From - Mon Jul 20 21:48:05 1998 Received: from broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca [198.169.128.1]) by skatter.USask.Ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA06244; Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:48:44 -0600 (CST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA25190; Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:36:58 -0600 Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:36:58 -0600 Message-Id: <199807152236.QAA25190@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 V2 #494 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: O X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, July 15 1998 Volume 02 : Number 494 In this issue: Re: Permission to use your stuff Re: Patronage McLellan style...... Bad US state ruling on guns Assault Powder Horns Ottawa Citizen - "Canada joins battle to ban light weapons" Union ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:26:50 -0600 From: David A Tomlinson Subject: Re: Permission to use your stuff Dave and Peter: >May I adapt and combine your excellent posts which appeared in CFD V2 490 >for use in our organization's upcomming newsletter? I am reffering to >"CHRETIEN'S "VERIFIER" BLUES" by Dave, and "RED WARNING -- "VERIFIERS" by >Peter. >The intent of the article will be to dissuade our members from becoming >verifiers and to encourage them to register their guns as Unknown. >I will credit the article; "With thanks to Dave Tomlinson and Peter Kearns" >or in any manner you wish. >Circulation is about 900, mostly in the Niagara area. You can use ANYTHING that I post, write in POINTBLANK, or write in my MUZZLEBLAST column in any magazine in any way you see fit. I recommend, however, because the legal points can be tricky, that you consider printing the material verbatim -- then adding your own comments. Dave Tomlinson, NFA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:26:46 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: Re: Patronage McLellan style...... It seems that "Addled Annie" looks after her friends when juicy patronage positions become available. It is alleged in a recent newspaper report that she used her position as Justice Minister to pressure a judicial appointment group into "giving" the job of Nova Scotia Supreme Court judge to her fellow Dalhousie Law School graduate, one Heather Robertson. (According to an article published in the Halifax Chronicle on 14 Jul 98). Some history: Annie was originally from N.S., obtained her degree in 1974, then moved out west, to perform her political miracles. Her friend Heather (described in the article as "a political animal"), had previously been accused of using her provincial political connections to secure a judicial appointment at a lower level in the Nova Scotia court system. There are regulations in place that require an impartial committee to be set up to review judicial applications and advise the government about the suitability of candidates for upcoming appointments. (This group is supposed to ensure that pork barrellers aren't "inserted" into the system, and the committee is supposed to be immune from political interference .) According to reports, the first time Heather Robertson's name was forwarded for consideration to the committee, they promptly rejected her application as "not recommended". (There are three categories: highly recommended, recommended and not recommended.) According to the Halifax chronicle article, Justice Minister McLellan then intervened and requested they reconsider their rejection of Ms. Robertson's application... With a request from the Justice Minister, the author of the article said, the message was crystal clear to the committee: "McLellan was going to name her to the court come hell or high water" (direct quote from the article). Apparently a copious amount of arm twisting was done to members of the committee by federal Liberals, and so Heather Robertson -- aided and abetted by "Addled Annie" -- secured an appointment for which the review committee originally regarded her as unqualified, and unworthy of consideration. Only one person seems to have demonstrated ethical and moral abhorence at this course of action and apparent political manipulation of what was supposed to be an independent committee. Judge Nancy Bateman resigned from the Judicial Advisory Committee because she was said to be incensed at the high level of political interference in a decision that should have been made based on the qualifications of the individual applying. Bateman was contacted by the author of the original article and said she had made her views clear in a letter to McLellan, and that she would have no objection to her letter being made public by the minister..... (It seems unlikely that if the letter is as damning as the newspaper article says, that the Justice Minister would ever let it see the light of day....). So there we have it folks. A federal minister has, according to the article, blatantly interfered with a judicial selection process -- to gain a plum job for her friend and fellow graduate. This despite the fact that her friend was considered unqualified for the position... So far no questions from Reform or the Bloc, but I bet there will be... Simon says: "Our Justice Minister demonstrates she isn't "addled" in one area.... furthering the interests of her friends and seemingly (ab)using her position of power to do it. If the report is true, she would be really dumb to let the details be made public... Whattsa matter Annie? Can't you use your position to muzzle the press?" _______________________________________________________________________ From: Justice Heather Robinson: "Not Recommended" by Jim Meek, Halifax Chronicle-Herald, 14 Jul 98 "Heather Robinson has marched through the ranks of patronage politics all the way to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia... She was once a fundraiser for former Premier John Savage, who later made her his chief-of-staff... later named her (alas) Chair of the Utility and Review Board." "...she was helped on her way by two grads from the [Dalhousie University] class of '74. Mary Clancy, defeated [Liberal] MP who now lives in a $1.2 million mansion near Boston as a guest of the taxpayer was a fierce champion of Heather's cause...[Clancy is Canada's consul-general in New England]. The other '74 [Dalhousie] law grad...is Anne McLellan, now the federal Justice Minister." "Nova Scotia's federal Justice Advisory Committee [JAC], the 7-member group set up in part to prevent partisan appointments...ranks applicants [for judgeships]... highly recommended, recommended [or] not recommended. [It] listed her among the undesirables ("Not recommended"). "McLellan knew Robertson as a political animal as well, but that didn't stop her from asking the [JAC] to reconsider Robertson's appointment... A pretext was seized, arms were twisted -- particularly those attached to the lay members of the [JAC] -- and, lo and behold, Heather Robertson was recommended for appointment..." "Judge Nancy Bateman resigned from the [JAC]... But...only said that her reasons for quitting were outlined in a letter to the Minister... she would neither release the letter nor object if the minister made it public." When Jim Meek asked "an official in Anne McLellan's office (Johanne Senecal) if the letter might be made public, she said the work of the [JAC] was confidential." Dave Tomlinson, NFA Simon says, "Oink, oink, oink..." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:26:57 -0600 From: lydia@travel-net.com Subject: Bad US state ruling on guns The Denver Post Online Council OK's gun law By Julia C. Martinez July 14 - Gun supporters packed Denver city council chambers Monday night in an effort to kill a controversial public nuisance ordinance that gives police the right to impound vehicles in which guns are found, if they suspect a crime has been committed. But the council, after hearing several people speak for and against the measure, voted to reauthorize the ordinance. Without council action, the ordinance was scheduled to die Aug. 1, based on a sunset provision contained in the ordinance. Opponents of the measure argued that the ordinance was unconstitutional, and deprived them of their right to bear arms and to be free of unlawful searches and seizures. "It's in direct conflict with the Constitution of the united states," said resident Thomas Mitzel. "What's at stake is our freedom and our liberties." Opponents said they feared being randomly stopped by police and having their cars impounded for days even though they had not committed a crime. But proponents of the measure said the ordinance, which has been on the books for 18 months, had made their neighborhoods safer because it had enabled authorities to close down crack houses and seize cars used for drive-by and other shootings. Marge Gilbert, a small, elderly woman, talked of living in fear in her own home and hearing the sounds of gunfire outside, of getting up in the morning and picking up 9 mm shell casings off her front lawn. "Imagine living with that high level of anxiety in your own home." The council also voted to broaden the ordinance to add transportation of controlled substances, possession of handguns by juveniles and attempting to elude police to the list of public nuisances covered by the ordinance. Under the ordinance, a public nuisance is defined as any property, including a vehicle, in which criminal activity occurs. The gun portion of the ordinance, opposed by gun advocates, targets individuals unlawfully carrying a weapon in their vehicle and provides for the demolition of the automobile if necessary. Denver has had a public nuisance law on the books since the 1960s. In January 1997, it added civil remedies that enabled police to seize, and sometimes destroy, vehicles involved in crimes. Lt. David Bricker, head of the Denver Police Department's Nuisance Abatement Unit, said his unit has handled 333 vehicle investigations since the ordinance was enacted and destroyed 10 to 15 cars deemed to have been involved in serious crimes. Bricker said that a hunter stopped for a traffic violation who has a hunting rifle in the car would not be arrested or have the car seized if the rifle is unloaded and incapacitated, meaning it has a trigger lock on it. The law exempts hunters, target shooters, people transporting a gun because they just bought it or are selling it, and people under direct threat of physical harm, said Lt. Dan Yount. Only only person whose car was impounded claimed to be going hunting, and that claim didn't arise until several days after the car had been seized, Yount said. A woman, whose car was impounded because she had a loaded weapon, was able to prove to authorities that she had been severely assaulted and was in fear of her life and had her car returned fairly quickly. Yount said the woman's car was seized in the first place because she did not immediately tell police that she had been threatened. But many of the people opposed to the ordinance are not hunters or target shooters, Bricker said before the council meeting. In recent days, Bricker said he has received numerous calls from gun advocates who say they won't drive through Denver without a loaded gun within their reach because they're afraid of people who live in Denver. "I guess theyre saying Denver is such a dangerous place they have to be armed. I don't believe that's true," Bricker said. The NRA and its supporters began flooding city council offices with phone calls last Wednesday in an attempt to convince city council to kill the ordinance. Some council members said they received upwards of 200 calls in four days from a range of callers, some people angry, others willing to listen to explanations about the ordinance. Councilwoman Susan Barnes-Gelt said one caller issued what could be interpreted as a threat, saying that "anyone who votes for the ordinance should be shot." - ----------- "War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." — John Stuart Mill ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:36:47 -0600 From: "The Gayders" Subject: Assault Powder Horns This is a portent of what will happen here if the gun grabbers get their way. This is almost too absurd to be believed - but it is all too real. Note the wrath and invective heaped upon those following the LETTER of the law, but not the SPIRIT of the law.... GUNSMITHS IN ARMS RACE FACE REVOLVER BAN By Dean Nelson, Scotland Editor Observer, Sunday July 12, 1998 New legislation to halt the proliferation of muzzle-loading revolvers is being prepared by the Government. The guns have become increasingly popular with shooters seeking to circumvent the 1997 Firearms Act which banned handguns after the Dunblane massacre. Muzzle-loaders, viewed as harmless antiques used by battle re-enactment societies, were exempted from the ban. But Ministers and senior police officers now believe the exemption has created a dangerous loophole which has undermined the point of the handgun ban - to ensure massacres like those at Hungerford and Dunblane never happen again. Observer inquiries have revealed an 'arms race' between overseas firearms manufacturers and British gunsmiths to develop new muzzle-loading revolvers to meet a soaring demand from shooters forced to turn in their handguns last September. Police firearms experts say the new weapons are just as deadly, almost as accurate and easy to reload, as those banned after Dunblane. Leading the 'arms race' is Stuart Rankine, a former handgun dealer and gunsmith based in Peebles in the Scottish Borders. Rankine, who refused to answer questions from The Observer and attacked our photographer with a stick, applied to register a patent for his new muzzle-loading revolver design on 28 September last year, just two days before the deadline for turning in handguns banned under the Act. Rankine hopes his design will reverse the decline in business since the handgun ban. The number of muzzle-loading guns has doubled since the ban came into force. More than 2,600 of the 5,600 muzzle-loading guns in existence are owned by former handgun owners who altered their licences from handguns to muzzle-loaders. Rankine's designs aim to overcome the weapon's design faults. Until recently, each of the revolver's six cylinders had to be indivually filled with powder, then bullets, and then covered with grease to prevent flashovers, in which one bullet ignites the other five. Then process was slow, dirty and dangerous. According to Rankine, his new weapon will be 'like a Smith & Wesson'. 'It will shoot modern, smokeless powder,' Rankine said. 'It's in its infancy but I've had a few calls about it. Someone will bring out something along these lines, I've just got to get my patent in first.' Two other handgun manufacturers have also been working on new designs to upgrade muzzle-loading revolvers to the perfomance level of the banned handguns. Pedersoli of Italy has produced a pistol which can be reloaded in seconds, and a 'five by five' flask which allows five chambers to be reloaded in one move. Another manufacturer, Millennium Arms 2000, has produced a 'nitro-proof' muzzle-loading pistol which uses smokeless powder. 'It is only a matter of time before the "five by five" works with the Millennium pistol. Then it will only be seconds slower to load than a banned handgun,' said one senior police firearms adviser. Ministers and some senior officers have been alarmed to find that some police forces have been granting licences allowing shooters more than one cylinder for their muzzle-loading pistols. 'The Government banned the handguns and here they are in a different guise,' said a senior police officer. Scottish Home Affairs Minister Henry McLeish said new legislation was necessary to plug the loophole and described Rankine's attempt to patent his design as 'an outrageous abuse of current gun laws'. He said he would raise the application with the Home Office. 'When we banned handguns, we promised further legislation to strengthen the gun laws. We now know that people are trying to substitute muzzle-loading guns for banned handguns. We can't allow the gun lobby to undermine what's been achieved.' ...End Forward ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:36:52 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Ottawa Citizen - "Canada joins battle to ban light weapons" PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Citizen DATE: 98.07.14 EDITION: FINAL SECTION: News PAGE: A10 BYLINE: Mike Trickey SOURCE: The Ottawa Citizen Canada joins battle to ban light weapons: Targeted items include grenades, rocket launchers Flushed with the success of last year's international treaty banning the use and sale of anti-personnel landmines, Canada is joining 20 other ``like-minded'' nations in taking on an even bigger challenge. A conference concluding today in Oslo is attempting to cobble together an action plan aimed at stopping the global spread of ``light weapons'' which can include assault rifles, hand grenades and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, small mortars and shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles. It's described by Norwegian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Helga Hernes as the ``disarmament issue of the `90s,'' but the leading nations advocating human security issues as foreign policy priorities will face an uphill battle in convincing the United States, with its powerful gun lobby, to sign on to any agreement that seeks to control the legal trade of weapons. The U.S. has sent representatives to the Oslo conference but their priority - -- shared as well by the French who are also attending and the Chinese and Russians who are not -- is to keep the focus of any new international agreement on illicit trade rather than treading into the lucrative and legal international arms trade. Canada, Norway and Belgium are seen as the lead nations in the small arms control drive. Yesterday, Canada proposed a convention that does not address either the illicit or legal transfer of handguns, but which would prohibit the transfer of military small arms and light weapons to any person or organization outside the police and military. Officials admit there are problems with such a proposal, not the least of which is that such a law would make it illegal for citizens to defend themselves from repressive or genocidal national leaders. The Canadian officials say if such a convention were adopted, it would have to go hand-in-hand with a more activist United Nations and/or International Criminal Court to protect the public from rogue leaders. Handguns are not addressed in the Canadian proposal. The reason, the officials say, is not to avoid a conflict with the U.S., but because handguns are not specifically designed for military purposes. Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy has been one of the most visible international campaigners for new global controls on small arms, addressing the issue in a speech to the United Nations Security Council last October. ``All too often it is small arms, rather than the weapons systems targeted by disarmament efforts, that cause the greatest bloodshed,'' he said. Peace and gun-control advocates argue that unless the United States and other big weapons-making and weapons-using nations move toward stricter gun-control laws, it will be virtually impossible to put a dent in the illicit trade, which comprises an estimated one-third of international small-arms sales. As well as divisions over whether to take on the legal weapons trade, there are splits within the attending nations and non-government organizations about the focus of the eventual treaty. Nations neighboring conflict zones are most concerned about stopping the flow of weapons to these regions and that has been the priority of a number of European nations. However, Latin American states are seeking tighter controls on handguns. Wendy Cukier of Canadian Coalition for Gun Control agrees with the Latins, arguing the alternate approach is too narrow. ``Conflict zones are part of the problem, but we also know that 300,000 people were killed last year with firearms in developed countries. I would hope that Canada takes a more integrated approach.'' She is concerned that in attempting to come up with a treaty that satisfies everyone, the treaty will end up a mishmash of high-sounding phrases that ultimately accomplish very little. ``There's always a risk that when trying to deal with complex problems to try to glom on to simple solutions because simple solutions sometimes make better headlines and not necessarily because they're more effective.'' Opponents of the landmines treaty have repeatedly argued that the agreement lumps together nations that use mines for legitimate border security purposes with rogue governments which scatter the weapons and leave a devastating trail of death and injury long after a conflict is over. Twenty-four of the 127 nations which signed the landmines accord have so far ratified the agreement in their legislatures. Another 16 are needed to give the accord the full legal force of an international treaty. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 16:36:55 -0600 From: Mark Hughes Subject: Union Calvin White wrote for your paper; With guns, people are pretty proficient at killing people (Title) The SUN would like In introduce Calvin White, who will be submitting a bi-monthly column White Writes will zero in on a number of the Social and political issues gripping the community, province and country. It's a testament to North American stupidity that there is an issue of gun control. Nations inhabited by more rational thinkers, such as Japan, some time ago clued in to the reality that guns kill. {snip} Dear Calvin White, You are a former candidate for the NDP Party, and your message to this paper is going to be posted throughout my plant, if given permission by the SUN, as evidence that the NDP does NOT support or look out for the "little guy"! I'm a member of the United Steel Workers of America. From my Union President on down, most OWN Firearms for sport, collections, or just plain plinking. I have just finished taking up four full petitions AGAINST C-68/Chapter 39 (Gun Control Law) and more are asking for Blank Petition Forms to get MORE Names against this unjust law that repeals 300 years of Common Law! The NDP and Mr. Calvin White DO NOT speak for the Members of our Union! We are, almost to a man, AGAINST C-68 and its Hideous provisions! The NDP does not gain marks for attacking their "supporters", while on the one hand they say were for the "little guy" and with the other "sucker punch" him with support for a Law that penalizes them and makes criminals out of them! The NDP has little support in my Local! Remember, Mr. White...Almost to a Man AGAINST! Mulroney found out what happens when you undercut your support base, Kim C. paid the price, so is/will the NDP! Mark J Hughes U.S.W.of A. Nova Scotia ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #494 **********************************