Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:47 -0600 Message-Id: <199911251452.IAA13409@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 V3 #211 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 Cdn-Firearms Digest Thursday, November 25 1999 Volume 03 : Number 211 In this issue: Re: A "MUST READ" FOR FERAL MONITORS AND ANNIE!!! Pt.II Re: Personal Info request to annoy the feds escaped murders and imprisioned victims. Re: A "MUST READ" FOR FERAL MONITORS AND ANNIE!!! Pt.I Re: Police Ignoring Orders and Lawyers FAC/PAL Re: Personal Info request to annoy the feds Outdoor range standards Grief Industry makes CD to make money from Montreal Massacre DUELING HUNTING POEMS Gun registry is hitting the mark Fact missing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:52:02 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: Re: A "MUST READ" FOR FERAL MONITORS AND ANNIE!!! Pt.II I confided to him that because I am in the "business" I have "courtesy memberships" in every gun range within 100 km of the city of Edmonton, and they are extended automatically. Then came the killer...... "The Firearms Act requires that I provide you with a valid FAC/PAL and a valid membership for an approved club or range when applying for a renewal of my ATT, so where does it say that there are time limit requirements?" This was where he mumbled that he only followed orders! I must confess gentle readers, that I did then (sort of) explode. I asked him to read from the top line of my ATT application, and he quoted, "renewal of an existing permit." I advised him about the nice letter I received from George's office that said all 1998 range permits were extended to cover the year 1999, and the date on the envelope indicates that the CFO issued that missive well after the Titanic was launched, (and used his title of CFO which only became effective after 1st December 1999!) This proves to me that acting as CFO under the authority of the Firearms Act, he gave me a permit to transport all of my restricted firearms to any approved range in this province. Therefore I asked the question of the unfortunate Mr. Clarke, "What have I done that makes me such a hazard to the citizenry, so that limitations will be placed on my renewed permit?" While he was gulping, "What crimes would I not commit with my legally registered arms within 300 km, that you believe I would commit outside that area?" Following that for 94 seconds the poor registrar was treated to a tongue lashing, (inter spiced with a fairly liberal amount of unsolicited advice about the firearms registration system,) the assurance that I would immediately complain in writing to "Annie," and if he saw fit to issue anything other than what I requested, then he would, (along with "good old George") be explaining to a provincial court judge, exactly how a fat old grandpa would be a menace to society if allowed to take a firearm more than 300 km from his own small and decrepit shack. (For the ladies, the fat old grandpa has trimmed down somewhat and is now almost as svelte as he is charming!) I wrote to Annie (by fax) demanding she hold an inquiry into the activities of the CFO, and also the way the office processed applications and permits. (Georgie isn't one of Annie's favourite people, and is rumoured to top her hit list!) I did casually mention that I personally don't trust the CFO or any promise or explanation emanating from him that wasn't written down and signed, and suggested a few questions she might ask to determine what was going on. In a lighter (and more helpful) vein I mentioned that if she wanted further details reported accurately that I would be happy to consult my recordings of the conversations with registrar Clarke concerning ATT issuance...... Strange the way things happen........ I asked the unfortunate registrar Clarke to go see George and voice my "legitimate concern" about him making up and inventing new portions of the Act, but he said George was away, location unknown. But the ever helpful Richard Clarke did promise (several times) that he would e-mail George "toot sweet" about my concerns.... It now turns out that Richard Clarke must have (apparently) learned how to lie expertly and tell tall tales, because at the precise time he told me this, one Stanley Beaumont, (a retired history teacher, NFA member and respected director of one of the ranges I belong to) was at the office discussing the 300 km limit that good old George was trying to place on his ATT....... With George himself! Oh those federales, what a bunch of mischief makers! Seems Stan is no slouch, as he told George that he wanted a "renewal of an existing permit." (We all cower at the knee of the infallible Tomlinson, and chant his mantras at the vassals of the state, at every opportunity!) NOW GET THIS............ George assured Stan that his existing province wide permit would be good for the year 2000, and he, (George) would extend it!! I would suggest that anybody from the "shangri la" province of Alberta, insure anything passing for advice about the firearms Act, or any promise from our CFO is written and signed in his own blood, and the taxpayer would do well to check their fingers and thumbs if they shake hands with the rascal, (and perchance check their wallet is still intact and on or about their person before they leave.) As you all know, I am the last person to malign anyone or impugn their reputation, but in my 'umble personal opinion our CFO is (apparently) a lying toadying jerk, with one set of rules for US, and another for a SELECT group. Please feel free to correct or chastise me if you believe I may be wrong. regards, Peter Kearns ******* The above are my personal opinions, based on my personal experience******** Simon says: The feds have been ducking a provincial court reference hearing saying their witness was too sick to attend, but he has been back doing his job as Assistant CFO for over a week now........ See ya in court Georgie! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:52:28 -0600 From: Christopher di Armani Subject: Re: Personal Info request to annoy the feds Peter, I''d be happy to post the ATI package on my web site as well, so with your permission I'll do just that and post the url here. That way people can grab it without the "privacy concern" if they want. Christopher ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:51:41 -0600 From: Paul Chicoine <701506@ican.net> Subject: escaped murders and imprisioned victims. Montreal. A convicted child killer somehow managed to get transfered to a miminum security facility in Quebec. He, of course just walked away. In the course of his trial Mr. Trudel made several death threats, including the family of his young victim. The victim"s (Eric Lafrance) father, Mr. Lafrance is receiving little or no police protection (think of a Nation of Cowards and "Dial 911 and die") and has decided to remain at home and arm himself to protect his family. If you could have heard his interview you would have pulled out your hair in frustration. All day today CBC radio 1 in Montreal will replay the sanitized version of this interview, you can find this on real audio. There is a slight chance the entire interview will be broadcast on the noon time program, listen in if you can, I'll try to get a recording Paul ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:52:06 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: Re: A "MUST READ" FOR FERAL MONITORS AND ANNIE!!! Pt.I Regarding Alberta issued ATT's, I ran into exactly the same problem as Buddy Brown did. A couple of months ago I applied to renew my existing Alberta wide restricted firearms range permit, (now styled ATT.) I sent in a nice friendly well written (and polite) note asking for my existing permit to be extended for 2000, and a copy to be forwarded forthwith. In my case, most likely because I am a notorious troublemaker, (the reputation is unjustified,) a nice young man from George Reid's office, (George is CFO,Alberta) dropped by my store two weeks after I sent the letter and hand delivered an application form for an ATT. He suggested that I may really like the new idea where we were permitted to go to any approved range using the permit as long as it was within 300 km of the registered address!! Being polite, (and some say downright pleasant and accommodating,) I pointed out to the nice young man that I already had a valid permit to take my pistols etc.. to any approved range in the great and glorious province of Alberta. He said, that well, sort of, er,,, things have changed and George (Reid) won't issue that type of permit anymore. He seemed startled when I told him that "George" already had. I have personally inspected TWO signed in George's neat and legible handwriting, and know of at least eight more, (and I'll bet Buddy will fax me a copy of his!) fax (780) 413 9756 So anyway I handed my application to the obnoxious lady who frequents the reception desk at the CFO, (confirmed today by Stan Beaumont, who said she was rude to him too!) and she told me curtly that it would be handed to a registrar, and "no" she didn't know when I would hear anything. Well brethren, six long weeks passed, so possessing a curious nature and inquiring mind I decided to ask what they were doing. I sent an exceedingly polite message asking what was happening, last Friday. This morning I received a telephone call from Richard Clarke, who boldly announced himself as a registrar with the CFO. A really nice man, with a firm and positive voice and self assured attitude, (a true bureaucrat's bureaucrat.) Richard opened his dialogue with the opinion that I couldn't be given an ATT that extended beyond the end of the year as none of my gun club memberships, (and he said he had thoroughly checked,) extended into, or covered the year 2000! I must admit in confidence brethren, that I thought his course of action a little churlish, and rapidly informed the now slightly less exuberant and slightly deflated registrar Clarke, that I belong to at least ten gun clubs, and that if he got off his arse and called the Strathcona Range, the manager would immediately assure him my membership extends until October 2000....... After he said "hum," I interjected, (because I was beginning to wax eloquent,) that not only was I a member, I just happened to be a handgun director, who was usually contacted by most of the bureaucrats, as I actually sign pistol proficiency and safety qualifications and other such nonsense! He then quietly asked for the telephone number of the range. (And the fibber told me he had already thoroughly checked with all the clubs and ranges I belong to!) I guess he must have shouted real loud if he didn't know the telephone number!) Those registrars must take lessons in ethics and honesty from the "poison dwarf." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:52:15 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: Re: Police Ignoring Orders and Lawyers >Many career politicians are trained lawyers and they, as a group, often >seem to act as if they know what's best for the masses. Facts and/or >the opinions of those being dictated to never enter their calculations. >I very much resent this attitude. Ah, yes -- but did you ever think that THEY are the politicians because YOU let the Party Leader take control of the political Party they "represent"? Think about it. No one who is not a MEMBER of a political Party has ANY say in who runs it, what its policies are, or who its candidate on the next ballot will be. If only ten per cent of firearms owners join the political Party of their choice, every candidate -- from every Party -- in the next federal election will be chosen by firearms owners. Yes, membership in a political Party is that rare. Less than 3 per cent of voters belong to ANY political Party -- but 40 per cent of voters are firearms owners. If one-tenth of our people join a Party, we outnumber the current membership. Less than 3 per cent?! Yes. The political Party members are a tiny and VERY unrepresentative group -- but they have ENORMOUS power. They choose every Leader of every Party, every policy of every Party, and every candidate for every election. Political Party Leaders do their best to keep YOU out of "THEIR" political Party. They do not WANT anyone with ideas. They want "their" Party to be a fan club -- with members who adore the Leader, donate money to the Party, and help get the Leader re-elected because they LOVE him. That is why all Canadian political parties are so small. There just are not enough people who adore the Leader, regardless of which Party you are looking at. There lies WEAKNESS. In theory, any Canadian can join any political Party, and work to have his or her own ideas adopted as Party policy. In fact, every time firearms community members try to join the tiny federal Liberal Party, they are turned away -- in defiance of the Liberal Party's own rules. But -- why would a Party refuse new members? Isn't the Party supposed to be representative of the voters, and wide open to new ideas? That is the THEORY. The FACT is that Party Leaders only want people who adore the Leader, and believe in his Godlike wisdom. They will do almost anything to PREVENT the admission of new members who do not agree with the Leader -- or who might want a new Leader. And that is the slippery road that leads down to dictatorship. Think about it -- where else can such a road lead? You are not happy paying a third more taxes than is reasonable -- just to cover the INTEREST on the huge debts that our Conservative/Liberal Ottawa Governments (CLOGs) foolishly contracted? Then JOIN the political Party of your choice -- and work INSIDE it to CHANGE it. As Adelaide sang, "You can't get alterations on a dress you haven't bought!" Simon says, "Firearms control is POLITICAL control. When Allan Rock told us that only soldiers and policemen (both "owned" by the government) should be allowed to have friearms, he was making a deep and important POLITICAL statement about WHO should CONTROL our society." David A Tomlinson National President, National Firearms Association Ph: (780)439-1394 Fax: (780)439-4091 natpres@nfa.ca Box 1779, EDMONTON AB, T5J 2P1 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:52:21 -0600 From: Chris taylor Subject: FAC/PAL As i had previously mentioned my F.A.C. application was recently denied or refused? After 8 months the local firearms officer out of Wingham, Ont, has contacted me to let me know this and has now requested a HOME visit to serve me my notice of denial or what ever they intend to call it. No doubt they will be interested in searching my home and likley confiscating my already LEGALLY owned firearms. I have taken the precaution of removing my guns to a safe house (Securley stored)And have the only key, My question now is, Are my compound bows considered firearms or weapons and can they take them as well? This will be the second such seizure, I had my guns seized in 93 and was charged with un safe storage, according to the law My guns were proved to be safley stored and returned to me. All charges were withdrawn. Wich apparently means nothing, as I am still being treated as a criminal and once again having my privicey and freedoms infringed upon. I think I,ll hide my bows just in case. Chris Taylor. N.F.A. Member ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:52:22 -0600 From: Peter Kearns Subject: Re: Personal Info request to annoy the feds Peter Cronhelm wrote: > " I am not a fed (ask Peter Kearns who can vouch for > me although he may just add in a few comments at the same time. :) ") Peter Kearns wrote: Cronhelm is a valued and respected friend of mine, and he possess excellent taste in ladies, (one in particular, who will no doubt hug and kiss me for that!) Although his taste in dogs is somewhat strange, and his choice of firearms is a little eccentric. He sure as heck isn't a fed, or I wouldn't drink with him, or invite him to my home. Peter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:51:49 -0600 From: bill.taylor@videeotron.ca Subject: Outdoor range standards Our outdoor range met the 1993 Quebec police standards for pistols and restricted rifles. This included the requirement for overhead baffles filled with 6 inches of crushed rock. These structures were made of aspenite (chipboard) and covered with asphalted paper. While inexpensive, the material turned out to be a poor choice, as they are starting to loose strength due to rain infiltration. Pictures can be seen at: http://pages.infinit.net/pistol/ We are presently looking for an improved design to replace the baffles before they deteriorate. Any ideas or suggestions would be most welcome; please reply directly to: bill.taylor@videotron.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:52:10 -0600 From: "Tom Zinck" Subject: Grief Industry makes CD to make money from Montreal Massacre http://www.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/1999/11/23/lepine991123 - -Tom Reform, OHA, NFA, ARRA, JPFO, NRA, GOA http://www.comnet.ca/~tzinck Frustrate a Liberal : Lease a gun today ! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:51:59 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: DUELING HUNTING POEMS PUBLICATION: The Moncton Times and Transcript DATE: 99.11.23 SECTION: Forum PAGE: D8 Hunting poem leapt to mind To The Editor: I thought of this little poem when I read the letters to the editor about hunting in Friday's paper. It is by Walter de la Mare. Here's to all the hunters! Dianne Warren, Rexton (Via e-mail) - -----Original Message----- From: John Perocchio [mailto:paracorp@magma.ca] Sent: November 23, 1999 11:22 AM To: Moncton Times & Transcript Subject: Dedicated to Dianne Warren, Rexton...poetry lover...where ever she may be! Dear Editor, I so enjoyed Ms. Warren's poem that I too was inspired to pen something for her to "digest" while eating her next steak: Dedicated to Dianne Warren, Rexton...poetry lover... Anti-hunters are contract killers Oh how dull anti-hunters are Preferring their meals killed from afar No hunt for them, the righteous few Butchers killing all your "game" for you They wallow in a moral sea 'Cause their cows were killed in secrecy So get stuffed I say for them to hear My heritage is hunting, let's make that clear... Sincerely, John Perocchio Kanata, Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:42 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Gun registry is hitting the mark PUBLICATION: The Toronto Star DATE: 1999.11.24 SECTION: NEWS SOURCE: CANADIAN PRESS BYLINE: Nahlah Ayed Gun registry is hitting the mark; 1,000 had gun licences denied or revoked by the Firearms Centre OTTAWA - Ottawa's new gun registry system is hitting its intended targets, the Canadian Firearms Centre says. Almost 1,000 people were denied gun licences or had them revoked in the last year - the registry's first year of operation. The latest figures show that since last December, 548 new applications for licences to own firearms were refused for public safety reasons. Cases involving a refused individual who already owns guns are referred to local authorities and the guns are confiscated. An additional 451 licences were revoked because the holders no longer met eligibility requirements. That number is seven times higher than the grand total for the last five years, the centre says. "We're seven times more efficient at revoking licences to people who should not have guns," said Jean Valin of the centre. "And that's unprecedented." Over the same period, the system also helped block 181 potential gun sales after background checks. The system, which has met resistance since its inception, requires all firearms owners to get a licence by 2001 and to register each firearm they own before 2003. Critics have said the system is complex, costly and does nothing to enhance public safety. The centre says the latest numbers deflate those arguments. Guns can only be revoked for public safety reasons, said Valin. There are no other legal grounds for denying ownership. Those reasons could include a history of violent behaviour, mental instability, or if a person's history includes a conviction of a crime or a prohibition against owning a gun. In April, for example, a Newfoundland man who had obtained a Firearms Acquisition Certificate by giving false information was nabbed by the system. The person tried to buy a firearm and the new system picked up the discrepancy in information. An investigation uncovered a history of violence and a criminal record. His licence was revoked. Valin said the vast majority of gun owners will have no problem getting licences. It is estimated there are 7 million guns in Canada and 3 million owners. Of those, the system has records of 1.5 million firearms and almost 464,000 owners. The gun registry is also the subject of a challenge the Supreme Court will hear next year. Several provinces are questioning the constitutionality of the registry, saying Ottawa is meddling in an area of provincial responsibility. The firearms centre says the system will cost $120 million over five years and have annual operating costs of $60 million. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:35 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Fact missing PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Citizen DATE: 1999.11.25 EDITION: FINAL SECTION: News PNAME : Letters PAGE: A17 BYLINE: Tom Zinck SOURCE: The Ottawa Citizen Fact missing I have a great deal of respect for Heidi Rathjen for the passion she has for her cause. However, one critical piece of information was omitted. Heidi says that the tragic Montreal massacre was the reason she starting lobbying to ban firearms. Yet the coroner who investigated the shootings said gun control would not have made any difference, while better police work and better pre-hospitalization care might have saved lives. Heidi states that ``small calibre handguns are only made for killing.'' In fact, these types of handguns are used in Olympic competitions and many shooting sports. After the Department of Justice declared these firearms to be ``dangerous,'' it planned to confiscate them. However, it has constantly put this off due to the legal and practical problems with the Firearms Act. It seems that these firearms are not ``dangerous'' after all. Heidi also slanders the National Firearms Association by saying they are ``against government intervention.'' The NFA has always supported practical, effective firearms legislation, just not the costly, ineffective universal registry that Prime Minister Chretien is stubbornly supporting. Tom Zinck, Nepean ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #211 **********************************