From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca on behalf of Cdn-Firearms Digest [owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca] Sent: Wednesday, 23 May, 2001 10:08 To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #785 Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, May 23 2001 Volume 03 : Number 785 In this issue: Feedback Media release Re: Put your money where your mouth is..... [none] Canadian Army Principles of War Judge upset at gun trial delays CFC - Special Bulletin To Outfitters - No. 2 RE: Feedback ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 21:29:23 -0600 From: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca (Michael Ackermann) Subject: Feedback The SMSA website got some negative feedback today. I'd appreciate some views from a wider audience before making a definative response. Please view this page from our website and then read this letter by Mike Kiley and my response. Feel free to follow the links to the rest of the site. Your thoughts? http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/mikeack/Consequences.htm ____________________________ From: "mike riley" 21:16 Subject: To: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca These gunshot pictures belong in medical/police archives for instructional purposes. They do NOT belong on a site that purports to advocate gun safety and the responsible actions of shooters. I'm a member and don't condone this on the site Mike Kiley __________________________________________ Mike, Thanks for your feedback. I was beginning to wonder if the site was getting any hits. I agree that these photo's are very disturbing. I chose to include them for a couple of reasons. First, I have been using them for four years now as an adjunct to the Federal and Provincial Firearms Safety Courses to press home to new shooters the absolute importance of strict firearms safety. I give a little talk about how much I love the shooting sports but at the same time have a healthy respect for these tools. In this regard the photos have been well received and effective. Second, I know that the antis are always accusing us shooters of glossing over or minimizing the potential for misuse of or harm with firearms. By putting this page on the site I think I am heading them off at the pass, so to speak. By admitting right up front that some people use firearms for destructive purposes, and then showing the true proportions represented by these misuses and the lawful shooters plan to avoid such misuse, I am hoping to rebut the antis' arguement before they make it. Third, I included the forest fire photo to show that there is potential for great danger in other activities than shooting. Fourth, we shooters are always accusing the antis of making 'cost only' arguements and ignoring the much greater benefits of firearms to society. I feel it would be hypocritical for us to make a 'benefits only' arguement and ignore some of the bad outcomes. Obviously you have found this page offensive. I will bring your concern to the club executive and we will respond to you. In addition, please feel free to raise this issue at any club meeting. If I had known your feelings on Sunday (20 May) I would have raised it myself for general discussion at our club meeting. Thanks again for your feedback and I will be in touch again shortly. - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca Hope for the best, Plan for the worst - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca Hope for the best, Plan for the worst ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:38:08 -0600 From: "William R. Sherman" Subject: Media release This is a media release dated May 8 1997!! >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 13:42:15 -0600 >From: Bruce Mills >Subject: Permits to Transport - Georgetown, ONt. >I just came across this at the Halton Regional Police Website, and thought >it might be of use to someone out there. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:38:22 -0600 From: "Mark L Horstead" Subject: Re: Put your money where your mouth is..... - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Powlesland" Sent: 22 May, 2001 16:27 Subject: Re: Put your money where your mouth is..... > From what I can gather the NFA doesn't "initiate" any cases. It merely > provides free legal advice to the lawyers involved in firearms-related > court cases. Or, on the rare occasion, provides expert testimony on > firearms. > > Indeed the NFA seems to be downright scared of "initiating" any cases, > (constitutional or otherwise) for fear, I guess, of losing. Well, "initiating" a case (other than one of those very expensive constitutional challenges) usually involves somebody being arrested and charged. Most somebodies are indeed probably "downright scared" of such a a case initiation, and who can blame them? While I would greatly admire any crusader willing to deliberately put himself through such unpleasantness and hazard I would simultaneously be just as greatly doubting his sanity. As it is, there seems to be no shortage of hapless somebodies that run afoul of this idiotic law quite naturally and thereby initiate cases without resorting to doing so deliberately. > Their policy seems to be to sit on the sidelines and let others take the > feds to court. Providing expert advice to victims' lawyers can be done for a few dollars' worth of photocopying, envelopes, and stamps. Providing expert witness testimony can be done with a few thousand dollars' worth of airplane tickets, car rental, hotels, and meals (I don't know what it actually costs for DAT to attend one of these trials, but I wouldn't expect him to suffer hardship for his efforts OR spend his entire life on the road). Providing funding for a gang of lawyers to argue a constitutional challenge can be done with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars - or more. A good deal of deciding where to apply our limited means, therefore, depends on simple economics. And then, besides that issue of cost, there's also the related issue of cost-EFFECTIVENESS. What gives the best benefit for the funds and effort expended? Attempting to influence (sometimes successfully, sometimes not) the outcome of dozens, if not hundreds, of trials whereby precedents are set that gradually, piece-by-piece, tear this law apart, or a huge one-shot show trial that might or might not destroy a part of the law? This is "Economy of Effort", one of the time-tested, battle-proven Principles of War in Canadian Army doctrine. DAT has pointed out before that NFA support attracts government attention, which frequently causes government influence to be brought to bear on the outcome of the trial. And the government's ability to influence, due to the resources available to it, is vastly superior to ours. It is highly unlikely, though, that a crown prosecutor would even realize that his/her intended victim's lawyer has received legal advice from the NFA until it's too late and another favourable precedent has been set and the law further weakened. This is "Surprise", another Principle of War. Perhaps if we were as well-off as the wendies like to make us out to be then we could indeed afford to fund constitutional challenges, but regrettably we're not. if somebody else like a group of provincial governments or an angry and determined band of aboriginals can and is willing to mount such a challenge then it only makes sense to join in and support same in an appropriate manner. Rome was neither built nor destroyed in a day. Neither was/will be C-68. But just as assuredly as one fell, so shall the other. Patience and perseverance. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:38:14 -0600 From: Don Clarke Subject: [none] Michael Ackermann wrote: > > The SMSA website got some negative feedback today. I'd appreciate some > views from a wider audience before making a definative response. > > Please view this page from our website and then read this letter by Mike > Kiley and my response. Feel free to follow the links to the rest of the > site. > > Your thoughts? Sorry Michael, but I agree with Mike. A good idea, but those pictures are too shocking to achieve the effect you want. Instead, the control freaks could use them to show 'why firearms should be banned'. Any person who has no opinion either way would probably side with the gun banners after seeing those pics. In my opinion, you should take that page off the web as soon as possible, before it is used to hurt us. Don ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:38:29 -0600 From: "Mark L Horstead" Subject: Canadian Army Principles of War In my last posting, I made mention of two of the ten Canadian Army Principles of War. It may be useful to have a close look at all of them. While these do not enjoy the fame of Sun Tzu's philosophies, they are just as valid. There is wisdom contain in them - remember, the Canadian Army has never lost a fight, except for adequate funding. And we _are_ at war on this issue. >From an old copy of CFP 300 "The Army": ************************************************ 208. GENERAL 1. Attempts have often been made to reduce military experience to certain fundamentals, the application of which may help to produce success in war. These fundamentals are known as the "Principles of War". 2. Though the application of the Principles of War alters with changes in weapons and tactics, the principles themselves are as applicable to modern as to ancient campaigns. Moreover, although these principles are often thought of as primarily strategical, they apply equally well in the field of tactics. Broadly speaking, these fundamentals are as pertinent to the operations of an infantry section as they are to those of an army group.* 3. The mere application of the Principles of War does not guarantee victory. Circumstances dictate the relative importance of each principle and in some cases a commander is unable to adhere fully to one principle except at the expense of another. A commander's challenge is to know where to place the emphasis at any given moment. Thus, these principles are not immutable laws, but rather a guide to action. Canada espouses ten Principles of War: Selection and Maintenance of the Aim, Maintenance of Morale, Offensive Action, Security, Surprise, Concentration of Force, Economy of Effort, Flexibility, Co-operation and Administration. 209. PRINCIPLES 1. Selection and Maintenance of the Aim. This is the master principle. In every operation it is essential to select and clearly define the aim. The ultimate aim is to impose one's will on the enemy. Subordinate aims must be directed toward this supreme aim. The aim must aso be simple, direct, and precise. Every plan or action must be tested by its bearing on the chosen aim and then be conducted to achieve that aim. 2. Maintenance of Morale. Success in war depends more on morale than on physical qualities. Numbers, armament and resources cannot compensate for lack of courage, energy, skill and bold offensive spirit. Morale is akin to combat motivation. It is therefore imperative that it be developed and maintained. High morale is reflected in a confident, resolute, willing and self-sacrificing attitude. 3. Offensive Action. Offensive action is the forerunner of victory. By wresting the initiative from the enemy, one acquires freedom of action and a distinct psychological advantage. The fight must be taken to the enemy: a commander must act, not react. An offensive, aggressive spirit must pervade in all types of operations. 4. Security. Security is a condition which gives a commander sufficient freedom of action to fulfil his aim. It is achieved by maintaining balance. This entails defence of bases and other interests which are vital to a nation or its armed forces. It requires: a. intelligence regarding the enemy's location, capability and intentions which permit friendly forces to plan and deploy effectively; and b. denial of information concerning friendly forces which the enemy requires to develop his plans. 5. Surprise. Surprise is a very effective and powerful influence in war; its effect on morale can be great. It can confer the initiative, threaten enemy morale, reduce own casualties and often give material advantages similar to a superior concentration of force. When other factors are equal or unfavourable, success may depend entirely upon surprise. This principle can be achieved strategically, tactically, or by exploiting new equipment or techniques. Its elements are secrecy, concealment, deception, originality, audacity and speed. Surprise must be exploited. 6. Concentration of Force. A commander must strive to concentrate combat power superior to that of the enemy at a decisive time and place. Concentration does not necessarily imply a massing of forces, but rather having them so disposed as to be able to unite to deliver a crushing blow when and where required. Concentration is a matter more of time than of space. 7. Economy of Effort. Economy of Effort requires a balanced employment of forces and a judicious expenditure of resources consistent with achieving the aim. Concentration of combat power at the point of main effort often requires the acceptance of risks elsewhere. 8. Flexibility. War demands a high degree of flexibility to enable plans to be altered to meet changing situations and unexpected developments. This entails not only good training, organization, discipline and staff work; but above all, that flexibility of mind and rapidity of decision-making on the part of a commander and his subordinates to ensure that time is never lost. It also calls for mobility of a high order so that forces can be concentrated and dispersed rapidly and economically. 9. Co-operation. The conduct of operations requires co-operation between the arms and services in the army, between the components of a joint force, between the armed forces and civil authorities, and, in a combined force, between allies. It is built on team spirit and training, and entails the co-ordination of all activities so as to achieve the maximum combined effort from the whole. Co-operation can be achieved if goodwill and the desire to work are fostered at all levels. 10. Administration. Operational plans are unlikely to succeed unless great care is devoted to administrative arrangements. These must be flexible and designed so that a commander has maximum freedom of action. Successful administration is the ability to make the best and most timely use of resources. 11. Administration is the indispensable servant of operations and is often the deciding factor in assessing the feasibility of an operation or the practicality of an aim. A commander requires a clear understanding of the administrative factors which may affect his activities. He must have that degree of control over the administrative plan which corresponds to his degree of operational responsibility. It is equally important that combat service support commanders and their staffs fully understand the nature of operations and hence their support implications. ************************************************ * Infantry section: eight to ten riflemen. Three sections plus a support weapons detachment and headquarters make a platoon - 30-40 guys. Three platoons plus a support weapons element and headquarters make a company - 100-130 guys. Three or four companies plus a support weapons company, administrative support company, and headquarters make a battalion - 800-1000 guys. Two or more battalions plus an armoured regiment, other combat and logistic support units, and a headquarters make a brigade - 4000-5000 guys. Two or more brigades plus other combat and logistic support units and a headquarters make a dvision - 15,000-20,000 guys. Two or more divisions plus other combat and logistic support units and a headquarters make a corps - 60,000-80,000 guys. Two or more corps plus other combat and logistic support units and a headquarters make an army - 200,000-250,000 guys. Two or more armies plus other combat and logistic support units and a headquarters make an army group - 750,000-1,000,000 guys. Big or small, these principles apply. Military versus Military or Recreational Firearms Community versus Lieberal Government, these principles apply. I invite discussion and questions. More to follow. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:38:37 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Judge upset at gun trial delays PUBLICATION: The Leader-Post (Regina) DATE: 2001.05.23 EDITION: FINAL SECTION: National PAGE: A5 SOURCE: Canadian Press DATELINE: CALGARY - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Judge upset at gun trial delays - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- CALGARY (CP) -- A judge was taken aback Tuesday after hearing that a firearms case against the head of Canada's pro-gun lobby had been set for trial three times over the last two years. ``I am shocked,'' Judge Heather Lamoureux of provincial court said after being asked for another delay in the case. ``I am concerned with Mr. Gregory doing this at the last moment,'' the judge said of defence lawyer Rob Gregory's request for a further delay. National Firearms Association president Jim Hinter, 40, was charged with careless use and storage of a firearm after neighbours complained that a bullet from his Calgary apartment entered their home in May 1999. In court last January, the trial was adjourned when Crown prosecutor Danny Elliott received a request from Gregory to postpone the case. Lawyers are to return to court this morning to set another trial date. Lamoureux said the trial will be heard before June 30. Hinter's lawyers had already requested two previous postponements and another was sought after Elliott broke his leg from falling off a roof, court heard. A judge can prohibit a person from owning firearms if he is convicted of unsafe handling, but the Crown is not seeking such a ban in this case. The National Firearms Association has long stressed that gun users should be trained in gun safety. The lobby group has also strongly opposed the federal government's contentious gun control law. The law came under fire again Tuesday when Garry , Canadian Alliance MP for Yorkton-Melville, complained the law is easier on foreign visitors than Canadian gun owners. ``Foreign visitors can come into Canada with their guns without having to pass any of the mandatory public safety tests and background checks forced on Canadian firearms owners,'' said. Canadian customs officials don't conduct criminal record checks on foreigners coming into the country with guns, he added. But David Austin, spokesman for the Canadian Firearms Registry, said that simply isn't true. ``They are confused,'' he said. ``They are screened by customs at the border point.'' Under the Firearms Act, customs officers are required to screen non-residents who want to import firearms, Austin said. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:38:43 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: CFC - Special Bulletin To Outfitters - No. 2 http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/owners%26users/bulletins/special/outfitters/bullet in2%2Den.html Special Bulletin To Outfitters - No. 2 Important Information For Customers From Other Countries ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:07:34 -0600 From: "Hoenisch, Frederick W ISTA:EX" Subject: RE: Feedback Good morning Mike: A west coast opinion: I have seen many of these photos before (as I actually sought them out, on the internet, shortly after my FAC course instructor made numerous comments about how TV's depiction of "bullet meets body" is so grossly misrepresented and incorrect). Initially when I viewed the webpage, I wondered how the anti-firearms groups could use these photo's against the recreational firearms community. And I was scared! I got a little comfort later on when I read your four justifications for using the photos. To keep this email short - you need to put those justifications (in shorter point form) on your webpage to divert some of the viewer's attention on the 'educational' value of the photos (in addition to the shock value you are intending). Hope this helps - and good luck. Yours truly, Fred. Frederick W. Hoenisch OpenVMS Services - ITSD - Province of British Columbia E317 (3GR) 4000 Seymour Place, Victoria, British Columbia, CANADA V8X 4S8 (work) 250 387 5673 (fax) 250 387 5231 Fred.Hoenisch@Gems9.gov.bc.ca Disclaimer: The opinions and statements contained in this posting are the sole responsibility of the author and have not in any way been reviewed or approved by my employer or any network service. - -----Original Message----- From: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca [mailto:mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 8:29 PM To: Hoenisch, Frederick W ISTA:EX Subject: Feedback The SMSA website got some negative feedback today. I'd appreciate some views from a wider audience before making a definative response. Please view this page from our website and then read this letter by Mike Kiley and my response. Feel free to follow the links to the rest of the site. Your thoughts? http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/mikeack/Consequences.htm ____________________________ From: "mike riley" 21:16 Subject: To: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca These gunshot pictures belong in medical/police archives for instructional purposes. They do NOT belong on a site that purports to advocate gun safety and the responsible actions of shooters. I'm a member and don't condone this on the site Mike Kiley __________________________________________ Mike, Thanks for your feedback. I was beginning to wonder if the site was getting any hits. I agree that these photo's are very disturbing. I chose to include them for a couple of reasons. First, I have been using them for four years now as an adjunct to the Federal and Provincial Firearms Safety Courses to press home to new shooters the absolute importance of strict firearms safety. I give a little talk about how much I love the shooting sports but at the same time have a healthy respect for these tools. In this regard the photos have been well received and effective. Second, I know that the antis are always accusing us shooters of glossing over or minimizing the potential for misuse of or harm with firearms. By putting this page on the site I think I am heading them off at the pass, so to speak. By admitting right up front that some people use firearms for destructive purposes, and then showing the true proportions represented by these misuses and the lawful shooters plan to avoid such misuse, I am hoping to rebut the antis' arguement before they make it. Third, I included the forest fire photo to show that there is potential for great danger in other activities than shooting. Fourth, we shooters are always accusing the antis of making 'cost only' arguements and ignoring the much greater benefits of firearms to society. I feel it would be hypocritical for us to make a 'benefits only' arguement and ignore some of the bad outcomes. Obviously you have found this page offensive. I will bring your concern to the club executive and we will respond to you. In addition, please feel free to raise this issue at any club meeting. If I had known your feelings on Sunday (20 May) I would have raised it myself for general discussion at our club meeting. Thanks again for your feedback and I will be in touch again shortly. - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca Hope for the best, Plan for the worst - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca Hope for the best, Plan for the worst ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #785 ********************************** 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.