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 #780 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 Cdn-Firearms Digest Thursday, December 24 1998 Volume 02 : Number 780 In this issue: Re: Money to QPF Re: Relics Re: CDN Tire verifiers C68 & Leadership Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #774 U.S. parts & accessories purchases FAC v's P&A License Re: re-registration AR15 Purchases Firearms Two pronged offensive on Government Proper Research Re: "Oh dem registration blues....." Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #772 Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #775 CHRISTMAS Re: Dealer Challenge NEWS - Buyback Victoria fails to reduce crime ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:26:27 -0600 From: Gordon Hitchen Subject: Re: Money to QPF To prepay their speeding tickets?? They travel so fast, don'tch know! Nothing is impossible- suppose Quebec decided to joing the Supreme Court fight and make it Governments representing 85% of the population fighting C68 . A 300 million bribe would just mean fruther eroding Policing in the West - already paid for under contract to the Federal Government. A win/win situation for annie - take the money from the West - pay it to the East not to join the West! Someone hopefully will make a daytime soap ofthe Liberal Governments actions, The titly is simple "As the Stomach Turns" Gordon David A Tomlinson wrote: > >This MAY be a rumour but I heard today from a friend that the cdn gov't > >gave $300 mln to the Quebec Police Force. Wow! That's a tad more from > >$85 mln. Maybe you could check this out? > > Dave Tomlinson, NFA -- CLOG: all Conservative or Liberal Ottawa Governments ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:25:59 -0600 From: David A Tomlinson Subject: Re: Relics >I got hold of a fact sheet circular entitled-- CFC I own Relics, 01/10/98---which states that Relics are firearms that ARE OF VALUE AS CURIOSITIES, RARITIES,MEMENTOES, REMEMBRANCES OR SOUVENIRS. >Without trying to be ignorant, how come we don't all own relics? We DO. Dave Tomlinson, NFA -- CLOG: all Conservative or Liberal Ottawa Governments ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:26:14 -0600 From: Gordon Hitchen Subject: Re: CDN Tire verifiers Canadian Tire at Capilano, in South East Edmonton - simply decided C68 was too much crap and went out of Firearms . I am told other side stores of the chain have not! Anyone gets close to one of these - please ask them about verifying. We should ask every verifier we learn of how much it costs to have a Gun verified? I hope I do not have to become a Verifierto find the answer to this but I suspect Ottawa has told these people the can charge "whatever the trade will bear" Gordon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:26:05 -0600 From: Dan MacInnis Subject: C68 & Leadership As we near the end of 1998, it is perhaps time for a bit of reflection. We have been fighting legislation such as C17 and C68 for a few years now, longer than I care to rememeber. It is incredible that our efforts have, for the most part, been in vain. I see this as a Leadership problem, we never had a united front. I ask myself a few questions. Was this because we are all so independent we will not unite behind any one person, or are we, as a group, incapable of following, or are, were, there no leaders capable of inspiring us? Well, if we do not unite within ten(10) years the firearms community will be history in Canada. By the year 2008, it will be no more. Shooting Clubs, Hunting Lodges, Camps, indeed hunting licences will be either so expensive to get/operate, or be so regulated they are no longer an enjoyment. We will become a Nation of Golfers and/or TV nuts. I shall not review the result of C68, but I do want to comment on the number of employee's and independent business' which will disappear druing 1999. Some have already closed their doors and shops. C68 is a job killer, in fact, an industry killer. Money wasted, time etc. all due, I feel, to lack of either Leadership or Support for Leadership, take your choice. We had the the financing, the information, the ability, the opportunity, the desire and determination to kill C68 early on in the game, but we could not. Did not. We did not even get positive changes. We also did not have a leader. We had many who aspired to be one. Groups and individuals. If, during the early part of 1999, we do not unite behind a leader, we are tout fini, the laughing stock in Ottawa. By a leader, I do not mean a Technocrat, nor a politician, I mean someone, male or female, who speaks for us collectively. Sitting Members of Parliament are suspect at best. Votes are what counts to them. Political parties fall under the same hammer. We are on our own. If is is to be, it is up to US. Who shall it be? Does such a person exist? Can they withstand the sniping, backbiting, intolerant remarks and personal attacks which will undoubtably come with the job? Over the Yuletide, perhaps we can reflect a bit on this. Tell me I'm wrong, please. Is this our real weakness, and Ottawa knew it all along? Or am I all wet? Our Slogan for 1999 could be 'Get Organised'. By May 1999 we should, must, be a collective united force. A learned friend once wrote "Grasp opportunity by the forelocks, for it is bald behind'. Well, this anology applies to us, next year (2000)is too late. 1999 is IT. Donald (Dan) MacInnis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:35:14 -0600 From: "Clive Edwards" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #774 Kali wrote: >...not everyone will vote for Reform! A good example is the Native community. Reform policy for them is >such that hey WILL NOT VOTE for Reform. How then do you proceed? Is it possible to have Reform >CHANGE THEIR POLICY, in order to court the votes of such large groups? There would be no distinction between Reform and the other parties if Reform were to do so. Reform is the only party that supports true equality among all Canadians, without regard to race, gender or religion. All the other parties have dug the hole we are in by hyphenating Canadians and then buying them off with specifically tailored programs and laws. Either we are all equal and responsible Canadians or we are not. No other party has taken the moral high ground on this, although the weasel words of the other parties have indicated they have tried to have their cake and eat it too. Clive Edwards NFA, HACS of BC Reform Canada Reform BC ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:35:24 -0600 From: "Clive Edwards" Subject: U.S. parts & accessories purchases I heard at the local gun shop today that Kesselrings, a gun shop in Rural Washington state, is complaining that they can no longer sell firearms parts or accessories, including reloading supplies and accessories to Canadians. Is this true? Anyone have any details? If this is a U.S. federal or state law, is getting a local straw purchaser involved a legal way around the law? How about just keeping quiet, paying in U.S. cash and declaring the goods at the border (Canadian side, of course!) Without prejudice Clive Edwards NFA, HACS of BC Reform Canada Reform BC ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:35:30 -0600 From: "Clive Edwards" Subject: FAC v's P&A License >(John Stamp), your (FAC) application was received in our office on November 27, 1998, within the allowable >time period. We returned it to you in error. We have accepted it for processing. Because the new legislation >is already in effect, you will receive one of the new Possession & Acquisition Licenses rather than an FAC. >The fee of $25.00 covers this because we received it prior to December 1, 1998. > >Yours truly >Dianne Kelly >Chief Firearms Officer Possibly Dianne Kelly thinks she is doing you a favour. After all, you would be getting the "new & improved firearms license", and at a bargain price, too! I would politely but firmly require the product that was available when you applied and not the new, improved product. You are right - if you accept the new and improved product, any existing old product you have will be void. From the fed's point of view, the new product has the improved features. From a purchaser's point of view, the previous product has more useful features. "without prejudice" Clive Edwards NFA, HACS of BC Reform Canada Reform BC ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:35:36 -0600 From: "Keith P. de Solla, P.Eng" Subject: Re: re-registration MJ wrote: > snip > > Almost everyone thinks the preaddressed envelope pretty much says "steal > this firearms information" Putting the form in a standard business > envelope and giving it to the local MP's office for forwarding through > their system, seems to be the best option. Anyone have experience with this? I sent one to my MP pointing out the security problem. I haven't received a response yet. > Please re-post the fax number for obtaining copies of current registration > certificates. A number of members want to confirm that firearms they > legally sold in the past are no longer registered to them or to a previous > address. (613) 993-5548 > thanks for your help, > > MJ - -- Keith P. de Solla, P.Eng NFA Field Officer IPSC Range Officer (NROI - Canada) http://www.cyberus.ca/~kdesolla/eohc.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:35:39 -0600 From: Barney Gotuaco Subject: AR15 Purchases To any politically incorrect out there.. Can anyone advise me if it is too late (22 Dec 98) to purchase an AR15 HBAR Flat top for Service Rifle competition with the Ont. Rifle Assoc and Dominion of Kanada Rifle Assoc. ?? Can they be purchased still or did C-68 really happen ?? Suggestions anyone ?? Barney Gotuaco barngotu@enoreo.on.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 09:38:57 -0600 From: Mike & Diane Subject: Firearms Please, quit calling your firearms "WEAPONS" They become weapons only when you use them to do harm to someone. They are FIREARMS! Repeat after me: FIREARMS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:14:50 -0600 From: "Ross" Subject: Two pronged offensive on Government I suggest again that Now may be the time for all firearms owners to launch a class action suit against the feds for devaluing our private proerty. My AR15E2 went from $2000.00 plus when new, is still new, and now worth 200.00 to 400.00 buckazoids. If the NFA has 100,000 members or whaterv and each contributes 20 bucks, then that is a significant warchest to recover what could be millions in damages. Remember it was their direct action that caused the reduction in value of our firearms. Nothing we did. This would not detract from the DEALER challenge, could benefit dealers in that their inventory was made worth less, gives the government another headache and another front to defend on. Suggestions., and if now is not the time, why not. j.r. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:14:58 -0600 From: "Barry Glasgow" Subject: Proper Research Two seemingly unrelated examples show us why we all need to do proper research and to be truthful in published articles. Some readers felt compelled to research where it was that the Justice Department's registration poster boy, Mike Chamberland, lived and then published the possible addresses based on a Canada411 web lookup ( http://canada411.sympatico.ca/english/person.html ) For one thing, someone in Mr. Chamberland's position would be absolutely out of his mind to have a listed number. So I looked it up to see what this kind of search would reveal and did see the two addresses posted by those other researchers but, more significantly, I noticed another that was totally missed by these intrepid souls. There's a M. Chamberland on Hartley Bay Rd. in Alban which is about a half-hour drive south of Sudbury. Now I'm not saying that this where the guy lives (I have no idea and don't really care), what I'm saying is that if you're going to research something, do it as thoroughly as you can and don't publish unfinished results or conjecture. It damages your case and your credibility. Which leads me to the second example. Some have posted antigun articles that have appeared in various places by one Mahmood Elahi. I'm not sure if "Mr." Elahi really is a male as e-mail postings are preceded with a female first name. It would not be out of character for one of the gender feminists who are attacking gun ownership to resort to that sort of thing and his/her articles (though well written) are littered with the type of hyperbole and anecdotal evidence we've come to expect from that crowd. But more to the point. In his/her so-called research into the subject, Elahi consistently refers to the 1200 people who are killed by firearms in accidents and suicides. In every article he/she has written, he/she consistently lumps the two unrelated types of death together into one number and mentions accidents first, despite the fact that accidents account for about 65 of those deaths per year. This improper use of research is common among the anti-gun types who are pushing for registration (knowing full well that their goal is prohibition) and the fact that the print media continues to publish this trash shows their unwillingness to confront these unprincipled individuals. The Ottawa Citizen has published several of Elahi's articles (complete with misleading data) and yet somehow found it necessary to edit one of my submissions by changing my reference to 7,000,000 firearms owners to "millions of firearms owners". It would appear to me that if they're going to publish twisted and misleading data submitted by firearms prohibitionists then they certainly ought not be correcting contradictory data from our side. Barry Glasgow Woodlawn, Ont. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:15:06 -0600 From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Re: "Oh dem registration blues....." On Tue, 22 Dec 1998 16:25:20 -0700, Peter Kearns wrote: > He told me how lucky we were to be able to get our >restricted firearms so quickly compared with the old >system....... There is an interesting psycho-epistemological inversion here... The term "lucky" refer to a situation, painful in _your_ evaluation, that _they_ label as such simply because(and for the exercise here, let's suppose it's true), as they pretend, _they_ harrass you less now and you therefore _have_ to feel lucky. It is as if you were meeting the same thug for the second time in a dark alley and that he would tell you you're lucky he only break your arm for last time you met him, he broke your leg... >As a casual afterthought the Asst, CFO added >that they would not release the Bushmaster lower to my >customer until he verbally confirmed the reason for >purchasing it, even though he had stated it in writing and >signed his statement was true.... Fieww! >I asked (in all >innocence) if the reason "to piss off the feds" would be >sufficient..... Maybe no wise to have said that but who said deep satisfaction came from wisdom? :-) > Then I was told some other goodies. Before a restricted >firearm can be released by the CFO the person purchasing it >is investigated for criminal record or outstanding charges, >other restricted arms registered to them are reviewed, and >according to my source the registrant MUST be interviewed by >the Firearms Officer who MUST be satisfied about the reasons >for use, BEFORE HE DECIDES THE TAXPAYER MAY HAVE IT. Can you spell A-R-B-I-T-R-A-R-Y ? Can you spell "we don't want you to have guns"? > Miramachi cannot authorise the release of restricted >firearms, as this may only be done at the CFO level! The >paperwork for my customer's Bushmaster was, (in fact had >been for some time) on a Firearms Officer's desk waiting >until he decided to process it...... Oh yes, in response to >my complaint about the firearms officer who didn't return my >call after me leaving FOUR voice mail messages...... I was >assured the Asst. CFO would "mention it to him." I am happy >we are fielding a dealers challenge to this crappy act, and >can assure our federal monitors every disgusting mean little >trick to delay law abiding Canadians from obtaining arms >will be noted and presented in court. And I suppose CC s. 337 doesn't apply here because there is nothing in the law specifying precise criterions for your permission of having or being refused such permit/liscence/authorization/piece of red tape ... Or am I out to lunch? > This system is set up to drive ALL dealers out of business, >and cause so many problems to discourage the legal ownership >of firearms by individuals........ AND THAT IS NOT LEGAL >UNDER OUR (SO CALLED) CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS...... >I suggest all firearms related businesses keep a log of all >calls to the CFR including the names of people who either >answered or failed to return calls for future use in >litgation. I figure the above enterprise has cost us 26 >calls times $5 per call in wasted time for a total of >$130..... and we intend to collect... >Simon says: [snip] > To Wendy Cukier, the capacity to tell the truth." - - "you expect me to talk?" - - "But _no_ Mr. Bond... I expect you to _die_!" - Auric Goldfinger Ciao jfa Note: I am not subscribed to the CFD. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:15:33 -0600 From: "VAM Computers" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #772 >Cdn-Firearms Digest Monday, December 21 1998 Volume 02 : Number 772 >If you allow anonymous mail then you have solved what is >outlined in the first paragraph and you don't have to worry >about a possible tap. There are 500+ anonymous remailers >out there and it would be much more difficult to tap 5000 >sources (us) going to 500 machines (remailers) before going >to the moderator. Or one could set up a hotmail or yahoo mail account with false info, & then forward mail from it. of course, it could be traced, but would it be worth the time? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:15:38 -0600 From: "VAM Computers" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #775 >Cdn-Firearms Digest Tuesday, December 22 1998 Volume 02 : Number 775 >>> It is a crowded, >>> overwhelmingly urban country in which letting people have access to guns >>> is a continuing disaster." Sigh. It's nice to know people are unable to control themselves, that access to guns turns you into a killing manic. Of course, if this were true, 7 million folks up here in Canada would be shooting people once every few days.... Gosh that'd depopulate the country quickly, wouldn't it? If you listen to this idiot, one would ban guns.. 'cept of course for responsible people like SWAT teams and the Military. Then we'd ban cars, gasoline, lighters, and books. Jerk. Some people will abuse ANYTHING. However, you must learn that the VAST majority of us don't. Dave Kratky ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:15:43 -0600 From: Bob Lickacz Subject: CHRISTMAS To everyone involved in the battle against the travesty we call the Firearms Act, I wish a very Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year. I hope you all get gunstuff from Santa. To our fedspook monitors, Liberals,Coalition for Gun Control, and CFC ----- BAH!! HUMBUG!!! Bob Lickacz NFA Edmonton ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:15:51 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: Re: Dealer Challenge We have received numerous promises of financial help and also been told many donations have been forwarded to the NFA. The amounts so far received do not reflect this, so PLEASE ****DEALERS****, if you wish to remain in business THEN GET OFF YOUR ASSES and dig deep in your pockets...... Verbal expressions of support are just hot air until backed with cold hard cash, and we cannot proceed until we have an amount that will cover court and legal fees. We are ready to proceed at the end of January, but WE WILL NOT UNLESS THOSE DEALERS RELYING ON OTHERS TO CARRY THEM DECIDE TO FORWARD SOME CASH. The lawyers say we have an excellent chance of winning and all we need is cash..... IT IS UP TO YOU, EITHER WE LAY BACK LIKE SHEEP AND WATCH OUR BUSINESSES GO UNDER, OR WE FIND THE MONEY TO FIGHT IN COURT.... YOUR choice....... Donations from anyone, individuals, gun clubs or shooters associations (WE ARE FIGHTING FOR YOUR RIGHTS TOO!) can be forwarded to: Dealer Challenge, c/o National Firearms Association, Box 4384, Station C Calgary, Alberta T2T 5N2 You may use your credit cards by calling (403) 640 1110 or fax 1144 WE CAN WIN BIG, OR WE CAN LOSE BIG, YOUR CHOICE........ Peter Kearns (Dealers Challenge is supported by NFA and CILA as well as many provincial and national associations, but it is a 'DEALER CHALLENGE') Any dealers who wish may e-mail me and receive regular updates regarding the challenge and it's progress kearns@compusmart.ab.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:16:02 -0600 From: SSAA Subject: NEWS - Buyback Victoria fails to reduce crime Herald Sun Melbourne Wednesday 23rd December Killings rise in gun hunt By Regina Titelius Up to one million illegal and unregistered firearms could still be hidden in Victorian homes despite the guns buy back scheme and a new amnesty. Murders by firearms have actually increased since the buyback scheme which removed 225,000 registered and unregistered firearms from circulation. There were 18 shooting murders in 1996-97, after the buyback scheme had been introduced compared with only six in 1995-1996 before the scheme started. Anti-gun and pro-gun lobbyists and politicians told the Herald Sun yesterday not enough was being done to reduce the number of illegal and unregistered firearms. Public safety would remain compromised while gun owners continued to flout the law, they said. State president of the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, Mr Sebastian Ziccone, said that from a safety point of view, the gun buyback had failed "dismally" and had minimal effect on reducing unregistered and illegal firearms. "The number of firearms used in crime has not changed... it would appear to have gone up, Mr Ziccone said. "Australia is no safer than before." He said the $500 million spent on compensation throughout Australia could have been better spent combating youth suicide and improving the mental health system. Estimates for the number of guns kept illegally vary widely from 140,000 according to the anti-gun groups to one million according to pro-gun groups. Then police minister Pat McNamara estimated in 1996 that there were between one million and two million unregistered guns in Victoria before the port Arthur massacre. Gun Control Australia president John Crook said more money needed to be spent on upgrading registration data. "The government has seldom put resources into the firearms registry," Mr Crook said. "They are not taking this seriously enough." Opposition police spokesman Andre Haermeyer said more effort was needed to track down firearms that were previously registered but had become illegal under the new laws and had not been handed in by owners. "These guns need to be tracked down," Mr Haermeyer said. The combination of the gun buyback scheme and a new amnesty - which is running until February has seen a decrease in the number of registered guns. New Victorian Police figures released to the Herald Sun yesterday show the number of registered guns has dropped by almost 200,000 since the Port Arthur massacre and subsequent changes to gun laws. More than 880,000 firearms were registered in Victoria before April 28, 1996 when 35 people were shot dead in the Tasmanian tourist town of Port Arthur/ Registrations at November this year have dwindled to 689,967 - a decrease of 198,633 registrations. The gun buyback which cost Victoria $106 million saw 207,100 prohibited guns surrendered between August 1996 and September last year. Outlawed guns under new legislation included semi-automatic centre-fire and rim-fire rifles and semi-automatics and pump action shotguns. A new firearms amnesty - which has run since August this year ad ends in February - is also encouraging gun owners to give up prohibited guns or to register their guns. But Mr Ziccone, said the decrease in registration was far lower than predicted by the State Government. Mr McNamara predicted in June that the new gun laws would halve the number of registered guns in Victoria. But the new laws have only reduced registrations by about 22 percent. Mr Ziccone said many gun owners had replaced illegal guns with legal guns and were even buying additional guns. "With what I handed in I have replaced with legal guns and many gun owners have done the same", he said. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #780 **********************************