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, 30 May, 2001 08:12 To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #797 Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, May 30 2001 Volume 03 : Number 797 In this issue: Re: Flumian to HRDC Re: It's wonderful to be "prominent." [none] Re: The Rotten Cops Collaborators? need copy of recent Charlton Heston speech Big gaping holes in the Canadian Firearms Safety Course system Re: FW: What were the results of this prosecution? Re: More Reasoning Re: More Reasoning Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #796 Controlled Goods Registration for Prohibited Firearms ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:52:29 -0600 From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: Flumian to HRDC > CILA / ICAL > Defending Canada's Heritage > Maryantonett Flumian, Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Firearms Centre, > has been appointed Associate Deputy Minister, Human Resources > Development Canada, effective July 3, 2001. I guess everything has been "fixed" at the CFC, and Jane need a "little help" at HRDC. I thought she had everything all sorted out there. It looks like privitization is scheduled for July 3. Bruce Hamilton, Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:52:42 -0600 From: "Peter Kearns" Subject: Re: It's wonderful to be "prominent." > From: "Paul Chicoine" <701506@ican.net> wrote: > > Peter Kearns wrote: > I recently read in several digest issues that "some" are > dissatisfied with what they "perceive" the NFA is doing or not > doing in the legal arena. Strangely the observations and > criticisms come from non members!! It seems that people who > don't pay dues or join the association (apparently) expect the > association to report directly to them, > - -snip- > > Wrong again Peter, I have asked this question and I am a paid up member. Peter Kearns wrote: I wasn't aware I mentioned your name Paul. In fact I didn't mention anybody's name..... I don't particularly care if you are a member or not. I pointed out that people criticising and "advising" the NFA are not paid up members, (or may be lapsed.) Perhaps you should consider that there are other people out there criticising whatever organisations they choose, and you really aren't unique. I refer you to my paragraph where I stated that "snipers" should buy a membership, work long hours for the association for many years and run for national office if their ideas are that good. (Good idea eh?) Thank you for calling me a "prominent member," but not for your flame which followed. I am an ordinary member of the NFA, and my "prominence" is more around the girth, and perhaps in the minds of detractors, who claim not to be looking for arguments, merely kicking a bag of policy around. (That's the first time I saw a personal flame referred to as a bag of policy!) Apparently you believe I have no right to criticise anybody, but it is perfectly OK for you to personally attack me, the NFA or anybody else that offends your sensibilities. (A tad hypocritical don't you think?) It seems the moderator must have missed your personal flame directed at me..... ((Below)) Paul Chicoine wrote: > Regarding snipers, well we all expect that. Question is, what is more damaging, a malcontent who questions or criticises an association to which he/she may or may not be a member or a prominent (ordinary member) of the NFA who criticises statements made by principle members of other firearms associations like the CILA ? > I criticise anybody I believe is wrong, but unlike some, I don't mind taking the return "broadsides." I achieved my "notoriety" by standing up for what I believe. I have been criticised many times, and certainly haven't been shy of criticising others, but I do resent those who seek to impose their views on the rest of us and then become downright petulant when anybody criticises or questions their views. I note in a previous article that Rick Lowe is rightly upset about people calling any critic a "Loudmouth." (Seems to me it's the people who aired their views first that should perhaps have that title.) "Not looking for arguments, just kicking a bag of policy about" regards, Peter Moderator: I perceived no Personal flame here - YET! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:52:48 -0600 From: "Herb McKay" Subject: [none] I agree with what Peters said about snipers.The people doing the sniping at the NFA send long messages about what they figure is the smart thing to do.I reckon those people would be better getting from behind their keyboards and doing some real work for the NFA or CELA or Lufa or what ever outfit they belong to.You aren't clever or smart saying what you would have done years after something has happened. For an example.Some one said that duck shooters raise millions each year in Canada and gun owners should do the same if they were organized and had good leaders.What did that guy do about it other than try and tell the rest of us how stupid we are?Well he never did anything neither, so I guess he isn't any smarter than the rest of us. Its easy to talk the talk, but I wonder if any of the experts pointing out our mistakes has ever done anything but tap out advice on there computer. Herb Mckay NFA and RFOA payed up Member ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:52:55 -0600 From: "Marc Thibault" Subject: Re: The Rotten Cops > > With the heavy millions being thrown into Policing, one > > would think there would be real "crime prevention", rather > > than "crime solutions after the fact. > > Let's see... we have special units being shut down, the > Force having to curtail use of their helicopters, patrol > boats, etc is well documented, etc. Talk about missing the point! The police do not have a mandate to prevent crime. Brave slogans and mottos notwithstanding, prevention isn't in the binding part of any union contract or other police services document. There is case law upholding that limitation of liability. To give the police a mandate to prevent crime, we'd have to give them the authority to deliver on the requirement. We call a country that does that a Police State. If you check their contracts, you'll find that they are charged with gathering evidence and apprehending criminals, full stop. Their job is to count the bodies and chase the perpetrators. The only place that prevention comes into play is that every citizen, including every cop, is authorized to react when they see a crime being committed (see Criminal Code Sections 25-31 and 494.) Since we arm them to the teeth, cops are more likely to use that authority than your typical urban socialist. The fanciful definition of a policeman is that of a citizen who is paid to spend all his time fulfilling the duty every citizen has to fight crime. Of course, it is to laugh. There are a couple of countries in Europe where that is a reasonable description, but here the police are a group apart; no more ordinary citizens than the power-tripping socialist politicians they answer to. We'd like to think that the police are not the enemy, but They tried to turn millions of citizens into criminals by using super- light pellets to classify airguns as firearms; They are forcing civilian shooting ranges to spend tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars to make "safety improvements" or shut down, even though every civilian shooting range in Canada has an unblemished safety record already; They voted to support the firearms registry; They have asked retailers to keep a record of who buys what ammunition; They have charged the unlicensed spouses of gun owners with possession offenses; They have persecuted people who successfully defend themselves against criminal attacks. I'm sure there's more, but that's what comes immediately to mind. A few weeks ago I was pulled over by a road patrol: "Did you know you have a dead headlight?" "Uh, yes. I'm on my way to Canadian Tire to get a replacement" "Do you have a gun in the car?" "What?! No." "Do you mind if we take a look?" "Are you arresting me?" "No, ..." As you might guess, the conversation went a little downhill from there. It seems that Driving While Holding a FAC has become probable cause. These are not our friends. \_____<><><>==== / _/-' No Victims Here ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:53:02 -0600 From: Rick Lowe Subject: Collaborators? Mike Ackermann, MD said... > Until they are willing to stand up and voice their concerns in a public > forum, I have little time for them. As far as I'm concerned they are > collaborators. Oh please... As it happens, both have, on this and other subjects. Now, while on the subject of those not loudly going public about wrongdoing or issues they are concerned about within their professions as being collaborators, I presume that would include all the doctors who remain silent on the uncomfortable issues within the medical profession, eh Dr. Mike? Do you speak out about those issues on public forums or reserve your public broadcasting just for the firearms issues? Are you a collaborator or is everything perfect within the world of medicine? Have you been screaming loudly and publicly that people such as my wife have been waiting for three months now for an MRI following a head injury with none in sight while a doctor gets a professional athlete in for his MRI within days if not hours? Where might I read your postings about that? That a professional athlete gets shoulder surgery within days if not hours, while an injured worker can wait months to get his shoulder operated on - living on WCB while waiting, if he's lucky enough to qualify for WCB? Can you tell me where I can read your public forum comments about that? How about the fact that they all give lip service to the concept that every Canadian is entitled to decent medical care - but try and find one willing to move to rural communities desperately trying to find a community physician? Where might I find your public commentary on that issue? That's just the very tip of the iceberg, right off the top of my head... Where might I read your public forum concerns about the ills in medicine that don't involve firearms in some manner - or is everything perfect in how the medical profession conducts itself? There must be thousands of postings from MD's out there regarding problems within the practices of the medical profession - - or a hell of a lot of collaborators using the standards you want to apply to police. > Hope for the best, Plan for the worst And pick carefully what you are going to be outraged about... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:54:47 -0600 From: Dr Grant Bjornson Subject: need copy of recent Charlton Heston speech If anyone has the text of a recent NRA speech of Charlton Heston's, in which he referred to marching with Martin Luther King in 1963 (among many other things!), would you please email it to me, so I can pass it on to a friend. It was printed in this digest a while ago. Thanks very much. -- GB ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:56:09 -0600 From: "Brian" Subject: Big gaping holes in the Canadian Firearms Safety Course system Just off the top of my head, at least three big topic areas are not covered with any substantial level of detail in the Canadian Firearms Safety Course(s): 1) Virtually no hunting information is included. Huge numbers of shooters also are or will become hunters and will require this type of information in order to hunt. Here in Manitoba, our Hunter and Firearms Safety Course used to contain at least the same level of detail regarding firearm safety, but it also covered information needed to hunt. As a result of the Canadian Firearms Safety Course approach, new Manitoba hunters will need to take two courses instead of one. Add also a third course - almost identical to the Canadian Firearms Safety Course - if a person plans to own 'restricted' firearms. That's three courses where in the past one course has worked at least as well and at a lower cost to boot. 2) It is far more likely that a firearm owner will run afoul of some exotic and nonsensical C-68 regulation than injure someone. Given the legal hazards faced by firearm owners living under a law that requires a 1500 page desk manual to properly explain, surely the primary focus of the course should be on the rights and responsibilities of firearm owners under C-68. Safe gun handling can be summed up in one page, but the whys and wherefores of staying within the law while trapping with an AR-15 will likely require a lawyer's assistance to decode and implement. 3) There is no burning of powder during the course. If a course is designed to certify a person as a trained and safe shooter, it might be nice to see whether they can really shoot in a safe manner like they have been trained to do, or whether they instead tend to ignore muzzle direction and other safety principles as soon as a round is discharged. Safety training is good and should be encouraged - but a comprehensive course that addresses the real needs of firearm owners would be much preferred to the present mess of redundant mini-courses. - --Brian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 01:01:26 -0600 From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: FW: What were the results of this prosecution? > DATE OF RESPONSE : 29/05/2001 > RESPONSE TO ENQUIRY : > Dear Sir: > > Thank you for your enquiry. > Please contact the Ontario Provincial Weapons Enforcement Unit at > 905-671-6830. > I hope this is of assistance. How useful! The next question is: what the heck is the Ontario Provincial Weapons Enforcement Unit? Bruce Hamilton, Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 01:02:52 -0600 From: "Jim Szpajcher" Subject: Re: More Reasoning David - Thanks so much for your clear and lucid account of how the Canadain Alliance got co-opted from the grass roots. There never were any moles or dissidents. I never heard such talk from inside the Reform party. There were only party members, who bought memberships and had a voice. From where I stand, it appears that Stockwell Day has done everything in his power to smother this. You don't inspire people by coercing them. You inspire them with vision. By dismissing the concerns of these folks, and labeling them in such unsavory terms, you have demonstrated once again why I should not, can not, and will not support either Stockwell Day - or the Canadian Alliance party as it now stands. This party has gone too far from the 1988 rallying cry "The West Wants In" after Mulroney stepped in and gave the F-18 maintenance contract to Quebec instead of Manitoba "For the good of the Country." What you are saying now is that I, as a former Reform Party member in the CA, had better shut up, sit down, and don't question what the new Elite Manipulators and Spin Doctors are dictating. Your description of Stockwell's Red Deer Advocate letter compares with the best of Goebbels. In regards to my further participation in this comic opera, where the inmates are clearly running the asylum: No can do, bro'. >From here on in, all my spare funds are going to go to the NCC and the NFA, where they fight to keep ALL politicians aware of the issues. As New Hampshire's motto says: "Live Free or Die". Thank you for the assistance in deciding this issue. Jim Szpajcher - ----- Original Message ----- From: David Leskowski Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 6:10 AM Subject: More Reasoning > > Jim, > The Leader's Office IS taking charge. The number of hired weasels, loose > cannons, and loudmouths are declining. I'm sure Schwartzkopf would approve. > Of course, now we hear from the "Whiner" faction that this is not > "team-building"....damned if you do, damned if you don't, kind of scenario. > Again, I prefer that we identify the moles and dissidents far in advance of > the next election. > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 07:59:58 -0600 From: "Jim Szpajcher" Subject: Re: More Reasoning David - Thanks so much for your clear and lucid account of how the Canadain Alliance got co-opted from the grass roots. There never were any moles or dissidents. I never heard such talk from inside the Reform party. There were only party members, who bought memberships and had a voice. From where I stand, it appears that Stockwell Day has done everything in his power to smother this. You don't inspire people by coercing them. You inspire them with vision. By dismissing the concerns of these folks, and labeling them in such unsavory terms, you have demonstrated once again why I should not, can not, and will not support either Stockwell Day - or the Canadian Alliance party as it now stands. This party has gone too far from the 1988 rallying cry "The West Wants In" after Mulroney stepped in and gave the F-18 maintenance contract to Quebec instead of Manitoba "For the good of the Country." What you are saying now is that I, as a former Reform Party member in the CA, had better shut up, sit down, and don't question what the new Elite Manipulators and Spin Doctors are dictating. Your description of Stockwell's Red Deer Advocate letter compares with the best of Goebbels. In regards to my further participation in this comic opera, where the inmates are clearly running the asylum: No can do, bro'. >From here on in, all my spare funds are going to go to the NCC and the NFA, where they fight to keep ALL politicians aware of the issues. As New Hampshire's motto says: "Live Free or Die". Thank you for the assistance in deciding this issue. Jim Szpajcher - ----- Original Message ----- From: David Leskowski Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 6:10 AM Subject: More Reasoning > > Jim, > The Leader's Office IS taking charge. The number of hired weasels, loose > cannons, and loudmouths are declining. I'm sure Schwartzkopf would approve. > Of course, now we hear from the "Whiner" faction that this is not > "team-building"....damned if you do, damned if you don't, kind of scenario. > Again, I prefer that we identify the moles and dissidents far in advance of > the next election. > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 08:00:04 -0600 From: "David M" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #796 - ----- Original Message ----- > > Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 19:34:16 -0600 > From: "Marc Thibault" > Subject: Re: In view of the events in Oldham this last weekend.... > > > I don't think that we are doing ourselves any favours by > > circulating speeches from suspected racists and nazis. > > > > Bruce > > Hamilton, > > Ontario J. Enoch Powell was no racist and as a distinguished soldier who enlisted as a private and finished the war as the Army's youngest brigadier he was not in any way shape or form a Nazi. "Above all, Powell was a man for whom no truth was so large and so uncomfortable that it should not be told. Telling what he regarded to be the truth on that occasion in 1968 eclipsed his previous achievement as an economic radical and destroyer of socialist ideology." That he is "a prophet without honour in his own country" is a sad reflection on the depths to which (once) Great Britain has sunk. An obituary can be found at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=000678129001802&rtmo=Vr3SrVVK&atmo=99999999 &pg=/et/98/2/14/ebpow14.html Regards, DM Moderator: Although there are different opinions about Powell nothing has been said to warrant exclusion from this forum. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 08:11:39 -0600 From: "Marc Thibault" Subject: Controlled Goods Registration for Prohibited Firearms It's been a busy night. On April 30 2001, an amendment to the Defence Production Act (Bill S-25) came quietly into force. This amendment establishes a Controlled Goods Registration Program and includes prohibited firearms and .50+ calibre ammunition as Controlled Goods. The language is familiar: 37.(1) No person shall, unless the person is registered under section 38 or exempt from registration under section 39 or 39.1, knowingly examine or possess a controlled good or transfer a controlled good to another person. 42.(1) For the purposes of ensuring compliance with this Part and the regulations, an inspector may at any reasonable time enter and inspect any place. 43. The Governor in Council may make regulations ... Here's the relevant section out of the Export Control List cited in the act. 2001. Arms and automatic weapons with a calibre of 12.7 mm (calibre of 0.50 inches) or less and accessories, as follows, and specially designed components therefor: a. Rifles, carbines, revolvers, pistols, machine pistols and machine guns; Note: 2001.a. does not control the following: 1. Muskets, rifles and carbines dated earlier than 1938; 2. Reproductions of muskets, rifles and carbines, the originals of which were manufactured earlier than 1890; 3. Revolvers, pistols and machine guns manufactured earlier than 1890, and their reproductions. b. Smooth-bore weapons specially designed for military use; c. Weapons using caseless ammunition; d. Silencers, special gun-mountings, clips and flash suppressors for arms controlled by sub-items 2001.a., 2001.b. or 2001.c. Technical Note: Smooth-bore weapons specially designed for military use as specified in sub-item 2001.b. are those which: a. Are proof tested at pressures above 1,300 bars; b. Operate normally and safely at pressures above 1,000 bars; and c. Are capable of accepting ammunition above 76.2 mm in length (e.g., commercial 12-gauge magnum shot gun shells). The parameters in this Technical Note are to be measured according to the standards of the Commission Internationale Permanente. Notes: 1. 2001. does not control smooth-bore weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes. These weapons must not be specially designed for military use or of the fully automatic firing type. 2. 2001. does control firearms specially designed for dummy ammunition and which are incapable of firing any controlled ammunition. 3. 2001. does not control weapons using non-centre fire cased ammunition and which are not of the fully automatic firing type. References: <> <> \_____<><><>==== / _/-' No Victims Here ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #797 ********************************** 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.