From: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V5 #720 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Errors-To: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Cdn-Firearms Digest Tuesday, February 4 2003 Volume 05 : Number 720 In this issue: Next Federal Budget? Ottawa opens the door to an era of Big Brother Re: Columbine testimony The Hession Report Re: The Hession Report Re: STEREOTYPING Good Guys? Re: Chalk up One for the "Good Guys" !! Re: Stereotyping ....letter from Rae Baker & Artistic Merit Re: lab guy CAUCHON, KPMG AND HESSION ALL MISS THE TARGET Re: Email Privacy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 10:33:38 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Next Federal Budget? Does anyone know when the next Federal Budget is coming down? I have the impression that it will be sometime soon, on the order of weeks. This might be an opportuinity to get Manley to put his money where his mouth is. Write to him and urge him not to give any more of our tax dollars for the operation of the firearms registry. John Manley Minister of Finance House of Commons Ottawa ON K1A 0A6 Phone:(613) 992-3269 Fax:(613) 995-1534 Email: manlej@parl.gc.ca http://www.johnmanley.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 10:49:31 -0600 (CST) From: "jim davies" Subject: Ottawa opens the door to an era of Big Brother Ottawa opens the door to an era of Big Brother Expanded anti-terrorism measures far too vulnerable to abuse: http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/editorials/story.asp?id={516FAE C4-4876-4201-A507-6A9C80C0AFE8} ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 10:51:04 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: Columbine testimony "Hondatoy Automotive Ltd." wrote: > > Some time ago I read here, testimony given by a parent of one of the victims > at Columbine. > In it he made reference to how Cain slew Able and how nobody was concerned > about the club he used, but rather how and why there had been such evil in > his heart. I would like to have this testimony again. Maybe somebody could > post it here again. > Thanks > Dave Rusnell. http://www.thecolumbineredemption.com/darrellspeach.htm Yours in Liberty, Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:14:17 -0600 (CST) From: Rick Lowe Subject: The Hession Report Bruce Mills provided the following link: The Hession Report: http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/en/general_public/news_releases/review_feb2003/review.asp For those who proclaimed the current version of the Firearms Act dead due to the financial and administrative problems, it should be fairly obvious now that the Titanic is NOT sinking - they're just going to get the passengers to pay for more pumps. I think the Firearms Act still has a chance of being killed off - but not while 90% of the firearms owners remain sitting on their asses, doing nothing but bitch to each other. It is obvious that this report was done by a seasoned veteran well schooled in generating bureaucracy. What could have been said in five words was usually drawn out into ten, with the entire thing well strewn with buzzwords and acronyms. Nevertheless, it is worth rooting through. I took a quick look through the report, and a few comments in the report caught my eye: The investments arising out of Bill C-68 to the point of completion of the" load-up" (the creation of the databases) of firearms registrations are not recoverable. That is, the estimated $400 million invested to create the massive electronic files of the license and firearms registry are not recoverable from future fee income. The registry, however, is the resulting asset that enables the CFP to operate for years to come. "Investments"??? I think it is pretty safe to say that Hession was either told the intent - or he is suggesting - is that the registry will be the source of revenue to "enable the CFP to operate for years to come." So registration fees are going to pay for NWEST, all those bureaucrates, the private contractors, the firearms centers, etc? Two scenarios instantly spring to mind. First, registration fees will become so high that nobody will lawfully buy firearms - they don't even have to do this as a deliberate strategy to start eliminating firearms owners, they just have to use it to try and pay for this bloated bullshit. Second, once new registrations are insufficient to pay the tab, then you will have to start renewing your firearms registrations on a regular basis - at a price, of course. And that will have the same effect as the first part. Fuelled by the aggressive actions of the anti-firearms control lobby whose cause is aided by the uncertainty, these vested interests are frustrating the alignment of all parties to the achievement of the expected outcomes. Well, there's a few things there. First, in reading the entire paragraph that is from, it appears that Hession sees the main enemy of the Firearms Program to be internal chaos and mismanagement - NOT the amount of spending. Ignoring the slam at concerned firearms owners by calling them the "anti firearms control lobby" (so the man is ignorant, what's new), Hession appears to say in this paragraph that the lack of agreement and mutual effort by all concerned is frustrating the workability of the Firearms Act. Aside from the "lobby" we represent, he names provinces and territories who have refused to opt in and are in general making a pain in the ass of themselves. There's a lesson in that. One thing we CAN do is continue to be vocal in our complaints about the Act, remain visible, band together to work harder than ever, and keep the heat on our provincial and territorial governments to stay away from having anything to do with this act. In short, Hession's report was intended to deal with how the government could get what it wanted. We should read and understand it (as best possible) to see what it tells us about getting what WE want. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:47:30 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: The Hession Report Rick Lowe wrote: > The investments arising out of Bill C-68 to the point of completion of the" > load-up" (the creation of the databases) of firearms registrations are not > recoverable. That is, the estimated $400 million invested to create the > massive electronic files of the license and firearms registry are not > recoverable from future fee income. The registry, however, is the resulting > asset that enables the CFP to operate for years to come. > > "Investments"??? I think it is pretty safe to say that Hession was either > told the intent - or he is suggesting - is that the registry will be the > source of revenue to "enable the CFP to operate for years to come." I view the terms "investment" and "asset" from a political point of view: the "investment" is in "pulbic safety", and the registry itself is a valuable "asset" in the ideological sense - it allows them to achieve the "expected outcomes". This is not to say that they *won't* jack up the costs of licenses and registrations, or shorten the renewal period, in order to price the ownership of firearms out of the reach of the average citizen... > Fuelled by the aggressive actions of the anti-firearms control lobby whose > cause is aided by the uncertainty, these vested interests are frustrating > the alignment of all parties to the achievement of the expected outcomes. I see this, again, in political terms: it is yet another attempt to marginalize and then demonize pro-gun rights activists as being part of the "problem", instead of being included as part of the "solution". The conclusion Hession draws is foregone, because he believes that the "expected outcomes" is something of value. > There's a lesson in that. One thing we CAN do is continue to be vocal in our > complaints about the Act, remain visible, band together to work harder than > ever, and keep the heat on our provincial and territorial governments to stay > away from having anything to do with this act. > > In short, Hession's report was intended to deal with how the government could > get what it wanted. We should read and understand it (as best possible) to > see what it tells us about getting what WE want. I saw a clip of Mike Duffy interviewing Martin Cauchon on CTV NewsNet Prime last night; Cauchon said that he has heard from many Canadians who support him and the firearms registry. I think it is time to write to him again and remind him that 5 million of us disagree... Martin Cauchon Minister of Justice House of Commons Ottawa ON K1A 0A6 Phone:(613) 995-7691 Fax:(613) 995-0114 Email:cauchm@parl.gc.ca Yours in Liberty, Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:48:10 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: STEREOTYPING Trigger Mortis wrote: > Could you tell us some lab guy jokes? > > Alan Harper > alan__harper@cogeco.ca > SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM > ************************* I have a cop joke: This cop arrested this guy under the Firearms Act... Yours in Liberty, Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 12:07:39 -0600 (CST) From: "Marc Thibault" Subject: Good Guys? Vulcan1isback wrote: > as was his alliance collegues on the issue of Child Protection > regarding internet pedophiles and changing laws to protect every child > from those who claim "Artistic Merit" defences. Why is it that most of us are so willing to give the Alliance a free ride on their highly selective support of civil rights? Is it just that it's not our ox that's being gored? The Alliance is vaguely against long gun registration on a property rights and waste of money basis. Nothing about the right to self defense, no support whatsoever for freedom of expression, and a soft position on separation of church and state; they are quite content to legislate against sin. Be careful what you applaud. We all agree that our laws must protect children from abuse; the Alliance is pushing for a great deal more-- censorship under the criminal code of material that neither involves nor risks harm to any child. Not my cup of tea, but then playing with guns is not everyone's cup of tea either. In both cases, like smoking pot, a form of recreation that the Alliance seems happy to leave in the hands of bureacrats to monitor and control. A principled defense of civil rights has no room for victimless crimes, whether we find a particular activity distasteful or not. This is not just about hunting and target shooting; it's about an unacceptably intrusive government trampling most of our civil rights. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 12:11:07 -0600 (CST) From: Rick Lowe Subject: Re: Chalk up One for the "Good Guys" !! Boris Gimbarzevsky wrote: > Presumably the CA party is incensed because Robin Sharpe put some of his > fantasies involving children into writing, and was acquitted of possession of > child pornography by the defence of "artistic merit". There are very few Well said, Dr. Bor... (what do people call you who quail at the thought of attempting to pronounce your last name for the first time). I happen to agree with you that Western society has long strayed from dealing with what is criminal to roping in what is distasteful with an increasingly wide loop. What is worse, some people who are victims of that in one area quickly turn aground and agree with the victimization of other people in exactly the same manner. Many firearms owners are guilty of that. Sometimes we manage to back off a little - we don't throw people in jail for being homosexual anymore, for example. But even then, although they have to pay the same taxes and have the same social obligations as others, we still don't allow them the same rights. Once upon a time, a little over twenty years ago, I worked enforcing what was known as "Schedule C". Even then, decades ago, I found the sheer volume of books, videos, and pictures the law had decided Canadians couldn't import or possess or be allowed to view to be absolutely stunning. We are talking about a VERY, VERY thick book. Much of that material was so innocent that I can only presume it ended up in Schedule C because somebody, somewhere didn't want Canadians viewing it. The very idea that somebody knows what writings, videos, and pictures are or aren't good for you is insulting and demeaning in and of itself. As part of "Schedule C", I regularly spent 8 hours a day watching every conceivable type of pornography you could think of. Frankly, I found the homosexual pornography disgusting - but then too, I found a lot of the acts depicted in the hetrosexual pornography disgusting as well (with many of the acts being virtually identical). The child pornography, more often than not I found puzzling, although some was clearly criminal (and ditto for some of the homo/hetrosexual stuff). I have to say that, as probably one of the all time high scorers as far as viewing immense amounts of pornography over a short period of time goes, I lead a remarkably boring hetrosexual life. My wife is my wife, and I guess we more or less do what most married folks do (which of course is none of your damned business). I wasn't scarred for life by watching porn for months on end, I haven't felt the slightest urge to change my sexual orientation, I haven't felt the urge to inflict on my wife some of the hetrosexual practices I viewed that are probably criminal. And if it is none of your damn business what floats my boat, then it is none of the damned business of myself and everybody else what floats other people's boats either. Like gun control, the issue of what is "bad" gets confused with what people personally don't like - and that leads to bad laws. We find gambling distastful. So we bust numbers rackets and gaming houses - while the government runs lotteries and allows church's to run bingoes (for a cut, of course). We find drug use distastful. So we spend billions on the "war on drugs" while happily agreeing with the government selling booze - the drug which is the greatest killer of people and destroyer of families and individuals in our society. And ditto for pornography. While many gun owners are applauding those laws, a whole bunch of other people are busily running around telling the world how dangerous some firearms are and they must be banned, and how dangerous we are and must be controlled. Think about it for a minute. Back when I was in university doing the criminology thing, the peer reviewed research had pretty much failed to find a link between criminality of any kind and the making, possession, and viewing of pornography. To the best of my knowledge, there has not been a watershed change in the findings of that field of study since then. To borrow some quotes (simply because this is where they're handy) from the findings of the Fraser Commission, posted by the Canadian Conservative Forum http://www.conservativeforum.org/ There is no systematic research evidence available which suggests a causal relationship between pornography and morality...There is no systematic research which suggests that increases in specific forms of deviant behaviour, reflected in crime trend statistics (e.g., rape) are causally related to pornography... There is no persuasive evidence that the viewing of pornography causes harm to the average adult...that exposure causes the average adult to harm others...that exposure causes the average adult to alter established sex practices. We tread on very, very dangerous ground when we start approving of governments' being allowed to define what writings, photographs, thoughts, practices, hobbies, objects etc should and shouldn't be criminal. What sounds "reasonable" in one area more often than not will come back to bite you on the ass somewhere else. That is simply the law of unintended consequences. Like Dr. Bor, however, I will note that there is a significant difference where children (or any other person for that matter) are the victims of criminal acts in the making of pornography or where those criminal acts are depicted in or part of that pornography. Kidnapping, "rape drugs", "snuff films", depictions of rape, etc all fall under that umbrella. In those instances, I think you deal with them accordingly. Unfortunately, the CA Party resembles the other political parties in that it too participates in advocating laws that beat up on strawmen, rather than looking at where the real problems lie. The only difference between the Liberal Party and the CA Party in this particular respect is that they both have very different strawmen they want to beat up on. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 12:27:58 -0600 (CST) From: Rick Lowe Subject: Re: Stereotyping In response to Bob Lickacz, "Trigger Mortis" wrote: > Could you tell us some lab guy jokes? Seeing as how Bob is in the environmental biz, how about if I give it a shot: These three environmental consultants have been hired under contract by the government to help get the local rednecks on side with the Kyoto agreement. They convene a town hall meeting for one evening and hundreds of people show up. One steps up to the microphone and tells the assembled rednecks that the topic for discussion this evening is the scientific aspects of methane gas emissions by cattle and global warming. A rancher steps stands up and says "Before we start discussing all that stuff, let me ask you guys a question first:" "A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat grass. The same stuff. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?" The three environmental consultants look at each other, confer, mutter a bit, and then the head one comes back and says "To tell you the truth, we have no idea." "Well, then," says the rancher, "How is it that you feel qualified to discuss global warming when you don't know shit?" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 12:31:51 -0600 (CST) From: "Todd Birch" Subject: ....letter from Rae Baker & Artistic Merit The problem with Rae Baker's 'vote 'em out of office' solution is that = we can't! Rae - we've been struggling under the same system since Confederation! = Upper and Lower Canada determine the outcome of our elections and have = since the get-go. How many more times do we have to go to the polls to = learn that? Boondoggles, shady business deals, broken Red Book promises, nothing, = absolutely nothing will prevent Upper and Lower Canada from getting = another Liberal Francophone as PM. CA can rant and get all the good optics possible during question period. = Looks good, sounds good. Paraphrasing Shakespeare -=20 ...."a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and = then is heard no more: it is the tale of an idiot, full of sound and = fury, Signifying nothing." Macbeth - scene V. Come to think of it, that pretty sums up most political rhetoric, = doesn't it? As to the discussion on the relative artistic merit of child pornography = - - gimme a break! It could be just as easily argued that there was = artistic merit to the Holocaust or any other atrocity of mass or = ritulalistic murder or sadistic mutilation. We won't trust a teen to drive until age 16 but we consider it OK to act = on their immature hormonal urges at 14 to satisfy the lustful cravings = of alleged mature adults? There is "artistic merit" in any of this = legalistic rhetoric? What we are hearing here is the ridiculous mouthings of a society that = has lost it's moral compass and is seeking to justify it. Todd Birch Merritt, BC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 13:11:58 -0600 (CST) From: B Farion Subject: Re: lab guy > ========= > > Could you tell us some lab guy jokes? > > Alan Harper > alan__harper@cogeco.ca > SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM > ************************* An archaeologist is a palentologist who was to lazy to dig deeper! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 13:12:32 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: CAUCHON, KPMG AND HESSION ALL MISS THE TARGET http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/breitkreuzgpress/guns75.htm NEWS RELEASE February 4, 2003 For Immediate Release CAUCHON, KPMG AND HESSION ALL MISS THE TARGET "The Justice Minister is still traveling down a road littered with mines left by his predecessors." Ottawa - Today, Garry Breitkreuz, Official Opposition Critic for Firearms and Property Rights, exposed the major flaw in the KPMG and Hession reports tabled by Justice Minister Cauchon yesterday. "It's unbelievable that these people don't learn from their own mistakes," said Breitkreuz. "In 1994, the bureaucrats warned the Justice Minister that they couldn't calculate the costs. They grossly underestimated the number of guns and gun owners that led to the current firearms fiasco and wasted a billion dollars. "Neither report delivered to Parliament yesterday addressed these incorrect assumptions. The Justice Minister is still traveling down a road littered with mines left by his predecessors." Government documents show many mistakes unaccounted for by the two consultants' reports. This is the mine field the Minister is walking into which he refuses to see: - - 400,000 gun owners still don't have licences and can't register their guns without them; - - 300,000 owners of registered handguns don't have licences authorizing them to own them; - - Up to 10 million guns still have to be registered; - - Five million registered firearms still have to be verified by the RCMP; - - Seventy-eight percent of the firearms registered have blank or unknown entries; - - 813,822 firearms have been registered without serial numbers; - - 131,000 persons prohibited from owning firearms by the courts are not tracked by the system; - - 9,000 persons who have had their firearms licences refused or revoked are not tracked by the system; - - 38,000 licenced gun owners unable to be located by the system; - - 15,381 firearms licences were issued to persons with no proof of having passed a firearms safety course; - - 26,800 duplicate Firearms Registration Certificates have been issued; and - - 832 duplicate firearms licences have been issued, and 259 firearms licences have been issued with the wrong photograph. "What is it going to cost to licence all the gun owners, register all the guns and fix all these mistakes?" asked Breitkreuz. "The Justice Minister's fancy consultant reports still can't answer these questions. He says it will take weeks to prepare an 'Action Plan'. He told Parliament to wait until fall to receive his grand total of what has been wasted on the Liberal's 'universal gun registry'." Breitkreuz predicted that taxpayers wouldn't know the truth before the next election. "By fall, the Liberals will be heavy into a leadership race and none of the candidates will want to defend their billion-dollar boondoggle. By spring, a new leader will be elected and the last thing the Liberals will want is this messing up their election plans. The majority of Canadians want the gun registry scrapped. They know how to stop the hemorrhaging. Too bad the Liberals don't listen to the majority when it conflicts with one of their sacred cows. It's clear the Liberals are bound and determined to dump more cash into this black hole. There's only one way to end it -- elect an Alliance government," concluded Breitkreuz. - -30- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 13:13:47 -0600 (CST) From: Roger Walker Subject: Re: Email Privacy On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Marc Thibault wrote: > tommyg@bmts.com wrote > > > Moral of the story: Do not use this digest for > > personal communications. Email may be suspect > > for a few of us as well. Especially if your views > > are considered 'radical'. > > That's what PGP is for. Given that it's free and only takes a half- > hour to set up and learn, it's odd that so few of the people posting > to this list use it. I just attended a Linux User Group meeting last night where I presented another installment of a Linux tutorial. The "main event" of the evening was a PGP key signing party. The discussion that led up to it was interesting. Most people end up using PGP to sign their posts and email. The benefits acrue to the recipients as the sender can supposedly no longer repudiate what they have put down in their email. By not signing their email, they have more "plausible deniability" should they every want or need it. The problem with using PGP for general communciations is that there is still not enough people to make a critical mass. Until then, your use of it will make you a target, and there are many ways of breaking the encoding than brute force. It will be less than worthwhile (to hide important communications) to use PGP if you can be easily targetted. Once everyone uses it for all communciations, it will be much more difficult for any particular communications to be targetted, and everyone will be safer as a result. Having said all this, if anyone feels they need to communicate with me using PGP, I'll go through the (minimal) effort of setting it up. But, despite certain impracticalities of using it, my first choice for secure communications will always be One Time Pad. - -- Roger Walker spam free @ http://www.evsmail.com Voice/Fax 1-780-440-2685 http://www.rat-hole.com "HIS Pain; OUR Gain" http://www.man-from-linux.com ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V5 #720 ********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:akimoya@sprint.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., P.O. Box 1342, Saskatoon SK S7K 3N9 Phone: (306) 382-7070 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.