acting as an agent of the registrar, doesn't the registrar HAVE to accept at least partial liability? Especially since the verifier will be working within the guidelines and using the equipment (software) supplied by the registrar? I'm sure this precedent has been set somewhere... If the verifiers are working without compensation, do they cease to be agents? If the aren't agents of the registrar, what are they? Besides being people forced to do the state's bidding, I mean. Why is being a "non-agency" civilian a requirement? David J. Wiebe DJWiebe@nonspam.msn.ca DavidJW@istar.nonspam.ca Remove "nonspam." from either address before replying... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:55 -0600 From: Alan Harper Subject: Re: Huntsville Ontario Gun and Trade Show > The 15th Annual Huntsville Gun and Trade Show will take place at the > Huntsville Community Center. There will be approximately 150 tables full of > guns and accessories. This is an interesting show as collectors from > northern and southern Ontario travel to Huntsville for an enjoyable day. > Bill Rantz > NFA Ontario President I'd like to attend. WHEN IS IT? You didn't include the date. Thanx. Al. ==============Colt - the Ultimate in point & click hardware========= = Al Harper, email - ce331@freenet.toronto.on.ca = = Box 51027, Eglinton Square, Scarboro, Ontario, Canada M1L 4T2 = ===="Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum" Appius Claudius the Blind, 281 BC=== ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:56 -0600 From: "David J. Wiebe" Subject: re: AUSTRALIA: Politician wants ban on Olympic shooting events >"The proposed amendments include entitling juniors to try their arms at >shooting. The minister's second-reading speech refers to people aged >under 18 now not being exempted, and states: [Loads of verbal diarrhea snipped] People like this are sick. There is really nothing you can say to them, because they live in perpetual fear. We have a person like this in the office (except that he is pushing immediate and total prohibition of firearms) and he is genuinely afraid. As with most fears, it is an unreasoning kind of thing. What can one say or do for these kinds of people? Motivated by fear (and maybe even some misguided empathy, in this case), these people speak loudly and get the attention of politicians and bureaucrats. Always contagious, fear spreads to the uniformed and is witnessed by the fence-sitters who might lean to the left after seeing such emotional displays. >It is easy to say that what happened in Arkansas will not happen here. Fear. >Andrew and Michael, a choirboy, to turn into killers Fear. >Our children are also fed a steady diet of television violence; they >turn for their entertainment to television violence and video games. >There is plenty of anecdotal evidence from psychiatrists and >psychologists that children do not understand that, if they see somebody >shot dead, that person cannot get up again. An uncontrollable outside influence turns children into uncomprehending killers. Fear. (Throw away the damn TV, McLean. Why go after guns when you've already named the evil?) >Parents in the wider community must consider the influences on children >exerted by families, institutions and various media organisations. Funny how McLean doesn't mention that parents must accept their responsibility for the raising and educating of their own children. There is obviously much more fecal matter in the original that we all find objectionable. My point is that these are the kind of people (gun-phobic) that I would like to be able to deal with. How can we calm these people? Soothe them, quiet them, reassure them, make friends with them, etc? Are there any psychiatrists out there? Any chance of getting a Freudian analysis of this person, based solely on that li'l speech? It might be illuminating. NOTE: Included text is from a draft document that was not intended to be quoted. They are relevant here only to illustrate a "classic case". David J. Wiebe DJWiebe@nonspam.msn.ca DavidJW@istar.nonspam.ca Charter Member & Director of the Pacific Shooters Association Member of The National Firearms Association, the Reform Party of Canada, the Responsible Firearms Owners Coalition of BC and the BC Wildlife Federation. Remove "nonspam." from either address before replying... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:26:59 -0600 From: Alan Harper Subject: Re: Verifiers > I volunteer to become a verifier. Since I know very little about > firearms I have all the qualifications. And I would be quite happy > to accept 'unknown', 'unknown'. And I would be telling the truth! I, too, will volunteer. I want to see their software. Then, they can stuff it. Bye. Al. ==============Colt - the Ultimate in point & click hardware========= = Al Harper, email - ce331@freenet.toronto.on.ca = = Box 51027, Eglinton Square, Scarboro, Ontario, Canada M1L 4T2 = ===="Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum" Appius Claudius the Blind, 281 BC=== ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:33:08 -0600 From: Bob Lickacz Subject: Re: Discharge of Firearms and Hunting Robert: Welcome to Alberta and welcome to Edmonton!! Yes, all counties surounding Edmonton have firearms discharge prohibitions. These prohibitions are somewhat piecemeal, and do not apply to the entire county in question. Generally these prohibited zones are within 1 to 6 miles from the Edmonton City limits. Some of the prohibited zones do allow disharge of firearms for predator control. Some allow only rimfire or shotgun discharge for predator control in the "prohibited zone". Some allow only shotgun discharge during hunting season. Confused enough yet? Some allow only property owners to discharge firearms in the prohibited zone, some only allow bona fide farmers to discharge firearms for pest control. Got that? With respect to rifle ranges, there are two within 10 miles of Edmonton. These are the Spruce Grove Gun Club, which is west of town, and the Sherwood Park Gun Club which is southeast of town. The Edmonton Gun Club is south of town, adjacent the International Airport, but is limited to shotgun only. There are two handgun/rimfire/shotgun ranges in Edmonton. These are the Firing Line, and the Phoenix Gun Range. If you hunt upland / migratory birds, you should be able to find a good spot within an hours drive of Edmonton. Whitetail / Mule deer can be hunted even closer if you use a shotgun or bow. Otherwise an hour drive should put you in a hunting spot. Moose would be about two hours out and elk a bit farther out. If you are into hunting coyotes this is THE place to be. The odd Liberal can still be shot here, but scarcity has dictated that they are now on a draw system. Bob Lickacz [Moderator: Bob, did you ever _clean_ a Liberal? HTB] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:33:11 -0600 From: "National Firearms Association; Calgary" Subject: Chauvin Gun Show If you are near Chauvin Alberta This weekend, look for the National Firearms Association Booth at the 14th Annual Gun and Hobby Show. If you are interested in more information, call Harvey or Anne Scott at (403) 858-3865 To contact the NFA Office in Calgary call (403) 640-1110 Jim Hinter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:33:14 -0600 From: Karl Schrader Subject: Unable to get regs Called the 1-800 number of the CFC today and requested a copy of the "plain language regulations" and was told that they do not have any on hand. Have not been printed yet ..... Supposed to take 2-3 weeks for delivery. What's going on ?? I AM SO EAGER TO COMPLY WITH THAT STUPID LAW TO THE LETTER AND THEY WON' T LET ME !!! Any similar experiences ?? The lady I spoke to turned out to be sitting in New Brunswick ?? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:37:07 -0600 From: Bill Rantz Subject: Huntsville Gun show Date of show is Sunday May 3 1998 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM. Sorry for omission on initial notice. I must try to stay away from the computer before 6:00 AM. Bill Rantz ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 19:37:25 -0600 From: Ian MacQuarrie Subject: Re: Verifiers, insurance and other matters I have just returned from a meeting of FSC instructors which was addressed by our provincial FO, Mr. Eric Goodwin, and by a Mr Timmons who I understand is in the verification unit (CFC)in Ottawa. I think my blood pressure has come down enough to type, so for your information, we were told that: - in B.C. clubs and organizations are fighting to become verifiers, since they believe this will bring in new members; - there is absolutely no reason for liability insurance for verifiers, since there is no way a verifier could be held liable for anything (when pressed, Mr. Goodwin stated that he had never heard of this problem, and was much too busy to monitor the Canadian Firearms Digest for possible enlightenment); - they see no problem with verification, since it will be simply a matter of matching a firearm with cute pictures on a CD-ROM, thoughtfully provided by the Center. Aside from that, I listened to two hours of false analogies (registration is like compulsory seat belt legislation - once people get used to it the compliance will be very high), boasting about how many people are going to be hired in NB and Ottawa to run the program, etc. Thought Dave might enjoy this, Ian MacQuarrie NFA member, thank God. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 22:00:18 -0600 From: Jim Davies Subject: Re: Verifiers, Australia On Wed, 29 Apr 1998, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Subject: Verifiers > > I volunteer to become a verifier. Since I know very little about > firearms I have all the qualifications. I am sure that the governments requirements for this "position" are the same as any other government position. A degree in *anything*, fluently bilingual and no real-world experience at all. That way you will fit in and have the required malleability to allow easy training in the government way of doing things. Anything they want you to know will be given to you. And, you will be as competent as any other civil servant. - --------------------- > > Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 06:16:15 -0600 > From: ALERT (via DAT) > Subject: AUSTRALIA: Politician wants ban on Olympic shooting events > > > There is no reason to believe that the underlying reasons that enabled > Andrew and Michael, a choirboy, to turn into killers... > > There is plenty of anecdotal evidence from psychiatrists and > psychologists that children do not understand... > Our society is abrogating > its responsibility to educate against violence -- wars and the use of > force -- to settle arguments. Our schools do not have peace studies as a > major component of their curriculum. We have an obligation to teach > justice, non-violence and peace... > > ... but guns are weapons that are specifically designed to kill... > I do not know how often people break guns, but if they do they should be > penalised by being made to wait 28 days... > I was interested in the problem of galahs, cockatoos, corellas and crows > attacking the hallowed golf courses of country Australia > > I remember when our police did not carry guns or gas or **extended > truncheons**. " > > Why take that risk to appease the gun lobby and the rednecks ^^^^^^^ Pages and pages of classic appeasement twaddle, complete with reference to most of their standard icons of well-meaning, dysfunctional wishful thinking plus a bit of technophobia thrown in to complement its penis-envy. She would find herself right at home in the liberal caucus... ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #368 **********************************