Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:36:45 -0600 Message-Id: <200001180136.TAA09079@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 #254 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 Monday, January 17 2000 Volume 03 : Number 254 In this issue: Wanted; Daisey Model 853C Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package Confiscation underway. admissability of evidence [Fwd: BOUNCE cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca: Approval required:] [none] Having a slow news day? Re: TAN generation Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #253 Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package Re: dreaded c-68 NFA RED WARNING: [none] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:33:03 -0600 From: Tom MacMillan Subject: Wanted; Daisey Model 853C Hello all, Son shoots air rifle in Army Cadets. New Daisy is beyond our means. Any one have a model 853C they would like to sell? I will pay postage. Must be this specific model to be used in Army Cadets. Muzzle velocity is 490 fps. ===== Tom & Pat MacMillan Ph:(902)673-3015 Model_43_Winchester@yahoo.com The above comments are my opinions and do not reflect the views of any organization. Please visit the National Firearm Association web pages at: http://www.nfa.ca/ Box 1, #9 Whidden Road Brookfield, NS, B0N 1C0 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:34:39 -0600 From: Christopher di Armani Subject: Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package While you're correct in saying that we cannot come out against the Young Offenders Act, you can bet your ass that C-68 was selected as the number for that bill for a VERY SPECIFIC reason. It muddies the waters and makes it that much harder for us to make our case to the public. So, we're going to have to be clear that we are fighting the Firearms Act, since that is what is now called since it was passed into law. Gotta love politicians.... At 08:33 PM 2000.01.16 -0600, you wrote: >Gentlemen, > lets be accurate with our plea for public support and info. Bill >C-68 is now the young offenders act. If you come out against that >you''ll >not get much support from the public. As far as legal gun owners in .....................> >our resorces. Mr Tomlison and co. are our best hope for owners. Keep up >the good work. Regs. Dale ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:23:18 -0600 From: Dan MacInnis Subject: Confiscation underway. News in the Lindsay (Ontario) Daily Post was (January 8, 2000) that the police had been called to a rural home near Omemee to investigate an incident not related to firearms. During the visit they saw shotguns and rifles, laid charges of careless storage for one and confiscated the balance, all long guns, shotguns and rifles. According to the police, (Ontario Provincial Police) the man was 32 years of age, had never owned an FAC, therefore it was proof he aquired the firearms illegally, as he would have been too young to own any before the FAC program began. He has been charged with aquiring a firearm or firearms illegally. So if I were not of legal age when the FAC program began, and had to register my guns, I would have to think twice if I never, over these years, had an FAC to obtain them. Confiscation has begun. Confirmation of this event can be obtained by contacting the Lindsay Daily Post and referring to the news story January 8th. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:23:55 -0600 From: dcmiller@mail.island.net (doug & karen miller) Subject: admissability of evidence I believe the critical point for the court is that "if the failure to use the evidence would embarrass the crown then the evidence is admissable". Locally we had a pot grower prosecuted based on evidence obtained by what the same trial same court ruled was an illegal search. The officers involved were not punished nor penalized in any way. Were I a cop and was aware of such policy there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that I would not hesitate to make illegal searches. If the degree of dishonesty eminating from the Dept of Justice and associated with firearms is any indication, I think we are going to see a progressive decrease in concern for the validity or accuracy of evidence as long as it achieves a conviction. I think for example that the RCMP forensic labs will be under increasing government pressure to supply the evidence the prosecution wants to hear rather than a concern with technical accuracy. I think most Canadians to some degree consider politicians to be puddles of slime but I think most also have felt that our judicial system and particularly the police forensic labs have been scrupulously honest. I think that the dishonesty of federal departments like the CFC coupled with some of the comments by Supt Buisson make me at least question just how honest they are or will continue to be. As an example posted on the digest I would suggest people recall the automatic rifle which police were able to create for a trial by using pistol primers and light loads in a rifle cartridge. Think about the dishonesty of Customs in the Kearns and McMurchie saga. Ultimately it makes you wonder how many Milgaards are out there undetected. Doug Mike R wrote > I just wanted to point out that this section of a previous posting: >> · illegally seized evidence is admissible in Canadian courts, so Canadians >> have no protection from warrantless police searches. >Is very misleading. Now I'm not naieve enough to think that illegally seized >evidence has never been admitted into a trial, but this post would lead one >to believe that it always is. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:32:59 -0700 From: Ian Parkinson Subject: [Fwd: BOUNCE cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca: Approval required:] From: E Wong Subject: Buy firearms from the states? I've been hearing people purhasing firearms from the States and bringing them back across the border. Have anyone done it recently? What's the procedure? Since the FFL in the US have to run a background check, is there any problems for Canadians to clear the system?? Enoch ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:26:52 -0600 From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: [none] From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca To: Breitkreuz.G@parl.gc.ca Subject: Re: Liberals spent 8 times more on gun registry than on cancer resear ch It's no surprise, just look who's in charge. Mr. Allan Rock was the Minister of Justice who brought in the gun law and now sits as Minister of Health overseeing cancer research in Canada. Ian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:29:56 -0600 From: Ken Pisichko Subject: Having a slow news day? On the weekend I sent a copy of Gary Breitkreuz' article (from CFD) regarding underfunding cancer research vis-a-vis costs of gun registration to various media types as shown in the attached header. Guess what greeted me when I was listening to the 6 AM (or was it 6:30 AM) CBC news? An article on the Manitoba NDP government's support of the province of Alberta's anti-Firearms case before the Supreme Court of Canada. It stated the MB Justice Minister's concerns with the legislation and the lack of targeting the criminals who use firearms etc. I believe that more listers should write a short note to the local and national media types expressing their personal concerns. A copy of the Breitkreuz commentary would help too. In my humble opinion... Ken in Winnipeg - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 17:23:24 -0600 (CST) From: Ken Pisichko To: checkup@toronto.cbc.ca, thismorning@toronto.cbc.ca, worldat6@toronto.cbc.ca, letters@globeandmail.ca, hirst@freepress.mb.ca Subject: Having a slow news day? Hi. I am sending this note with a copy of info from an MP regarding underfunding of cancer research and funding of gun-control in Canada. I realize that underfunding of medical service in Canada is topical and that support by some of the media for gun-control continues. .............snip............. How many of you have had personal friends and family die from Cancer? How many have been killed by a gun? Is this worthy of "news" on or about Feb 20, 2000? I will let you and the news editors/producers decide. Mr. Breitkreuz has included telephone numbers etc in his e-mail article. Ken Pisichko (204) 338-5388 kpisich@mbnet.mb.ca - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 08:16:36 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Liberals spent 8 times more on gun registry than on cancer > NEWS RELEASE > > January 14, 2000 > For Immediate Release > > LIVES LOST BY UNDERFUNDING CANCER RESEARCH AMOUNTS TO CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE > "In 1998/99, the Liberals spent 8 times more on their gun registration > scheme than on cancer research." [snip] ... you got the idea????? K.P. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:30:42 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: Re: TAN generation > I have a question tht relates to the generation of TAN numbers; in >looking at a official copy of version 2.0 or 2.1 of the FRT disc I noticed >that it generated a TAN number when a particular firearm was referenced. Is >this number unique to each verifyer or to each make and model of gun? In >other words if Peter Kearns verified a " BSA rifle; Enfield P17 sporterized >" would the same TAN number pop up as if the same gun were verified here in >BC. Does this number fall within a certain range by province or by verifyer? > With only 5 digits, it seems hardly likely that the numbers can be >very unique. You baffle me. Where do you see a TAN number "generated" on lookup? On the display page? If so, you are looking at the firearm index number for that firearm display page in the FART, not a TAN. > Do you know what the file name is where the disc serial number or >identifier is? No, not my area of expertise. Some of the bootleg copies apparently do not have serial numbers, as they were wiped by copiers. > A final observation; I notice the format of identification still >does not concentrate on the frame or reciever and its unique features but >continues to reference identification marks on uncontrolled spare parts of >factory original examples. I guess I can't understand why they have not had >a legal expert review the proceedure and sample descriptions within the >context are they legally and technically valid. Yes, that is a serious problem, which I am currently exploiting. The reason they do not make it possible to identify a "frame or receiver" is that it is simply impossible. Most have NO markings other than a serial number, and there is simply NO entry into the data maze possible. To enter the data maze with any hope of finding the search object, you have to be able to tell the program to search for some known characteristic -- but the average "verifier," faced with a naked "frame or reciever" -- or even one with all its parts in place -- has NOTHING to use as a "known characteristic." He has no way to START. 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: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:31:33 -0600 From: Bill Farion Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #253 > Farmers, fishermen, miners, medical practioners, etc.... every special > intrest group is taking the govt to task for inadequate funding, but not > one of them ever mentions the millions wasted on the gun registration > scam.. WHY NOT!! That's one of the main reasons we are losing. > When will the firearms organizations who want our membership dollars > expand Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Hi; In the last issue Pacific Yachting's editor was complaining about cuts to the Coast Gaurd's budget. I sent him a letter pointing out that the $750,000,000 spent in the last 2-3 years by the gov't on gun control allmost exactly equals the budget of keeping the ship that lays down the channel markers, makes up the tide tables and keeps the sea lanes safe. The ship was decomissioned last summer. As well there is no money for the debris trap on the Fraser River. Bet he does not print it. The folks in the lower mainland might want to follow up on this! Cheers Bill (;-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:32:14 -0600 From: Bill Farion Subject: Re: [alert] CILA Sign Campaign Package Al Dorans wrote: > Dear Firearms Owner, > > > Tentatively, on one side of each sign there will be a small C-68 (Slash) > logo and a large information byte relating to C-68. Two examples would be > "The Home Invasion Bill" and "The Criminal Friendly Bill". On the reverse > side of each sign will be 2 small logos, "We remember" and "Je me > souviens". Hi; I think a mixed bag of 6 signs in a smaller package might be more saleable. Our club has only 50 members! As well I would personally spend $50 a lot faster than $130. Cheers Bill (;-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:35:40 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: Re: dreaded c-68 >Received enclosure from hunt club this week. >Chief Firearms Office Bulletin >Ontario Provincial Police >Notice to all firearms owners >As of January 1, 2001 Yyou will not be able to: >Own a firearm >Carry a firearm >Borrow a firearm >Purchase ammunition >Obtain an authorization to transport >unless >You have received your firearms licence or still have a valid firearms acquisition certificate. Correct. >You will require a Possession Only Licence if you just want to keep the firearms that you currently own. Correct. >You will require a Possession And Acquisition licence if you plan on purchasing additional firearms. Correct. >Licence application available at post office or by calling 800 731 4000 Although it may take several months to go through the process and the applications are often "out of stock." >Don't delay and get caught without your firearms licence. However, the longer you delay in applying, the more chance that they will move the deadline date because THEY cannot handle the volume of last-minute applications. It is all they can do to handle the small volume of applications-per-day that they are faced with now, and they are backlogged. >remember, you must be in possession of a licence no later than January,2001 If the government cannot handle the volume to issue the licences, then the authorities are responsible if you do not have your licence. >Is the above bulletin correct according to law, or is this just another silly servants effort to badger and suppress? It is the truth. Where have you been, somewhere with your head buried in the sand? This was enacted in Dec 95, proclaimed into law on 01 Dec 98, and has been the law of the land since that day. 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: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:36:10 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: NFA RED WARNING: >A quick look below will refresh your memory concerning incorrect information >on a firearm verification. I went to have the gun re-verified. Imagine >having an argument with the verifier that a model 1400 shot gun is 5 shots >according to Winchester but only 2 shots according to the CFC database. They >say the reason is that there is a plug, duh, another verifier confirmed yes >the plug does indeed come out however the database indicates 2 so 2 it is. I >now have two verifications which incorrectly indicate 2 shots because the >CFC says so. DANGER. Telling the verifier ANYTHING makes YOU subject to 5 years in prison, because under FA s. 106 and 109, it is an offence if a person "knowingly makes a statement, orally or in writing, that is false or misleading" in the process of applying for a registration certificate. NOTICE that the word "knowingly" modifies "makes a statement" -- but does NOT modify "that is false or misleading." If you tell a verifier what you THINK is correct, you can go to prison for it. NOTICE that there is no time limit on such an offence. If you do it, the charge can be laid twenty years from now -- when they are cleaning out the last few firearms owners in Canada. DANGER. You do NOT know -- you CANNOT know -- what they will decide is "false or misleading," so the only SAFE thing you can do is to supply NO information that YOU are responsible for. They pay verifiers to verify - -- so let them DO their job. If they make stupid mistakes, that is not YOUR fault. If their FRT disk is telling them to put down wrong information, that is not YOUR fault. RULES: Never put your own signature over ANY description of a firearm. Send in the information supplied by a verifier -- and change the line to say "supplied by verifier (name and number)" instead of saying that YOU certify the information as being accurate to the best of your knowledge. That way, if anyone is going to jail it is the government's verifier -- not YOU. 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: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:36:43 -0600 From: SSAA (by way of) Subject: [none] Dave Tomlinson ) Subject: NEWS - UK GUN CRIME STILL RISING... The Times 16 Jan 2000 Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Armed force: police are worried at the escalation of gun crimes, including gang shootings Killings rise as 3m illegal guns flood Britain Jon Ungoed-Thomas UP TO 3m illegal guns are in circulation in Britain, leading to a rise in drive-by shootings and gangland-style executions, new figures have revealed. Police are concerned that the amnesty after the massacre of schoolchildren in Dunblane in 1996, which led to 200,000 weapons being handed in, has failed to dent the underworld's supply of pistols and revolvers. Criminals have maintained a steady flow of smuggled guns from eastern Europe, exhibition weapons reactivated in illegal "factories" run by underworld dealers, and guns stolen from private collections. The estimate that 3m guns are illegally held in the UK - made by researchers collecting evidence for a parliamentary inquiry into the gun trade - is far higher than previously thought. The vast stockpiles of weapons have fuelled the recent spate of shootings in cities including London, Birmingham and Manchester, where a 17-year-old was killed last week. Research suggests that in some areas a third of young criminals, classed as those aged 15 to 25 with convictions, own or have access to guns ranging from Beretta sub-machineguns to Luger pistols, which can be bought from underworld dealers for as little as £200. "There is a move from the pistol and the shotgun to automatic weapons," said Detective Superintendent Keith Hudson, of the national crime squad. "We are recovering weapons that are relatively new - and sometimes still in their boxes - from eastern European countries." In London there were more than 20 fatal shootings last year allegedly linked with the Yardies, gangsters who have their roots in Jamaica, compared with nine killings in 1998. In one, Andy Balfour, 32, was shot with a Mac 10 sub-machinegun, which can fire 20 rounds a second. He was hit eight times. Last July Tim Westwood, a BBC hip-hop disc jockey, was shot by a man who opened fire on the car in which he was travelling in Kennington, south London. Killings in Manchester included the death last week of Gabriel Egharevba, 17, who was shot by a man on a motorbike in Longsight. It was the eighth fatal shooting in the city in seven months. In April 1998 two youths aged 14 and 17 were shot in the same area by a gang with automatic machineguns. Detectives say modern weapons are fast becoming fashion accessories among young drug dealers protecting themselves and their territory. Unarmed officers say they risk confronting teenagers on mountain bikes brandishing automatic weapons. In Birmingham there have been about 100 crimes a month involving firearms since last March, compared with 88 a month in the year ending in April 1998. Two men were shot dead in Birmingham in separate incidents at Christmas. Anti-gun campaigners hoped the handgun ban after Dunblane - where Thomas Hamilton shot dead 16 children and a teacher - would reduce firearm crime. The latest figures, however, show crime involving weapons is on the increase. Home Office figures reveal that, overall, armed crime rose 10% in 1998. There were 13,671 armed offences compared with 12,410 the previous year. Experts, however, believe that only half the weapons used in armed incidents are genuine firearms, the others being imitations. Opponents of the handgun ban implemented after Dunblane say it has failed to cut gun crime because of the multiple sources of weapons available to the criminal underworld. Firearms experts say more research is needed to assess the source of the weapons accurately. Kate Broadhurst, a researcher at the Scarman Centre, said: "Controls on legally held firearms are clearly unlikely to have much of an impact." Customs officers do not believe smuggled guns account for the bulk of criminal weapons. Criminals instead rely on reactivating decommissioned guns, such as the 9mm Uzi or MAC 10, or supplies from corrupt dealers. Home Office officials insist the legislation has cut off an important supply of guns to the underworld. They say the handgun ban was never intended to combat firearms-related crime, but was a direct response to Dunblane, which involved legally held handguns. "It is lunatic that a handgun ban was imposed which even the Home Office accepts won't reduce crimes involving firearms," said Chris Price, chairman of the Gun Trader Association. "It's not the criminals that have suffered, but legitimate gun users and gun traders." ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #254 **********************************