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 #936 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 Sunday, March 21 1999 Volume 02 : Number 936 In this issue: Informal poll re:32 cal less than 105mm Re:Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #935 registration certificate - fact or fiction Re: Re-Registering Handguns re:32 cal less than 105mm Metal storm Re: Metal storm Bingo! Dewat firearms Re: Safe storage RFC-Sask. web site quote from a cop re Brinks shooting safe storage! CFC throughput rate -- Minor additions by DAT. Re: Purchase of firearm at a gunshow. Re: Metal storm Customs comments Fw: Exerpt from canadanews article March edition. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 06:30:56 -0600 From: "Larry Going" Subject: Informal poll An informal poll at The Recreational Firearms Community of Saskatchewan web site returned the results below: When you have to register your firearms in 2003, will you register: (of 101 respondents) 46% none of them? 47% some of them? 8% all of them? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 06:30:48 -0600 From: Barry Snow Subject: re:32 cal less than 105mm F.A.s. 12 (7) is very specific about pre 1946 prohibited and which relatives may possess the same. This is what I referred to when asking if a grandfathered owner could adopt and grandfather many "children." I referred to Lord and Lady SBH 25-32. DAT says this can be stopped by FA s. 27(c) but this only refers to transfer of prohibited to BUSINESS or importation of non-prohibited by individual. Please direct me to some other statute which agrees with the CFC as I do not see how this applies. CC.s.92 (4)(b)9(ii) seems to allow the hier to possess as well as executor unless you are referring to some other section again. cowboy-whose-hat-never-covered-his-neck Barry ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 09:03:42 -0600 From: Eric Goodwin Subject: Re:Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #935 I'm working out of the office until 29 March 99. I'll check my mail daily & get back to you as soon as I can. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 10:47:41 -0600 From: Peter Cronhelm Subject: registration certificate - fact or fiction Beleive it or not I actually got a reg certificate recently. It was the old style and it was for a gun registered Nov 27 '98. When I hear of all the people who applied for FAC's and got PAL's I am a bit surprised that I got the old style reg certificate. Peter Cronhelm PS there are a bunch of FART inspired mistakes or inconsistencies on this particular certificate. For instance the number of shots is wrong and the calibre is listed by an old and somewhat obsolete name. The calibre stamped on the gun is something different and the common name of said calibre in N America is something different again. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 11:16:13 -0600 From: David A Tomlinson Subject: Re: Re-Registering Handguns >Was wondering about the reason for reregistering already >registered handguns. The discussion came up at work a few days ago as it >usually does. All current registration certificates EXPIRE on 30 Dec 2002 [FA s. 127(2)(b)]. Therefore, they must be renewed on or before that date. One of the fellows there had heard that the reason people >were having to reregister their handguns was that the previous handgun >information had been lost. Now they are trying to get everyone to >register again. And trying not to let anyone find out about this bungle >that could cause them to look even worse than they already do. Now this >is probably nothing more than a rumour but the more i think about it the >more it makes sense. I mean if they already had the information on >previously registered handguns it should have been relativly easy to >transfer such information into the new system. The old system is rotten to the core. For many years, they have been issuing new certificates without deleting the old one, and losing PEOPLE who moved, emigrated or died without telling them. As a result, 20 to 40 per cent (estimated) of the 1.25 million registered firearms either do not exist, have been exported, are not at the address shown on the registration certificate, and/or are not in the hands of the person shown on the registration certificate. That is inevitable. Registration system data starts "going bad" as soon as data is entered, and as long as human beings are running the system and possessing firearms, it will continue to go bad by a certain percentage per year -- 2 per cent bad data this year becomes 4 per cent in the next year, then 6 per cent in the next year --- because there is, and can be, NO way to tell a defective record from a correct record other than by making contract wih the PERSON and seeing the FIREARM, a costly and timewasting exercise that has NEVER been done since registration started in 1934. NOW do you understand why they are not transferring the old systm's data into the new system? David A Tomlinson National President, NFA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 11:16:23 -0600 From: David A Tomlinson Subject: re:32 cal less than 105mm >F.A.s. 12 (7) is very specific about pre 1946 prohibited and which >relatives may possess the same. This is what I referred to when asking >if a grandfathered owner could adopt and grandfather many "children." I >referred to Lord and Lady SBH 25-32. > DAT says this can be stopped by FA s. 27(c) but this only refers to >transfer of prohibited to BUSINESS or importation of non-prohibited by >individual. Please direct me to some other statute which agrees with >the CFC as I do not see how this applies. WRONG. FA s. 27(c) authorizes the CFO to block ANY "transfer OR importation" of any "restricted firearm" or "handgun referred to in [FA s.] 12(6)" to ANYONE. David A Tomlinson National President, NFA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 11:17:56 -0600 From: Peter Cronhelm Subject: Metal storm > Subject: Re: A Million Rounds a Minute > > Dosen't it already meet the full auto definition of more than one shot with > single pull of the trigger? Not if it doesn't have a trigger. The old style gatling guns are technically NOT prohibited as machine guns because they do not have a trigger. They operate by crank and it is entirely possible to fire one round at a time. If the metal storm was operated via computer there would be no trigger thus the thing is not technically a machine gun. The laws are idiotic but they are the laws. Peter Cronhelm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 13:07:34 -0600 From: Libbie3540@aol.com Subject: Re: Metal storm There was a device sold a few years ago in the usa called the "BMF Activator" that clipped to the trigger guard of a semi-automatic rifle. You spun the little handle on it and you could fire your rifle like a automatic. Isn't this like the gattling gun you are talking about? And is it illegal to own one of these devices? Libby ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 13:20:06 -0600 From: Name.Withheld Subject: Bingo! Tom Cahoe's posting of 19 Mar @ 6:44:07 re Fed Fisheries (last para) is right on the mark ! It is being set up in other Provinces the same way. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 06:37:23 -0600 From: "kaiten6" Subject: Dewat firearms I was talking to the CFC a couple of days ago about some questions I had concerning our new & improved ? firearms law.I and the polite (but not very knowledgeable)person at the CFC were discussing some dewat firearms I have, he advised me that the regulations concerning dewats was under review & that new regulations would be made available in about 4-6 weeks.Anybody know anything about these so-called new regulations?-Cheers-Cody ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 06:37:29 -0600 From: "Linda (Kali) Jordan" Subject: Re: Safe storage Perhaps someone can help me here -- I have always wondered WHY there are currently no safe storage places available for short or even long term rental (at least here in lower mainland Vancouver). At one point we did phone around to see if such a thing was available since we were going on an extended trip and did not feel comfortable leaving our "babies" in the house unattended, especially since the fact that we had a "large cache" of firearms in our home and the basic address of our home had just prior to that been published in the newspapers. Needless to say -- there were no places we could take these items for storage, and I have always wondered WHY. Can anyone help me with an answer to this? If a storage such as Gordon describes was available at the time, we would most definitely have taken advantage of it. Instead, we had to make arrangements for someone to be available to take care of the home in our absence, which was a bit inconvenient. Lest you wonder, I do not agree with an individual being forced to keep their sports equipment at a club, as most clubs only have someone on "guard" during extremely short periods of time. If clubs were now to have firearms kept in them, they would most surely end up being the target for criminals. I feel they are far safer in my own home. However there have been times during the many years we have owned them that I would have liked to know an "option" of a 24 hour guarded place could have been available, such as when extended trips are planned. Perhaps if we got some of that government money (like the popcorn company got), then we could set up some really good combination range and storage areas. Linda (Kali) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 06:37:24 -0600 From: "Larry Going" Subject: RFC-Sask. web site Sympatico has advised that the personal web site server will be down for several days. My apologies to those trying to access the site. Larry Going RFC Sask. Web Page: http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/going/rfc/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 06:37:38 -0600 From: omen@smtp.interlog.com Subject: quote from a cop re Brinks shooting A Brinks guard shot (more than once) AFTER an unarmed robber (who had just smashed the guard in the face and stole some money), and this is what some cop said about it: "Brinks employees are citizens like everyone else and depending on what the circumstances were, if a citizen is concerned for their safety obviously they're permitted to discharge a firearm," said Staff-Insp. Stephen Harris. (from the Toronto Sun website). Hmmm.... It'll be interesting to see what if anything will happen re charges. Damian - -- Damian R. Kanarek | "The main problem with Microsoft is infotask international inc. | that they have no taste. And I don't (software development consultants) | mean that in a small way, I mean email: omen@interlog.com | that in a big way." - Steve Jobs ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 06:37:41 -0600 From: Gordon Hitchen Subject: safe storage! How does this sound? A rented storage unit in a compound manned 24 hrs a day, security fenced, video monitored. The unit has on roll-up steel door! Padlocked. Inside the usual steel gun cabinate - - bolted to the wall! Ammunition stored in the same unit in a separate locked box! Oh yes! Forgot to mention the two Rotweiller guard dogs in the compound from 8 PM to 8AM. And entry to the compound is by electroniclly controlled , password operated system. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 10:09:13 -0600 From: Rod Regier Subject: CFC throughput rate -- Minor additions by DAT. An RFC contact of mine has been told that the CFC is supposedly processing 265 registrations per day, and presently has a backlog of approx. 29,000 pending registrations. As far is now known, NO actual registration certificates of the post-01 Dec 98 type have been actually delivered yet. Given their present staffing level, that's around 1 man-day per processed registration (not including mailing; it is not known why they do not mail the registration certificates that they claim have been processed). Well, lets see. 31 Dec 2002 is roughly 3.75 years away. The standard work year is around 250 days. 3.75 * 250 * 265 = roughly 250,000 remaining registration work units, so at this rate, they will be able to register about 250,000 firearms by 01 Jan 2003. (3.75 * 250 = 937 working days until end of registration window) Gee, they're going to have to move faster than that. There are probably around 700,000 non-ghost restricted/prohibited w/GF firearms that will need to be re-registered, plus another say 6,000,000 units even if we use the government's under-estimated value. (The actual number requiring registration is about 20,000,000.) So, say 7,000,000 units pending processing over 937 working days. That's around 7500 units per day required throughput, requiring 28 times as many workers as they have today. That is going to be EXPENSIVE. The CFC is going to need to multiply their throughput by a factor of 28, if the RFC started to co-operate with them in order that they complete registrations using the gov't figure of 7,000,000 units, AND if the processing is scheduled as an even-rate work load for the entire period -- which seems unlikely. Oh, wait a moment -- I forgot -- there will be many TRANSFERS of firearms (requiring deregistration and reregistration) during that period, and there will have to be time, staff and processing for those! The NFA iceberg looks pretty big from here... - -- Rod Regier, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 x108 Dymaxion Research Ltd., 5515 Cogswell St., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3J 1R2 Canada email: RRegier@dymaxion.ca corporate url: http://www.dymaxion.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 10:09:14 -0600 From: David A Tomlinson Subject: Re: Purchase of firearm at a gunshow. >I am planning on going to the ******* show next weekend and want to >know how to legally purchase and take posession of a firearm (both >pistol and long arm). Your guidance would be appreciated. The LAW says you cannot take possession of ANY firearm until a firearms registration certificate for it "is issued" [FA s. 23(d)]. It also says the seller's registration certificate EXPIRES at the moment of sale [FA s. 66], so if either of you is in possession of the firearm from moment of sale until you become the "holder" of a registration certificate, you are a criminal. Catch-22. The officials will tell you that you can phone 1-800-731-4000 and transfer the firearm (either kind) by telephone, taking it home on the basis of a number you scrawl on a bit of paper. CC s. 117.11 says that the burden of proof that you HAVE a registration certificate is on YOU, so God help you if any police officer asks and all you have to show him is a number -- in YOUR handwriting -- scrawled on a bit of paper. The courts have held that that is legal -- because it is so easy to PROVE that it is registered. All you have to do is show them your (non-existent) registration certificate! The firearms control officials are notorious for LOSING applications, geeting things wrong, and being unable to find applications that ARE in the computer -- somewhere -- so your number (in case of trouble) may well NOT get you out of trouble, even after they are called to confirm your story. If you accept their advice, and transfer by telephone, I STRONGLY recommend that you tape the conversation. If you can do that, you will have a defence of "official misdirection" and be home free. David A Tomlinson National President, NFA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 10:09:19 -0600 From: David A Tomlinson Subject: Re: Metal storm >There was a device sold a few years ago in the usa called the "BMF Activator" >that clipped to the trigger guard of a semi-automatic rifle. You spun the >little handle on it and you could fire your rifle like a automatic. Isn't this >like the gattling gun you are talking about? Yes. >And is it illegal to own one of these devices? Yes. They were outlawed by Order in Council several years ago. Did you know that full automatic firearms were unrestricted -- did not even have to be registered -- until 1945, and that the number of violent crimes committed with a legally-owned full automatic firearm is ZERO? And yet our paranoid government believes that no Canadian who did not own one on 01 Jan 78 can be trusted with one. We older types who do own them can be trusted to keep ours until we die off -- but THIS generation is 100 per cent untrustworthy. Do you feel insulted? You should. David A Tomlinson National President, NFA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 10:09:04 -0600 From: JRP <705717@ican.net> Subject: Customs comments Hello >From Southwestern Ontario: A friend of mine recently made a trip into Port Huron Michigan from Sarnia Ontario. He made a couple of stops in Port Huron and then went on to a gun show in Mt. Clemens Mich. 40 minutes west from Port Huron. Upon his arrival back at the border crossing he stated that some items were purchased by other people in the vehicle and they were sent over to inspection. As the Customs Officer approached the car my friend got out and was asked if there were any deals at the Gun Show ? He never stated he was going to the Gun Show when he crossed into the U S. and never told the Canadian Customs Officer in the booth upon his return that he had been at the Gun Show.They checked and found nothing else in the car. The people paid the duty on the items they purchased ( nothing from the gun show ) and went on their way. Seems that anyone who might have been in the parking lot with a Canadian plate was reported to Customs ? by someone.The gun show portion requires separate entry and admission after entering into the building, you can view all the other displays and vendors and not even go into the part which contains the gun show. JRP ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 10:08:57 -0600 From: "canadanews" Subject: Fw: Exerpt from canadanews article March edition. Comments are made by "Guest Editors & Contributors" but do not necessarily reflect or represent the opinion of the publisher. All articles are presented "Without Prejudice or Political Motivation" and are for the enjoyment and enlightenment of the readers. THE GUN LOBBY HUFFS AND PUFFS BUT ALBERTA'S ANNIE BLOWS THEIR CANDLE OUT Part One Over the past several months leading up to this issue of canadanews we have been monitoring gun lobby chatter on several internet sites including the Canadian Firearms Digest, Canadian Firearms Chat, Canadian Firearms Alert, as well as countless others out there in boundless cyberspace. We have to give the owners, and moderators of these sites full credit for creating a forum for those vehemently opposed to what they see as an unnecessary new law that intrudes on their rights and freedoms as Canadian citizens. Maybe they are right but they to must know by now that all this chatter will have no real affect on government or any shift in policy that they can imagine because of their internal chatter. More likely it is just a forum to vent frustration by those who are opposed, carefully controlled by those who are in control. Taking the numbers that are continually thrown around by what is called the Canadian Firearms Community at 7 to 8 million gun owners this lobby group by any stretch of the imagination must be larger than any other group in Canadian history. Following the same train of thought it would stand to reason that they must also be the richest, monetarily speaking in the country. So why are they going nowhere and being ignored by most politicians and the media? So what is the truth here? Are there really 7 to 8 million gun owners? Are there really 21 to 30 million firearms privately owned in Canada? If so maybe they should be registered folks, that is an incredible amount of fire power. Bureaucrats and politicians alike would and do ask these same questions and obviously either believe the numbers, but do not fear the gun lobby, or do not believe the size of the gun lobby and therefore do not bother to listen to them. Now on the other hand if they truly do exist they must be a terribly disorganized bunch with the exception of a few who we see contributing regularly on the various forums available in Canadian cyberspace. Here is an example, and we are only speaking of what we see because after all perception is reality. The recent Fed-Up II rally in Ottawa, which was promoted extensively within the so called innernet of the firearms community only drew a few thousand supporters. A very similar event organized by many different groups comprising a rural alliance with different views, but one objective drew 250,000 supporters out to a march in Great Britain. The new Labor Government of Tony Blair decided they better wait for another mandate before taking further action against their country folk. Not surprising, with that kind of volume of voices. In Australia, the new Australia first Party reports after only two years a membership which exceeds the total number of members comprising all other political parties in the country. It is a political revolution in the outback. It also seems that this country will change its head of state by becoming a republic with an American style constitution and a President before the year 2000. It was really unfortunate for our country folk, after all the effort by the gun owners, and the well planned media campaign by the Canadian Recreational Firearms Community that Alberta's own, Annie skillfully blew their candle out. So as I see it, it's back to the drawing board for the Canadian Gun Lobby as the imminent and dreaded deadline draws near. What is next for them as they huff and puff but continually go pop as their candles are blown out. Will they reorganize? Will they get along? Can they get along? Are their egos bigger that their might? Are their hearts really targeted on individual freedoms or do they just want a society without any gun control like the old west? We will all just have to wait and see. But in the mean time write me at cannews@canoemail.com and let me know what you think. FGE Guest Editor Vancouver (In Part two and three canadanews will deal with the other side of the coin, "Society, Rural versus urban ideals, and the political correctness of gun control.) Send your rebuttals to cannews@telusplanet.net David Parry Moderator ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #936 **********************************