From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #600 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Errors-To: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Cdn-Firearms Digest Saturday, March 9 2002 Volume 04 : Number 600 In this issue: GUN CONTROL STOPS CROOKS? ME TOO JP, ME TOO BourqueNews: "CANADA POST IS BREAKING THE LAW !" Fw: In like a lion... (Dell Computer) Gun Show Re: The price of non-compliance Re: The price of non-compliance Re:NFA audit unlicensed owners Re: The price of non-compliance Feminist empowerment -- the kind we like instructors certificate revoked by the CFO ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 22:33:00 -0600 From: "The Jordans" Subject: GUN CONTROL STOPS CROOKS? GUN CONTROL STOPS CROOKS? According to Statistics Canada figures, attempted murders involving guns shot up by almost 20 per cent between 1995 and 2000. As well, the percentage of homicides in which guns were used was up three per cent since the federal government's new gun control law was passed. The figures were released at the request of PC-DR MP Jim Pankiw. The numbers show what the opposition has been saying all along -- that criminals are still using guns while the registry targets law-abiding citizens. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 23:25:29 -0600 From: "Bob Lickacz" Subject: ME TOO JP, ME TOO FROM J P: Subject: BourqueNews: "CANADA POST IS BREAKING THE LAW !" "CANADA POST IS BREAKING THE LAW !" PRIVACY COMMISH RADWANSKI BLASTS CANPOST'S OUELLET Letter from Radwanski to Ouellet: "Canada Post violates Privacy Act by selling to business mailers, without obtaining appropriate consent, the new home addresses of Canadians ... presumably on your instruction as President and CEO, has flatly refused to accept my finding or implement my recommendation ... brazenly violating an act of Parliament ... very wrong for Canada Post Corporation to insist on some "right" to take personal information that Canadians have provided for a specific, paid service and disclose it to third parties for financial reward ... Canada Post is refusing to accept the finding or to implement the recommendation . This is unusual and problematic. I believe that a very serious situation indeed does exist: Canada Post Corporation is breaking the law, and refusing to cease doing so ... The law is the law; it must be obeyed." ... MORE: Radwanski reveals that in 1995 Canada Post had a "business arrangement with the Quebec Liberal Party to mail letters from the Party advising ex-residents of Quebec of their right to vote in the Quebec referendum." Click To read the letter. http://www.newswire.ca/releases/March2002/08/c9028.html - -------------------------------------------------------------------- Attention News Editors: The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, George Radwanski, today sent the following letter to André Ouellet, President and Chief Executive Officer of Canada Post Corporation. OTTAWA, March 8 /CNW/ - The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, George Radwanski, today sent the following letter to André Ouellet, President and Chief Executive Officer of Canada Post Corporation. Dear Mr. Ouellet: On January 14, 2002, I issued the finding of my investigation into a complaint regarding Canada Post's National Change of Address (NCOA) service. I notified Canada Post that it is violating the Privacy Act by selling to business mailers, without obtaining appropriate consent, the new home addresses of Canadians who pay the Corporation to redirect their mail. I recommended that Canada Post come into compliance with the Privacy Act, and with the privacy rights of Canadians, through a simple solution: providing check-off boxes on the face of its NCOA form so that people using this service can explicitly consent or decline to have their new address disclosed to third parties. Canada Post, presumably on your instruction as President and CEO, has flatly refused to accept my finding or implement my recommendation. Instead, I regret to find that Canada Post has now chosen to compound this inappropriate course of conduct by mounting a deceptive communications campaign. In identical letters to the editor that have already been published in a number of Canadian newspapers, the Corporation - through Ms Ida Irwin, your Director of Media Relations - makes a number of statements that Canada Post knows or should know to be patently false. I will address each of them in turn. First, Canada Post states: "Contrary to what Mr. Radwanski claims, Canada Post does not sell mailing lists." The fact is that Canada Post charges businesses and organizations - which can include list brokers, mass mailers and direct marketers - a "licensing fee." In exchange for this fee, the mailers are able to access the names, old addresses and new addresses of Canadians who have paid Canada Post $30 to have their mail redirected. They can then use this information to update the addresses in their existing databases. The mailers pay a fee to Canada Post. Canada Post, in exchange, permits them to obtain certain information - the new addresses of relocating individuals. I believe most people would agree that, by any reasonable definition of the term, Canada Post is indeed thereby "selling" this information. To try to pretend otherwise is, in my view, quite simply dishonest. Second, Canada Post states: "The five previous privacy-related complaints lodged about the service were all deemed unfounded before Mr. Radwanski became privacy commissioner." In fact, this Office under my predecessor dealt with a total of eight complaints related to the NCOA service. Of these, four were discontinued because the complainants did not respond to follow-up requests for information and could not be located. One was Well-Founded (Canada Post disclosed the complainant's Change of Address Notification Form to his former landlord). One was settled (the complainant's temporary move to his cottage was entered as a permanent move in the NCOA database; Canada post removed the cottage address from the database). Only two complaints, both in 1995, were Not Well-Founded. Both involved Canada Post itself using change of address information, under a business arrangement with the Quebec Liberal Party, to mail letters from the Party advising ex-residents of Quebec of their right to vote in the Quebec referendum. The complaints were Not Well-Founded because in those instances, unlike the matter at hand, new addresses were not actually disclosed by Canada Post to any third parties. In short, contrary to Canada Post's statement, no complaint involving Canada Post's disclosure of NCOA addresses to third parties was adjudicated as Not Well-Founded. Canada Post is, or should be, well aware of this, since all eight complaints and their disposition are detailed in the Corporation's own "Annual Report to Parliament on the Privacy Act" documents for 1994/95, 1995/1996, 1996/97, 1997/98 and 2000/2001. Moreover, far from finding Canada Post's sale of NCOA information without proper consent to be acceptable, my predecessor made clear to the Corporation his grave concerns. A letter sent by this Office to Mr. Richard Sharp, Corporate Privacy Coordinator, Canada Post Corporation, on March 22, 1996 states: "Notwithstanding the Privacy Commissioner's stated reservations concerning 'negative consent', this is the preferred option of Canada Post Corporation under the NCOA II program. It places the onus on the individual to request that Canada Post not disclose their new address to mass mailers, otherwise consent will be assumed. This does not...constitute consent to disclose personal information as referred to in the Privacy Act. "Before consent can be said to exist the individual must be given a choice whether or not to agree to having Canada Post notify mass mailers of the new address. Consent must be clear, transparent and unequivocal." Finally, Canada Post states in its current letters to the editor: "Mr. Radwanski is trying to create an issue where, clearly, Canadians feel none exists." Canada Post Corporation - particularly with you, a former federal minister, as its head - must surely be aware that no Canadian law or tradition permits brazenly violating an act of Parliament provided that only a small number of people complain. Indeed, Section 29(3) of the Privacy Act authorizes the Privacy Commissioner to initiate an investigation of any possible breach of the Act on his own initiative, even in the absence of any public complaint whatsoever. Privacy is a fundamental human right, recognized not only in the laws of Canada but also by the United Nations. The basic premise of the Privacy Act is that our personal information belongs to us. Apart from specified exceptions, no federal institution can collect, use or disclose our personal information without our consent - and it can collect, use or disclose that information only for the specific purpose for which we gave consent. It is therefore very wrong for Canada Post Corporation to insist on some "right" to take personal information that Canadians have provided for a specific, paid service and disclose it to third parties for financial reward - unless those Canadians go to the trouble of asking Canada Post to respect their privacy rights. The Privacy Act mandates the Privacy Commissioner to oversee that all federal institutions respect its provisions, and to investigate all complaints that any institution is failing to do so. I received a complaint regarding the NCOA service. I investigated, as I am required to do by law. Upon completion of the investigation, I issued a finding and made a recommendation, again as I am required to do by law. Canada Post is refusing to accept the finding or to implement the recommendation. This is unusual and problematic. The legislative scheme is that when the Privacy Commissioner after investigation informs an institution that it is not in compliance with the Act, the institution will follow the Commissioner's recommendations to come into compliance. The Privacy Act clearly does not contemplate that federal institutions will comply only if they agree with the Privacy Commissioner, if it is convenient, or if there are no costs associated with respecting privacy rights. Any such approach would make the law a sham. Even though the disclosure of new addresses to mailers may not rank near the top of a hierarchy of gravity of privacy violations, this too is irrelevant. The law is the law; it must be obeyed. Rights are rights; they must be respected. I would note further that if Canada Post believes, as it purports, that Canadians have no objection to having their new addresses sold to mailers, the Corporation should have no reluctance to implement my recommendation: allow Canadians to express their enthusiasm for this practice through a check-off consent box on the face of the NCOA form. If, on the other hand, significant numbers of Canadians do not want their personal information disclosed in this fashion, Canada Post cannot justify continuing this practice without their express consent simply because it is profitable to do so. Far from "trying to create an issue where...none exists," I believe that a very serious situation indeed does exist: Canada Post Corporation is breaking the law, and refusing to cease doing so. I request that you take immediate steps to respect my findings in this matter and come into compliance with the Privacy Act as recommended. Yours sincerely, George Radwanski Privacy Commissioner of Canada cc: The Hon. John Manley - -30- For further information: Anne-Marie Hayden, Media Relations, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Tel: (613) 995-0103, ahayden@privcom.gc.ca, www.privcom.gc.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 00:14:11 -0600 From: "The Jordans" Subject: Fw: In like a lion... (Dell Computer) From: Free-Market.net - The Freedom Network edited by Thomas L. Knapp First Week of March, 2002: In like a lion ... Well, you're actually getting your "Action of the Week" column weekly this time. On the very edge of "weekly," but weekly nonetheless. As usual, there's a reason for that, and a better one than usual. March came in like a lion, and I've been following that lion's trail for several days, trying to catch it. Like many Second Amendment activists, I was ready to put the screws to Dell, Inc., one of the nation's largest computer companies. I had planned to use this week's column to do so. But I wanted to get it right, and I'm glad I waited a bit and followed up to make sure I was doing the right thing. At issue was Dell's failure to fill an order for a new laptop from Jack Weigand of Weigand Combat Handguns. At first blush -- and even after a couple of second looks -- it appeared that Dell had a heretofore unpublicized policy of not doing business with gun-related enterprises, and possibly even a policy of supporting victim disarmament advocacy organizations such as Handgun Control, Inc. The word "boycott" was in the air ... We got it wrong, folks. There's just no other way to explain it. This week, I'd like to turn Action of the Week around a little bit. No, I'm not asking you to buy a Dell computer. What I am asking you to do is help get the word out and put a stop to what might be a very big mistake. Boycotts and letter-writing campaigns can be very effective tools. You know that as well as I do, and we've participated together in letting companies know when they've stepped on liberty's toes. The flip side of the coin is that such actions can work counter to our purposes when they are pointed in the wrong direction. If a company hasn't done anything wrong, or if it promptly responds to concerns and takes action to solve a problem, we need to spread the word about that with the same fervor that we put into getting the initial alert out. To put a finer point on it, Dell has gone out of its way to explain the mistake and to reassure gun owners. But if doing so doesn't fix the situation, why should they listen to us? There's a carrot and a stick involved, and if all we ever show is stick, the person or company we're beating with that stick has no incentive to pay us any heed. To the extent that the Dell story has legs and continues to circulate, we are telling Dell "We don't care if you are right or wrong. We don't care what you've done to clarify, correct or address the situation. We have a story, and we're sticking to it -- whether it's true or not." That doesn't bode well for the freedom community's relations with Dell. Worse, it doesn't bode well for the next company which might need a wake-up call. If Company X sees, from Dell's experience, that there's nothing it can do to satisfy the concerns of freedom activists, they may well not even try to. Several libertarian and gun publications are following the Dell story. The best coverage I've seen so far comes from Sierra Times. Help get the word out. When the Dell story pops up on mailing lists or in conversation with friends, make sure that the whole story is told. You can forward this column, or the Sierra Times link, or you can tell it in your own words -- but don't let it go untold. From: Freedom Action of the Week: http://www.free-market.net/features/action/ Edited by Tom Knapp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 00:15:20 -0600 From: The Hills Subject: Gun Show Hello Well it is the month of March And the Kamloops Target Sports Assocciation is proud to announce the 19th annual Gun&Antique show with the WildLife Art and The Western Knife Association. This is going to happen on March 23rd &24th. Please make it a point to come to the show. I am usually helping the participants find their way into the KXA and to their tables. If you come look me up and say hello My name is Lawrence Hill and I will be glad to introduce you to Kamloops. Take care ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 10:43:38 -0600 From: "Jim Szpajcher" Subject: Re: The price of non-compliance John - > Jim, it's not a matter that I don't care. It's more the reality that you and > the millions don't care what happens to me. Canadian apathy has proven > that clearly to me. Millions are supposed to care what happens to you? I think you're on the wrong planet, John. >Did you not know that when you bought guns with > your old FAC and signed that ledger that you registered that rifle/shotgun > to yourself? I do know the difference between getting a green registration certificate and signing a ledger in a sporting goods store. Do you? The Government DOES! That is why the Government is bringing in REGISTRATION! Jim Szpajcher Airdrie, Alberta ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 10:45:55 -0600 From: "DJ MacIntyre" Subject: Re: The price of non-compliance Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:52:08 -0600 From: "John Poulin" Subject: Re: The price of non-compliance >I must be living in a strange part of Canada then. We have had >registered pistols and rifles for decades and nobody is telling me >to buy unregistered ones. I wonder how your dealers fare in your part of >the world because you never buy registered guns? Did you not >know that when you bought guns with your old FAC and signed that >ledger that you registered that rifle/shotgun to yourself? And did you know that when that big green ledger was filled, they ordered a new one, and the old one was packed in a box in a warehouse with other boxes, full to the brim with ledgers, and that's where they sit to this very day? Beautiful theory, yes, but I'll bet you a box of donuts it never made it into an electronic database anywhere. Yes, you identified yourself with that firearm at time of purchase. But that info is lost today. >What's that quote. All it takes for evil to overcome is that good >men sit back and do nothing. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to stand by and do nothing. - - Sir Edmund Burke. However, Edmund never saw the Canadian Gun Registry ;-). DJ _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 12:16:56 -0600 From: "Karl Schrader" Subject: Re:NFA audit Debating if I should be posting anything at all anymore, this NFA crap is really hitting the fan ! I did not want to comment on the NFA debacle since the information was incomplete. After seeing the alleged "audit", the information is still incomplete and I have to concur with Gordon Hitchen (see below). What a disappointment all this is ! Whatever credibility the NFA had as a cleanly run organization is shot to hell and the antis are just laughing again. Ah, chucks, just wasted 6-7 years believing that decency and honesty would carry the day. The NFA better get it's act together or we all will be shooting flintlocks in 3 years time. Come to think of it, that would not be such a bad thing, game populations would increase and the liberal public safety mania would be satisfied and they would finally leave us alone. (NFA = National Flintlock Association ??) signed: Flintlock Charlie Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 13:30:39 -0600 From: Gordon Hitchen Subject: Re: Billboards The short answer to your question Jim, is that only a forensic audit will fully answer it. No mention of the Billboard Trust Account, The Dealers Defence Fund Trust account, The Legal Defence Trust Fund Account was made in this audit as no accounts were located. Part of the reason the (use whatever name they are calling us now) group was formed was to get that type of financial information to our Members. Gordon Hitchen Director NFA Alberta ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 12:18:29 -0600 From: Barry Snow Subject: unlicensed owners If these people continue to hide, (passive Civil Disobedience) their numbers are not a consideration and they are not making a protest. I too know many who never got a licence to possess. They are hiding, not protesting. Many many more I have talked to are not going to register all of their guns. If they only register a few or one, they too are hiding and not protesting. The fact there is such an abundance of anecdotal evidence of this type of hiding should make the 80% of citizenry very nervous about the end results of this legislation for which they apparently are so eager. Simple Solution: Since such a vast majority of Canadians support this legislation it should be a simple matter for the CFC/CFR to set up a reverse registry. All persons who do NOT own firearms would be required to get a license. This way, they can show their sincerity and strong desire for this registry and reveal all the persons who do NOT get a licence to not possess are firearms owners. Since such a vast majority of Canadians support the initialization and collection of this data base, they will be quick to act and put their names on the list of non-owners. I just hate to cry fowl without offering an alternate solution to an onerous problem. This way, all the chickens can remain hidden only until they are revealed by the good and righteous who would shove this piece of crap down our throats. (musings from the back 40) tanstaafl, Barry >How do I know this? Because I run into gun owners every day who think _I'M_ >crazy to get my licence and own registered guns. And they far outnumber >those of us who DO have licences. > >And, if you still possess firearms in a decade, be prepared to thank all >those firearms owners that you've just heaped scorn onto. > >Jim Szpajcher > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 12:19:37 -0600 From: "John Poulin" Subject: Re: The price of non-compliance From: "Jim Szpajcher" > Millions are supposed to care what happens to you? I think you're on the > wrong planet, John. Yes, supposed to care, but they don't. That's why I have logically chosen to not hang alone. The sheeple care not one wit what happens to you or me. They do care about my paycheck and taxes being paid though. > I do know the difference between getting a green registration certificate > and signing a ledger in a sporting goods store. > > Do you? The Government DOES! OK Jim, we understand semantics then. Lets move on to why non-compliance will win the battle and destroy C-68. Still waiting for that one. John ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 13:09:59 -0600 From: "Murray Bell" Subject: Feminist empowerment -- the kind we like "A Mount Holyoke junior has taken her professors' feminist teachings rather more seriously than they might have wished. Christie Caywood, a student at the all-women's school and founder of its chapter of Second Amendment Sisters, has suggested that students be allowed to carry firearms for self-defense. Citing several recent cases of rape in the area and the campus's unarmed police force, Caywood told CNSNews, 'Why wouldn't they want us armed? I'm at a women's college and they talk about empowerment. We shouldn't have to depend on others to take care of [us].' You go, girl!" -- National Review, 11 March 2002 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 22:58:55 -0600 From: "Trigger Mortis" Subject: instructors certificate revoked by the CFO Feb 13, 2002 I called the FSESO on the phone and talked to Virginia. I told her that I was late with my annual insurance premium payment of $93. I said that I didn’t want to lose my certification. She said there was no problem about my certification and how would I like to pay it. She said she could accept VISA over the phone. I said I didn’t have my VISA handy, but did have MasterCard. She said they didn’t handle MasterCard. I said I had a cheque made out and ready to send. She said that is OK. I mailed the cheque today. =================== I guess Virginia forgot to check with the CFO to see if I was on the politically incorrect sh!t list. A couple of days later I got a letter from the CFO stating that my instructors ceritificate is REVOKED for not being punctual with my annual insurance premium. I have sent it in late before, like last year for instance, with no problem. =================== Here's the letter, from the Firearms Safety Service of Ontario, which I received on Feb 26, 2002. ============== FSESO P O Box 280 Durham, ON N0G 1R0 Robert Harper 27 Mackenzie Crescent Kingston, ON K7M 2S2 Feb 19, 2002 Re: Canadian Firearms Safety Course and/or Canadian Restricted Firearms Safety Course - 2002 Insurance Payment ________________________________________________________ The Firearms Safety Education Service of Ontario has received payment for your 2002 insurance pertaining to the Canadian Firearms Safety Course and/or Canadian Restricted Firearms Safety Course, and/or the Hunter Education Program. However, your payment for insurance cannot be processed by the Firearms Safety Education Service of Ontario. As required, the Chief Firearms Office was provided a list of instructor/examiners who failed to pay their insurance, and as a result do not meet certification requirements. We have been advised that decertification on your behalf has already been confirmed by the Chief Firearms Office, and as such, your payment enclosed is being returned. Yours truly, (signed) Virginia Eastman Enclosure (my cheque for $93 dated Feb 13, 2002 - Al Harper) ============== More to come. Alan Harper NFA 6829L Ontario alan__harper@cogeco.ca SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #600 ********************************** 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.