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 #782 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 Monday, February 17 2003 Volume 05 : Number 782 In this issue: My letter to the Sudbury Star My letter to the National Post Military Backbone - Off topic Re: VALENTINE'S DAY Verification not required? SHOOTING USA - SCOUTTEN'S NEW SHOW the perspective of the foxhole Cooey Model 39 - Need Part Re: bada-bing,bada-boom Re: They've got Really High Hopes Fw: Copps in the race Re: SHOOTING USA - SCOUTTEN'S NEW SHOW China Exploits "Terrorism" Repress Freedom Letter: Registry misses guns that are on loan or lease Liberal gun vote sparks backlash: Government MPs oppose closure, cost ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 12:57:09 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: My letter to the Sudbury Star Just submitted, not yet printed. Have you written a letter today? - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Armed robbery case relies on DNA Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 13:55:38 -0500 From: Bruce Mills To: editorial@thesudburystar.com Dear Editor: Why does this case need DNA evidence at all? The police recovered the firearm used in the crime - all they should have to do is look it up in the Firearms Registration database to discover who the culprit is! That's right, I forgot - criminals don't register their guns! Only law abiding citizens have to. Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:26:44 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: My letter to the National Post Just submitted, not yet printed. Have you written a letter today? - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Political Opportunists Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 15:21:10 -0500 From: Bruce Mills To: Editor - National Post Thomas S. Axworthy's question in his column "Do you want a foxy leader or one who roars?" can be very simply reworded: "Do you want to be governed by a political opportunist who will do anything to get re-elected, or do you want someone who will stand by their principles and do the right thing?" Personally, I am sick and tired of political opportunists. Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 17:42:25 -0600 (CST) From: "Jim Szpajcher" Subject: Military Backbone - Off topic For what it's worth: Newsworld's program "Live Sunday" reports at 16:00 hr, MST, that Major General Cameron Ross has resigned. The official explanation is "personal reasons", but there was a discussion with David Pratt which gave credence to Ross's outraged disagreement over the announced sending of Canadian military personnel to Afghanistan, given the exhausted, impoverished state that the Liberals have reduced the forces to. It was also announced that his resignation has not been officially "accepted" yet. If Ross has indeed made a stand against the continual depredation of the Liberals on Canadian military strength, I salute him. If anyone has any further information, I would appreciate hearing more. Jim Szpajcher St. Paul, AB ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 17:43:09 -0600 (CST) From: Jim Powlesland Subject: Re: VALENTINE'S DAY On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, BOB LICKACZ wrote: > I wish everyone a happy Valentine's day. Being a romantic, I bought > my wife a case of shells for that 12 gauge the CFC doesn't know she > owns. You should have bought her a bottle of Hoppe's No. 9. ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 18:21:07 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Verification not required? I have heard rumours that the wogs at the CFC are not requiring verification, or a verifier's number, for some transactions after Jan 1/03. If I am not mistaken, doing this would require an Order In Council to get around the Regulation that came into force on that date to get around this. So far, I have been unable to find anything. This needs to be thoroughly looked into, as "verifiction" was one of the cornerstones on which "public safety" was originally based. Yours in Liberty, Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 18:25:56 -0600 (CST) From: "Dewey" Subject: SHOOTING USA - SCOUTTEN'S NEW SHOW SHOOTING USA - SCOUTTEN'S NEW SHOW Jim Scoutten, the former producer and host of American Shooter TV, has formed his own production company under the name Tier One Media, Inc. to continue his 10 years of reporting on all aspects of the firearms industry. Scoutten says his new show will cover everything from national championship matches in many disciplines of the shooting sports, to new products, to historic guns, to exhibition shooting. Scoutten has partnered with the Outdoor Life Network to produce and host a new series: Shooting USA. The first shows will appear in June of this year. Details are at http://www.jimscoutten.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 21:59:21 -0600 (CST) From: "jim davies" Subject: the perspective of the foxhole > > Boy, this sure demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of recent world > > history, although it is a pretty good CBCing of the Yanks. Even a cursory > > understanding of world events will put this into context. > > Really? Well then, correct me where I'm wrong then... > Okay. Consider the following: > >> Well, the French certainly know what it is like to go to war while the US > >> government keeps its' soldiers at home... > > 1. When did the first battle of WWI involving French forces of Company size or > larger take place? Now when did the first battle of WWI involving American > Forces of Company size or larger take place? For bonus points, how many YEARS > apart were these battles. > > 2. True of false. The Americans were engaged in commerce with both the Allies > and with Germany for years during WWI while Canada, the French, and English were > dying by the tens of thousands fighting the Germans. > etc. etc. Tactically speaking, as you are, there is no argument with your logic. However, world history is strategic not tactical in nature. Perhaps that is why not too many platoon leaders are selected as heads of state. If we ignore this then your arguments make perfect sense. If we assume that any war the Europeans start has to be attended by and supported immediately and without reservations by everyone else, including the Yanks you are correct. If we base right-or-wrong only on who was there and who did what at any given fight, then you are also correct. It is a matter of history that the self-professed leaders of the pre-WW2 world were Britain and France. It is also a matter of history that WW2 as we know it was created and enabled by the fatally flawed policy of appeasement followed by Britain and France. Yet, if your reasoning means that all other countries must be ready, aye ready, to march upon the crashing of these world leader's policies, then your arguments are historically sound. It is a hallmark of the British left that the US was evil in not supporting England in her wars. Of course, it is a hallmark of the British left that the Yanks are always evil and wrong. This is true whether they are being blamed for letting the world unfold without any interference as they did up to 1941 or whether, after being forced into the position of western world leadership by the incompetence of Britain and France they are blamed for doing anything, such as standing up to Saddam Hussein. So, your opinion is a good one from the perspective of the foxhole. It lacks a little depth, however. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 22:00:24 -0600 (CST) From: "The Penney's" Subject: Cooey Model 39 - Need Part Guys, I have an old single shot Model 39 Cooey that I'm in the process of refinishing and putting back into a useful condition. I have a neighborhood kid who has expressed great interest in the hunting and shooting sports and was approached by his mother (single mom) to teach him proper gun safety (she was planning on purchasing an air rifle for him) since she knew that I was trained in this area. I was more than happy to help out and provided lots of hands on instruction and book work as well. My new pupil demonstrated great maturity and learned to handle firearms with the respect they deserve. I'm sure he'll have no problem passing the CFSC later this Spring. As a reward for demonstrating such a commitment and drive to learn how to handle and use firearms safely I plan on reserving this old Cooey for his exclusive use (best I can do considering our idiotic gun laws) and will happily transfer it to him once he is of age. One problem: Somewhere along the line the bolt knob was lost and I haven't been able to find a replacement for it. If anyone knows for a bolt knob or has one to sell, would you please drop me a line? Thanks. Regards, Sean ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 22:02:03 -0600 (CST) From: Vulcun1isback@aol.com Subject: Re: bada-bing,bada-boom In a message dated 2/16/2003 8:07:30 AM Central Standard Time, owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca writes: > Most smokeless powder is single-base. That means it is ALL nitro-cellulose. > Some FASTER powders are double-base. That means that there is a small > amount of > nitro-glycerine added to the NC. NEITHER one is an explosive. > > note the phrase.....Father and son both had the idea of developing a more > effective explosive than gunpowder by using nitroglycerine Alfred Noe born on 21 October 1833, and his two older brothers Robert and Louis were fourth-generation Nobels. His father, Immanuel the younger, had trained as an architect and began his professional life as a building contractor. After initial financial difficulties his business flourished, particularly in Russia, where he also manufactured land and sea mines. Father and son both had the idea of developing a more effective explosive than gunpowder by using nitroglycerine. During the Crimean War, the Nobel family lost all its Russian business interests and returned to Sweden. The father passed on to his son Alfred the patent awarded to him for adding nitroglycerine to gunpowder. In 1864, a production facility built in Sweden in July of the same year was destroyed by an explosion. In that year, too, Alfred patented his invention of a detonator with a percussion cap. "Nitroglycerin Ltd" was founded and, from 1865 on, subsidiaries were set up, particularly in Germany, the USA, the United Kingdom, France and Italy. Dynamite, also known as "Nobel's safety powder", was patented in 1867. The Swiss "Societe Dynamite Nobel" was established in Isleten near Flueelen, in anticipation of the construction of the Gotthard railway tunnel, which was mined through some 15 kilometers of granite between 1872 and 1882. In the 1890s Alfred Nobel acquired the Bofors iron foundries in Sweden. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 22:02:56 -0600 (CST) From: Vulcun1isback@aol.com Subject: Re: They've got Really High Hopes In a message dated 2/16/2003 11:24:17 AM Central Standard Time, owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca writes: > Beats me, but why are they putting "inexplosive components" into the > "Explosives Act"? > > Unless it's being used to choke off firearms ownership by the backdoor. > > Seriously, does anybody have an inkling on how this would really affect any > reloaders ? > This is just my guess but I think they want to slowly ensure the firearms sports dies. First they will try to pass this legislation- making it illegall to own brass,primers,powder,and I suppose that may even include the very reloading equipment we own. Now once that is strongly enforced- all factory ammo will slowly be even more regulated to the point where you will be restricted (or having to prove to the government) why you need that box of ammo. (hasn't come down to that yet-but I just know it's heading down that path-if this legislation gets passed via Bill C-17) Naturally- we can also expect them to refine what classes of firearms that they feel we need. Here lies for them an excuse to use their favorite words (having no sporting purpose) to try to ban all semi-auto rifles and handguns. ( and you can bet that the anti-gunners want to see this class of firearms gone- and they will make up all kinds of excuses and lies to try to support this) it's not just about reloading- it's about the power to use Terrorism as an excuse to steal away our rights to pursue a peaceful,enjoyable hobby -merely because they don't feel that hobby is politically correct. I think they know and fear that should a civil war break out , the government may be able to choke off supplies of ammunition from store shelves,and perhaps even try to control importation of same- but they will never know who has reloading components and equipment (or how much of it they own) that can be used to make countless supplies of ones own ammo . (This is just one of many reasons to ensure you have an adaquate supply of your own) Just look at it this way- if you were a government as corrupt as this one, wouldn't you be worried about pissing off the wrong crowd (especially when the crowd has already (peacably mind you) demonstrated that they are fed up with your governments anti-gun agendas ? (In short- I think the government strongly fears a revolt from the firearms community-and possibly Canadians in general) I think the government just may be looking a little farther up the road,and is scared at what it sees. - and this may indeed be the reason to try to cut off our ammunition supplies by any means they can think of. But I think it has a lot to do with payback as well. The government was greatly hurt and embarrassed politically be our actions,concentrated effort via the media- to make them look like the liars and corrupt idiots that they are- we succeeded and that success was greatly compounded by the auditor generals report. Needless to say, what really bothered the government is the fact that all these years MP Garry Breitkreuz has been saying everything that came out in the auditor generals report,and no one previously from the liberal party,the media,or the public took him serious-because of the usual liberal political spin-doctoring. This allowed Garry to have the last laugh, and it infuriated the Liberal partry to no end-To be showed as liars publicly by an opposition member of the House-supported by facts from their own auditor general. This will be interesting to see- but if the Liberals think for one moment that people will start registering reloading equipment or turn it in, or will stand by while the liberals ban their favorite hobbies...good luck...The liberals think they faced Real stiff opposition from gun owners regarding registration- I don't know of anyone who will comply with this legislation if it passes. Hey but the way things are going- it looks like their primary objective is to turn all gun owners into criminals, - so they have an excuse to use their gestapo to try to "get tough" with us huh ? I sure hope they have a lot of jail space available- because when the next government is elected (and I'm almost positive it won't be them) they may find a few of themselves behind bars for fraud and corruption charges (Oh Happy Day) ....and if that happens there may not be much of a liberal party left in the future to worry about any longer (grin). ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 22:03:30 -0600 (CST) From: Med Crotteau Subject: Fw: Copps in the race NOTE: This was sent to me from Ontario today. Just a little bit interesting, IMHO. KEEP YOUR POWDER DRY!!! MED Any one who watched Question Period today got a glimpse of what Sheila Copps` new Canada will be like . I don`t know exactly what she means by --empowering minorities & empowering women but it sure scares me -- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 22:15:29 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: SHOOTING USA - SCOUTTEN'S NEW SHOW Dewey wrote: > > SHOOTING USA - SCOUTTEN'S NEW SHOW > Jim Scoutten, the former producer and host of American Shooter TV, has > formed his own production company under the name Tier One Media, Inc. to > continue his 10 years of reporting on all aspects of the firearms industry. > Scoutten says his new show will cover everything from national championship > matches in many disciplines of the shooting sports, to new products, to > historic guns, to exhibition shooting. Scoutten has partnered with the > Outdoor Life Network to produce and host a new series: Shooting USA. The > first shows will appear in June of this year. Details are at > http://www.jimscoutten.com Ripped off from the Gun Nutz BBS: http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/viewtopic.php?t=4239 I'm Jim Scoutten and the news is, we've got a contract from OLN US to produce a new series of gun shows for the US channel. The new name is Shooting USA (sorry about the implied nationalism, but that's the name) We had to change to a new name because the name "American Shooter" is owned by my former employers, for the ten years I produced and hosted that show. You may read about the details of Shooting USA if you would like at: www.JimScoutten.com The new shows will start on OLN-US in June and continue year round. Now let me suggest a strategy: OLN US is capable of recommending programs to OLN Canada. I've already mentioned to OLN US that there is an audience in Canada for this show that's been frustrated ever since American Shooter moved off the (now anti-gun) "New TNN". So you might want to drop a feedback message to OLN US that you're up here and hope OLN Canada will carry the new show. That's to demonstrate the interest so OLN US will make the recommendatin. Your e-mails to OLN Canada are going to confuse 'em because the show isn't on the air in the US yet. So you might want to tell them what you know about the show starting in June, to help OLN Canada understand what you want on their channel. Striker (who I know from the AR-15 forum down here) has already given you the contact link for OLN Canada. Here's the feedback form for OLN US: http://olntv.com/GIFB_feedback.cfm Regards, And good luck to us all! Jim Scoutten Shooting USA ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 09:15:34 -0600 (CST) From: Joe Gingrich Subject: China Exploits "Terrorism" Repress Freedom The Canadian government would never use terrorism to repress freedom, would they? The liberals brought in C-36 an anti-terrorism bill directed at Canadian citizens. Who copied whom? Yours in tyranny, Joe Gingrich White Fox, Sask., Soviet Kanukistan(formerly Canada) Feb. 16, 2003 >From NewsMax.com/ China Exploits ‘Terrorism’ to Repress Freedom China is at it again, this time using "terrorism" as an excuse to crack down on dissidents and reformers. At a closed trial in Shenzhen, dissident Wang Bingzhang, a founder of the Free China Movement, was sentenced this past week to life in prison on trumped-up charges of "terrorism" and "spying." Chinese democracy activists say Wang was abducted by Chinese agents last June in Hanoi, Vietnam after he secretly met with Chinese labor leaders. Beijing is using the "war on terror" as an excuse to imprison and execute political opponents and religious leaders, reports the Economist. This is the first time the communist regime has sentenced a dissident on charges of terrorism, China Reform Monitor says. The U.S. government expressed "deep concern" over the life sentence and said "the war on terrorism must not be misused to repress legitimate political grievances or dissent." Wang's sentencing came two weeks after a Tibetan man, Lobsang Dhondup, was executed in connection with bombings in Sichuan province. A senior Tibetan monk, Tenzin Delek, was also sentenced to death for his alleged involvement, but the execution was deferred for two years. The only evidence cited against the accused was an alleged confession by the executed man. Chinese officials are also attempting to use terrorism charges against the outlawed Falun Gong spiritual movement. Since Christmas, Chinese authorities have detained Father Dong Yingmu, a priest of the underground Catholic Church in Baoding Diocese, Hebei province, reports Catholic News Service. In the U.S., Cardinal Kung Foundation has listed bishops and underground priests of Baoding Diocese who are missing or detained. They include: Bishop Joseph Su Zhimin of Baoding, 70, and his auxiliary, 53-year-old Bishop An Shuxin. It is not known whether they are still alive. Father Li Jianbo, 27, is also in detention and reported to be extremely ill. Editor's Note: Did you know that two of China's military planners took credit for bin Laden's 9/11 attacks? In fact, the attacks were mentioned in a Chinese military manual three years before 9/11 -- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 09:16:28 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Letter: Registry misses guns that are on loan or lease SIMCOE.COM http://www.simcoe.com/sc/barrie/letter/story/891441p-1059345c.html# Registry misses guns that are on loan or lease Feb. 14, 2003 Iain M. Graham gave a good outline of many of the problems inherent to the Firearms Act, in "Gun registry contains basic flaw," Jan. 21, Barrie Advance. Here's another. A policeman, going to a 911 call at a residential address, checks the MDT (Mobile Data Terminal) in his car for information from the firearms registry. It tells him that either firearms are registered to a resident at that address, or no firearms are registered to a resident there. In the first case, this could mean that there are legally-owned firearms present, there are illegal firearms present, or there are no firearms present. In the second case, this could mean either that there are legally-owned firearms present, there are illegal firearms present, or there are no firearms present. Whoops - exactly the same thing. How could that possibly happen? Firstly, and obviously, illegally-owned firearms are not entered into the registry. Any residence, regardless of information held in the registry, could contain illegal firearms. Under the billion-dollar Liberal law, there is a distinction between ownership and possession. Firearms are to be registered to the owner. Somebody other than the owner may, however, legally be in possession. An owner may lend, rent, or lease a firearm, to another individual who holds the appropriate licence, but because ownership has not changed, the firearm is still registered to the original owner. There is no requirement to inform the registry or police or anyone at all that this has happened. Hence, the registry may indicate that there are legally-owned firearms at an address, when in fact there are none as the owner has rented them all out, or it may indicate that there are none present when in fact a resident has legally borrowed one or several. Any copper who trusted this (registry) would likely have a violent end to a short career. Mark L Horstead Newmarket ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 09:18:13 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Liberal gun vote sparks backlash: Government MPs oppose closure, cost and Senate conduct Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca PUBLICATION: National Post DATE: 2003.02.17 EDITION: National SECTION: News PAGE: A1 / Front BYLINE: Bill Curry SOURCE: National Post DATELINE: OTTAWAParliamentary bills; Closure; Opposition; Canada ILLUSTRATION: Black & White Photo: Tom Hanson, The Canadian Press / MartinCauchon, the Justice Minister, debates the gun registry in the House of Commons .; Black & White Photo: (Roger) Gallaway !@IMAGES=Black & White Photo: Tom Hanson, The Canadian Press / Martin Cauchon, the Justice Minister, debates the gun registry in the House of Commons . [28657-8067.jpg]; Black & White Photo: / (Roger) Gallaway [28657-8065.jpg]; NOTE: bcurry@nationalpost.com - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Liberal gun vote sparks backlash: Government MPs oppose closure, cost and Senate conduct - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OTTAWA - Liberal MPs are protesting their own government's decision to shut down debate today in an attempt to quietly pass new firearms legislation, with some MPs pledging to vote with the opposition. Today's debate would mark the first time the Commons has voted on a matter dealing with the government's controversial firearms program since it denied a request for an additional $72-million last December. It would also be the 82nd time the Chretien Liberals have limited debate since coming to power in 1992. The legislation is fairly mundane -- it creates a Commissioner of Firearms and makes some administrative changes -- but Liberal MPs have three objections. First, some Liberals are siding with the Canadian Alliance in condemning the government for attempting to pass the bill, C-10A, in one day. Second, the MPs fear a vote in favour of the bill would give a green light to Martin Cauchon, the Justice Minister, to make another request for money even though he has yet to satisfy concerns about the programs' rising costs. Finally, some Liberals, such as Roger Gallaway, MP for Sarnia, take offence to the wording of the motion, which asks the House of Commons to ignore the fact that the Senate has violated its rights by splitting the bill and sending it back to the House. "What is being proposed is scandalous,'' said Mr. Gallaway, who accuses the government of trying to maintain the firearms program through "back-door'' measures such as the bill from the Senate and is urging his colleagues to vote against the bill and the vote to limit debate. "It's a Minister who has no principles now, because as the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, he's asking Members of Parliament to waive the law because he's got a problem,'' he said. When the House of Commons passed Bill C-10, the bill originally contained aspects dealing with cruelty to animals. But some of the new firearms laws in the bill had to be passed by the Jan. 1, 2003 registration deadline, so the Senate split off those sections into C-10A and sent it back to the House for approval. But given that the House received the bill the same week that Sheila Frasier, the Auditor General, slammed the program for major cost overruns, minister Cauchon chose to issue a one-year amnesty to gun owners that would have been affected by the new bill rather than face the controversial debate that has now been put off to today. The Liberals have scheduled a vote for around noon today that would allow the government to limit the debate on the bill from the Senate. Should that pass, the government would vote to make the bill law this evening. It would not have to return to the Senate. It is extremely rare for the Senate to split a bill and to do so, the Upper Chamber had to ask the House of Commons to "waive its rights and privileges in this case,'' in order to approve what it has done. But that phrase is drawing the ire of some Liberal backbenchers, who say the Senate has gone too far. "I think Canadians should know that we've now sunk to the point where the Cabinet is asking the House of Commons to waive the law because they're in a tough spot,'' Mr. Gallaway said. "They think so little of us that their proposal is to waive the law to solve their problems.'' Today's motion to shut down debate and bring the bill to a final vote this evening marks the 82nd time the Liberal government under Prime Minister Jean Chretien has used closure or time allocation. By comparison, Brian Mulroney's Tory government shut down debate 72 times from 1984 to 1993. Don Boudria, the Government House Leader, said he was forced to bring in time allocation today because the Alliance had pledged to block the bill with a never-ending debate. "Once they say 'never,' well, that's where we are,'' he said. Mr. Boudria also argued that the unusual motion asking MPs to waive their privileges has been used before under the Mulroney government. John Reynolds, the Alliance House leader, disagreed his party is too blame and said he plans to appeal to Peter Milliken, the House Speaker, today in an effort to block the government's plans. "[Mr. Boudria] wants the debate over in one day, so he puts closure on it,'' he said. "It's unheard of. It's an arrogant government. They've beaten Mulroney. They used to yell and scream about Mulroney using closure. Well, they've exceeded him and they'll be hitting 100, I'm sure, before this session's over.'' Paul Steckle, an Ontario Liberal MP, took issue with Mr. Boudria's plan to stage the vote on time allocation around noon on a Monday, when many MPs have yet to arrive from their ridings. The timing of the vote will likely mean fewer MPs from the West, where opposition to the firearms registry is strongest, will be in the House. He has also argued the firearms program should not proceed until the government has proven it is on a solid financial footing. "I take offense that he's calling it on a Monday morning when so many Members are en route,'' he said. "If this is some sort of a scheme to have this closure brought in the absence of many who might otherwise not support that, I find that despicable.'' The government is clearly concerned with the outcome of today's vote, given that officials with the Whip's office were phoning MPs at home yesterday, arguing the new firearms bill, C-10A, would actually save the firearms program $3-million a month by streamlining its operations. The bill would allow more aspects of registration to be completed online. It also makes allowances for people to posess prohibited firearms, provided they have been passed on through the family. The bill has been criticized for creating a position of Commissioner of Firearms to oversee the administration. Some Senators said the Commissioner lacks independence because he or she will report to the Justice Minister, not Parliament. "They're talking about saving $50-million over 10 years [under the new bill]. Give me a break,'' Mr. Steckle said. "That's a minuscule amount of money compared to what we spent over the last seven years -- and we still haven't got a system.'' "I think there's a lot of Members who have a lot of concerns with the way we're treating this thing and a lot of Canadians have a lot of concerns on this issue,'' he said. Joe Volpe, another Ontario Liberal MP, said he will likely skip today's vote on time allocation and may vote against the government's main motion at the vote this evening. "It's insane,'' he said. "For what? This is essentially a Senate money bill that the House is being asked to accept. Why would any Member of Parliament do that?'' Mr. Volpe, who said he will likely vote against the bill, warned MPs are starting to take issue with what some see as the government's excessive use of closure motions. "These are important points and important precedents of Parliamentary procedure and if we want to just say, 'Forget it, we don't want to have anything to do with that any more,' well, we can abolish the House of Commons and let the executive rule by degree,'' he said. "But if you really do believe in accountability and responsibility, then you have to at least have some debate on what the issues are. I'll wager that most Members of Parliament don't know what the motion refers to.'' ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V5 #782 ********************************** 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.