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 #735 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 Thursday, February 6 2003 Volume 05 : Number 735 In this issue: Olson the LIEberal Report Newsmagazine - Oscar Lacombe Good idea ....ethics vs morals... Billboards of some type Re: "Street Life" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 20:00:09 -0600 (CST) From: "jim davies" Subject: Olson the LIEberal > > He added that most prisoners don't give a damn, but he'll vote > > Liberal: "Once a Liberal, always a Liberal; I'll never abandon the > > boat." > > Actually the above quote would make a more effective billboard than just > "I vote Liberal". Don't forget his endorsement of Martin. Martin's his man... - -------------------------------- > Subject: Re: Layton - ---------- > Maybe he can get the seals to vote for him... Reminds me of the "Penguin and the Mechanic" joke... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 20:04:52 -0600 (CST) From: "Richard A. Fritze" Subject: Report Newsmagazine - Oscar Lacombe Aside from a couple errors [ie., Mr Turnbull's given name, the charges laid in Ottawa re CUFOA protestors], the following is a fair depiction of Oscar Lacombe's protest on New Year's Day in Edmonton. The story appeared in the January 20, 2003, issue of the Report Newsmagazine [ http://report.ca ]. RAF xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx One good man versus a 'bad law' Oscar Lacombe, honorary sergeant-at-arms, politely refuses to register his rifle by Kevin Steel Caption: Lacombe as sergeant-at-arms: Law-abiding man. Caption: Lacombe and his illegal gun: Only it was seized. On the first day of the year, Oscar John Lacombe, 74, strode onto the Alberta Legislature grounds carrying a rifle. Wrapped in plastic, with the bolt removed, was his old Mark VII, manufactured in Canada, by H. W. Cooey Company (later Winchester Canada) out of Coburg, Ont. A standard issue to Cadet Services, he used this gun while a member of the Armed Forces in competition shooting against other army units, the RCMP and city police. A small crowd of reporters and media awaited him. They, like the police, had been notified he would be there. He placed the gun on the ground and asked two fellow soldiers, members of the Aboriginal Veterans Society, to join him. Herbert Bell, 70, a Korean War veteran, and Victor Letendre, 77, president of the society, a Second World War veteran, stepped forward and stood behind Mr. Lacombe, brothers in arms. With war medals glistening on chests in the low afternoon sun, Oscar Lacombe began to speak. He was there protesting the federal gun registry, he explained. As of January 1, 2003, all guns in Canada must be registered. Those that do not register them can face six months in jail or a fine of $2,000. This rifle on the ground, his rifle, was not registered. He had no intention of doing so. Therefore, he was now a criminal. "I'm the guy the government spent a billion dollars trying to catch," he said. "If the government believes in its law, then they better come and arrest me! And if they don't, then repeal the law!" Carrying his rifle, he defiantly walked to his truck, a brand new Dodge Club Cab driven by his son Brian, and drove away. The police followed. About 16 kilometres away, in north Edmonton, they were pulled over. The police were taking the gun. Mr. Lacombe has nothing but praise for the Edmonton Police tactical squad constables, who he says acted in a courteous and professional manner. The scene, however, was not without humour. One of the policemen made a slip of the tongue, saying, "I'm sorry, Mr. Lacombe, but we're going to have to confiscate your truck." "My truck!" Mr. Lacombe replied. "However am I going to get to church?" "The rifle," said the constable, correcting himself. "I mean, we have to confiscate the rifle." "Am I under arrest?" Mr. Lacombe asked. No, they said. He was free to go. In other parts of Canada things did not go as smoothly. On Parliament Hill, a rather rowdy group of 150 registry protestors gathered. Some burned their licences, others vowed - through megaphones - never to register any of their weapons. The police moved in when they began handing around a part of gun. John Turnbull, of Jarvie, Alta., and Ed Hudson from Saskatoon were charged with brandishing part of a firearm. Oscar Lacombe had just proved that he can openly, respectfully, defy the law, but the police will not openly arrest him. He also seemed to be proving, in relation to the gun registry, St. Augustine's observation that "A law that is not just, seems to be no law at all." So who is Oscar Lacombe, and why is he willing to stand up now, protesting the law of the land, risking jail? His main reason for this public civil disobedience is, in his words, "It's a bad law that directly affects me." He sees it as a costly adventure by a government pandering for urban votes but a law that will do little or nothing to enhance public safety. He does not believe that public support for the registry is as high as the media reports. Finally, and simply, he no longer trusts the government. He points to the auditor general's report released at the beginning of December. This estimated the cost of the registry would balloon to $1 billion by 2005, this after they promised it would only cost $2 million to implement. "Now the same people who predicted it would cost a billion are saying itŐll cost $2 billion. And for what?" Mr. Lacombe asks rhetorically. "To make otherwise law-abiding people like me into criminals." As for his personal involvement, in the days leading up to the protest he would simply say, "I figured I'm the guy to do it." But even as he said this, there was a look of unease about him. This is not a man who takes to lawbreaking lightly. As he sat in the living room of his small bungalow in the town of Mundare, 77 kilometres east of Edmonton, where he moved this last September, his eyes roved the walls that are covered in pictures and framed letters that testify to a lifetime devoted to service and upholding the law. Proudly displayed in his front room are his Certificates of Service. For almost half of his adult life, Mr. Lacombe was a soldier. He joined the Armed Forces in 1949. Promoted to warrant officer, he served in Korea in 1951, hauling ammunition and later with the military police. He went on to Japan, then to Europe for five years under the auspices of NATO. He did tours of Egypt, Cyprus and the Middle East as a peacekeeper for the UN. In all, he spent 27 years with the military, including his militia time. After leaving the army at the end of 1973, he became a bodyguard for the newly elected premier of Alberta, Peter Lougheed, a job he held for 12 years. From there he went on to become the sergeant-at-arms in the Alberta Legislature, a post he held from 1980 to 1993, for a time pulling double duty as the premier's bodyguard when the Legislature was not sitting. He was the first Metis appointed to that position in Canada. Mr. Lacombe was so highly regarded as a sergeant-at-arms by the politicians and bureaucrats he worked with that, just after his retirement, on January 26, 1993, the Alberta Assembly passed the following motion: "Be it resolved that, the Legislative Assembly of Alberta confers upon Oscar J. Lacombe for his lifetime the title of Honorary Sergeant-at-Arms." This was the first time this honour had been so conferred in any of the Commonwealth countries. Even now, in his retirement, he continues to serve as a member of the Driver Control Board, monitoring licence suspensions. Elaborating on the fact that he is the "guy to do it," Mr. Lacombe says, "I've served my country well. I've got no criminal record. I've nothing but good things said about me, from lieutenant governors on down. I've even got a letter from a Governor General, and from ambassadors, so I think I've earned the right to criticize my government." And again he refers to the pictures on the walls, the memorabilia of a lifetime that testifies to his assertions. Alongside the framed letters he has portraits of the three premiers he worked under; Peter Lougheed, Don Getty and Ralph Klein, each personally signed, addressing him with notes of thanks. He has pictures of himself with former lieutenant governors Ralph Steinhauer, Grant MacEwan and a host of other dignitaries, both domestic and foreign. In his living room, he has a plaque from Pope John Paul II thanking him for his service as part of the Holy Father's bodyguard on his visit to Alberta in 1984. He considers this pontifical plaque "a great honour," though he does not consider himself particularly religious. (He does not use his second middle name, Joseph, because John Joseph sounds, as he says, "too Catholic.") He was, however, raised a Catholic. He was born in St. Paul, Alta., in 1929, on the eve of the Great Depression. On his father's side, he is a great-great grandnephew of the famous missionary Albert Lacombe; on his mother's, he is a great-grandson of Lawrence Garneau, one of the pioneers of Edmonton who homesteaded the land where the University of Alberta now stands. In all, Mr. Lacombe has three Native bloods coursing through him: Ojibwa, Sioux and Cree. Though he is proud of his heritage and background, he remembers a hard life growing up in a Metis family of 14, a life where the family just barely got by. They hunted so that they could put meat on the table. "If it wasn't for a .22 and a shotgun, I would have starved when I was a kid," Mr. Lacombe says. "You shot your food and you ate bannock in the wintertime to survive." He keenly recalls the first deer he shot, when he was just nine years old. "I had a little rabbit gun. It was September. I was down in an old slough that had dried up, where we cut hay. There were a couple of rabbits that were hanging off my belt, and one partridge, I believe. And I had shorts [bullets] because they were very cheap, and they were good enough for a rabbit or a partridge or a squirrel. And all of a sudden, I was sort of downwind, this deer stood up and just looked at me. And I looked at the deer. I carried five extra longs, mushroom bullets, it has a hole in the thing. My father had showed me how to unload and reload a gun by pulling the trigger so it does not click. I gave a short whistle; it turned like this [he turns his head to the side] and...[he points to a spot just below his ear and snaps his fingers] I had only a small pocket knife and could only cut one side of the throat, so I ran like hell to get my father." Only at the end of this story does one realize the nine-year-old hunter was alone, a fact that might horrify urbanites of today. But to Mr. Lacombe, it is a minor detail. Father and son brought the prize back home in a stone boat, a proud moment for a young provider. It is memories like these that best reflect his attitude towards firearms. Yes, he says, they can be dangerous. In fact, one of his concerns leading up to the protest was that someone with less experience than he might attempt to imitate him by carrying a loaded weapon to a protest and causing an accident. But with the proper safety training and the right attitude, firearms are not nearly as dangerous as he believes the media has made them out to be. "We were 12 kids in the house with a dozen or so guns around. On top of that, we had lots of cousins coming over all the time and visitors coming up from Saddle Lake to shoot black duck." He shakes his head. "There were no accidents." Mr. Lacombe makes this point because the basic argument advocates for gun control have used time and again is that more guns equal more death and injury. Gary Mauser, a professor in the faculty of business administration at Simon Fraser University who has written extensively on the gun-control issue, says this argument is simply stating the obvious. "It is a pretty solid fact that if you had no guns, you wouldn't have any gun accidents," he says. "In the same way, in a small town with no skyscrapers you have few people committing suicide by jumping off of skyscrapers." But this does not necessarily translate into a lower overall rate of death and injury. Often cited by gun-control advocates are firearm suicide rates. But they do not mention the fact that Canada, with a smaller percentage of gun ownership than the U.S., has a higher suicide rate overall than its neighbour to the south, according to World Health Organization statistics. This suggests that removing a means, like guns, does not, in the larger sense, necessarily affect the ends. But it is not only in suicide that the presumption that fewer guns equals less violence breaks down. In his 1998 book, More Guns, Less Crime, author John Lott Jr. demonstrated that jurisdictions in the U.S. with high gun ownership had lower crime rates than those where guns were tightly restricted. And in areas that passed laws allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons, the crime rate actually went down. Conversely, a new book, Guns and Violence: The English Experience, shows how the crime rate, particularly the rate of crimes involving handguns, can increase even as stricter gun-control measures are put in place. Though Britain already had strict gun control, in 1997 it banned all handguns in response to a 1996 massacre in a grade school gymnasium in Dunblane, Scotland, where Thomas Hamilton, using registered weapons, shot and killed 16 young children and a teacher before turning the gun on himself. Following the ban, however, gun crime in Britain went up 40%; all violent crime doubled between 1997 and 2001. Joyce Malcolm, professor of history at Bentley College in Waltham, Massachusetts, and senior adviser in the MIT Security Studies Program, and the author of Guns and Violence, says that even as evidence mounts that the gun ban in Britain is having the effect opposite to that which it was intended, the pro-gun control forces are showing no sign of retreat. "I think they are so committed to the programs and have spent such an enormous amount of money on them, they simply cannot back down." She notes that British Prime Minister Tony Blair has just committed to allowing double jeopardy in order to reduce the number of jury trials because of the cost the rising crime rate is imposing on society. "So they are even willing to sacrifice ancient rights to solve a problem, rather than allow the public to rearm them-selves and re-introduce the right to self-protection." And she notes that Britain now has the most public surveillance of any country in the world, all to very little effect. She believes gun-control measures are an easy way for governments to appear to be doing something. "The goal should be public safety, and that goal is not being achieved by their gun-control measures. So they ought to look at other methods. People's lives are at stake." In Canada, the Centre for Firearms Control is going to great lengths to justify its existence, even as costs continue to skyrocket. On December 27, the government announced that all that was needed to meet the January 1 deadline was a letter of intent, submitted through the mail, by fax or the Internet. Alliance MP Garry Breitkreuz called this "covering their own butts" and saw it as a sign of desperation from a bureaucracy that had failed. As further evidence of this desperation, Mr. Breitkreuz points to a poll commissioned by the Firearms Centre but never released. Conducted by Government Policy Consultants Research at a cost of $3,800, the poll consisted of three statements and asked respondents if they agreed or disagreed. The statements were, in this order: 1) Generally speaking, Canadians would be better off if our firearms laws were more like the Americans. 2) Requiring Canadian drivers to be licensed and their cars to be registered helps to ensure that public safety is protected. 3) Requiring Canadian firearms owners to be licensed and their firearms to be registered helps to ensure that public safety is protected. In the trade, this is known as a push poll, in which questions are designed to produce a certain result, in this case, to show a high level of support for the gun registry by, first, playing on Canadians' perception of the U.S. as a violent society, and, second, by equating the registration of guns with the registration of vehicles, a specious analogy, given that a vehicle is more highly visible than a gun, and that in English common law there is no special right to drive as there is the right to bear arms. (For the record, of the 1,620 people surveyed, 61% disagreed with the first statement, 91% agreed with the second and 73% agreed with the third.) Despite the present desperation of the Liberal government on this issue, this does not change the fact that previous polls have consistently shown a high level of support for gun control in Canada. Gallup surveys since 1995 show each year that support runs around 70%. But how will this support translate into practice, now that the registry is in effect? Will people start phoning the police and turning in their neighbours for possessing unregistered weapons? Given that the police are not charging people like Oscar Lacombe, who openly defied the registry, that hardly seems likely. Additionally, the level of non-compliance with this law, according to Ted Morton, professor of political science at the University of Calgary, is "staggering." He says there is a high level of non- compliance right across the socio- economic spectrum, from the wealthiest, most prominent, people in the community down to people working for $10 an hour. Unofficial estimates put the number of unregistered gun owners (now, on paper, as criminals) at between 200,000 and a million. "It'll be like prohibition in the U.S. Because the law will not be enforced, either by neighbours or by police, it will bring respect for the law down in general." Though the public will certainly demand the police try their utmost to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, just owning a gun, registered or unregistered, may not be as scandalous or as odious as the federal government wants it to be. So Oscar Lacombe remains a free man. The federal government appears to have passed a law so bad that it is unwilling to enforce it. Mr. Lacombe is proud of the part he played in bringing that to light, though he admits, "Civil disobedience is really not my forte." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 20:05:28 -0600 (CST) From: "jim davies" Subject: Good idea > So fire away. However, link the support of scum like Olson for the > Liberals to their criminal friendly policies, rather than just saying > Olson supports the Liberals, so the Liberals must be bad. > > Jason Hayes Now that is a good idea. "LIEberals are TOUGH on crime? What do the Killers say? " [picture of Clifford Olson with quote] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 20:44:01 -0600 (CST) From: "Todd Birch" Subject: ....ethics vs morals... My dictionary defines these words thusly: - - ethic, Greek root word - 'ethos', custom, habit; - relating to = morals; containing precepts of morality... - - moral, Latin root word - 'mores', manners; - relating to right and = wrong as determined by duty, ethical; capable of distinguishing between = right and wrong; governed by the laws of right and wrong..... Sort of like picking fly shit out of pepper, isn't it? I once heard a definition of an ethical man as one who was unafraid to = ask the right question. It then becomes a moral issue as said man struggles to do the ethical = thing in response to the question....... Todd Birch Merritt,BC ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 20:44:37 -0600 (CST) From: "Jim Szpajcher" Subject: Billboards of some type Bruce - I do think that the idea has merit - but it is the kind of thing that would only work once. It might not hurt to also talk to the National Citizen's Coalition, also. Jim Szpajcher > > That is where the Liberals are most vulnerable and that is what the > > billboards should address. > > While I understand every argument you have made, and agree with it to a certain > extent, I am still f@&*ing mad at that stupid cow Caplan and her comments before > the last election: "The Alliance Party if full of racists and bigots". > > How do you fight crap like that, except with the same kind of fire? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 20:45:43 -0600 (CST) From: Rick Lowe Subject: Re: "Street Life" Vulcun1isback@aol.com said: > > Could you refer me to where I could learn more about this apparently common > > crime? > > Sure...FBI ( http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/cac/kidnap.htm ) As I said, I wasn't aware that many, many kids are kidnapped each year in North America for the purposes of making child pornography as you claim. One would expect that if this is a regular crime, there would be a fair amount of publicity around it. The website you reference above refers to kidnappings for ransom, kidnappings by parents, children whose whereabouts are unknown to their legal guardian, runaways, child homicide, serial murder of children, etc. However, there is not one single reference to kidnapping for the purposes of making child pornography on that website. Odd that the FBI wouldn't mention it if it were so prevalant, wouldn't you agree? > WPG Police gang unit, (in fact ask any gang unit of any major city..it is > actually very common these days and in the U.S. is a huge problem) Odd that the FBI and the RCMP don't mention it. Odd that Winnipeg police and other police forces don't bring this to the attention of the media when these kidnappings occur. Odd that such a huge problem goes apparently virtually unmentioned in major newspapers. Odd that a search using Google and the search terms "child pornography" and "kidnapping" doesn't dig up a single instance of kidnapping for the purposes of making child pornography. I tend to think of kidnappings in North America for the purposes of using the victim to make pornography like the tales of how if you own a firearm for self defense, it is most likely to be used against you by the criminal. It probably does happen once in a while, but it doesn't happen very often. > ..but you won't learn this "street fact" in University criminology courses > ..they don't teach things about "Street gang activities/Violent abductions > and gang rapes,etc." Really? Which school of criminology did you attend or are aware of that had no courses dealing with violent crime, gang activities, and sex crimes? In fact, being as these types of crime are so in the public eye these days, these classes of crime tend to get more than their fair share of study. Then there are the instructors at the universities. One of mine, as just one example, was Jim Steenson. For old "E" Div types, they may recall that Jim retired to teaching from the RCMP as a Staff Sergeant who had many years of experience as both a watch commander and in assorted serious crimes units. And there was Fred Howarth, who had worked within BC Pen back when some of the worst prisoners in Canada were housed there and during the riots that ended up with Mary Steinhauser losing her life in a hostage taking. If you couldn't learn anything about gang activities and street crime from former police officers, parole officers, etc... you weren't listening. The myth that people who teach in universities have no knowledge of the issues they teach about is just that - a myth. > - I've dealt personally with enough street gang members and know how they > operate.. Exactly how many did you arrest for kidnapping children for the purposes of making child pornography? I have to tell you we targeted gangs and their members fairly often, and I never arrested one in connection for having anything to do with kidnappings for the purpose of making child pornography. I also don't recall a single watchfor having to deal with gang kidnappings related to the making of child pornography. The Lower Mainland has more than its' share of gangs from various cultural backgrounds, pornography rings, etc. If kidnapping for the purposes of creating child pornography was a common problem, you would think it would be a more frequent part of the complaints law enforcement personnel deal with each day. > But take my word for it.... I know how they operate. I would just like to know how many of those gang members you were aware of that you saw arrested for kidnapping for the purposes of making child pornography. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V5 #735 ********************************** 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.