From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca on behalf of Cdn-Firearms Digest [owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca] Sent: Monday, 23 April, 2001 19:43 To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #737 Cdn-Firearms Digest Monday, April 23 2001 Volume 03 : Number 737 In this issue: Nabob Ad Please Update your Addressbook Re: Shall we fight? Re: Shall we fight? Please Update Your Addressbook Kearns Incident Anti-gun logic misses the problem CFC response to questions about employees who handle Specials Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #735 Shall we fight? CFD V3 #733 Shall we fight? Shot Teen. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 11:24:37 -0600 From: Alfred Hovdestad Subject: Nabob Ad Did anyone else see the ad in last week's Elm Street? It featured three guys, one of which is identified as a vegetarian, sitting around a campfire drinking coffee. The caption at the bottom reads "He's just here for [NABOB] better beans, better coffee.". One of the other guys is cradling a double-barrel shotgun in his lap with the action open. The third guy has a lever action rifle leaning against a log, also with the action open. This is one of the first ads that I have seen featuring firearms in a positive light. We should be sending our comments to Elm Street magazine (elmstreet@m-v-p.com) and Nabob (which, I think, is a division of Kraft Foods). Alfred ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:55:16 -0600 From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Please Update your Addressbook From: customer_service@telus.net Subject: Please Update Your Addressbook Your message has been delivered successfully. Please change to . As the domain will no longer exist after October 31, 2001 you must update your address book to as noted in the change above. For further information, please visit http://www.telus.net/change/index.html. Thank You from TELUS Internet Services. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:56:59 -0600 From: Jim Powlesland Subject: Re: Shall we fight? On Sun, 22 Apr 2001, "Gordon Hitchen" wrote: > This is a time to begin fighting in the Courts with the money we > already have on hand - we can always work at raising more money as > the fight progresses if need be - but lets get started immediately! Agreed!! And the sooner the better. The registration deadline is only a year and a half away. And we should think of funding several legal assaults, not just one. The Firearms Act violates numerous constitutional rights so we have plenty to choose from. Raising the funds shouldn't be too formidable. Hunters, after all, are quite used to donating money, time, and effort to causes that effect them directly. For those anxious about losing, it should be kept in mind that taking anything to court is a gamble, even so-called "sure" cases. We should be prepared to lose one or two battles in the war. Just keep in mind that the Firearms Act is just sitting there like a ripe plum waiting to be plucked. All we need is the nerve to reach out and take it... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:01:44 -0600 From: Jim Powlesland Subject: Re: Shall we fight? On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, "Gordon Hitchen" wrote: > I have little experience with lawyers rates. here in Edmonton a > first class defence to a murder charge is 15 thousand dollars. According to the criminal lawyers I know, they tend to avoid taking murder cases simply because murderers tend not to have any money. They usually do murder cases "pro bono" (lawyers have to take on a certain number of pro bono cases every year). > The Lawyer you hire sets the charges - one must shop around if you > are not in the loop to get the best for the least! A good one can cost hundreds of dollars per hour. However they are usually worth every penny if your freedom is on the line. > In my gut I feel it is time to chuck the sign thing and come out > fighting! Agreed! Billboards are very useful *before* and *during* an election, not 5 months after. Using them now is like shutting the barn door after the horse is gone. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:03:44 -0600 From: Subject: Please Update Your Addressbook Your message has been delivered successfully. Please change to . As the domain will no longer exist after October 31, 2001 you must update your address book to as noted in the change above. For further information, please visit http://www.telus.net/change/index.html. Thank You from TELUS Internet Services. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:26:30 -0600 From: "med2" <929200@ican.net> Subject: Kearns Incident Is this the shot that is heard across Canada?? If not, why not?? There have been questions asked,about the swat teams attending simple police calls. More than once the CFD has had this question broached. "I wonder if this is what they call practice ? Have any of you noticed that shootings, barricading or other Police calls are stated as Police Incidents now?? It used to be that the radio, TV announcer would state that a shooting, suicide etc. was at such and such location in our city? Now there is a terse sentence that the intersection XYZ is closed due to a Police incident?? Or that is what I'm hearing. Make no mistake about it, we are in a sad situation here in Canada. The arrogant Gov't. in power today is very much a police state, and the public needs to rally against this FED UP ll RALLY, APEC & now the Walled city?? Lets face it, we are being toyed with. Money talks, Bullshit walks but I guess I have to send money to the NFA,but mine will be for the Kearns Defense Fund. Yes, my appeal is still in the Appeals Court and I still have my lawyer working on it. MED member NFA16777R supporter ONLY CROOKED POLITICIANS FEAR ARMED CITIZENS ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:17:19 -0600 From: Barry Glasgow Subject: Anti-gun logic misses the problem In an Op-ed submission to the Montreal Gazette titled "U.S. gun laws defy common sense", Robert Schryer of Brossard writes: "... what kind of a country allows its children to possess such an arsenal of weapons?" In the first half of the 20th century, children far younger than 14 - in both Canada and the U.S. - were permitted to possess and use firearms for hunting and other forms of recreational shooting. It is only in the latter half of that century and the beginning of this one that teens have taken to using such weapons against fellow students. It is revealing that Mr. Schryer conveniently ignores the fact the case in question involved the making of a bomb and that most of the mayhem (both here and in the U.S.) has played out long after stricter gun laws have been enacted. U.S. federal legislation makes it a crime to bring firearms within 1000 yards of a school yet this hasn't had the desired effect. The question Mr. Schryer should be asking is "What kind of society allows its children to evolve to the point where they are capable of considering such terrible acts of violence?" Avoiding this question while focusing on things that are not themselves the inherent cause only serves to prolong and exacerbate the problem. Barry Glasgow Woodlawn, Ontario 613-832-2449 (h) 613-763-3097 (w) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:21:03 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: CFC response to questions about employees who handle firearms Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca - -----Original Message----- From: Canadian Firearms Centre [mailto:CFCindis@JUSTICE.GC.CA] Sent: April 23, 2001 3:13 PM To: Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1 Subject: FW: The enquiry that has been assigned/forwarded to me. This is the action taken for the Enquiry (E200141215358) made by Dennis Young (BreitG0@parl.gc.ca ) on 12/04/2001 DATE OF RESPONSE : 23/04/2001 RESPONSE TO ENQUIRY : Dear Sir: Thank you for your enquiry. The licensing requirement referred to in the Special Bulletin for Businesses - - No. 30 applies only to employees of businesses that have a firearms business licence. Although some outfitting businesses are required to have a firearms business licence, not all of them need one. Provincial and territorial Chief Firearms Officers (CFOs) are responsible for determining which businesses in their jurisdiction need a firearms business licence. The outfitter you refer to can call his CFO at 1 800 731-4000 for more information on policies and requirements in his area. If the outfitter you refer to is not licensed as a firearms business, the employees are not required to have possession and acquisition licences for restricted firearms. Employees would need, however, to have valid licences allowing them to be in possession of the firearms they handle. Section 9 (3) of the Firearms Act requires employees of licensed firearms businesses to have a valid FAC or possession and acquisition licence that is valid for restricted firearms, regardless of the class of firearm the employee handles. The Minister of Justice, however, has recently tabled an amendment to the law dealing with the licensing of firearms business employees. If passed by Parliament, an employee of a business that only handles non-restricted firearms would require a possession and acquisition licence at the non-restricted level. I hope this is of assistance. Yours truly, Penelope Muller Communications Group Canadian Firearms Centre QUESTION ASKED : Subject: Questions about employees who handle firearms Importance: High Special Bulletin for Businesses - No. 30 Temporary Licences and Grace Period An outfitter is concerned about the following statement from Special Bulletin for Businesses - No. 30. "Under the Firearms Act, all of your employees who handle firearms for employment purposes must have a valid licence that gives them possession and acquisition privileges for restricted firearms, regardless of the class of firearms they actually handle. Since temporary licences only give possession privileges, not acquisition privileges, they do not allow employees to handle firearms for employment purposes." He would like to know: (1) Why do his employees have to have a licence for "restricted" firearms when they are only handling non-restricted firearms? (2) Why do his employees have to have an "acquisition" licence when they aren't actually acquiring firearms? (3) Can't a person with a Possession Only licence borrow a firearm from someone? (4) His employees only have Possession Only licences so what does he have to do to comply with the law? This is an urgent matter because this outfitter's U.S. customers are coming in for the spring bear hunt. Dennis Young BreitG0@parl.gc.ca Parliamentary Assistant 992-4394 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:54:47 -0600 From: "Gordon Hitchen" Subject: Specials As the Eastern Government introduces a mini recession to Eastern Canada perhaps this recipe will help! AH-GEE-DAH-MO (Squirrel Soup) 3-4 squirrels, cut up 1/4 cup chopped carrots 1Tbsp salt 1/4 cup chopped celery 1 medium onion, 1/4 cup diced potatoes chopped Dry corn , if desired seasoning of your choice Place the squirrels , salt and onions in a pot and cover with water. Simmer until meat falls off the bones. Add the remaining ingredients and continue to simmer until tender. Can be thickened with flour if desired. Another PETA Recipe taken from the People Eating Tasty Animals Collection! Gordon ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:21:18 -0600 From: Robert LaCasse Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #735 I like this idea big time, concerning my situations at http://home.istar.ca/~vampire/assault.html , but like the 1970's probable cause Home Invasion "Rights", and the th fact that "They" can do whatever "they" want because any "person" (a Roman Law fiction entity) who has a "license" (FAC, PAL, POL, etc.) is under a contract (illegally imposed) that has given ownership of your guns and control to "them". By applying for a "license" you admit to doing something illegal and become an "outlaw", thus losing your natural right to ownership of property (guns) that you had as a free man of commoner status. Those rights are affirmed by the Magna Carta, which, incidentally, the Alberta Judges used to tell Premier Klein to stuff his rollback of their salary. You can try a read at http://www.patriotsonguard.org to start learning about retaking your natural rights. Though it would be good to have a list of these 6-7 Charter of Rights Infingements, that are usually overlooked by the Judges, as matter goes to court anyway! Bob On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:35:44 -0600, you wrote: |>------------------------------ |> |>Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:49:13 -0600 |>From: "Karl Schrader" |>Subject: Court Challenge to C-68 !! Shall we fight?? |> |>Gordon Hitchen's posting in digest # 733 summarized our position |>fairly accurate. |>The enormous energy and organizational effort expended for the |>Quebec |>rally really did not accomplish anything except to provide the media |>with a feeding frenzy concentrating on the violent aspect. Order and |>Good Government was well prepared to handle this. Sharpshooters on |>the |>roofs and the phalanxes of medieval looking and equipped Government |>enforcers saw to this. |>400 rally participants are now facing criminal charges. O.k., the |>slowly developing tendency of |>the mood from "Deference to Defiance" in "our country" took another |>setback. |> |>The oppression and destruction of the recreational firearms |>community |>is also progressing according to blueprint. The liberals did not and |>will not budge one inch faced with normal, peaceful protests. The |>general public has been brainwashed by the State Broadcaster and the |>liberal dominated print media. The only way we could achieve |>anything |>resembling common sense is to use the legal system which, hopefully, |>is still intact and not yet corrupted. |>All our "still functioning" organizations "combined" should be able |>to |>raise the necessary funds to launch a legal challenge to C-68 |>(F.A.). |>Here is my reply to Gordon Hitchen: |> |>Good Morning, Gordon: |>Just saw your posting in the digest and I am fully behind you. |>It will cost about 50 K to push a fairly simple challenge right |>through to the SCC. |>I understand that Dr. Ted Morton has assembled material invoking the |>Charter and as far as I can determine there are about 6-7 Charter |>violations in C-68 which could be cited in one suit and the court |>has |>to deal with all of them in one shot. That would make it probably |>cheaper for us. |>So far we have acted like bloody amateurs and did not get anywhere. |>The liberals will not budge. |>We have nothing more to loose, so what are we waiting for ???? |>Regards, |>Karl |> |>------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:23:57 -0600 From: "Alan Harper" Subject: Shall we fight? On March 21, I got a call from the CFO Ontario. I was told, by Jeff Hale, that I "made a mockery" of the application for collector status and that the CFO would not accept it. He also said the CFO would not approve of the transfer of my revolver, which is in the collector realm. He says section 30 of the FA specifies that I must agree to let the Firearms Officer into my house for periodic inspections. I demanded that he respond to me in writing with his decision. He said, "We don't do that." After a fruitless conversation with him, he asked me if I would like to talk to his supervisor, Brenda. Brenda talked to me. She didn't like me saying that they should acquire a search warrant to come into my house. She also didn't like my lack of detail in response to the other questions. She says that some people answered with several pages for some questions. I demanded that she respond to me in writing. She refused. She went on to say that the search warrant could be gotten by the police, but not by the CFO, and that was why I must respond that I would like to be visited for inspection without a search warrant. I asked her, was there not a section which addressed a refusal of entry without a search warrant? She agreed that there is, but she does not know the section number. I said that I answered what I took to be a legal document (the application for collector status) by answering with facts that I know to be true and not to indulge in speculation or opinion. She says that she wants me to give opinions. She says she is not accepting my application for collector status as I answered it. She also says that she is putting my application for transfer in the shredder, unless I write a new application for collector status with satisfactory answers. I said to her that I am not withdrawing my application to transfer and that she had better process it. She refuses to do that. She said that she can send me another application for collector status and I should respond in more detail and without the stipulation of a search warrant for inspection. I suggested that she fill out the answers the way she wants them and I will sign it. She will not do that. Brenda says that I can call her at X7545, from 0800-2000, for assistance filling out the forms. She says she is there to help me. After I got off the phone, I read section 106 of the Firearms Act: ============ 106. (1) Every person commits an offence who, for the purpose of procuring a licence, registration certificate or authorization for that person or any other person, knowingly makes a statement orally or in writing that is false or misleading or knowingly fails to disclose any information that is relevant to the application for the licence, registration certificate or authorization. (2) Every person commits an offence who, for the purpose of procuring the confirmation by a customs officer of a document under this Act for that person or any other person, knowingly makes a statement orally or in writing that is false or misleading or knowingly fails to disclose any information that is relevant to the document. (3) In this section, "statement" means an assertion of fact, opinion, belief or knowledge, whether material or not and whether admissible or not. =========== I don't appreciate being threatened, such as "she is putting my application for transfer in the shredder, unless I write a new application for collector status with satisfactory answers". I don't appreciate the CFO refusing to respond in writing, as specified in section 72 of the FA. I have pretty much figured out what I am going to say in my letter, in response to the CFO. I would appreciate input from members before I mail it. You may have some good ideas which I can incorporate in my letter. You can write to the digest, or to me at: alan__harper@hotmail.com or rharper@cgocable.net Bye. Al. SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM ************************* ____________________________________________________________________ _____ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:40:07 -0600 From: Gary Ramsey Subject: CFD V3 #733 Shall we fight? I agree with Gordon's opinion that perhaps it is time to resort to the courts as another way to show Canadians how the authorities and the federal government are trampling on our rights. The one thing I take exception to is the East vs West thing. PLEASE give it a rest. I was one of countless Ontarians who worked their butts off in the last election. But for the vote splitting we would have a different mix in Ottawa today. I am just as disappointed as anyone west of the Manitoba-Ontario border. Gordon refers to the Eastern Government. What comprises the Western Government? The Northern Government? Or the Southern Ontario Government? The last time I looked all parts of our great country were under the same elected dictatorship; it just happens to have its headquarters in Ottawa. Firearm owners in Ontario feel just as oppressed as firearm owners in Newfoundland or British Columbia. This is not a West vs East battle. It is a battle between the federal government and every firearm owner across this nation. To promote this East vs West nonsense is to play right into the federal government's divide and conquer tactics. Let's continue the fight, but let's fight together. Gary Ramsey NFA Field Officer - Ontario Member, Canadian Alliance ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:43:17 -0600 From: "Mike Hargreaves" Subject: Shot Teen. Now am I just old fashioned or what!! What the hell is an 18 year old = doing out at 3:40 AM!! one that lives at home!! +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ [George Dovendaen Ellison, 18, was partying in The Key Place Restaurant and Bar on Dufferin St. near Eglinton Ave. when he was shot = around 3:40 a.m.] +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Does anyone remember the 11. pm adds that said "Do you know were your = children are?" =20 And dont give me that crap about rights, and at 16 they are allowed to = leave home, crap, I don't "party" till 4 AM, never mind an18 year old. If you love your children, you would not allow them to be out, at 18, = till 3:40 AM!! I just asked my lovely Wife, who has two Son's.,the three = Grand Kids call me Papa, so I suppose they are mine too! did she allow = them out till 3:40 AM when they lived at home? No way she said. And the two children by my first marriage, a Girl and Boy, were not out = at 3:40 AM when they lived at home either!! I have gone out at Midnight to pick up my Daughter, from a house party, = because she wanted to go home, and her date had been drinking!! It is = called "LOVE," "LOVE!!" you love your children, you look after them, = whether they like it or not!! I still love them to death! all of them.=20 And I am sure they love us, right back. My children still ask the "Old Guy!" as my Son calls me, for opinions on = things! do they always take my advice, or opinion "NO!" NO, but, they listen. God bless all children! So, do you know were your = Children are? Mike Hargreaves. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #737 ********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:acardin33@home.com List owner: mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca FAQ list: http://www.magma.ca/~asd/cfd-faq1.html and http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Faq/cfd-faq1.html Web Site: http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/homepage.html FTP Site: ftp://teapot.usask.ca/pub/cdn-firearms/ CFDigest Archives: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/~ab133/ or put the next command in an e-mail message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca get cdn-firearms-digest v03.n198 end (198 is the digest issue number and 03 is the volume) To unsubscribe from _all_ the lists, put the next five lines in a message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca unsubscribe cdn-firearms-digest unsubscribe cdn-firearms-alert unsubscribe cdn-firearms-chat unsubscribe cdn-firearms end (To subscribe, use "subscribe" instead of "unsubscribe".) If you find this service valuable, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the freenet we use: Saskatoon Free-Net Assoc., 1702 20th St. West, Saskatoon SK S7M OZ9 Phone: (306) 382-7070 modem lines: (306) 956-3700 and (306) 956-3701 Home page: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/ National Firearms Association (N.F.A.) Box 4384, Station C Calgary AB T2T 5N2 ph.: (403) 640-1110 fax: (403) 640-1144 mailto:nfainfo@nfa.ca Web site: http://www.nfa.ca/ DONATIONS GRATEFULLY ACCEPTED! Automatic, monthly donations may be made to the N.F.A. by sending postdated cheques, or your Visa/MasterCard number and expiry date, to the Membership address above, along with the amount you would like to donate: $5, $10, or another amount. Automatic donations may be cancelled at any time. N.F.A. memberships: families: $40; seniors: $25; individuals: $30; businesses: $50. Included are regular issues of the N.F.A. newsletter Point Blank, as well as magazines like "Canadian Sportsman". Add just $4.75 per person for $5,000,000 insurance! Clubs: get associate memberships for just $3 per member ($45 minimum) and members will be still eligible for $5,000,000 liability insurance for just $4.75 each! These e-mail digests are free to everyone, and are made possible by the efforts of countless volunteers. Permission is granted to copy and distribute this digest as long as it not altered in any way.