From - Fri Dec 4 11:41:34 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 HAA14363; Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:54:16 -0600 (CST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA01731; Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:38:13 -0600 Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:38:13 -0600 Message-Id: <199812041338.HAA01731@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 #733 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: X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 360c873d00009f68 Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, December 4 1998 Volume 02 : Number 734 In this issue: New Firearms Law comes into effect Second Compartment of C-68 Leaking Again FAC Renewal Refused CFC Bulletin #27 Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #732 MINISTER'S SPENDING PRIORITIES ARE WRONG A Practical Question Illegal Advice on CFC WWW Page JUST SAY NO--- Registration centre deluged ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:32:41 -0600 From: Mark Hughes Subject: New Firearms Law comes into effect Another letter to the Editor, Evening News, New Glasgow, Nova Scotia; mailto:evening.news@north.nsis.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the (CP) article, 'New Firearms Law comes into effect,' December 2, page 2 of the Evening News it states the new law "promises that fewer people will get killed and crime rates will drop." and Justice Minister Anne McLellan saying, "we have one of the most comprehensive gun control systems in the world." Really? Lets look at our Mother Country, who we are following in gun restrictions and see how well abusive restrictions on Law-abiding Citizens works in the real world. In 1988, Britain enacted a rigorous firearms control law, reducing the number of legal firearms owners by 22.4 per cent per 100,000 over five years. In that same five-year period, violent crime rose by 30.6 per cent; robbery by 80.6 per cent; and robbery with a firearm, which should have been the most affected, by 117 per cent. (British Home Office statistics, 1988-93) Like Prohibition, Firearms control laws do not and cannot take unregistered firearms out of the hands of violent criminals. A resident of Britain today is significantly more likely to be a victim of crime than a resident of the supposedly gun-plagued U.S. The only thing our Firearms act is going to do is make hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens criminal's over night for not having a piece of paper permitting then to keep their private property; and permitting them the privilege of being taxed to keep their private property and the privilege to hand them over upon demand of a government order. Remember, we are only privileged in this Country! What obvious lessons did our Government NOT learn and won't tell us; 1. The criminals now see ordinary Citizens as helpless and defenceless, ideal targets for crime. (Criminals by nature avoid the strong and attack the weak); 2. The criminals do not turn in THEIR guns when the law outlaws them. So they continue to rob, kill and maim, but in a "culture of safety," their safety! 3. Firearms crime, after 50 years of constantly-increasing firearms control legislation, is now at an all-time high, criminals are routinely carrying firearms for the first time in British history; and the police are routinely carrying firearms for the first time in British history. 4. If you live in Britain, the chance that you will be a victim of crime is now HIGHER than the chance that you will be a victim of crime if you live in the US. The US rates are going down -- sharply, in those states that have enacted "concealed carry" laws -- while British rates are still rising. What's the real threat of death to Canadians from firearms? Lets just take Sports for example, forgetting for the moment that Diseases kill many more Canadians and Breast Cancer kills thousands more Women every year; In fact every 17 minutes a women dies as the result of breast cancer and the government will spend a paltry 4 million in research to find a cure; Statistics: from Stats Can in Canadian Almanac & Directory, 1998. Sport deaths per 100,000 people, 1994, Injury/or death; Football: 3,313.48; Baseball: 1,391.78; Cycling: 1,189.63; Volleyball: 622.99; Swimming: 194.45; Golf: 185.59; Tennis: 179.43; Fishing: 173.18; Bowling: 57.32; Badminton: 30.76; Billiards: 19.91; Ping Pong: 15.32; and Hunting: 7.06. Sure can see a real epidemic there! This more than shows the Federal Liberal Government is full of hot air, why we all read in this paper a report from our MP Peter MacKay on how the Justice Department inflated RCMP Figures by a horrendous amount to try and justify the suppression of rights of all Canadians. The RCMP figures showed only 0.08% of firearms seized in violent crimes are Rifles and Shotguns. It's all a hoax! A 500 Billion Dollar Hoax! Regional Police Chief, Brian Ford said it best what the real results will be under our new 'People Control Law' when your paper quotes him as saying, "...the Act will make it easier to lay charges and get convictions for breaching the new rules." Yes, allot easier to harass, charge and convict ordinary citizens for paper crimes while real criminals continue to operate in a "culture of safety", to use the Justice Ministers words. Mark Hughes ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:34:03 -0600 From: Jean Hogue Subject: Second Compartment of C-68 Leaking Again Definition (NFA): Second Compartment of C-68 Titanic - ---------------------------------------------------- Former Justice Minister Allan Rock deliberately disregarded the government's legal obligation to formally consult First Nations representatives when he imposed C-68 gun control. Rock was not going to let legal traditions stand in his way. Situtation: - ----------- Any First Nation member charged under C-68 (Now Chapter 39 of the Statutes) can have this law invalidated. A recent position taken by Jean Valin, the PR spin doctor of the Canadian Firearms Centre, was to the effect that the law should be enforced less stringently in communities where this law is not popular. It appeared that the second compartment was plugged: the government was going to remain quiet about violations on the part of First Nation members who would just have to remain quiet about it. No arrests in exchange for no oppostion to the law. This creates the ugly situation mandating that citizens are no longer equal before the law. 40-year old urban white males would be fair game for prosecution, First Nation members specifically exempted by virtue of some "gentlemen's agreement". Allan Rock's disgusting legacy. The second compartment is leaking again ... - ------------------------------------------- Source: La Presse, Thursday Dec. 3, 1998, p. A1 Mohawks not disarming, by Marc Thibodeau Kahnawake [a reserve on the south shore of the St-Lawrence river near Montreal] Mohawk traditionalists refuse to abide by this law they view as a thinly disguised attempt on the part of the federal government to disarm First Nation members. The weekly Mohawk paper "The Eastern Door" recently carried an editorial from Kenneth Deer claiming that having to request permits from Big Brother would threaten efficient self-defence. "The Oka [resort area Nort West of Montreal, near a Mohawk cemetary, triggered an uprising when developpers tried to clear cut the forest to extend a golf course in 1990] forest would be a golf course today if protesters had not been armed." "Canada did not surrender its own weapons and neither should we." Deer says the government enacted this law to make things easier for itself at the next territorial confrontation. [An army spokesman did complain about the Mohawks having .50 caliber firearms capable of piercing the thin armour of Armoured Personnel Carrier vehicles -- care to guess why .50 caliber firearms were banned ?] As a result of 1990 standoff with the army and police, many Mohawks share the editorialist's view ... They are convinced they constitute a nation and that they have a right to defend themselves. Kahnawake band council spokesman does not believe Mr. Deer's comment are shared by the majority. Nevertheless, Khanawake will not obey Ottawa's law since the Mohawks' own regulations are deemed sufficient. Registration will be on a voluntary basis. THE BAND COUNCIL ALSO WANTS TO ISSUE PERMITS TO CARRY FIREARMS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE RECOGNIZED OUTSIDE OF THE RESERVE BY THE SURETE DU QUEBEC. [emphasis added] Mr. Morris, part of a team of negociators is claiming these concessions under the provisions allowing "accommodations" for First Nation communities. Jean Valin [him again] says these accommodations can only bear on "minor" points and it is out of the question that First Nation members be exempted from the obligation to register their firearms. [No they won't be exempted, they just won't be prosecuted.] ["Hey ! Where's all that water coming from ?"] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:31:41 -0600 From: Paul Subject: FAC Renewal Refused Peter I am writing you as DAT has indicated that he will be away, need some guidance on this matter. A week ago (Nov 26/98) I had taken into my local RCMP office my FAC paperwork, for an renewal under the old act. This was for my mail order FAC, which I had planned to get in before, but my movements were restricted by a back injury (which I am still trying to recover from). Today I had received a phone call from the detachment that the BC provincial A.G. (CFPO?) will NOT renew due to the fact, that my current FAC is good for a few years. So much for refusals for safety reasons only. In all fairness, the FORMER firearms officer at the detachment had inquired on different ways to push it through. So the problem is not there but on a higher level on the paper chain. I will tell him that I want written reason for the refusal ( on letterhead stationary). I have not yet gone to the detachment to get my money order or photo yet, as the detachment will return them to me and show me the section under the NEW act. Do you have any ideas on how to proceed ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:31:34 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: CFC Bulletin #27 Please note that the bulletin makes reference to "granfathered" owners of "prohibited hanguns." It makes no reference as to when anyone was grandfathered and appears to be using 1st December as the start date rather then the March 14th 1996....... Curious...... regards, Peter "Simon says" According to the bulletin there should be a huge rush of people handing in pistol barrels....... Wanna buy some swamp land? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:31:53 -0600 From: mbonner@techplus.com (Mike Bonner) Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #732 Heard last night that the City of Winnipeg is seeking intervenor status at the C68 Alberta challenge, at the request of the Calition for Gun Control, to support Bill C68, supported by the just-elected Mayor, Glen Murray and brand new Police Chief. I guess if Winnipeggers knew before the Civic Election that Murray would have done that, he might just not have been elected. It's to make the streets of Winnipeg safer, it seems. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:31:02 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: MINISTER'S SPENDING PRIORITIES ARE WRONG > Garry Breitkreuz, MP > Yorkton-Melville > House of Commons > Ottawa, Ontario > K1A 0A6 > Phone: 613-992-4394 > Fax: 613-992-8676 > e-mail: breitg0@parl.gc.ca > > > > December 3, 1998 > Mr. Brian Sargeant > Letters Editor > The Ottawa Citizen > 1101 Baxter Road, Box 5020, > Ottawa, Ontario > K2C 3M4 > > Dear Mr. Sargeant: > > Re: Justice Minister's Spending Priorities are Completely Wrong > > Justice Minister Anne McLellan's quote reported in the Ottawa Citizen > on December 2nd was absolutely ridiculous. ("Gun law 'a dream' > collector claims" - Citizen, December 2, 1998). She said, "...if we > can prevent one woman, one child, one police officer from losing their > lives, then we will have achieved a remarkable thing." > > Can the Minister of Justice please tell everyone in Canada how many > women's lives would have been saved if she had spent the $200 million > (wasted so far on gun registration) on breast cancer research, women's > crisis centres, family counseling, and suicide prevention centres? > How many children's lives would have been saved if the Minister had > spent the $200 million (wasted so far on gun registration) > investigating real cases of child abuse, young offenders programs and > crime prevention? How many police officers lives would have been > saved if the Minister had spent the $200 million (wasted so far on gun > registration) to give police the resources they are begging for to > fight street gangs, biker gangs, organized crime, and drug > trafficking? > > We've had mandatory handgun registration since 1934 and the government > has been unable to produce any evidence to show it has saved one life > or prevented one crime. In spite of this reality, it's truly > remarkable that the Minister has been able to convince the mass media > that she's doing something wonderful for society. > > While the Minister of Justice is about to waste a billion dollars by > the year 2015 regulating duck hunters, all these real criminal justice > priorities are crying for money. Why can't Anne McLellan see those > tears? All the Minister has to do is ask women, children and police > on the street where the $200 million would do the most good but she > won't and neither will the Chiefs of Police. Top down elitist > politics at its best. This is justice Liberal style. > > Sincerely, > Garry Breitkreuz, MP > Yorkton-Melville ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:32:45 -0600 From: "Robin Leech" Subject: A Practical Question An Edmonton firearms dealer recently asked me a question that I find interesting, and for which there is no apparent answer: "If a customer comes in, purchases a gun, is cleared and pays the $25 transfer fee, decides a short time later that he really doesn't want the gun, returns to the store with the gun and asks for his money back. Now, does he get his $25 back, too?" Robin Leech ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:32:53 -0600 From: "Thomas Zinck" Subject: Illegal Advice on CFC WWW Page Hello. On the Canadian Firearms Center Internet WWW page : http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/General_public/scenari2/sld005.htm Advice is given on how to purchase a non-restricted firearm through the mail. This advice does NOT say that the purchaser MUST sent his/her original FAC /license to the owner of the firearm. This advice is illegal, and anyone given this advice can be charged un CC 22, 126 and FA 23, 32. Firearms Act Sections : Authorization to transfer firearms 23. A person may transfer a firearm if, at the time of the transfer, (a) the transferee produces to the person a document that purports to be a licence authorizing the transferee to acquire and possess that kind of firearm; (b) the person (i) has no reason to believe that the transferee is not authorized by the document to acquire and possess that kind of firearm, and (ii) informs a chief firearms officer of the transfer and obtains the authorization of the chief firearms officer for the transfer; (c) the transferee holds a licence authorizing the transferee to acquire and possess that kind of firearm; (d) a new registration certificate for the firearm is issued in accordance with this Act; and Mail-order transfers of firearms 32. A person may transfer a firearm by mail only if (a) the verifications, notifications, issuances and authorizations referred to in sections 21 to 28, 30, 31, 40 to 43 and 46 to 52 take place within a reasonable period before the transfer in the prescribed manner; (b) the firearm is delivered by a person designated by a chief firearms officer and the person ensures that the transferee holds a licence authorizing the transferee to acquire that kind of firearm; and (c) the prescribed conditions are complied with. CC Sections : 22(1) Person counselling offence 22. (1) Where a person counsels another person to be a party to an offence and that other person is afterwards a party to that offence, the person who counselled is a party to that offence, notwithstanding that the offence was committed in a way different from that which was counselled. 126(1) Disobeying a statute 126. (1) Every one who, without lawful excuse, contravenes an Act of Parliament by wilfully doing anything that it forbids or by wilfully omitting to do anything that it requires to be done is, unless a punishment is expressly provided by law, guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years Tom Zinck Nepean ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:30:30 -0600 From: Bob Slator Subject: JUST SAY NO--- JUST SAY NO---Dealer-dialer update Dec. 3,1998 Unite and Fight The time to turn up the heat is now. The Federal government opposition now has the fuel that they needed to light a blaze under the Liberal benches. Because we are refusing to verify, they are hammering the Liberals with the extreme tax dollar waste of implementing the controversial, ineffective Bill C-68. We need the public awareness as to just how much this is taking out of tax payers' pocketbooks. The Canadian public, firearm owners, and non-owners alike, must know that they will be no safer with this new legislation. What they do understand is that their tax dollars are being wasted. The will support us on that issue. We need every firearms dealer and wholesaler along with the owners to join us on the phones now to give the Reform opposition as much information as they can and their own M.P. as much static as they can. Yesterday we fed the Reform opposition the initial figures on the waste factor. They have to do the math on our reports because I have no idea how much it cost to have 4 R.C.M.P officers flown to Sault Ste. Marie with 2 nights accomodation to spend a morning re-registering our 49 already registered handguns. Another shop who had phoned ahead of me had 5 officers come in to re-register his restricted firearms. These folks will have to continue to fly around the country as used firearms continue to come into the shops. Keep phoning! Our input is needed in the House of Commons now. They are putting their backs into it. Let's help them help us. You can phone 1-800-667-3355 to get your M.P.'s as well as an opposition M.P.'s phone number in Ottawa. You can phone Premier Mike Harris or your M.P.P. Let him know how furious you are with the Federal wasted budget that could have been spent on Healthcare. Let him know the Federal government has ground to halt the sale of firearms in Ontario and we could face a layoff situation shortly without the cash flow. That takes a lot of money out of the Harris budget. This is the crucial time to hit the media with both barrels if you are experiencing difficulties in your business. We will report the Browning shipment that landed here today that needs a verifier and the clock will start ticking until they are verified by a government verifier in order to be sold. Do you smell a class action suit?? We know that support for this law is modest despite the claim of strong public backing. It is dominated by the Coalition for Gun Control and Chiefs of Police, a group drastically smaller in voting numbers than the firearms community now coupled with concerned tax payers. Oppositon members also found it interesting yesterday that we were refused the names of the now public list of volunteer verifiers in Canada. We are presently dealing with the Ontario Human Rights Commission (1-800-387-9080) regarding this latest issue. We are being thrown a lifeline. It is important the we dealers and wholesalers pick it up and fight to survive. Our livelihood and future depends on what we do NOW as the Federal government paves the way to an intrusive and dangerous legislation. Firearms dealers and wholesalers have the biggest personal stake in this debate. UNITE and FIGHT. While speaking with some undecided volunteer verifiers, we agreed that if we dealers and wholesalers rolled over and did not keep up the fight for the firearms community, that those people would eventually lose interest, give up hunting and shooting and we would eventually lose our customer base. They need the leadership of the firearms industry who should be and are uniting and supplying resistance in any way we can. As the Supreme Court Challenge begins, let us show our unity in saving our Canadian property rights. If you have any concerns and/or feel that your business income is being threatened or has declined since Dec 1/98, let us know. Better yet, we suggest that you tell your M.P. (don't laugh), an opposition M.P., your M.P.P., Ontario Premier Mike Harris, and/or the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Yours in Liberty, Wes at Ellwood Epps Sporting Goods Jane at Perry's Gun Shop e-mail: epps@encode.com phone/fax:(705) 759-8346 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:32:19 -0600 From: Paul Meyer Subject: Registration centre deluged I heard a report on the CBC Radio News yesterday about the firearms registry being up and running. During the report, they noted that the registration centre was "deluged with 5000 application forms." This suggests to me that they are operating at or near full capacity. Assuming that these registrations all arrived on the same day, (right, people have been sending in forms since Oct 01 and they have been stockpiled for processing on Dec 01...but I digress....) and that the "deluge" continues unabated, (i.e. 5000 new registrations each and every working day) and that the forms are all processed as quickly as they are received what does this tell us? Remember, NONE of these registrations involve "verifying," just entering the data. 250 working days times 5000 registrations equals 1.25 million firearms registered every year. Since there are just 4 years until Jan 1, 2003 they will be able to register about 5 million firearms. What happens to the other 2 million (their estimate) or 5 million (more reasonable estimate) that they haven't got the personnel to handle? Keep in mind, this 5 million number doesn't include new sales (say a few hundred thousand per year...) or make allowances for the tens (hundreds?) of thousands of crossbows out there. I have my doubts about whether they will continue to receive a nice even 5000 per day, and even their own estimates suggest that this pace won't accomplish the job. Expect to see some significant new government job opportunities over the next few years in Atlantic Canada! Paul Meyer 250-368-2407 pmeyer@hasimons.com ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #734 **********************************