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 V3 #18 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: 37247a2500001a17 Cdn-Firearms Digest Tuesday, June 1 1999 Volume 03 : Number 018 In this issue: Re: "Fostering a culture of safety..." Your Recent Posting on Importing Loss of CA status The common sense revolution? Cranbrook Firearms Officer Concerns Promoting a culture of safety (prohibition?) New poll Thanks to Bushnell Optics Re: BRAZIL TO BAN LEGALLY-OWNED GUNS ALTERNATIVE TO HYSTERICAL ANTI-GUN DEMANDS pre-dec 1/98 tranfers Re: Loss of CA status Re: Loss of CA status Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #16 Cowboy Action Shooters Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #17 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 05:54:47 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: Re: "Fostering a culture of safety..." It appears the new gun laws are having impacts undreamt of by the nitwits that wrote them. A friend of mine who I know to be truthfull went to a garage sale in the Edmonton area yesterday, and as things were slow started chatting to the guy running the sale. He mentioned to the garage sale person that he enjoyed shooting and was immediately asked if he needed any guns... My friend was a little puzzled but asked why, etc... The garage sale person complained he had about ten unregistered handguns that were given to him by an American who lived next to him for a couple of years. A sample of the illicit hoard was a commercial P35 Highpower Browning 9mm, and a two inch barreled .357 Mag Dan Wesson! It turns out the garage sale guy wasn't a police officer doing a sting, but one of countless Canadians who have illicit firearms and don't trust the police enough to turn them in. My friend not wishing to see our friend get into any trouble (apparently) relieved him of the troublesome items, (WHICH WERE ALL LOADED!) It appears the American figured everyone knew how to load and unload guns. I have a sneaking suspicion that the hoard now resides somewhere in Alberta. I wonder how many millions of unregistered firearms are in this great country......... Peter Kearns NFA Communications Simon says: Yes, we did tell our friend that he should turn in the illegal firearms (if indeed he purchased them.) However it is a terrible indication that law abiding Canadians are fast becoming customers for illegal weaponry because they fear our government intends to confiscate the ones they know about. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 05:57:31 -0600 From: Ron Alton Subject: Your Recent Posting on Importing Randy I gather from your followup posting re the the World Net Daily references that the original inference I took was incorrect re gun movement into the USA ie the new policy/Clinton Executive Order you were referring to was with regard to importing into Canada-is this the case? This area I believe has been reported on by others via the digest. There is still some confusion in my mind on this re what leeway individual Canadian citizens have? As an example when my wife and I were at the Grand American last August we ran smack into the new "alien law" that Clinton had brought in that was being implemented as of July/98-this law was spawned in the aftermath of the pyscho Arab that got off a plane a few years back in the USA, went out and bought a gun with no background check as provided for by law at that time and he then proceeded to blow away several people-it was explained to us by large dealers who set up shop at the Grand that a Canadian now has to be in the USA for 90days before a dealer can legally sell him a gun (as a matter of interest, virtually every large USA dealer specializing in trap and skeet guns in particular are at the Grand as are all of the major manufacturers from Browning to whoever in the business)-my point of confusion is with respect to whether or not a Canadian citizen, having met the 90day rule and purchased a shotgun(in possession of a valid FAC or new PAL) can in fact bring such a firearm back himself OR does such an "import" require some kind of new authority(permit or whatever) only available through dealers?? I've sent a copy of this to the digest as well since hopefully somebody out there has the answer to this one? Regards, Ron Alton ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:01:17 -0600 From: "Jim Buckner" Subject: Loss of CA status Back in late summer of 92, we were all told we must register any converted auto's in our possession before Oct 1, 1992. By doing this we would have CA status allowing such owners to buy and trade among them selves. My wife and I did so with one M14 Winchester, dual registered it. Now we must re-register all previous resticted registered firearms, this includes our M14, but under the new registration regulations we are not allowed to dual register. We're told the only way for both of us to keep our CA statice is to purchase another CA before one of use re-registers the M14. This sounded good to me, you can never have to many guns. But, when we bought another CA and waiting for approval of the transfer, we were informed we don't have CA statice anymore. Apparently, Orders In Council have moved the goul posts again. It doesn't matter that we made application to register the M14 Sept. 11, 1992. But FRAS did not complete the registration and mail it back to us until Oct.7, 92. Six days to late, and I wonder how many other CA owners are in the same situation. Jim Buckner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:02:16 -0600 From: Kevin Watson Subject: The common sense revolution? Sault Ste. Marie city police just shot ,killed and wasted another black bear, so much for conservation! Kevin Watson, Ontario trapper. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:11:22 -0600 From: Rick Lowe Subject: Cranbrook Firearms Officer Concerns DAT et al: I'm posting to bring your attention to what is beginning to appear to be systematic abuse of the firearms legislation by the local detachment. Bear in mind that the facts as I know them are only the one side. In fairness, I would like to remind everybody that the local Firearms Officer may have a completely different version of these events. Last Thursday, Cranbrook members appeared at a local man's door and seized his firearms. The facts as I know them are that he was convicted and sentenced on some kind of criminal offence a few years ago. The police at that time and the judge at that time, to the best of my knowledge, did not apply for a prohibition order, much less issue one. The only apparent event to trigger this recent seizure was that the man was attempting a lawful transfer where a handgun owned by him would be registered to his wife, and a rifle belonging to her would in turn be registered to him as the owner. I was just talking to a man a few minutes ago who appeared at my door to tell me he had a very similar seizure carried out against him yesterday. Here is his version of events. He and his wife had been involved in a domestic dispute approximately two weeks ago in which the police were called. There was no violence involved; no charges were laid and in fact the members didn't even suggest one of them leave the home for the evening - - and that's a fairly normal way of dealing with things as a low key response when tempers are hot. So obviously, the members at the time didn't have any worries about violence when they were actually in the home right in the middle of the dispute. They left both of them and the firearms together in the house when they left. The police showed up yesterday - two weeks later - while he was away at work and seized his firearms. The reason he was given was that his wife had called police to express fear and asked that they be taken. He tells me he has an affidavit from his wife stating that she said no such thing. And although there was no violence during the dispute and certainly no charges laid, the receipt he received for the firearms gave the reason for seizure as "domestic violence" - not "domestic dispute" which would have been much more accurate. Interestingly enough, this man works with explosives every day right in the middle of town and they have done nothing to restrict his access to explosives. Finally, I have to wonder if the fact this man rides a Harley and hangs out with other local Harley riders has anything to do with it. Now, the other side of the story may have the police claiming she only signed that affidavit out of fear as they still live together or whatever - I don't know. It is even possible he has a criminal record as long as my arm - I don't know that either, one way or another. I only got his side of the story, not the police's. However, from the side of the story that I have heard, there is enough to have more than a little concern about what went on - particularly in light of the seizure the previous day. I have advised this fellow to bring this to the attention of Jim Abbot, our local MP, as he is currently dealing with the previous seizure. I have also advised him to lay a complaint both with the local detachment commander and with the civilian complaints board. In addition, I advised him to contact the NFA, but unfortunately did not have the telephone number when this guy was brought to talk with me by one of his friends - he is unknown to me and I wasn't expecting him. He advised me that he was more than happy to have his name and phone number published, as he would like the whole world to know what is going on, so here it is as a contact number: Douglas Osmond (250) 489-3194 It is beginning to appear that Cranbrook is a good detachment to keep a careful eye on, despite it being in the middle of a community where most people own firearms and where firearms crimes are almost nonexistant. Last year, you may recall I posted that the local detachment was charging $25 for carry permits contrary to the law until I intervened (others may have intervened as well, I don't know). Presently, they are refusing to register a short barrelled handgun that I purchased and applied to register prior to 01 December 1998 - despite having it pointed out to them that others elsewhere in near identical circumstances had their firearms registered without comment, and despite having the Abell decision brought to their attention. That issue is presently in the hands of our Minister of Justice with a letter of complaint as I work my way up the food chain on this one. I will add as an aside that I am disappointed in the lackadasical interest shown in the handgun issue by our local federal Reform constituency office. One would think that the MP's handlers would have him camped on Annie's Ass (or wherever) on an issue such as this. However, I was told by the office assistant there that in his opinion I was pretty much standing on the thin edge of legality by purchasing and attempting to register what I knew would shortly become a prohibited firearm. And he seemed a little reluctant to have this Reform constituency do anything proactive about it other than simply keep tabs with what Annie is doing. He suggested that perhaps I should take it to court. I will do that if necessary. However, in my humble view, if Reform does support firearms owners, this is the sort of issue they should seize on and take to the government. A firearm owner should not have to go to the personal expense of lawyers and court because his Reform MP prefers to stand in the background while police in their riding refuse to register a firearm contrary to practice elsewhere and in contradiction of the Abell decision. Anyway, that's a head's up on what is going on in the Cranbrook area, and why I think this city is one in particular that local firearms owners should watch out for and keep an eye on what the local firearms officer is doing. It may even be worth it for the NFA to take out a small add in the local paper asking that anybody who has had their firearms seized since last December contact them - I wonder how many other people out there have had their firearms seized but haven't said anything out of fear or shame. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:12:45 -0600 From: Rod Regier Subject: Promoting a culture of safety (prohibition?) 29-May-99 just got back from the Rivewview, N.B. gunshow. CFC booth - reminded of the Monty Python sketch "Is there where I come for an argument?". Civil servants being asked technical/legal questions for which they have no answers, and members of the public expressing their dismay with the arcane, arbitrary convoluted rules they're supposed to comply with. Paraphrase of some of the ground rules imposed on the exhibitors, supposedly by the government bureaucrats in order that they would permit the show to be held: - - Handguns can be displayed, but not touched by any of the non-exhibitor attendees. - - Handguns may not have a posted price. The above restrictions do no apply to non-restricted long guns. Looks to me more like a culture of prohibition, not safety. I thought the section of C-68 regarding regulation of gunshows had not been proclaimed yet. - -- 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: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:13:45 -0600 From: "Larry Going" Subject: New poll For the week of May 23, 1999, the Recreational Firearms Community of Saskatchewan Web Site quizlet asked: "Do you think owning a firearm for self-defence is a good idea?" (of 132 respondents) 100% Yes 0% No 0% Not Sure A new poll asks the question: "Do you believe schools in Canada should have armed security guards?" Give your opinion at: http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/going/rfc/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:19:12 -0600 From: Tom MacMillan Subject: Thanks to Bushnell Optics About six weeks ago I E-mailed Bushnell about finding a lens cap for a Sentry II spotting scope. They never did reply to my E-mail, but... The company sent a replacement eye piece cap for this "out of production" product. Via courier, at their own exspence, I might add! I thought this was very nice of them. We shooters should support companies who "who do the right thing", me thinks. Tom MacMillan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:21:45 -0600 From: Alan Harper Subject: Re: BRAZIL TO BAN LEGALLY-OWNED GUNS >NFA CONFIDENT PREDICTION: This new law will INCREASE Brazil's rates of >violent crime, murder, robbery, home invasion, and burglary of occupied >homes by night -- because that is ALWAYS what happened in every country, >worldwide, when severely restrictive firearms control laws were imposed. > >David A Tomlinson >National President, NFA I know a couple from Brazil. They returned for a visit, a couple of years ago. Crime, with firearms, is rampant. While they took a city bus in Sao Paolo, 2 men got on, brandishing handguns, in broad daylight. One covered the driver, and the other collected valuables in a sack. The lady I know was visibly upset and the guy collecting the goodies told her, "Don't worry mama, we won't hurt you. You can get off now." The couple got off the bus. The bus then continued on its way, and the robbery continued. The robbers were so confident, that they allowed witnesses to escape, while they continued robbing the remainder of the passengers. They both knew what to expect when they returned, but did not expect it to be so blatant. They dressed "like bums" and the robbers did not know that they were relatively wealthy tourists. They did not wear any jewelry. Fernando says he will never go back to Brazil. He is retired in Northern Ontario now with his wife. Bye. Al. "For every vision, there is an equal and opposite revision" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:23:46 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: ALTERNATIVE TO HYSTERICAL ANTI-GUN DEMANDS On April 26, 1999 Dr. Stuart D. Johnson a Criminologist now retired from the University of Manitoba wrote the following letter to the Editor of the Winnipeg Free Press. Dear Sir: Following close upon any firearms tragedy in Canada or the United States, I have come to expect certain members of the public to begin yammering for more and stricter gun control laws. Whether to achieve some political agendum or merely through ignorance, such laws, if enacted, tell Canadian gun owners that their rights and freedoms hinge not upon their own conduct but upon the potential acts of criminals and madmen. The obvious implication of this is that the conduct of criminals that dictates the scope of freedoms and privileges in the rest of society. By forcing the law abiding to accommodate themselves to the potential behaviour of criminals, we are conceding defeat. Our legal system and criminal justice system should be forcing criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behaviour of the law abiding. While I do not pretend to have originated this line of reasoning, I do believe it should be considered as an alternative to the reflexive and near hysterical anti-gun demands to which we have sadly become accustomed. Signed: Stuart D. Johnson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:27:30 -0600 From: Barry Snow Subject: pre-dec 1/98 tranfers Since the old (C-17) firearms act was repealed, is there anything to cover firearms that were aquired without an FAC before the implementation of Ch. 39? For example, I had given my children firearms prior to Dec 1/98 and they should now be able to get possession only certificates. Am I reading this correctly? Thanks. Barry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:40:08 -0600 From: Alan Harper Subject: Re: Loss of CA status I saw a fellow walk into the Toronto registration office after Oct 1, 1992, with an M14. He said he was there before Oct 1, and was told he didn't need to register it. He suspected that was wrong and returned to straighten it out. They took the rifle inside the office to discuss something. I said to him, "You know, you'll never see that gun again." He didn't look too happy. I wonder what happened about it. Bye. Al. "For every vision, there is an equal and opposite revision" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:41:47 -0600 From: Alan Harper Subject: Re: Loss of CA status >Back in late summer of 92, we were all told we must register any converted >auto's in our possession before Oct 1, 1992. By doing this we would have CA >status allowing such owners to buy and trade among them selves. My wife >and I did so with one M14 Winchester, dual registered it. Now we must >re-register all previous resticted registered firearms, this includes our >M14, but under the new registration regulations we are not allowed to dual >register. We're told the only way for both of us to keep our CA statice is >to purchase another CA before one of use re-registers the M14. This sounded >good to me, you can never have to many guns. But, when we bought another CA >and waiting for approval of the transfer, we were informed we don't have CA >statice anymore. Apparently, Orders In Council have moved the goul posts >again. It doesn't matter that we made application to register the M14 Sept. >11, 1992. But FRAS did not complete the registration and mail it back to us >until Oct.7, 92. Six days to late, and I wonder how many other CA owners >are in the same situation. > > Jim Buckner - ---------- Don't accept that as an answer, Jim. They are bullxxxxxxg you. You both have the registration certificates. Make copies and guard them. Don't give them up to the feds. Buy another CA. If you run into any opposition, document everything, including who said what, where and when. Put down your impressions of the people talking, including tone of voice (i.e.. sarcastic, rude, etc.). Contact the NFA for guidance. Raise hell with your MP & provincial MP. Make all further contact in writing and demand written answers. Save all the documents. You were either talking to an idiot or someone who is lying to you. Don't take any crap from either. Bye. Al. "For every vision, there is an equal and opposite revision" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:43:15 -0600 From: Alan Harper Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #16 >I live in Quebec Province and and the aquisition of a new handgun >is a crazy move.I want for a registration in february and I received >nothing to date.Can you tell me how many times for have the paper for a >handgun in the rest of the Canada.I have a contact now with the umbusman in >Quebec and he want now if it have a difference in the >others provinces.Please help me.Thanks > Joce - ---------- I got an AR10 rifle, in April of 1998. I got the green slip in April 1999. How's that for service? Bye. Al. "For every vision, there is an equal and opposite revision" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 14:46:00 -0600 From: David Parry Subject: Cowboy Action Shooters I am looking for the addresses, (email preferred) of some Cowboy Shooter groups in Canada, Germany, and Australia, as I am trying to sell a few original Winchester Model '97 trench and Riot guns. If anyone out there can help me I would appreciate the effort. Please reply directly to me, parry@ionline.net Cheers, David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 05:20:11 -0600 From: "Jocelyn Breton" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #17 Hi everybody Today a woman call me for the ombusman.She said the S"Q" take 4 month for make a register certificate for a handgun.I respond to the woman i can have the same response of the .S.Q.She said make a complaint to the public security minister with a copy to the ombusman,but before she said call the S"Q" for make a check.I call the S"Q" and OH SURPRISE'they said my papers are on the last step and i suppose receive the permit in a couple of weeks and MORE,she give me a reference number,a think i can,t never have before.The lesson call your ombusman because the S"Q" authority and i think the GRC don,t like went you call this people.I make a call to my deputy for the same reason,and i am waiting the response.Excuse my english. Never surrender. Joce ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #18 *********************************