Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:03:58 -0600 Message-Id: <200003030003.SAA19287@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 #285 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, March 2 2000 Volume 03 : Number 285 In this issue: Killings rise as 3m illegal guns flood Britain Firearms export ban Re: United States Ban on Export of Arms Foreign Affairs Update on U.S. Firearms Embargo Offering a reward FAX RECEIVED FROM FOREIGN AFFAIRS UPDATE Senseless death Switzerland CILA Letter Alert: "Right to bear arms does anything but CILA Letter to the Era Banner Editor ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:35 -0600 From: "RJK Sr,." Subject: Killings rise as 3m illegal guns flood Britain 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." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:26 -0600 From: "dan baron" Subject: Firearms export ban To Bob Nault, Representative for Kenora Rainy River Riding? In regards to the export ban on rifles, handguns, firearm components and ammunition from the United States. How can the Canadian government be spending so much money on gun registration and not know the whereabouts of firearms that they licensed to come into Canada? How does the government plan to uncover the criminal element if its not interested in looking for it. Its apparent that the time spent deceiving citizens into swallowing the firearms act should have been spent on the problem of crime itself. This is appalling conduct for MP's who call themselves representatives of the Canadian citizen. Dan Baron RR#2, Dryden,Ont P8N 2Y5 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:08 -0600 From: "R. P. Finegan" Subject: Re: United States Ban on Export of Arms It seems to me that a ban by the USA on the export of arms and ammunition to Canada can be regarded as a hostile act, of the sort employed by a nation against an enemy nation. If that is the case, and perhaps it is, bearing in mind that Canada still has territorial disputes with the USA, such as those over the Dixon Entrance or the Arctic Archipelago, then I suggest that any Canadian involved in the induction of such a ban has been engaged in treasonable activity. It is also a signal that free trade between the two countries can be suspended at any time by an arbitrary decision of the president of the USA. The international treaty on free trade is therefore meaningless, and is to all intents and purposes nullified if any of the partners can simply pick and choose, at the option of some individual member of their government, whether or not to allow export of a commodity to another partner. The lesson to be learned from this exercise by the President of the United States is that Canada cannot trust the United States to provide arms and ammunition required, apart from the needs of hunters and recreational shooters, for the defence of the nation. In a sense, the sovereignty of Canada has been impugned by this arbitrary action of the United States, and the response should be the establishment of a domestic arms and ammunition industry in Canada, of a dimension sufficient to make the country henceforth independent of the United States in this vitally important respect. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:06 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Foreign Affairs Update on U.S. Firearms Embargo Danuta Tardiff, Parliamentary Affairs at Foreign Affairs just called with an update. She advised that the U.S. government has only suspended issuing new export licences. Firearms and ammunition approved under previous licences should be flowing normally. If any Canadian firearms dealers have evidence to the contrary, please e-mail, call or fax Garry immediately. > Dennis Young > Parliamentary Assistant > for Garry Breitkreuz, MP > e-mail: breitg0@parl.gc.ca > Fax: (613) 992-8676 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:03 -0600 From: "Jason Hayes" Subject: Offering a reward Steve Maher wrote; If anyone offers a reward like that, it will simply give the Antis even more incentive to twist their figures and distort their facts (if any). We'll be deluged (and so will be the airwaves) with even more of the same crap those people hand out today. And we will have asked for it. I know, they won't be proving anything, according to strict rules of statistics. But most of the listening public won't know that, and will be even more strongly persuaded... and so our efforts will blow up in our faces. This is not necessarily true. I know of one fellow who has a $250,000 reward out for anyone who can prove (scientifically) that evolution occurred. That is, macroevolution or the evolution of new kinds (not micro or adaptation). His reward started as a $10,000 US reward ten years ago and has recently been bumped to the $250,000 US mark. No one has proven it yet - the $250,000 is still available. The info on the reward can be found at http://www.drdino.com/. As a side note, this is a posting on the feasibility of offering a reward for the proof that anti-gun legislation works - NOT an invitation to discuss evolution vs. creation science in this forum. If you don't agree with Dr Hovind and want to argue with him or me about this, e-mail Dr Hovind or me directly. Later Jason Hayes ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:18 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: FAX RECEIVED FROM FOREIGN AFFAIRS UPDATE Danuta Tardif, Cabinet and Parliamentary Affairs > Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade > Phone: (613) 944-5153 Fax: (613) 944-0665 > > FAX UPDATE RECEIVED - THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2000 AT 2:12 PM > > * On January 31st, the US Government temporarily stopped issuing NEW > export licences for firearms and ammunition proposed for export to Canada. > US export licences issued up to that date remain valid and shipments to > Canada are continuing. > > * The U.S. government has agreed to expedite the issuance of new > export licences for the operational training requirement of Canadian law > enforcement agencies. > > * In other words, there is no US ban on gun or ammunition exports to > Canada. > > * Before April 1999, guns and ammunition to Canada were exempt from > America export licence regulations. In order for the US to meet its > international obligations, Canada was added to the list requiring licences. > The American system has no connection to Canada's firearms registration > program. > > * The new requirement imposed considerable delay in the American > processing system. > > * The US government asked Canada to request a freeze in new licences > so that they could expedite the processing of urgent cases (e.g. RCMP > Ammunition orders) > > * Given that the US regulations have been in effect for less than a > year, the US did not know what normal exports to Canada were, the U.S. > simply wanted to get a better handle on their exports. To the U.S. > government, the volumes destined for Canada appeared abnormally high > compared to other countries. > > * Of the 115,000 handguns reported in the press, LESS than 1500 have > actually been imported with over 1000 of them going to law enforcement. > > * There is no evidence that Canada is a trans-shipment point for > weapons from the U.S. Indeed, White House spokesperson Joe Lockhart > confirmed on Friday, February 25, 2000 that there is no evidence that guns > and ammunition are entering Canada illegally or are being smuggled back into > the USA. > > * Canada is cooperating with the US government in their review of US > export licences. We expect that Canadian and American concerns will be > addressed. We expect that the issuance of all other new export permits will > resume promptly. > > * We are working with American officials to revise procedures to > provide them comfort on exports to Canada while at the same time reducing > possible delays faced by Canadian business and public safety importers. > > * Canada maintains a highly effective system to control gun imports > through the issuance of import certificates and import permits. The > issuance of Import Permits must meet legitimate requirements and be > consistent with the previously issued import certificate may also be > required before the permit is issued. > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:29 -0600 From: "Chris Gelowitz" Subject: Senseless death I feel terrible remorse at the senseless death of the girl in Michigan. However, it is a FACT that guns save many more lives than they accidentally take. The highly emotional stories of lives saved by guns are never reported. Also, this shooting death has been overblown. When was the last frontpage story about a 6 year old dying in a car accident because her mother didn't strap her in properly? Both deaths are just as tragic, and the car death is even MORE preventable, but of course a gun death gets unwarranted attention. I wish I could stop all accidental gun deaths, but I cannot, and nobody can. If we continue to remove guns from society, MORE people will die senseless deaths, not less. However, these new deaths due to lack of guns will probably not be reported by the media, I guess because it's more politically correct to be unarmed and get killed by a bear or an armed invader than it is to get accidentally killed by a gun in the wrong hands. I know, people will be thinking "If it saves one life, it's worth it". Well, if that logic were correct, we should get rid of bathtubs, trampolines, stairs, and everything else that causes FAR MORE deaths than accidental gun shots EVER WILL. Please don't let the emotional rhetoric of a single accidental gun death cloud your logic over the benefits that guns provide our society every day. Chris Gelowitz Wetaskiwin, AB chris.gelowitz@bigfoot.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:03 -0600 From: Kjell Nilsen Subject: Switzerland I read in your latest issue that the three countries with the most firearms were The US, Norway, and Canada. But I thought Switzerland had the highest number? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:34 -0600 From: Al Dorans Subject: CILA Letter Alert: "Right to bear arms does anything but protect people" Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca CILA / ICAL Defending Canada's Heritage - --------------------------------------------- Dear Firearms Owner, The enclosed letter is a retyped version of an orginal article sent to me and appearing in the Era Banner on Feb. 24, 2000. The paper's area of urban influence is Newmarket and Toronto. If gun owners are to protect their shooting sports, the information and attitudes therein should be addressed. CILA will provide a response and post it to the Digest. The Era banner is a Metroland community newspaper and welcomes your letters. Submissions must be less that 400 words and must include a daytime telephone number, name and address. Letters to the Era Banner: Box 236 Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 4X1 Fax: (905) 853-4626 Email: letters@erabanner.com The Era Banner Thursday Feb 24, 2000 Debora Kelly Right to bear arms does anything but protect people It gives me the creeps. Ted Morton is vowing to continue the battle in the courts against Canada's gun control bill launching a new lawsuit within the next few months that argues the federal law infringes on the right to liberty guaranteed in the Charter of Rights. That's just a little too wave-the-Stars-and-Stripes; God-bless-America for me. There is an epidemic of slaughter in American streets. Let's look at the facts: last year, nine people were killed with guns in Holland;12 in Australia; l8 in Japan; 20 in France; 31 in England; 35 in Sweden; 108 in Canada; and (drum roll, please) close to 40,000 people were killed by, guns in the U.S. in one year. And those figures don't take into account the number of people who have been injured by gun shots. In Canada alone, the numbers then jump to 2,000. In America's gun culture, the "the right to bear arms" is a fiercely protected constitutional right - the proof of that can be found in the bedside drawers and top shelves of closets across the land of liberty. But as the figures prove. 0wning guns hasnt protected U.S. citizens - on the contrary. It's God Bless Canada, if you ask me. This week, the Supreme Court heard the arguments of Morton and other gun control opponents -not to mention seven provinces and territories, including Ontario - that the 1995 Firearms Act should be struck down because the licensing of firearms is a provincial, not federal responsibility. This jurisdictional stickler has re-opened the gun control debate. Ottawa, backed by pro-gun control ·organizations, police chiefs and the City of Toronto, insists it has the right to protect public safety. Canadian law has required licensing and registration of handguns since the 1930s. The new law extends that law to shotguns and rifles, which account for more deaths than handguns do. Should the gun-control opponents lose this battle, Plan B kicks in, whatever is necessary to tie this legislation up in the courts, Morton has declared. No rational person thinks gun control will prevent all senseless murders and injuries and tragic accidents. Or prevent the wrong person from getting a gun if he really wants one. Nor will criminals be lining up for firearm licences or to register the guns they smuggled across the border, for goodness' sake. Certainly, a rational person knows well, simply owning a gun does not a criminal make. There are law-abiding citizens who own guns, including farmers, hunters and gun collectors. And call me a sadly misinformed city slicker, a government dupe; if you like, but why is registration "the first step toward confiscation'; as gun control opponents protest? (Gosh, nobody has ever confiscated any vehicle I owned - not even when they should have - despite the fact they are registered. "The Grenade" my first car, a fourth-hand car, was a ticking time bomb, that eventually, mercilessly, died at the side of the road.) Advocates of the gun control law argue licensing can help screen out people who might use a weapon to harm themselves or others and that a registry may help track down weapons. It just seems so simple to me: you own a gun, you register it. What's the big deal? What has a responsible gun owner to fear from this law? Who cares if the federal government has overstepped its bounds on this one? The Supreme Court isn't expected to rule for months. The federal government must stay on track with Bill C68; never mind the delay tactics of the anti-gun control lobby. If there's any chance this law will increase public safety one iota, I'm for it and so are eight out of 10 Canadians. And that's just one more reason why I'm proud to be a Canadian. Professor Al Dorans Director of Operations, Ottawa Office Canadian Institute for Legislative Action / Institut Canadien pour l'Action Législative National Office: P.O.Box 44030, 600 Grandview St. S. Oshawa, ON. L1H 8P4 Ph: (905) 571-2150 Fax: (905) 436-7721 e-mail: teebee@sprint.ca Ottawa Office: 27 Cedar Grove Crt. Nepean, ON. K2G 0M4 Ph: (613) 828-8805 Fax: (613) 828-6967 e-mail: aldorans@magma.ca Home: http://www.cila.org A proud member of the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities / Forum du Monde sur le Futur d'Activités des Sports des Armes à Feu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:59:26 -0600 From: Al Dorans Subject: CILA Letter to the Era Banner Editor CILA / ICAL Defending Canada's Heritage - --------------------------------------------- CILA Letter to the Era Banner Editor "Criminal Control: Emotion, Myth and Truth" Re. "Right to bear arms does anything but protect people" (Feb. 24), Debora Kelly's article is high on emotion, high on myth and low on truth. Emotionally, it gives her the "creeps" that gun owners would have the gall to challenge Bill C-68: The Firearms Act, on a "jurisdictional stickler", … like violations of their constitutional and Charter rights! She writes, "Who cares if the federal government has overstepped its bounds on this one?" Yikes! She fears "the American gun culture" and the "epidemic of slaughter in American streets." I fear that Ms. Kelly has swallowed the anti-gun rights platform … hook, line and sinker. In truth, the United Nations Index reveals that out of 152 countries, the 3 best countries in which to live are Canada, the United States and Norway. The 3 countries with the greatest number of firearms are the United States, Norway and Canada. This suggests that a very strong relationship exists between civilian gun ownership and safe societies. Polls indicate that 80% of Canadians believe that crime is on the rise. In truth, violent crime has been declining in Canada and the USA for the past 7 years (Statistics Canada, FBI Statistics). So why don't Canadians know about this? Sensationalized media reports of isolated shootings have swept aside truth and created the illusion of a gun epidemic. Another reason for the gun control controversy is that the media generally, fails to publish the scientific truth that firearms save lives. Mauser and Buckner (1997) reported that Canadians use firearms 64,000 times a year defensively to protect themselves against animals and criminals. They estimated that 3,300 lives are saved each year due to civilian gun ownership. For every life lost with a firearm in Canada, 40 lives are saved. In the USA, Lott (1998) conducted the most rigorous study on the relationship between gun control and violent crime. Using extensive FBI statistics for all 50 states and 3,054 counties over 18 years, Lott concluded in his book: "More Guns, Less Crime". He found that the "civilian ownership of firearms" deters violent crime and mass killings. In states where gun availability was higher, crime rates were significantly lower. Non-gun owners benefit from a "shield of protection" provided by those who own firearms, especially if criminals have no idea where the guns are located. How do firearms save lives? Wright and Rossi (1994) discovered that criminals fear armed homeowners more than the police. Criminals specifically avoid burglarizing houses when citizens are at home because they are afraid of getting shot. Instead, they prefer less risky crimes, such as stealing cars. However, if criminals receive guarantees that all civilians are undefended, open season would be declared on citizens, their families and their private property. Ms. Kelly claims "owning guns hasn't protected American citizens". False. Lott (1998) found that Americans use firearms for self-protection 2.5 million times each year. Suter (1994) reported that for every life lost with a gun in the USA, 65-75 lives are saved. Firearms are a net benefit to society. Contrary to Ms. Kelly's opinion and that of anti-gun rights activists, firearms owners are not opponents of gun laws. They support reasonable and effective firearms legislation that reduces crime, saves lives and is administered by the provinces. Ms. Kelly states, "If there's any chance this law will increase public safety one iota, I'm for it and so are eight out of 10 Canadians." Wrong on both counts. Deputy Prime Minister Herb Gray verified in the House that there was no evidence that Canada's 64 year-old handgun registration system had reduced crime or saved lives, despite a whopping cost of $640 million! Government initiated polls showing 80% support for the government's preferred positions are bogus. Only 200 Canadians out of 30 million know Canada's 1600 pages of complex gun laws (Mauser and Buckner, 1997). Polling the uninformed on the need for stricter gun laws is unethical and fraudulent. The statistics Ms. Kelly cites for gun deaths are unbelievable. Since she failed to identify her sources, they cannot be verified. However, to demonstrate how gun death statistics are over-inflated in the media, anti-gun rights groups report 1400 Canadians die annually from shootings. In 1997, Statistics Canada identified this figure, not as 1400 but 1059. Since 818 of these are suicides that are largely "not preventable", this leaves 237. This number includes criminals shooting criminals, police killing criminals in the line of duty, biker gang deaths and drug gang shootings. Given that 211,000 Canadians died from all causes in 1997, the number of "normal" Canadians killed by a firearm was under 75, or a miniscule .0004 of all deaths. The chance of an average Canadian being killed by lightning is greater than being killed by a handgun. The previous gross distortions apply also to inflated USA statistics being quoted by anti-self-defense activists. Firearms owners are the safest people on the planet. Insurance companies make huge profits selling them $5 million in liability insurance for only $3.00. Hence, responsible gun owners are no statistical threat to themselves or to society. To wage war on responsible firearms owners is to target the easy and the innocent. Ms. Kelly asks, "Why is registration the first step toward confiscation?" Wherever registration has occurred, confiscation has followed. Wherever registration has occurred, it has been a dismal failure. Because cars are registered, it does not follow that Canadians should register all of their private property including guns, knives, axes, computers, gold, jewelry and paintings. Gun owners know that computer hackers will break into the registry, making it easier for criminals to steal guns and invade defenseless homes. C-68 is not about public safety and criminal control. It is about citizen control and a social engineering experiment gone berserk. Two United Nations conferences in Cairo (1996) and in Buenos Aires (1998) demonstrate conclusively that Canada, Japan and Lord Axworthy are leading a UN globalization New World Order agenda to disarm world civilians of all their firearms. Canada is the role model. The past century of warfare reveals a common pattern for establishing dictatorships: 1) Registration to identify where guns are; 2) Confiscation of guns from innocent civilians; 3) Genocide of defenseless citizens. The examples of Germany, Rwanda, Chile, Russia, Kosovo and 6 million defenseless Jews make this plain. In Kosovo alone, 1 million defenseless women were raped. This is obscene. In 2 world wars, 113,000 young Canadian soldiers sacrificed their lives to protect our precious democratic freedoms that are now under attack. In the Era Banner, concern was expressed over Bass Pro Shops having an indoor shooting range in the Newmarket Mall. For previous reasons, the presence of responsible shooters in the civilian population makes our communities much safer. In Canada, 44% of rural house holds own firearms compared to 11% in cities. Since violent crime in cities is 40% higher than in rural areas, here is further evidence that more guns equal less crime. Why should Canadians waste $3.5 billion over-regulating responsible firearms owners for no gain in reduced crime and saved lives, when that money could save 60,000 Canadian lives every year? Professor Al Dorans Director of Operations, Ottawa Office Canadian Institute for Legislative Action National Office: P.O.Box 44030, 600 Grandview St. S. Oshawa, ON. L1H 8P4 Ph: (905) 571-2150 Fax: (905) 436-7721 e-mail: teebee@sprint.ca Ottawa Office: 27 Cedar Grove Crt. Nepean, ON. K2G 0M4 Ph: (613) 828-8805 Fax: (613) 828-6967 e-mail: aldorans@magma.ca Home: http://www.cila.org ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #285 **********************************