From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca on behalf of Cdn-Firearms Digest [owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca] Sent: Saturday, 02 February, 2002 19:33 To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #509 Cdn-Firearms Digest Saturday, February 2 2002 Volume 04 : Number 509 In this issue: Re: Gun show announcements Let "them" verify your firearms before registering RE: Prohib weapon in vehicle confidence in our money??? Re: Gun registry defends pace of licensing Re: Unknown Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Yorkton Gun Show Gun Probe Finds 151 Weapons Missing Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #506 CFC Call Centers Down? Re: confidence in our money??? Man shot, cop hurt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 13:54:46 -0600 From: "Stewart Dale" Subject: Re: Gun show announcements It is nice to be advised of upcoming gun shows, but it would be even = nicer if the people making these announcements would tell us in what city the show is being = held. Stew. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 13:54:46 -0600 From: Sorensens Subject: Let "them" verify your firearms before registering I have a suggestion for all those who are thinking about filling out = registration information and giving it to the authorities. The following = (in italic) is an example of the information you should be giving them: Dec. 18/02. Merry Christmas. Best of the season to all. I was = attempting to fill out a form for registering my firearms and I have a = big problem that I can not solve by myself. I have several firearms = that require registration under our current laws, But because the = current laws hold me criminally responsible for the information, I will = not supply information over the phone, fax or internet. I will require a = verifier to inspect and supply the information directly for = registration. I expect a call fairly soon as registration is supposed to = be done this year. We only have a couple of weeks left. Thank you. Dennis R. Sorensen Phone 250 652-5610 Keep a copy of the letter you mail in. It will be proof you have = cooperated with the registry and are waiting for the verifier. If you = have any old firearms without a serial number, have your local gunsmith = stamp an identifying number on them. An example(perfectly legal) the = first numbers are the date intermingled with some letters and then = starting with 01 your initials. If you have more to do change the 01 to = 02 and so on. Here is how I would do one gun on Feb 13th this year. = 021302FUKU2ROCK01DRS the second gun the same day would be = 021302FUKU2ROCK02DRS. These are unique identifying numbers and meet the = requirements for registration. I believe the law requires the caliber of = the firearm. Insist that only the caliber be listed, not the cartridge = designation. for instance: a Winchester Model 70 that uses the cartridge = 30-06 should be listed as a 30 caliber. So should a 308 Winchester. = Those are the correct terminology's for the requirement of caliber under = the law. The correct definition of caliber when referring to a barrel, = is the bore diameter. When referring to the cartridge it is the bullet = diameter. Let them register the caliber of your 44 magnum rifle as a 41 = caliber, because that is the bore diameter. The bullet diameter is a 43 = caliber. Where do they get off by insisting it is registered by = cartridge designation.. the law does not say that. It says "caliber". = Most of the moronic verifiers do not know the difference. They will not = know what you are talking about. Enough ranting for this letter.. Dennis R. Sorensen ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 13:54:46 -0600 From: "Rod Regier" Subject: RE: Prohib weapon in vehicle Long before C-68 or C-17, it is an offense to be an occupant of a motor vehicle in which a person knows there is a prohibited weapon. (Used to be S.88(2) in 1988). There are military and LEO exemptions. Also exemptions for grandfathered owners w/regis cert etc. A "sawed-off shotgun" normally falls into the category of a prohibited weapon. I suspect this was written to make it easier to scoop up all participants in robberies, etc, not just the gunman. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 13:54:45 -0600 From: "Trigger Mortis" Subject: confidence in our money??? >Anyway, the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance have reliably assured >Canadians that the major reason our currency is a bottom-feeder is a >"perception >problem." ================= Yeah. People perceive that the dollar is not healthy. Why?? Well, probably it's because people also perceive that the government is not the only organization issuing money. I drove out west in the summer. I noticed, at many gas stations and stores, a sign saying that they don't accept 50's or 100's. I asked one woman, who ran a family gas station in the middle of nowhere, why they don't accept them. She said because they are afraid of getting bogus bills. I asked if she had already gotten any counterfeit bills. She said yes, they got a phony 10. She said the bank spotted it when she tried to deposit it and sent it to the RCMP. I asked when that was. She said 3 or 4 months ago. I asked if the RCMP had called her. She said no. So, the banks are pulling all the 1's, 2's and 1000's out of circulation. That leaves the 5, 10, 20, 50 & 100. They are not accepting 50's or 100's. That leaves the 5, 10 & 20. She got stuck with a bogus 10 and I got a bogus 20 in 1997. That leaves the 5. The 20 I got looked like it was washed out in the laundry a couple of times. I looked at it under a 30 power microscope and the printing looked OK to me. My local bank didn't like the looks of it and wouldn't accept it, so I mailed it, on Nov 25, 1997, to the Bank of Canada for their opinion. They wrote back and told me that it was bogus and they couldn't return it to me, because they were obliged to turn it over to the RCMP. I never heard from the RCMP. Now, the fact that neither myself nor the lady in the store heard from the RCMP tells me that this problem is large and must occur frequently. If there were only isolated incidents, the RCMP would be following all of them up. After all, counterfeiting is considered to be a serious crime, isn't it? Even loonies are being counterfeited. I saw a display of counterfeit loonies at a coin show in Toronto a couple of years ago. They were displayed by an RCMP officer, because the RCMP are the only people who have authority to be in possession of counterfeit money, and then only under certain conditions. Anyway, I handled the phony loonies. They were terrible copies. They didn't look good at all. I asked the Mountie why anybody would even bother to make loonies. Why not make 50's or 100's? He said that the guy who made the loonies I was handling (there were about 20 of them) did it as a hobby. Some hobby! I also remember a bank clerk telling me that she had orders to pass phonies, found in the bank's possession, to the customers, so that the bank wouldn't take the loss when the phony was noticed. That was quite a while ago. In conclusion, people don't have faith in our monetary system, and it shows. Bye. Al. rharper@cgocable.net SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 13:54:46 -0600 From: Alfred Hovdestad Subject: Re: Gun registry defends pace of licensing How many of them were marked "Thanks, but no thanks!" Alfred > David Austin said in a telephone interview from Ottawa that more than a > million of the 1.8 million licensed gun owners in Canada have returned their > packages already. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 14:52:27 -0600 From: "TriggerMortis" Subject: Re: Unknown >Supply them with NOTHING. All the fields, describing the gun, should be >marked as "unknown. I'm not a lawyer but I believe that this approach could get you into trouble. For most (not all) firearms, some of the information on the form is immediately obvious to anyone. For example whether or not the barrel length is 18.5 inches or greater. Placing unknown in these fields, could be considered providing "false or misleading information". My approach will be to provide whatever incontrovertable information that can be determined from direct inspection. This includes type, action, whether or not the firearm is single shot, whether or not the firearm is a frame/reciever and (in most cases) barrel length. On an attached sheet, I will provide provide markings to be found on the firearm and where they are located (ie barrel, reciever, etc.). In the fields for make, serial number, gauge/calibre and model I will put "See attached". I will also provide a signed statement as follows: "The enclosed firearms registration sheet requires information from sources to which I do not have access. All information that can be determined by inspection of the firearm is included on the firearms registration sheet. All information marked on the receiver and barrel of the firearm is provided on the reverse of this sheet. " If I simply tell them that the barrel of the firearm is marked "22LR" nobody can later accuse me of accused of providing "false or misleading information" even if "22LR" is not a calibre designation used in the FART. If they use a number marked on the reciever as the serial number - I didn't SAY it was the serial number - and I'll have a signed copy of my submission to prove it. Just my 2 cents worth. ============== Well, I'm not a lawyer either, but I figure that Canadian law doesn't require me to supply information when I am not recognized as an expert. That's why the verifier system was created. They wanted professional verifiers, so let them supply them when information is collected. Also, I figure I am entitled to keep my mouth shut when possible criminal charges are involved (see section 106 of the FA). I am entitled by virtue of our Charter of Rights. If they want to lay charges, I am willing to let the judge review our Charter of Rights. I am confident I will win in that case. Yeah, I know. I might have to spend some money on a lawyer. Also, the general thrust from my former posting is to make the government use valuable resources, like manpower and travel expenses, to get their firearms database info. I will identify myself and supply them with my address, phone number and FL number. They can do the rest. If you supply them with minimal information, like what you can read off your barrel, for instance, you relieve them of that burden. They will likely accept whatever you say and that will be the end of it. The end, that is, until some incident down the road requires a review of the information you have on file about that firearm. They may be looking for some technicality to screw you and they'll likely find it. I know that sounds cynical, but I think it is also realistic. An example of bad information, directly from the firearm, is a rifle I bought once. It was an FN Mauser. The barrel clearly said "30-06". A popular conversion from the 60's was to re-chamber 30-06 to .308 Norma Mag, and that is what was done to my rifle. The guy who did it should have, but didn't, indicate the new chambering by restamping the barrel. It's bad enough getting your face sand-blasted by escaping rearward gas, but under our new laws, I would also be guilty of violating section 106, if I supplied the government the "information" that my rifle was a 30-06, even though I acted in good faith. Good faith is not good enough and that is clearly indicated in the wording of section 106. I wouldn't expect someone to get 5 years in jail for that, but I would expect a conviction, lawyer's fees, and possible loss of all firearms without compensation. Another example is J. C. Higgins or Sears firearms. Those companies never made any firearms. They just marketed them. Put down those names and, again, you have unwittingly broken section 106. I emphasize, again, that you act in good faith, but good faith is not enough. Here's section 106: - -------- 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. - ------- Note in 106(3), that your "opinion" is to be considered when they decide whether you have broken the law. So, if your opinion is that the gun was made by Sears, then (sound of loud, annoying buzzer) you lose. You mentioned "whether or not the barrel length is 18.5 inches or greater". Previously, they wanted the exact measurement. Now, they don't need the exact measurement. What assurance do you have that they won't need the exact measurement in the future? They'll look at information, supplied by you, and determine that you "failed to disclose any information that is relevant to the application for the licence, registration certificate or authorization". Does that sound far-fetched? Maybe next week, it would seem that way, but what about 5 or 10 years from now? You have no protection against prosecution then. There is no time limit for them to prosecute you and you have no way to know what is relevant to them. They keep changing the details of the rules as often as they change their socks. In conclusion, when the time comes for them to gather my information, they better send someone to get it, because I do not pretend to be expert enough to figure out what they want now, or at some time in the future. Nice to hear from you and I removed your name, so I could send this to the Digest, after I noticed how long-winded I was getting. Blind CC to you. Bye. Al. "the Church of England entered the 20th century opposed to buggery and in favor of fox hunting, but by the start of the 21st century it had reversed its position" - - the British Earl of Onslow ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 14:52:25 -0600 From: Edward Hudson Subject: Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Mr Dale Blue, President Responsible Firearms Owners of Alberta Dear Dale, Re: Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Thank you very much for your note of encouragement regarding this committee hearing. In my request to Mr Breitkreuz I shamelessly plagiarized your letter - thanks for the permission to do so. I trust that you will be successful in your endeavor to appear as a witness, and hopefully some one from LUFA will be able to travel with you to Ottawa. Sincerely, Eduardo Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2002 11:59:57 -0600 From: Edward Hudson Organization: An Un-licensed Firearms Owner To: breitg@parl.gc.ca, vachom@parl.gc.ca CC: Jim Turnbull 02Feb02 Mr. Garry Breitkreuz, MP Dear Mr. Breitkreuz: Re: Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights I understand you are preparing a list of expert witnesses and organizations that would like to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to give testimony on how the implementation of the Firearms Act is affecting their jobs, their industry, their business activities and their recreational pursuits and pastimes. Law-abiding Unregistered Firearms Association (LUFA) would appreciate being on this list. We are certainly familiar with the Statutes of Canada 1995, Chapter 39 and both the direct, and indirect, effect it is having on our members. We are confident representatives from LUFA could provide valuable insight as to the negative results of Bill C-68. Thank you for all your efforts to protect the freedoms of all Canadians. Sincerely, Jim Turnbull, Treasurer Edward B. Hudson DVM, MS, Past President Law-abiding Unregistered Firearms Association (LUFA) c.c. Marie Danielle Vachon, Clerk, Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 14:54:48 -0600 From: "E. Duchnitski" Subject: Yorkton Gun Show Yorkton Gun Show will be held on Feb. 23 & 24. We do have some table space available for rent. Please email or call 306-783-6025 for more info ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 14:57:38 -0600 From: Bruce Mills Subject: Gun Probe Finds 151 Weapons Missing Something like this couldn't happen here, could it? http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/ap/20020124/us/stolen_guns_2.html Thursday January 24 8:49 PM ET Gun Probe Finds 151 Weapons Missing BELLEVILLE, Ill. (AP) - An investigation into the theft of five handguns from a county evidence room revealed that more than 150 guns had disappeared. Seven of the firearms have been recovered, including one used in a Bridgeton, Mo., shooting that left a man hospitalized, St. Clair County Sheriff's Sgt. Dave Thornton said. The guns had been seized by law enforcement agencies in the county and were being held at the circuit clerk's office to eventually be sold to collectors or melted down. County employees discovered the thefts when one police department requested guns it had seized be returned. A former building janitor, Joseph Williams, 34, was charged with three counts of burglary in connection with thefts from the evidence room in early January. Authorities said Williams was caught on a surveillance camera taking several guns from the room. They declined to say whether he is a suspect in the disappearance of the other firearms, ranging from handguns to semiautomatics. None of the 151 missing guns was being held as evidence, Circuit Court Clerk Barney Metz told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch for Thursday's editions. He said weapons that might be needed for trial are kept separately in a locked vault. Metz said the office takes in 50 to 60 firearms a year. The sheriff's department clears them out every few years. LouAnn Henry, Metz's chief clerk, said the evidence room had been strengthened since the thefts with a wood door protected by two locks. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 14:58:53 -0600 From: "Bob James" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #506 > From: Lee Jasper > Subject: Dog attack > Don't you get a bit tired of the animal rightists' claiming - > you can't blame the dog, its the owners fault. If only the owner > properly trained the dog . . . Lee While I agree with just about every thing else you said I really have to disagree with that statement. " You can`t blame the dogs it is the owners fault. While I have owned guns for 55 years I have had dogs even longer. And yes I own one of those "viscious" Rottwielers that I take to hospitals and old age homes where she is virtually welcomed with open arms. Many people look forward to her visits and I have been asked to demonstrate her training and agility. She has more letters after her name than most Lawyers and Professors. And that is because of responsible ownership, training, obedience and socialization. So please DO NOT attack my dog. > And an attack every 60 seconds? Yes and 98.9 % of these by those cute little untrained Pekenese, Poodles and Bichon Frise ( my apologies to owners of these dogs, I not picking on them as I have at one time or another had them all as pets). They too need training and socializing but to have a large breed dog and not do this is irresponsible and definately the owners fault not the dogs. You can`t fault a dog for doing what he is trained to do. Bob James RFO & Elco Von Der Rottcus 2nd, CD, CDX, CGC, TD "Bailey" for short PS. DJ MacIntyre Bailey thanks you. - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.by AVG Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.317 / Virus Database: 176 - Release Date: 1/21/02 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 14:58:59 -0600 From: Bruce Mills Subject: CFC Call Centers Down? I picked this up from the can.talk.guns newsgroup; soemone was complainig that the CFC call center was down for the weekend: The message was; "sorry, but our call center computers are down. Went down Feb 1st at 9pm, won't be back up till Monday, Feb 4th, 2002. If you want to transfer a firearm, the information will be taken down in writing by a call center employee to be processed on Monday." And then they went on to thank me for my understanding and patience. Is this just a one time thing? Has it happened before? Will it happen again? Can we expect that this will become the "norm"? $700 million for what? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 19:32:34 -0600 From: John Coupland Subject: Re: confidence in our money??? Al, If people don't have faith in the tokens of valuata which physically circulate, then they will be forced to leave paper or electronic trails of transactions, which are much more easily accessible to those interested. Why in heaven's name would the RCMP want to interfere with that? John Trigger Mortis wrote: - --- snip --- > Now, the fact that neither myself nor the lady in the store heard from the > RCMP tells me that this problem is large and must occur frequently. If > there were only isolated incidents, the RCMP would be following all of them > up. After all, counterfeiting is considered to be a serious crime, isn't > it? - --- snip --- > In conclusion, people don't have faith in our monetary system, and it shows.--- snip --- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 19:32:33 -0600 From: Bruce Mills Subject: Man shot, cop hurt Nothing substantive about why the cop was hit, or why the man was shot... http://www.canoe.ca/TorontoNews/02n1.html February 2, 2002 Man shot, cop hurt West-end melee after police stop stolen Cherokee By JONATHAN JENKINS and BRIAN GRAY -- Toronto Sun One Toronto Police officer is in hospital after being hit by a stolen Jeep Cherokee and his partner is being treated for shock after gunning down the suspect last night. The driver of a grey Jeep Cherokee that hit the injured officer was shot three times in the chest. He was in critical condition last night. The four-year veteran officer's injuries are non-life-threatening, Police Chief Julian Fantino said last night. At the St. Joseph's hospital, a Toronto Police Association spokesman said the officer was conscious but sleepy. "We just wanted to make sure he was okay, but he wanted to make sure everybody else was okay," Douglas Corrigan, the director of field services for the association, said last night. "After he asked if everybody was okay, he went for a snooze before they took him for X-rays," Corrigan said. Fantino said the officer who fired the shots has been on the force for six months and was being treated in hospital for traumatic stress. "He is very distressed. It was a very traumatic event for him," Fantino said. Shots were fired shortly after 9:30 p.m. at Bloor and Havelock Sts., near Dufferin St. Police officers swarmed the area after hearing an "officer down" call on their radios. "We all heard it on the radio, but it was all over by the time it was on," Sgt. Mark Welch said. Patrons at the Bloor Bar and Billiards rushed to the windows when they heard a series of gunshots in quick succession. "We saw one officer struggling on the ground while the other officer was standing over another man with his gun pointing at him," said the bar owner Ornella Madeiros. "He was telling him not to move and not to get up," she said. "We saw him get up to sit and then he went back to the ground and stayed there," Madeiros said. The shot man was taken on an emergency run to St. Michael's Hospital in critical condition with gunshot wounds in the chest. A second man in the Cherokee was arrested at gunpoint at the scene. The unidentified cop's cruiser was parked facing eastbound on Bloor St. in the Havelock St. intersection with its door still open. The Jeep was parked facing west on a sidewalk nearby. The province's Special Investigations Unit was called in at 9:55 p.m., spokesman Rose Hong said. No subject or witness officers were identified last night but the SIU has assigned 11 investigators, including five forensic specialists, to the case. The SIU handles incidents in which serious injury or death involving police officers. Traffic on Bloor St. was cut off from Dufferin St. to Davenport Rd. - -- With files from Laura Bobak and Joe Warmington ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #509 ********************************** 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@shaw.ca 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 v04.n192 end (192 is the digest issue number and 04 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/ 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.