Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:58:16 -0600 Message-Id: <199911251458.IAA13956@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 Ottawa Citizen: Registry a mess... CFC - Key Statistics on November 12, 1999 Re: FAC/PAL ATI Request Levi's really cares about your business!! FW: NEWS RELEASE Re: [alert] FED UP III Rally Survey Internet-Guns Why are M.A.D.D. Canada & others diluting their message with anti-gun Ads... communique_-_le_24_novembre_1999 Mr. Valin quote Calgary Herald Nov 24 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:53:44 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: Re: A "MUST READ" FOR FERAL MONITORS AND ANNIE!!! Pt.II >"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... Er... No, actually. The Firearms Act does NOT require you to have "membership" in an approved club or range to get an ATT. The March 1998 Regulations do not require that either. Under the previous Act, a commercial range had to have a shooting club as part of the operation because only a shooting club could get approval to operate a shooting range. That allowed the firearms control bureaucrats to say that they would not issue permits to take guns to shooting ranges if you were not a club member, because no one but a club member could shoot at a range! That was never true -- many clubs allowed casual shooters on day passes at their ranges -- but they used it. Under today's law, however, approval to operate a shooting range is available to "any PERSON (individual or corporation -- emphasis added)" under the terms of Firearms Act section 29. Therefore, when the CFO's office demanded that I prove membership in a club, I simply pointed out that membership in a club is no longer required. I can legally shoot at a purely commercial range without belonging to ANY club. Mutter, mutter, mutter... He was not happy with me, but what can he do? Simon says, "It is intelligent to KNOW exactly what the law requires. Only when you know the law better than they do can you tie theirr tails into small, painful knots." 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: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:29 -0600 From: "Carlo Robazza" Subject: Ottawa Citizen: Registry a mess... "Federal firearms registry a mess, confidential consultants' report says" http://www.ottawacitizen.com/national/991124/3193700.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:47 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: CFC - Key Statistics on November 12, 1999 Firearms Act is already making a difference http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/important_info/difference/Default.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:53:40 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: Re: FAC/PAL >Are my >compound bows considered firearms or weapons and can they take them as >well? NFA ADVICE: No, they are not covered by the Firearms Act or the firearms sections of the Criminal Code. Only crossbows are covered. A pistol crossbow is now a "prohibited weapon" by Order in Council (a pity, because they are handy for stringing wiring above false ceilings), and ordinary crossbows require a licence or "grandfathered" FAC for purchase. Crossbows do not have to be registered. 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: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:53:20 -0600 From: Brian Drader Subject: ATI Request I requested ALL records and documents via an ATI request to the RCMP. The request was (purposefully, it appears) misinterpreted as a request for a list of my registered firearms. Since I have only one, the list was short. However, it was entertaining nonetheless since FRAS has again failed to update my address upon request. I called the CFC 800# and was transferred to a person who informed me they could not help me and I would need to call the 800# again. Next, I called the CFC (30 seconds after my first call) and was told that they could not transfer me due to system problems. When the associate also refused to issue me the number to contact the ATI people, I asked for her supervisor. The supervisor also refused to assist and eventually I was transferred to the center manager's voice mail. Next day I called the 800# again and was informed that the center manager would be calling me. No call so far. It appears that they're stonewalling to wait out the 15 or 30 day ap! peals time limit. Lack of meaningful response to ATI requests is legally actionable, and it looks as though I'll be taking some action ASAP if things aren't resolved to my satisfaction. Cheers, Brian ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:53:12 -0600 From: "Jason Hayes" Subject: Levi's really cares about your business!! Here's the reply that I received from Levi's for my e-mail about their anti-gun page. I can see that they are really serious about making sure any concern a potential customer might have is immediately dealt with. On 11/23/99 you responded to our `Talkback Response` form. Thanks for your feedback. We're here, we're listening, and we're committed to making Levi'sMusic.com your channel. Sincerely, The Levi's Music Team cmg@levismusic.com This is the text of the complaint that I sent them. Re: your anti-firearm petition at http://www.levismusic.com/fuse99/pax_petition.html Please note that your villification of firearms and firearms owners, coupled with your company's decline into politically correct relativism has ensured that you have lost any member of my family as potential customers. Simply put, Levi's jeans will not see the color of my hard earned money until they publicly denounce their anti-civil liberties stance. Furthermore, your petition has been widely circulated throughout civil-libertarian and firearms related discussion groups on the internet. Levi's anti-firearm / anti-civil liberties stance has alienated several thousand firearms owners. Rest assured that they will react to Levi's anti-civil liberty stance as I have (i.e. you will not see their hard earned money either). Sincerely Jason Hayes Jason Hayes B.Sc., Tech Graduate Studies Student, U of Calgary Faculty of Environmental Design (Environmental Science) Personal : jthayes@home.com, hayes_jt@yahoo.com http://www.members.home.net/jthayes ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:31 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: FW: NEWS RELEASE Distribution list: The Hon. Allan Rock, Minister of Justice Copies: The Right Hon. Jean Chr=E9tien, Prime Minister of Canada Garry Breitkreuz, MP Clifford Lincoln, MP (Lachine - Lac-St.-Louis) Pierre Bourque, multimedia journalist Nov. 24, 1999 Dear Minister Rock, As the attached press release attests (as currently seen on "Bourque Newswatch", http://www.bourque.org), the Reform Party of Canada MP for Yorkton-Melville and Official Opposition Firearms Critic has once = thrown in his "2=A2" worth on a controversial issue which is obviously not prompted as much by his ridings constituents as it is by the "right-wing" platform of the party he represents in his capacity of "Official Opposition Firearms Critic". I have long been an advocate for the most rigid possible firearm legislation in this country. It is an issue that has become very familiar to the electorate since the =C9cole Polytechnique massacre = (Marc L=E9pine) in Montreal all those years ago. Since then, our neighbors to the South have experienced tragic incident after tragic incident involving crimes committed by firearms which, had their legislatures been successful in controlling to some measure, = would not have been so readily available. Shortly after the Littleton, Colorado high school massacre, Canada suffered a similar "blemish" in Alberta. Other incidents, too numerous to mention here include the shootings at the Voyageur terminal in Ottawa, etc... In fact, Mr. Breitkreuz's last attempt to bring his outrage about Canadian legislation (Bill C-68) was ill-timed (for HIS purposes) as it was released just prior to the breaking news of the Littleton massacre. Now, here he comes again. I have written several articles on this subject and have communicated with activists on both sides of the issue. One prominent fact emerges and that a good portion of Canadians who oppose Bill C-68 actually cite portions of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (Thomas Jefferson's "...right to bear arms...") as an excuse for NOT restricting the ownership and use of firearms in Canada. This is, first and foremost, a very sad comment on the literacy rate of some Canadians and secondly, it is a myth that groups, such as the Reform Party of Canada and/or selected members within their pparliamentary caucus, refuse to clarify and straighten out. The result, of course is the sporadic groundswell of opposition to extremely necessary legislation = in this matter. With specific regard to the administrative "nightmare" that has become the earliest stages of Bill C-68's process, I happen to (somewhat reluctantly) agree with Mr. Breitkreuz but ONLY in the sense that, instead of having the legislation stricken from the books, the registration of firearms (and enforcement thereof) should be = drastically improved, revamped and intensified. Immediately following the Littleton massacre, I had intended to do a piece on what I termed as "Gladiator Mentality" in the U.S. Of course, the untimely addition of mr. Breitkreuz's original press release on the gun issue added to my piece in that I was definitely able to put a Canadian face on the issue. I remember writing that instead of merely requiring gun owners to have their weapons registered, our federal government should actually legislate that ALL casual firearms (other than for police and military purposes) be kept in federally sponsored and run repositories = throughout the country where an owner could claim his/her weapon only after having presented documents proving the reason he was doing so (permits, licences, etc...). After the period for which he/she would have access to the weapon, it would have to be returned to the repository from = which it came failing which an arrest warrant would be issued proclaiming the owner as allegedly being in possession of an illegal firearm. >From what I can see has occured, the current method for registering firearms is in serious need of re-organization. Until the Canadian electorate can fully come to its senses and enact much stricter firearm legislation, there will always be that "Sword of Damocles" hanging over the electorate's head and no one could accurately predict when or where the next shooting will come from next. Under the current provisions of Bill C-68 meanwhile, we should rejoice, rather than condemn it. After all, if the law can prevent even ONE accidental or intentional shooting, it has fulfilled a good portion of its "raison d'=EAtre". The inconveniences and grumbles cited by Mr. Breitkreuz and his "gun totin' backwater cronies" are, therefore, ill-founded and nothing but a nuisance to the respect of the law and = the electorate it is designed to protect and serve. Sincere regards, Peter McCrindle Pointe Claire, QC (in the federal riding of Lachine - Lac-St.-Louis) http://www.garry-breitkreuz.com/breitkreuzgpress/Fire54.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:53:31 -0600 From: "Larry Whitmore - Ontario Handgun Assoc." Subject: Re: [alert] FED UP III Rally Survey Al, The Board of Directors of the OHA have stated that the OHA will support the rally in Ottawa whenever it is held. That would probably entail financial support as well, if and when requested. Please keep us advised and let us know if there is anything we can do to assist. Best Regards Larry Whitmore Executive Manager Ontario Handgun Association 2055 Dundas Street East, Unit 105 Mississauga, On L4X 2V9 (905) 238 3090 fax (905) 238 5269 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:53:56 -0600 From: " Name Withheld by Request" Subject: Internet-Guns *NB* - If this is used in the Digest, will you please remove evidence of who and where it was submitted from please. Thank You. TWIMC: Came across this item today. I never saw the web site, but obviously based on a complaint to the "authorities", action against this individual was commenced. I can read more into this than I care to mention. What other actions are/will be taken based on "a complaint" (or are "they" watching)? Is freedom of expression on the Internet "against the rules"? We are not amused! http://www/V3/newsfeedca/stories/print/z112104.html Web 'humour' lands man in hot water Monday, 22 November 1999 HALIFAX (CP) A NOVA Scotia man's clumsy attempt at Internet humour over the Colorado school shootings ended Tuesday with his sentencing for careless storage of firearms. Police seized two weapons from Richard Cecil Billard, 28, after his Web site showed him holding a shotgun and referred to the trench coat mafia. Twenty-five students at the Columbine high school in Littleton, Colo., were killed by two members of the outcast group last April 20. Billard pleaded guilty Sept. 30 to the firearms charge. He was placed on one year's probation and ordered to perform 25 hours of community service. "What he did was engage in a very stupid activity," Judge Castor Williams said in handing down the conditional discharge in provincial court. Police traced Billard to his home after someone complained about the site, which was posted less than a week after the killings. They found two shotguns, one stuffed behind a sofa and the other leaning against the wall of his computer room. Both weapons were working and neither had trigger locks to prevent firing. Billard's wife, Lisa, said in a presentence report that her husband misjudged the "vastness" of the Internet. "The Web page was meant to be humorous as those who know him know he's the complete opposite of the image portrayed," the presentence report said. (Halifax Daily News) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:55 -0600 From: "John Perocchio" Subject: Why are M.A.D.D. Canada & others diluting their message with anti-gun Ads... Hello All, I have just re-read the letter from Robert E. Pretty regarding the = M.A.D.D. Canada commercial on CBC TV (see Cdn-Firearms-Digest Vol. 3 # = 208 or reprinted in it's entirety at the end of this e-mail unless = edited) which portrays firearms owners as drunken car drivers. You will = recall the ongoing campaign in Ontario to stop the spousal abuse = commercial that casts firearms owners in the role of violent abusers. In = my 25+ years of firearms lobbying I have come to understand that not = much happens by mistake, consequently I find it no surprise that, with = the Registry in major trouble and C-68 falling into significant = disrepute with even it's original supporters, it would not be = inconceivable that the image of firearms & owners needs re-inventing. = This being the case, has the re-invention been done on a subliminal = basis? This may be the question to ask M.A.D.D. and, in Ontario, anyone = still airing the playing the anti-gun spousal abuse ad. When major, & worthy, institutions begin to dilute their messages by = playing federal politics you know this nation is in trouble (in case = you just woke up from a deep Liberal La-La Land sleep!).=20 Perhaps it's time to remind these people that 25% of this nation own = firearms (7+ million owners / 21+ million firearms), support, volunteer = & donate to their causes & vote.... Send them a message! John Perocchio=20 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ------- MADD Canada 6507C Mississauga Road Mississauga, ON Canada L5N 1A6 Toronto area: (905) 813-6233 Toll-free: 1-800-665-6233 Fax: (905) 813-8920=20 Web site: http://www.madd.ca/ >From their site:...To learn more about MADD Canada's public policy = agenda, regularly visit this Hot Issues webpage. To get involved and = help MADD Canada make a difference by working with our country's = law-makers, send a e-mail message expressing your interests to = assistance@madd.ca, or phone the National Office at 1-800-665-6233. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:52:50 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: communique_-_le_24_novembre_1999 communique le 24 novembre 1999 Pour publication immediate un rapport pricewaterhousecoopers fait etat du fiasco du registre federal des armes a feu < Meme s'il y a 70 % moins de demandes que prevu - il ne suffira pas de rafistoler les systemes et les procedures pour eliminer l'arriere. > Ottawa - Garry Breitkreuz, depute de Yorkton-Melville et porte-parole de l'Opposition officielle pour les armes a feu, a lance aujourd'hui un autre pave dans la mare du systeme federal d'enregistrement des armes a feu. < La Loi sur l'acces a l'information est en train de devenir un veritable cauchemar pour le ministre de la Justice >, declare Breitkreuz. < La seule table des matieres du rapport PriceWaterhouseCoopers sans compter les 74 pages de texte se lit comme une histoire d'horreur ecrite pour des bureaucrates par Stephen King. > Voici seulement quelques exemples : < Il y a des arrieres partout dans le systeme - L'acheminement du travail est inflexible et inefficient - Le traitement des exceptions est la norme - Le systeme n'est pas concu en vue de l'efficience operationnelle - La structure d'organisation en place ressemble davantage a celle d'un projet - La structure d'organisation en devenir ne favorisera pas la productivite operationnelle. > < Maintenant nous savons pourquoi les deputes recoivent tellement de plaintes. Le systeme d'enregistrement des armes a feu tout entier est un fouillis pur et simple >, declare Breitkreuz. < Le gouvernement a commis l'erreur classique de ne pas mettre a l'essai les systemes bureaucratiques avant d'en faire essuyer les platres au public. Pas etonnant que les couts aient grimpe a plus de 300 millions de dollars, soit trois fois et demi le budget originel de 85 millions. La lecture des recommandations des consultants m'amene a croire que la bureaucratie va augmenter de facon exponentielle et que les couts vont continuer de monter en fleche.> Voici quelques-unes des constatations alarmantes du rapport PriceWaterhouseCoopers : * Les demandes de permis s'elevent a 10 p. 100 des previsions. * Seulement 13 p. 100 des 41 500 demandes de permis recues ont ete traitees. * Seulement 2 p. 100 des 29 500 demandes d'enregistrement recues ont ete traitees. * Seulement 42 p. 100 des 19 800 demandes de cession d'armes a feu recues par telephone ont ete traitees. * < Il faut en moyenne 3 heures > pour effectuer une cession d'armes a feu [pas 15 minutes comme l'avait promis la ministre]. * < Ils doivent raccrocher lorsqu'on les appelle pour chercher ou en est le travail dans plus de 50 files d'appel. >. * Les arrieres historiques du Registre canadien des armes a feu ne diminuent pas de facon appreciable. * Le volume des plaintes et des demandes de renseignements est directement proportionnel au volume de l'arriere. Les consultants de PriceWaterhouseCooper en viennent a la conclusion suivante : < Il ne suffira pas de rafistoler les systemes et les procedures pour eliminer l'arriere. > Voici comment ils resument leur analyse : < Toutefois, si ces problemes de productivite ne sont pas regles, le Programme canadien de controle des armes a feu ne sera pas en mesure de remplir la tache qu'on en attend. > [c'est eux qui soulignent] < Au moins les Liberaux disposent-ils d'un autre exemple de la facon dont il ne faut pas s'y prendre >, conclut Breitkreuz. < La ministre de la Justice aura-t-elle le courage de < demanteler tout de suite un registre mal concu et inutile > comme le lui demandait le comite de redaction du Windsor Star le 17 novembre? > - -30- Pour obtenir des copies du rapport PriceWaterhouseCoopers : Yorkton : (306) 782-3309 Ottawa : (613) 992-4394 Courriel : breitg0@parl.gc.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:53:48 -0600 From: lundgark@telusplanet.net Subject: Mr. Valin quote Calgary Herald Nov 24 >The Calgary Herald has an article on A16 today entitled: "Consultant >shoots holes in firearms legislation" >But Jean Valin, spokesperson for the Canadian Firearms Centre, said that >there has been a substantial growth in productivity since the >PricewaterhouseCoopers advice. > >There were growing pains. "The report was quite helpful in identifying >areas where we could streamline and improve efficiency," Valin said. > >Before the registry opened last December, it would take an average of >six months to issue a firearms acquisition certificate. Now a properly >completed application can be processed in three or four months, he said. >A firearm transfer takes about 20 minutes after a sale if a dealer's >inventory has been sent to the centre. "Until April, that performance >was very spotty. Today it's much more consistent." Three to four months to issue a firearms possesion and acquisition license is totally unaceptable. Also Mr. Valin is incorrect in his statement regarding registration. I have purchased several firearms under the new sytem and not one of them took less than three weeks for the registration to be completed. All firearms were verified and were part of the dealers inventory "registered" with the Canadian Firearms Centre. According to the "letter of the law", the transfer cannot be completed until the registration certificate is in the possession of the firearms purchaser. Currently it is "policy" the firearm can be transfered on application to register. There are those of us who remember when a policy of transfer of restricted firearms was allowed on application, then the policy was recinded as it was "not the letter of the law". Suddenly transfers of registered firearms took up to six months as the purchaser needed the registration certificate before they could take possession. IT WILL HAPPEN THIS WAY AGAIN. I am fed up with the deceit and misinformation coming from agents speaking on behalf of the Minister of Justice and the Canadian firearms Centre. I am also fed up with being advised by agents of the federal government to act in a manner contrary to the firearms act and criminal code of Canada. I am concerned there is not a list of those who are prohibited from possessing firearms publically available so the public can help the police enforce court ordered prohibitions. There is no increased penalty in the firearms act for stealing a firearm, nor is there any protection for firearms owners. If the firearms act was about keeping firearms out of the possession of those who should not have them, it fails on all counts - miserably! Karen & Jerrold Lundgard Peace River, Alberta mailto:lundgark@telusplanet.net ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #211 **********************************