Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:02:00 -0600 Message-Id: <200001141602.KAA07373@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 #251 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 Friday, January 14 2000 Volume 03 : Number 251 In this issue: Re: 911 delay 20 somethings CBC's "Shooting Holes in the Gun Laws" mysteriously altered date on court documents Comparisons of Countries -- the effectiveness of gun control registering candles Application for ATT in BC> Hi: Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package Feedback U.S. BLOCKS GUN SALES WITHOUT A GUN REGISTRY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 12:12:10 -0600 From: Peter Cronhelm Subject: Re: 911 delay > The hoplophobes in the crowd who prefer to let the police take > responsibility for their own safety should read the following > CAREFULLY. It took 7 minutes for the first cop to arrive and 2 1/2 > hours for the police to make a meaningfull move. A LOT can happen in 7 minutes. > > Peter Cronhelm > > > Terrifying time delay > > By JACKI LEROUX -- Ottawa Sun > > > > OTTAWA -- Two men trapped for two hours with a pair of their dead or dying colleagues implored a 911 operator to send help as they cowered in a sprawling bus garage, an inquest into last April's deadly shooting rampage was told yesterday. The OC Transpo massacre inquest is only two days old, and already lawyers for the victims' families are questioning how police responded to the tragedy. > > > > Following a nearly 30-minute tape in which an OC Transpo employee relays details to a 911 operator from inside the garage where Pierre Lebrun had just gone on a shooting rampage, lawyer Lawrence Greenspon lashed out at regional police for inaction. > > > > "This is the first time we've heard this (tape)," said an outraged > > Greenspon, who represents some of the victims' families. "This is all very new evidence for us. Two men are lying there presumably either dying or dead, and where are the police? Where's the tactical squad?" > > > > On Day 2 of what is expected to be a lengthy coroner's inquest into last April's tragedy in which Lebrun killed four co-workers before turning the gun on himself, the five-person jury listened to recordings of two dramatic 911 calls placed by OC Transpo workers. > > > > One of the calls was from Claude Brazeau, who, along with co-worker Dave Halloran, hid in a stockroom office where two of the victims -- Clare Davidson and David Lemay -- had been shot. > > > > Also shot to death were Brian Guay and Harry Schoenmakers. > > > > "There's a guy with a gun at OC Transpo!" Brazeau is heard yelling into the phone. "His name is Pierre Lebrun! > > > > 'THEY'RE NOT MOVING' > > > > "They're not moving," Brazeau is heard saying later, referring to the two dead men nearby. "Holy s---," he repeats over and over, his breathing heavy > > with emotion. > > > > The jury heard how that call was placed at 2:40 p.m., but it took the regional police's tactical squad a full half-hour to arrive on scene. > > > > "It's quite clear that these two men were very close to death and there's a whole half- hour here where nothing's being done," Greenspon said. "Perhaps something could have been done" to save the victims, he said. > > > > Greenspon grilled squad supervisor Staff Sgt. Mike Ryan about the time it took for their Immediate Action Team to move in. > > > > Ryan testified it took at least 20 minutes for the IAT to pull together since most of its members had been deployed to the Elgin St. courthouse that day to protect a witness. The team arrived on scene about 3:10 p.m., a half-hour after Brazeau's call was placed. > > > > Police evidence has established officers were having great difficulty > > locating the precise area of the shootings in the 20,000-sq.-metre garage. For at least an hour after the shooting, police had nothing to work from but a roughly hand-drawn map. > > > > Ryan acknowledged he was aware of the phone contact even before he arrived at the site 20 minutes after the shooting. > > > > Brazeau not only immediately identified the shooter, he gave a physical description while Halloran relayed the fact Lebrun was using a hunting rifle and was an experienced hunter. > > > > "Does he wear glasses?" asked the operator. > > "No," said Brazeau. "He stutters." > > By the time all five of the victims were found inside the garage, nearly > > 21/2 hours had passed since the 911 call. > > > > Greenspon questioned why Brazeau was kept on the line with a 911 operator rather than being transferred to the tactical squad so he could assist them with getting inside the massive building. > > > > "You have the benefit of having someone sitting in a room in the middle of it all, where two people had just been shot," Greenspon said. "They had somebody who works there, who can describe the location of where the shootings have taken place, who the shooter is, who he shot and what condition they're in. Why did it take at least 40 minutes before that call was put through to the command post?" > > > > THE INQUEST > > Background on the coroner's inquest into the OC Transpo shootings, which began Monday: > > > > HOW LONG: One month > > > > WHO PRESIDES: A five-member jury > > > > WHO WILL TESTIFY: Dozens of witnesses will take the stand and testify about the shooting and provide testimony on gunman Pierre Lebrun. Witnesses include OC Transpo workers who escaped the rampage, Lebrun's two surviving > > victims, Rick Guertin and Joe Casagrande, senior OC Transpo managers, regional police officers, psychiatrists and Lebrun's father, Rene. > > > > THE MANDATE: The jury will hear all the evidence associated with the shootings and, without assigning guilt, come up with a list of > > recommendations on how similar incidents can be avoided in the future. The recommendations could be specific to OC Transpo or could suggest changes to existing laws. > > > > DUO WAIT IN FEAR > > The following is part of a conversation captured on 911 tapes between two OC Transpo employees as a pair of shot co-workers lay bleeding in the same room. > > CLAUDE BRAZEAU: Dave, Dave, did you lock the door? No! No! Don't unlock it. > > Shut the lights off, okay Dave ... oh my God. > > > > DAVE HALLORAN: What's that noise ... Don't touch that shell. > > > > CLAUDE BRAZEAU: Yeah, stay on the ground. > > > > DAVE HALLORAN: They're (police) taking a long f---ing time to get there. > > It's Pierre Lebrun, he's the guy who shot him. > > > > CLAUDE BRAZEAU: We gotta be patient. They can't come in just like that. Does > > he have a lot of blood, Dave? > > > > TIMELINE > > > > 2:40 p.m. -- Two 911 calls are placed from OC Transpo workers. One of them > > from Claude Brazeau is made from inside the St. Laurent Blvd. garage stock > > room office where Clare Davidson and David Lemay lay after being shot. > > > > 2:47 p.m. -- The first regional police patrol officer arrives on scene and > > begins blocking off the site. > > > > 3:09 p.m. -- The tactical squad arrives. > > > > 3:40 p.m. -- After receiving an interior map of the garage, the squad moves > > in. > > > > 3:49 p.m. -- Officers move towards the area of the stock room offices where > > Brazeau is hiding. They are delayed considerably by the fact the area is > > wide open, making it the perfect spot for a gunman to take potshots at them. > > They can see the body of Brian Guay through a doorway, but it takes several > > minutes to pry the door open. > > > > 4:35 p.m. -- They reach Guay. > > > > 4:40 p.m. -- They reach the bodies of Davidson and Lemay. > > > > 4:45 p.m. -- They reach the body of Lebrun. > > > > 5:06 p.m. -- They reach the body of Harry Schoenmakers. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 12:12:03 -0600 From: "John Evers" Subject: 20 somethings > Peter is right the best way to get people into the sport is to have an > open house. We had our first one this past year and it was a great > success. Our regular membership is about 200 people. WE ATTRACTED at least 20 new members as a result of the weekend!!!!!!! Our club also has a very strong Junior Program which has about 40 teens and preteens on a given Friday night. As they say gettem young!!! > Regards > John Evers ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 12:12:03 -0600 From: "Randy Nelson" Subject: CBC's "Shooting Holes in the Gun Laws" > Dear CBC, > > After reviewing several excerpts from your Ottawa broadcast of last evening: > "Shooting Holes in the Gun Laws", I've come away with two, very contrasting > observations. One, I don't feel that the Firearm community's voice was properly represented. And two, I essentially agree with much of what was said. > That the CBC again, did not impartially represent the views of the > Recreational Firearms Community (RFC) comes as no surprise -- blatant > Enright-ism! I do find it curious however, that last night's discussion was > not another CBC-sponsored, firearm trashing session. Rather, talk was > surprisingly focused on ways in which only sane, responsible citizens should > gain access to firearm use. At the risk of sounding somewhat audacious, > could it be that the lamp of commonsense is finally illumining the minds of > some within the sans-firearm crowd? > > Canada’s firearm owners demand effective gun-related crime control. The > National Firearms Association (NFA) has long been in favor of extensive > personal background checks, safety training and follow-up for candidate > firearm owners. Placing legislative emphasis on the firearm-owner rather > than on his or her property, is the cornerstone of the NFA’s Practical > Firearms Controls System (PFCS). The PFCS is a functional and cost effective > alternative to the Liberals’ irrational firearm registration ruse. > > As a responsible firearm owner, I’ll refrain from sending Wendy any roses > just yet. But, might perceptions be changing? Gosh, if we continue moving in > this direction, we might even see a united gun control solution; one that > actually works! > Randy Nelson > Edmonton, AB > "The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in > insidious encroachment by men of zeal, > well-meaning, but without understanding." > - Louis D. Brandeis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 12:12:04 -0600 From: Brian Drader Subject: mysteriously altered date on court documents > > People have noted several cases, including mine, where police have failed to return firearms after being so ordered by a judge. While I don't particularly want to take my case to court again, I figured I'd give it a try if my firearms weren't returned in short order. With that in mind, I sent a letter to my MP (cc'd to Garry Breitkreuz, Anne McLellan and my local CFO) in which I demanded the immediate return of my firearms and the updating of my address information, which has been incorrect for more than three years now. I spoke with Constable Reis of the Manitoba CFO's office today, and it seems like I'll see my property (at least, that which hasn't gone "missing" en route to the evidence log) returned ASAP. The Winnipeg Police Service have no lawful authority to detain my firearms, which have been ordered returned by a judge. The constable I was speaking with attributed the disconnect to a old prohibition order which somehow reads "2000" instead of "1999". That's odd, it doesn't read that way on my copies, which I immediately faxed over. Yet another reason to document everything, if you don't already. I'd like to think that even Annie's minions wouldn't stoop so low as to tamper with court documents, but... someone apparently did. > > Cheers, > Brian Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:01:43 -0600 From: armen@ULSTER.NET (by way of mike ) Subject: Comparisons of Countries -- the effectiveness of gun control > Thought you might find this interesting... > > Arm > > -------------------------------------------------- > IT'S NOT JUST GUN CONTROL LAWS > National attention has been given recently to the notion that foreign > countries that harshly restrict gun ownership have crime rates much lower > than that of the United States. Advocates of anti-gun agendas often make > this claim but fail, however, to acknowledge important civil rights > differences between criminal justice systems. > > JAPAN > Here are some aspects of Japan's criminal justice system that those > captivated by gun control fail to acknowledge: > · Japanese police routinely search citizens at will and twice a year pay > "home visits" to citizens' residences. > · After arrest a suspect may be detained without bail for up to 28 days > before a prosecutor must bring him before a judge. Amnesty International > calls Japan's police custody system a "flagrant violation of United Nations > human rights principles." > · Suspects' confession rate in Japan is 95%. > · Suspects who stand trial have no right to a jury. > · Japanese trial conviction rate is 99.91%. > · The Tokyo Bar Association says Japanese police "engage in torture or > illegal treatment. Even in cases where suspects claimed to have been > tortured and their bodies bore physical traces to back their claims, courts > have still accepted their confessions." > > GREAT BRITAIN > Great Britain has lower handgun homicide rates than the US, but also lower > rates of homicide with knives, feet and fists. As British police > superintendent Colin Greenwood asked, "is it also suggested that knives are > less readily available in England than they are in the USA, or that > American criminals have more hands and feet than their British > counterparts?" > · Britain places strict qualifications on freedom of speech and the right to > assemble, allowing, for example, book bans, censorship of videos and prior > restraint of speech. > · Parliament increasingly gives police more power to stop and search > vehicles as well as pedestrians. Britain has no Bill of Rights and no true > equivalent of the Supreme Court with the power to strike down > unconstitutional laws. > · Police may arrest any person they "reasonably suspect" supports an illegal > organization. > · Civil jury trials in Great Britain have been abolished in all cases except > libel; criminal jury trials are rare. > · Police are allowed to interrogate suspects who have asked that > interrogation stop and are allowed to keep defense lawyers away from > suspects under interrogation for limited periods. There are strong > disincentives for suspects questioned by police to invoke the right to > remain silent. > · Evidence derived from leads developed during a coerced confession is > allowed. > · The grand jury, an ancient common law institution, was abolished in 1933. > Britain's years of lowest gun crime came in an era when gun controls were > virtually non-existent. Increasingly stringent gun controls have been > followed by increasing gun crime. Despite tight licensing procedures, > handgun-related robbery rose 200% during the past dozen years, five times as > fast as the rise in the US > > CANADA > Dr. Brandon Centerwall of the University of Washington found that from 1976 > to 1980, ethnically and economically similar areas in the US and Canada > had virtually identical homicide rates despite their differing firearms > laws. > · illegally seized evidence is admissible in Canadian courts, so Canadians > have no protection from warrantless police searches. > · Canadian police, unlike their US counterparts, are not always required > to say what they are searching for. > · Freedom of association is restricted by the government's keeping tabs on > alleged "subversive" groups. Security services maintain files on one of > every 40 Canadians. > · Canadian prosecutors are far more likely than their American brethren to > bring criminal charges in what we would consider self-defense cases. In > Canada, self-protection is not considered a valid reason for owning > firearms. > Canadian limits on gun ownership for personal protection may have increased > some crimes. From 1978 to 1988, the burglary rate increased 25%, surpassing > the US rate. Half of Canada's burglaries are of occupied homes, compared > to only 10% in the US > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:01:37 -0600 From: Don Shesnicky Subject: registering candles > Just before posting this I had an thought, read the below and > then the real piece of info included afterwards. From the > www.guntruths.com site that someone recently posted about: > > Robert W. Lee of The New American made an excellent point in the > March 29, 1999 "Gun Report." Mr. Lee cited a January 7, 1999, > Associated Press report regarding an 82 percent increase in deaths > caused by firearms since 1990. Firearms "misuse" caused 126 deaths... > > > Now here's the real one: > > Robert W. Lee of The New American made an excellent point in the > March 29, 1999 "Gun Report." Mr. Lee cited a January 7, 1999, > Associated Press report regarding an 82 percent increase in fires > caused by candles since 1990. Candle "misuse" caused 126 deaths, > 9,930 fires and $170.6 million in property damage in 1996, alone. > Based on this alarming increase in candle-related injury and death, > Mr. Lee wondered "If gun makers are held accountable for injuries > and deaths resulting from the misuse of their products, then why > not, say candle makers?" Good point. We should register candles > and limit the public access to them. Let's "do it for the children." > > Yep good point. And if you did substitute firearms for candles in > that piece, they'd slam it in our face. > > Don > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:01:36 -0600 From: "Robert Merz" Subject: Application for ATT in BC> Hi: > My old Permit to Carry is about to expire in early March, so after > reading various articles in the digest I completed an application for an > ATT which I sent via registered mail. In my application I filled out > section B (firearm information) with: > > PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A RENEWAL; IT IS NOT AN "AB > INITIO" APPLICATION FOR AN AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSPORT. > ALSO PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A DEMAND, MADE UNDER THER CRIMINAL CODE OF > CANADA, FOR A RENEWAL OF THE 1998/1999 PERMIT TO CARRY/AUTHORIZATION TO > TRANSPORT (PHOTOCOPY ENCLOSED) WITH THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS THAT > WERE ON THE 1998 AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSPORT > > I copied this information word for word from a post to the digest (V3 > #227) from Kelly Weiss. > > The CFC (BC Branch) received the application on Monday, Jan.10 and I received a phone call from one of the staff on Thursday the 13th. She > insisted that I had to provide the firearms details requested in section > B before they would issue an ATT. When I explained that I believed that > the old Permit to Carry had been converted to a new ATT and therefore > the information requested would not be required as it had not been > required in 1999 she cut me off mid explanation and told me that the > Permit to Carry was entirely different from the new ATT and could not be > compared to it. After she was done I continued with my explanation that > with the letter of extension for 1999 my old Permit to Carry had been > converted into a new Authorization to Transport with the same > conditions. She then told me that the matter was under investigation by > her bosses and she would get back to me after they had made a decision. > So if the matter is under investigation I can assume the only reason for > her call was to try and harrass me into relenting and giving her the > information needed to further restrict my Permit to Carry/ Authorization > to Transport, as the matter was obviously under investigation before her > call and she was obviously aware of this. > > If anyone has any advice regarding this matter please email me. > > Robert Merz > > merz@uniserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:01:42 -0600 From: "Mike Bonner" Subject: Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package > Al, thank God you do not have "say no to gun control" on that long list of > good fed-bashing stuff. It really did not help the cause previously. > Mike Bonner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:01:34 -0600 From: Angie and Randy Schmidt Subject: Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package Feedback > Hello Al Dorans, > > I'm glad to see progress on the sign package. The topics for the front > of the signs are very good, except for the sign #19 reference to > recreational "genocide". The word genocide (even if it often really > does follow from gun control) should be saved more specifically for real > deaths. Sometimes we can loss credibility on our key arguments by > overstating smaller issues. Similarly, adding a "?" after sign #22's > jail reference seems, to me at least, to be a more believable point. > Several of the Liberal issues on the backs of the signs are weak, hard > to interpret, or play against some people's emotions, examples are > "Karate Cretch Assault", the "... Trapping Disaster", "Pension Tax > Grabs" (I am a Federal Civil Servant, so I am familiar with this), and > "... Starving Fiasco". > > Thanks for all the good work. Your public references to Canada, U.S., > and Norway as U.N. best places to live, corresponding to high levels of > firearm ownership, makes a very positive point for us in discussions. > > Randy Schmidt. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:01:41 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: U.S. BLOCKS GUN SALES WITHOUT A GUN REGISTRY January 13, 2000 > The Editor > The Fredericton Daily Gleaner > 1 page fax sent to: (506) 452-7405 > > Dear Editor: > > Re: U.S. BLOCKS GUN SALES WITHOUT A GUN REGISTRY - WHY CAN'T CANADA? > > My previous letter seems to have provoked the bureaucrats in the Department > of Justice ("Firearms program already paying dividends" by Louis Cormier, > Media Relations Officer, Canadian Firearms Centre Ottawa, The Daily Gleaner, > Editorial Section, Page A6, January 11, 2000). Mr. Cormier responds just > like a Liberal politician - ignoring the truth and spreading more manure. > > He fumbles around desperately trying to convince your readers to ignore > their good old common sense and believe that the three hundred > million-dollar gun registry is cost-effective because it blocked 235 gun > sales. What Mr. Cormier failed to mention in his letter was that one of the > gun sales they blocked was a sale to an officer in the Calgary City Police - > a man who carries a gun to work every day. > > Sadly, the truth is out there but it cannot be found in the Department of > Justice. All anyone has to do is read the newspapers to expose the fallacy > of Mr. Cormier's arguments. Last month, the Regina Leader-Post reported > that in the United States 160,000 people were prevented from buying firearms > in the last year using computerized instant background checks. The U.S. > blocked all these legal gun sales without a gun registry, why can't Canada? > Sincerely, > Garry Breitkreuz, MP > Yorkton-Melville > House of Commons > Ottawa, Ontario > K1A 0A6 > (613) 992-4394 ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #251 **********************************