From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #626 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 Tuesday, March 19 2002 Volume 04 : Number 626 In this issue: Re: Interesting Conversation UPDATE: NUMBER OF GUNS REGISTERED SO FAR RE: Natives to take deer-hunting case to Supreme Court RE: Natives to take deer-hunting case to Supreme Court RE: Law against impromptu target shooting? Re: scanner P99QA OPERATION PHONEBOOK Re: New police guns spark concern Re: No one hurt as student fires gun during show-and-tell CAUCHON: "the gun registry system works well." (no subject) Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #623 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:51:03 -0600 From: Gordon Hitchen Subject: Re: Interesting Conversation At 01:32 PM 3/18/02 -0600, you wrote: >While I was working the NFA table at the NS Sports & RV Show this past >weekend I decided to visit the enemy camp which was located only three >booths away. Sounds wonderful Jim. I spoke with Ray (The Major) Laycock in Calgary and he will be getting in touch with you with some of the information you asked about. Let me know when it arrives. Gordon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:48:41 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: UPDATE: NUMBER OF GUNS REGISTERED SO FAR http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/numberofgunsjan102002 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:51:17 -0600 From: "Jason Hayes" Subject: RE: Natives to take deer-hunting case to Supreme Court Actually I did read the treaty carefully, and as my post noted, they were allowed "ammunition" - that doesn't limit the supplies to black powder ammunition, or flint arrowheads. In contemporary terms, it could very well refer to .22-250, 30-06, etc as these are "ammunition". More importantly, the implication of the treaty (and this has been upheld in other cases - look at the findings in R. v. Sparrow) was that the First Nations were allowed to use implements and equipment germane to the time period. To provide a bit more information, Sparrow had three main implications for Native rights in Canada. They were; 1) Native rights are not static; they evolve to meet the time period that the natives live in. Courts must interpret the rights in a generous and liberal manner 2) Government can only infringe on native rights for a compelling reason - such as management or conservation of a resource 3) After conservation goals are met, natives have a priority right to the resource (in the Sparrow case -fish) for food and ceremonial purposes (not commercial purposes). The first part of the Sparrow ruling specifically notes that the rights of First Nations hunters and fishers cannot be limited to black powder or spears or bows and arrows. Also, other parts of the Treaty that I listed, (read it at http://www.treaty8.org/), discuss payments that the natives were to receive, in perpetuity, for giving up the land to the Crown. With those payments (adjusted for inflation and put into today's dollars) the natives could more than likely purchase nets. What it all comes down to is it is useless to get angry with the First Nations as they are living up to the terms of the agreement. If you want to get mad at someone, get mad at the "white guys" who brokered the treaties. Furthermore, it strikes me as hypocritical for members of the firearms community to actively promote "dancing on the head of a pin", malicious compliance and/or civil disobedience, and following the letter (rather than intent) of the law in the case of c-68 while decrying the First Nations for doing the exact same thing with the terms of their treaties. We should be working together with them wherever possible as both groups are in similar positions with regard to the federal government. That is, the fed gov is doing whatever it can to infringe on rights - period, full stop. It doesn't matter whether those rights are defined in treaties or common law. The fed gov is advocating government at the expense of freedom and liberty. (Note: this involves people of all political stripes - yes even the CA...anyone remember Bob Mills - MP for Red Deer and his plan to force everyone getting on a plane to get government approval and documentation and to use their passport to track their movement?) When people can stop seeing the First Nations as a problem and start seeing them as allies in the fight to diminish the influence and size of our government, they will be significantly more effective in promoting the concept of individual rights and freedoms. Jason Hayes Research Analyst The Fraser Institute Alberta Policy Research Center Suite 301 - 815 1st St SW Calgary, AB, Canada T2P 1N3 Toll Free: 1-866-716-7175 Ph: 403-216-7175 Fax: 403-234-9010 E-Mail: jasonh@fraserinstitute.ca Web: http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/ Please read the treaty little bit more carefully. First the treaty was signet in the year 1899,. How many rifles using the smokeless powder did exist at that time? Lett them use black powder rifles. And they were given twine to make own nets, why not today, let them make own nets. And what about the electric lamps and reflectors, why don't they use troches ? E.S. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:12:26 -0600 From: "Jason Hayes" Subject: RE: Natives to take deer-hunting case to Supreme Court Your point is...? I did not argue that the government could not make laws governing wildlife management. Another post I sent earlier, specifically notes that R v Sparrow showed the government had that right. I was arguing that natives have a right to use modern conveniences in the pursuit of their right to hunt and fish. Jason Hayes Research Analyst The Fraser Institute Alberta Policy Research Center Suite 301 - 815 1st St SW Calgary, AB, Canada T2P 1N3 Toll Free: 1-866-716-7175 Ph: 403-216-7175 Fax: 403-234-9010 E-Mail: jasonh@fraserinstitute.ca Web: http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/ On reading the enclosed excerpt from Treaty 8 what immediately jumps out at me is the second half of the line: >...they shall have right to pursue their usual vocations of hunting, >trapping and fishing throughout the tract surrendered as heretofore >described, _subject to such regulations as may from time to time >be made by the Government of the country_... duh, ya mean like jack-lighting??? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:13:19 -0600 From: "Ken Kellar" Subject: RE: Law against impromptu target shooting? Municipal discharge regulations are set by the local municipal bylaws and are specific to each municipality. This is not in the provincial domain. Cheers Ken >From: "Yannis Marine" >Subject: Re: Law against impromptu target shooting? > Brad, > >I can not tell for Winnipeg, but in Ontario you can not discharge a firearm >within city limits unless it is an approved firing range. > >Yanni ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:45:28 -0600 From: B Farion Subject: Re: scanner > I have seen this unit in Detroit, MI on 3/16/02. The National Guardsmen were > watching over it. Looks like it will become a permanent fixture in the truck > compound. Hi; Well, an x-ray unit is not a gamma scanner or spectrometer or scintillometer. Would hate to be the person caught between the source and the recording unit! Does Osama have lead-lined chain mail to disguise him self while running borders?? Cheers Bill (;-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:47:05 -0600 From: Michel =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=E9bert?= Subject: P99QA Letter submitted not yet printed To: letters@thegazette.southam.ca Subject: New police guns spark concerns Linda Gyulai should do some research before writing he article on guns. The trigger pull for the P99QA is 6.5 pounds and this is taken from the Walther company web page. There are also four independently operating safeties. I personally believe that the police will be better armed to face the criminal elements of our society with this new sidearm. They will be carrying more ammunition and the reloading time will be much shorter. These are in my views critical elements to consider when replacing old firearms. In regards to the .357 magnums that will be replaced, the trigger pull is more around the 14 pounds mark and at the time, some money was spent to convert them to double action only. This means that they could not manually cock the hammer, they had to use the trigger. The old and obsolete .38 special they had, had about the same trigger pull in double action but, the hammer could be manually cocked reducing the trigger pull to 3 pounds or less to shoot. It seems that Mr. Manseau does not know what he is talking about. I do not pretend to be an expert. I do have a background in gunsmithing and I do some recreational shooting as well. Michel Hebert NFA member ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:49:32 -0600 From: "Bob Lickacz" Subject: OPERATION PHONEBOOK The federal government's firearms registration program is going so well that they have decided to offer Canadian gun owners the chance to register their guns for free. Now when was the last time the government offered you something for nothing? Well in keeping with this free offer, the CFC sent out packages to all licensed gun owners. My wife got her free offer, but no second reminder offer. Many gun owners got the original offer and a follow up reminder notice. The good ol' gang at the CFC must not like yours truly because I didn't even get one free offer. Talk about how to hurt a guy's feelings. I noticed that included in the free offer package my wife got, there was a return envelope. The address was: P.O. Box 9815 CSC-T Ottawa, Ontario K1G 6P9 This address appears just as above, with respect to the number of lines and capitalization. Back in the olden days, when I was a bona fide, card carrying member of the Coalition For Gun Control, I would always get these heart wrenching begging letters from my dear friend Wendy Cukier. (It always pays to know what your enemies are up to.) These letters included a self addressed envelope for a contribution. I sent the 3" thick Edmonton Yellow Pages phone books as my contribution to Wendy's cause. Wendykins got a lot of phone books from me. It was interesting to see some of my postings to this Digest, quoted in CFGC propaganda. Well to make a long story short, should you choose to attach your free registration offer envelope to an old phone book, should you forget to include your return address, and should you forget to add any more than a single $0.01 stamp, the post office will deliver said phone book to our dear friends at the CFC "POSTAGE DUE". Now I noticed that the font on this freebie envelope was 14 pitch, Arial Black Bold. Knowing this bit of information, you can print up thousands of these envelopes that look identical to the envelopes the CFC puts out. You can buy a thousand #10 standard white envelopes from Staples or Office Depot for about $17.00 including GST. A thousand $0.01 stamps costs $10.70. I took a copy of the Edmonton Yellow Pages phone book down to the post office and determined that it would cost 16 cannabucks in postage to mail the book. The nice lady behind the counter said that the post office would tack on a $6.00 fine for a postage due package. Now should anyone choose to send away their old phonebooks in the manner described above, the CFC may run short of money a little sooner than they expected. One fellow at the Edmonton Sportman's Show complained to me that this "was a waste of taxpayers' dollars". Yup he was right about that. You can choose to have the CFC spend this money this way, which will be in defense of our collective firearms, or you can get my friend the Prime Minister to spend the cash in Shawinigan on another fountain. The choice is yours. Remember: 14 pitch, Arial Black Bold font. If you are not computer literate enough to print these envelopes, ask any kid to show you how. These envelopes were a real hot item at the Edmonton Sportman's Show. It was a good money raiser too. All we asked for was a small token donation to defray the costs of the supplies. Looking into my psychic crystal ball I think I see the CFC getting a few phone books in the near future. Bob Lickacz NFA Edmonton ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:51:56 -0600 From: Rick Lowe Subject: Re: New police guns spark concern > PUBLICATION: Montreal Gazette > But an added safety measure is the pressure required to pull the trigger, he > said. "Twelve pounds is simply harder to shoot," Manseau said. "So there's > less chance there will be accidental (firing). It's unacceptable to switch > guns to one that requires less pressure than 12 pounds." I'm so glad to have these public watchdogs telling us what is safe about a firearm and what is not. Chances are Manseau knows about as much about service use of firearms as I know about sucking off the public porkbarrel trough. Is a firearm that has an 8.5 lb trigger pull more likely to cause an accidental shooting than a 12 lb. trigger? No. Bad training is the cause of accidental (read: negligent) shootings, not trigger pull weight. Of course, if Mr. Manseau and his brain trust are correct, I guess we can expect to see him demanding all police shotguns and long guns also be modified to at least have 12 lb. trigger pulls. Lighter trigger pulls - to a point in a service firearm - do however, enhance accuracy and therefore the probability that the bullets will go where the officer intended. What a concept. > But if you want to know why many police officers are in favour of switching > to semi-automatic pistols, just ask Benoit Vigneault. > > The Surete du Quebec officer and instructor will tell you the story of ... > "If I had a safety catch, I'm dead," he said. "We don't need a safety > (catch). I don't even have a half a second to fire on a gunman, I shouldn't > have a safety (catch) on top of it. I'm the safety." On the other side of the coin, I see the SQ have their own brain trust to counter Mr. Manseau. If firearms instructor Vigneault feels he can't operate a safety catch during the time he brings a firearm into use - whether it is the Remington 870 in his car or his sidearm - then he isn't particularly well trained, certainly shouldn't be training others, and probably shouldn't be armed at all. The whole issue of official police policy on firearms is rather depressing at times. At a PPC match, Robin Gomes from Depot told several of us in a conversation that the RCMP went from revolvers to double action only pistols because they didn't feel their members could handle the complexity of retraining to a sidearm that had a safety catch after using revolvers. Mind boggling... they're bright enough to be trained and use laser speed equipment, breath analysis equipment, do advanced traffic accident analysis - use the firearms on issue to ERT teams - etc... but not bright enough to learn to use a safety on their sidearms just like the ones on their shotguns. What a crock. I think the REAL reason is that it would require slightly more training, and training equates to budgeting money, and firearms training for police is simply not a high priority with most police departments. It is common within the RCMP, for example, for some members in some detachments to go years without even the meager yearly qualification shoot - their detachments are too cheap or too indifferent to budget the time and money to do this. And the number of rounds fired in the yearly qualification are a joke to begin with. There are safety issues to having a service firearm that has a safety catch, should an officer be disarmed in a struggle, but clearly they are not important to the police bureaucrates with more important things on their mind (ie expensive custom built riding boots) and who will never in the remainder of their careers carry a firearm on the streets in circumstances where they may have to use it. Jeez, what drivel they spew. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:52:49 -0600 From: Rick Lowe Subject: Re: No one hurt as student fires gun during show-and-tell > No one was hurt when the went off inside Lake Melville School in North > West River, the RCMP said in a statement released yesterday. The slug from > the .22-calibre rifle lodged in a cabinet. > > The nine-year-old student, whose name was not released, had brought the > rifle to school with his 36-year-old father as part of Heritage Day, which > celebrates Labrador history through the display of family artifacts. The boy > was handling the rifle when it discharged, police said. A lot of people argue that the fed's firearm training course - flawed though it indeed is - is unnecessary. And then some moron, who has been granted the trust that we wish all of society would give legitimate firearms owners, brings a firearm into a school that has not been cleared of ammunition and puts a hole in the wall. What do you think the chances are that other schools are going to consider extending this level of trust when some other child/parent wants to bring a firearm into a classroom? More often than not, we're our own worst enemies. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:54:09 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: CAUCHON: "the gun registry system works well." HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES Tuesday, March 19, 2002 Hansard Blues Unedited copy - not official until printed ORAL QUESTION PERIOD * * * Mr. Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton--Melville, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, documents from the justice minister's own department reveal that he has already lost track of over 38,000 licensed firearms owners, despite the fact that firearms owners can get a two year prison term if they do not report their change of address. The same problems that plagued the old handgun registry since 1934 are clearly evident in the new one, namely huge errors in the system. How can the police rely on a gun registry that is missing hundreds of thousands of guns and tens of thousands of gun owners? ¹ (1500) Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, first of all the government is very proud of the choice that it has made in terms of policy: proceeding with gun registration; making sure as well that to carry sidearms in this country will be seen as a privilege and not as a right; including the framework to ensure we will continue to have a safe and secure country and communities. Second, the gun registry system works well. Of course we did proceed with it lately and we will proceed with public works department outsourcing in order to make sure that we keep offering the population very good services. The licence process is over and now we are proceeding with the registration. * * * UPDATED FIREARMS QUICK FACTS http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/firearmsquickfacts.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:11:53 -0500 From: Bruce Mills Subject: (no subject) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: What the Animal Alliance thinks of hunters, farmers and gun owners Excerpt from Animal Alliance of Canada - Winter 2002 Fund Raising Letter After decades of struggle, our laws are beginning to recognize that animals deserve rights. It's you who can take credit for this. You see, the reality is that Bill C15B did not come about because our federal politicians in the Liberal Party suddenly saw the light. No! C15B happened because Animal Alliance and our political arm, Environment Voters - thanks to your generous donations and letter writing - proved in elections and on Parliament Hill that support for C15B would win votes, and failure to pass C15B would cost votes. It started in the last federal election. Because of a commitment made by the Minister of Justice, Anne McLellan, in the House of Commons to pass C15B, Environment Voters campaigned for her re-election. Under attack by hunters and gun owners and a cabal of extremist right wing groups, Ms McLellan was in a losing campaign. Environment Voters stepped in and championed her election. We ran the better campaign. Ms McLellan won by 700 votes. Good to her word, Ms. McLellan introduced the breakthrough animal protection legislation. Not surprising it was viciously opposed by the fur trade, researchers, hunters, agri-business - all those who profit or take pleasure in the harming of animals. Their tactics? Fear-mongering, lies, and the vilification of people like you who have compassion for animals. We countered again, went to Parliament Hill and reminded the federal Liberal MPs who were being brow-beaten by the $1,000/day animal exploitation lobbyists that if they failed to pass C15B, Animal Alliance and Environment Voters would campaign in the next election for their defeat. Again we prevailed. Bill C15B survived the committee processes and will, barring unforeseen events, pass into law shortly. But our job is not over, which is why I'm asking you - why I need you - to renew your support of Animal Alliance today. Getting our politicians to pass good animal protection laws is about reward and punishment - rewarding them for doing a good job and punishing them for doing a poor one. The Liberals have done a good job on Bill C15B, and our first chance to reward them will be in the upcoming by-election in Calgary Southwest, Preston Manning's old electoral district. With your help, Animal Alliance's political arm, Environment Voters, will run a campaign in the by-election to help the Liberal candidate get elected. It'll be a tough fight. This is the Canadian Alliance's heartland. Nevertheless, if the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives split the right wing vote, it's possible for the Liberal candidate to win. Win or lose, what's important is that you and I once again show the Liberal Party and the other parties that - unlike in the past - thanks to you and the Animal Alliance there are now more votes in compassion than cruelty. For the sake of the animals who touch our hearts, I pray that with these two examples I've convinced you that renewing your support for Animal Alliance will truly help the animals, including those who share your caring home. Hoping that you will renew your support, may I ask even more of you? Any gift you choose to make will be greatly appreciated, but - if at all possible - please consider becoming a monthly contributor. Regular, predictable monthly contributions from you - either through automatic withdrawal from your bank account or by way of credit card - allows us to plan the most effective use of your contributions. Through monthly giving, you will help lower our overhead costs dramatically, which means we can spend much more of your valued contributions on protecting animals. In closing, I want to thank you again for all you did in 2001. If we keep working together, as we've done in the past - we can create a safer world for the animals who share and enrich our lives. Sincerely, for the animals who share your home and our world, Liz White Director, Animal Alliance of Canada PS: We need you to renew your support today. Please, help us - work with us - - to save the animals that share your home from being sold to research. Give us the means to reward or punish our politicians for their animal protection records. Thank you. http://www.animalalliance.ca/urgentalert/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 16:15:43 -0600 From: "B. Boswell" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #623 Night hunting in the area where I live on Vancouver Island is carried out by a few. Rather than get involved in the "rights" arguments the authorities are charging the individuals with unsafe discharge of a firearm. The argument is that insufficient area around and behind the target is visible to allow for any type of "safe" shot and that argument is being upheld by the courts. Bob Boswell > > The decision to allow night with a light provoked backlash from > > sportsmen, hunters and some provincial politicians. They argued jacking was > > not a sport and called the practice cowardly and dangerous. > > way. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V4 #626 ********************************** 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.