From: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V6 #529 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, September 30 2003 Volume 06 : Number 529 In this issue: Re: Help with answers please Unlike Mr. Rock's billion-dollar gun registry, this $70-million will Editorial: Contracting out our sovereignty Canadian legislation as an example Re: Help with answers please Re: Help with answers please Not too late to disarm this 'Loaded Weapon' campaign from Converse Two charged at airport after gun comments South Africa: One man, one gun, states new law ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:44:13 -0600 (CST) From: "Bruce Montague" Subject: Re: Help with answers please Dear Linda: You asked for comments on the following questions: 1. What kind of license? 2. Who may qualify for ownership? 3. Safe storage law will stay as is, is that OK? 4. Any other issue you can add here. 5. What about registration, what to do with existing data if it is dropped? My name is Bruce Montague, owner of a gunsmithing shop in north-western Ontario, and an active member of CUFOA. I have participated in the Jan 1st stand on parliament hill and also the sea to sea rally conducted this past July. I have given a great deal of thought into all of the above issues. My responses follow: 1. What kind of license? NO FORM OF LICENSE IS ACCEPTABLE TO ME!!! As soon as you accept some form of license you accept the concept that you are being granted a privilege. Simply put - - I have a right to own and posses my firearms and nobody can tell me otherwise. This is something that is actually written into our Bill of Rights (inferred) and specifically written into the Magna Carta (which is, by the way still in effect here). 2. Who may qualify for ownership? Any Canadian Citizen, not sitting in Jail. There may also be some other exceptions, such as parole, but I think you get the point. 3. Safe storage law will stay as is, is that OK? The government has no business in the homes of Canadians. We have the right to run our household that way we see fit, with no interference from the government. This is an intrusion, that if left unchecked will have far reaching consequences. I do believe in safe storage, but that should be a personal choice. What is safe in one household may not be in another (ie. one may have kids around as opposed to only mature adults). We make choices every day, as to what is best for us, but ultimately the responsibility rests with us. For example, who am I to say that you should stop eating those greasy fries and start exercising, because it is good for you? I eat well and exercise regularly but that is my choice and I respect your right to live the way you think is best. 4. Any other issue you can add here. Lots of issues that could be added but then I would go on forever! Suffice it to say that we have to be very careful of the rights and freedoms that we try to legislate away, just because we think it is best for our particular lifestyle. RESPECT OTHER PEOPLES RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, UNLESS THEY INFRINGE UPON YOURS. 5. What about registration, what to do with existing data if it is dropped? Registration is nothing more than a Trojan Horse. It is a means to and end (ie. confiscation), and should be scrapped. All the data collected should be destroyed. I hope this helps you to gain some insight to the deeper issues of "gun control". Yours in Liberty, Bruce. "The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." -Henry St. George Tucker, in Blackstone's 1768 "Commentaries on the Laws of England." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:45:57 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Unlike Mr. Rock's billion-dollar gun registry, this $70-million will PUBLICATION: National Post DATE: 2003.09.30 EDITION: National SECTION: Editorials PAGE: A15 COLUMN: In Calgary BYLINE: John Weissenberger and George Koch SOURCE: National Post DATELINE: CALGARY - -------------------------------------------------------------------------= Trans-Canada roadkill - -------------------------------------------------------------------------= CALGARY - Allan Rock has thrown the West a bone. Under Canadian Alliance questioning, Mr. Rock recently revealed plans to twin a 35-kilometre, two-lane stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway in Banff National Park. Reported cost: $70-million. Unlike Mr. Rock's billion-dollar gun registry, this modest expenditure will save lives and bring economic benefits. It's said the Great Wall of China is the only human structure visible from space, possibly because the Trans-Canada Highway is hardly visible from the ground. The former is an enduring symbol of human ingenuity and perseverance. The latter is a deadly embarrassment. In the past four years, 24 people have been killed on the short stretch that's finally come to Mr. Rock's attention. As they grind along just feet behind the next vehicle, tourists might mistakenly conclude they're experiencing some historical recreation, an asphalt Upper Canada Village. The Trans-Canada is certainly a monument to mid-20th century engineering. Liberal Cabinet ministers, enjoying their subsidized flights between Ottawa and the West Coast, seem to prefer a view of the West's mountain ranges unbroken by broad roadways. So do the Liberals' green symbiotes, who speak of "rewilding" much of the West, presumably just past the last Starbucks. This would certainly please the greens' beloved "charismatic mega-fauna" -- bears, cougars and ungulates -- leaving the uncharismatic, taxpaying mega-fauna to run a potholed gauntlet every time they get behind the wheel. Ridicule of Liberal megaprojects is almost always warranted. However, pundits were wrong to denounce as political pork-barreling the "legacy plan" by Prime Minister Jean Chretien -- fleetingly blurted out a year or so back, then instantly dropped -- to finish twinning the Trans-Canada from sea to sea. The editorialists obviously have no idea what's become of Canada's highways. The Kicking Horse Pass, a symbol of Western parochialism to certain blissful Eastern pundits, isn't some empty stretch of useless blacktop. Highway 1 -- remember the numeral -- is a vital trade corridor and an intensely travelled highway barely maintaining an uneasy equilibrium among its many competing users. These number an estimated 10,000 vehicles per day. Creeping grandparents in Chrysler Neons must share the road with somnolent locals in ancient pickups, jet-lagged Germans in rented RVs and the occasional Albertan hurtling towards the fleshpots of Vancouver. Meanwhile, buses crammed with Taiwanese tourists periodically plough into heavily laden tractor-trailers, to tragic effect. The 225-kilometre stretch west of Golden, near the B.C.-Alberta border, has killed almost 160 people in the past 15 years. The death toll jumped by 20% during the '90s, while nationwide highway deaths decreased by 20%. Mr. Rock's project -- the micro-legacy of his boss's legacy -- will be money well-spent. Twinning literally any stretch of heavily used highway saves lives almost instantly, and will continue to do so until the demise of the automobile. The short section from Canmore to Banff, for example, regularly killed travellers in the few years before it was twinned. Since then, fatalities have been virtually nil. Rock's Road should be only the beginning. We need to finish the job. And not merely for safety reasons. Most economists will agree that reducing "friction" in the economy -- be it excessive taxes and regulations, international trade barriers or physical obstacles like run-down ports and roads -- increases productivity and net societal wealth. It costs approximately $100 per hour to operate a large, six-axle commercial truck like those using the two-lane sections of the Trans-Canada. Based on average daily traffic of 1,000 heavy trucks, a one-hour reduction in travelling time between Vancouver and Calgary would generate direct savings of $37-million per year. Indirect benefits, harder to quantify, would likely be far greater. The U.S. Interstate system triggered a productivity step-change in the 1950s and early '60s. Twinning the Trans-Canada throughout Western Canada could have a similar effect on a trading market of nearly 10 million (Alberta, B.C. and the Seattle area). This isn't a question of logic, but of political will. In 2000, federal fuel taxes hauled in $4.7-billion. A mere 4% was spent on highways. In the United States, a far greater proportion of a much larger revenue pool finds its way back onto the pavement. Today, roads in the poorest U.S. states are markedly better than those in Canada's richest provinces. Unfortunately, modern Liberal "nation-building" consists of overpriced ads telling us what a great job our one-party state is doing. Economic stimulus? Big tips at Ottawa restaurants. So much for the spirit that built the CPR, the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Canol Road. Twinning the Trans-Canada would promote trade and tourism, reduce wear and tear on millions of vehicles, improve comfort and convenience, and save numerous innocent lives per year. All this for the price of an HRDC scandal or gun-registry boondoggle. Let's get paving, before Sheila Copps declares the Trans-Canada a historic monument, or seeds it over for elk pasture. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:47:49 -0600 (CST) From: paul chicoine Subject: Editorial: Contracting out our sovereignty http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/editorials/story.asp?id=66F5F 00D-CC9A-4819-AED1-7B932D359B7F Contracting out our sovereignty The Gazette Tuesday, September 30, 2003 We're as eager as almost anyone to see governments at all levels privatize and "contract out" more nonessential services. But it's still a shock to learn the Canadian navy is considering hiring private companies to fly basic sovereignty patrols along our East and West Coasts. The primordial purpose of a state, they taught us in Poli Sci 101, is to protect its citizens and its own integrity. Defence and police, then, are by any measure the most essential of government functions. But now our air force, starved to death by successive governments and especially the current one, can no longer provide the navy with enough patrol planes to monitor our coasts. We're down to a pathetic 700 flying hours per coast per year. True, nobody expects a Norwegian or Indonesian invasion flotilla to loom out of the mist one morning. But these patrols are essential in policing fisheries, pollution, immigration, drug smuggling and more. So we're wondering. Would this contractor have to be Canadian, at least? What if the U.S. armed forces bid? Surely it's time Ottawa found the money to fund at least enough of a defence establishment to give Canadians the self-respect of simple coastal patrols. Is that too much to ask? © Copyright 2003 Montreal Gazette ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:48:38 -0600 (CST) From: "Trigger Mortis" Subject: Canadian legislation as an example >New Zealand abandoned its long gun registry in 1981. Handguns and MSSA's >are >registered and there are no plans to do away with that requirement even >though it is of no real use. There are only a little over 2000 licenced >handgun owners in NZ and they are subject to such onerous restrictions that >the sport of pistol shooting may just die a natural death because so few >people are willing to put up with the needless bureaucracy. I think I am >right in saying that not a single crime has been committed using a legally >owned handgun in this country. > >Meanwhile there are a number of people in our government who are so >ideologically blind or just plain stupid that they are seeking to >reintroduce registration for long guns citing Canada as an example of a >country where it is achieving real benefits in public safety, I kid you >not!! It should be noted that NZ has a high rate of firearms ownership per >capita and an exceptionally low rate of firearms crime. > >David. Nice to hear from you, David. It just about makes me puke to hear that your politicians are using the pathetic mess from my country as an example of enlightened legislation. I waited 2 years to get 3 guns transferred previously and I am in the same boat now with a couple of other guns. The money wasted here is a national disgrace. There is no accountability for one billion dollars spent. The number of guns on the black market has increased greatly. Many, many people have no intention of registering anything with the government. They feel, and rightly so, that the government has only 2 reasons to register anything: 1. to tax it 2. to confiscate it I have talked to many people who have let their licenses expire and who sold off all their registered stuff. They now have only unregistered and unknown caches of various firearms and ammo. That stuff will enter the black market sooner or later, probably. Smuggling handguns into Canada is done widely and is basically unstoppable, considering our huge border and trade with the US. Respect for the law is at an all time low and the heavy handed approach the government takes with otherwise law-abiding "paperwork criminals" is diminishing respect for the law even further. It is a pretty shitty situation here, with gun laws that don't work and cost huge sums of money in the process. If you ever need a good example of how not to legislate gun laws, Canada is an excellent example of stupidity and incompetence. Our Canadian government motto of "Peace, Order and Good Government" fails on all 3 counts. Alan Harper alan__harper@cogeco.ca SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM ************************* ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:01:30 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: Help with answers please The Jordan's wrote: > The plain and simple, long and short fact is - it IS the Liberals who will > be looking at the issue again. "Someone" will have to deal with them and > will need to "carry the message". What better person to present an issue > than one who already knows and mingles with the people involved? What > better person to speak in several ears at several functions and put the > ideas and thoughts across? Then to follow that - for people across the > country to go to their MP's (and write letters or do whatever they wish) - > BUT with "exactly the SAME message" coming from one and all (everyone on > the same page saying the same thing). Unfortunately, you may not get "exactly the same message" from everyone; it is almost guaranteed that you won't. > My friend is not a quisling - and this exercise is not a "back room deal" > (THAT has been tried before and failed as well - more times than many > realize). This IS an exercise (survey - poll - what have you...) to try to > find a consensus on what we can ALL ask for. No one has done this > before. No one has come up with a "collective" response that anyone and > everyone (gun owner and non-gun owner alike) could take to the voting polls > and politicians alike and ask for with confidence that others are behind > them. Many have "done their own thing" yet have not gotten down to the > nitty-gritty of "what the bottom line is". This is much different than the way your original message was worded led me to believe. I thought it was some member of the RFC who was representing *us* to the Lieberal party. Instead, it is a Lieberal insider trying to get a handle on what we would find acceptable - although it's not like we haven't been telling them all along... > Keep in mind the Liberals are not on the ropes with the issue, public > opinion shows they do have support, but for the "wrong reasons". Also - > the registry is NOT the real issue. It never was. BUT - - it was the > catalyst for many to get active. They will be soon. Day after day a new nail in the Firearms Act coffin appears in the newspapers. It is only a matter of time, and we have some 6 months before the next Federal election to keep hammering the point home. It *WILL* be a major election issue - which is no doubt why the Lieberals are revisiting this now, in preparation... Unfortnately for them, the debate is NOT over! > For those who have responded already - and those who have not yet but will > - many thanks. It will take time to receive and compile the responses but > you will hear from me again. > > For those who are not responding - why not? Armed with this new information, I will be submitting my responses shortly. Yours in Liberty, Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:18:22 -0600 (CST) From: "Al Muir" Subject: Re: Help with answers please > Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:05:55 -0600 (CST) > From: The Jordan's > Subject: Re: Help with answers please > > Keep in mind the Liberals are not on the ropes with the issue, public > opinion shows they do have support, > Linda Would that be the 39% in the latest poll Linda? Keeping in mind that it is down from the last poll and is likely to be still eroding. They are not only on the ropes with this issue, their legs are wobbly.They have nowhere to go but down. I have to insist again that we harden our resolve and maintain any negotiations from a position of strength. No retreat, no surrender Al ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:18:52 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Not too late to disarm this 'Loaded Weapon' campaign from Converse http://www.canada.com/search/story.aspx?id=4178bd2f-e361-45f6-9e86-9f8c4c761871 >From CP Not too late to disarm this 'Loaded Weapon' campaign from Converse JIM LITKE Canadian Press Thursday, September 25, 2003 (AP) - Let's be clear about this much: It's not just the NBA that has a gun-owning membership to rival the NRA. The sad truth is almost every major pro sports league in America has a long and sometimes tragic history of players playing around with loaded weapons. That is what happens when you hand enough knuckleheads enough money to inflate their self-worth and indulge every fantasy. But, until now, none of them had an official shoe. "We have no second thoughts about the name, whatsoever," Converse spokesman Dave Maddocks said. "Sports is loaded with battlefield terminology. This is merely the name of a shoe." Exactly how commissioner David Stern is going to shoehorn himself in between a clueless manufacturer and a public already weary of law-breaking players is anybody's guess. His office said he wasn't returning calls about the shoe and NBA spokesman Matt Bourne said players are free to endorse any footwear they choose. But remember, the Washington Bullets morphed into the Wizards a few short years ago with Stern's blessing. And he certainly wasn't shy about exerting pressure on Allen Iverson to cut the homophobic rants out of a CD he recorded. So maybe it won't be too late for him to disarm the folks at Converse. Just imagine the minutes from the meeting where they came up with "Loaded Weapon." Converse executive: "Next." Marketing consultant No. 1: "How about 'The Shoe Bomb?"' Converse executive: "Already taken. That's why you have to take your shoes off at the airport." Marketing consultant No. 2: "OK. Something more tasteful, less explicit . . . I got it. How about 'Loaded Weapon?"' Converse executive: "Perfect." According to the official version, the new shoe is actually the next generation of a Converse model brought out in 1981 called the "Weapon." That shoe featured an ankle support system; the updated version features a new cushion system that was "loaded" into the shoe - thus the name. The company already has recruited five NBA rookies - Chris Bosh of the Raptors Toronto, Kirk Hinrich of Chicago, Dwyane Wade of Miami, Mike Sweetney of New York and Troy Bell of Memphis - to endorse the new product in a series of television ads. Strange as this whole episode seems, stranger still is that none of the other sneaker companies thought of something like this sooner. After all, there's never been a shortage of endorsers, whether it was Scottie Pippen with a loaded weapon on the seat of his illegally parked car, Olden Polynice imitating a police officer or Iverson waving a piece around every now and then just to keep it real. A personal favourite would have been Voshon Lenard, the Denver Nuggets guard who was arrested not long ago for firing a .45-calibre handgun in his back yard. Twice. Even so, this would not have been noteworthy by league standards were it not for a novel excuse. Lenard told police he was scaring off deer. The problem with gunplay is that it's rarely funny and that a casual attitude toward violence only encourages more of the same. A former NBA player got off easy the first time he was charged with a weapons violation, lecturing schoolkids and buying ads touting gun safety in the local newspaper. As you read this, Jayson Williams is awaiting trial in the shooting death of a limousine driver during a party at his home. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 12:16:43 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Two charged at airport after gun comments http://www.canada.com/search/story.aspx?id=d37d7396-e0cd-45e3-a634-6e19f404b8dd >From BN Two charged at airport after gun comments Broadcast News Sunday, September 28, 2003 Two Ontario women have been charged with disturbing the peace in connection with an incident at the Fredericton airport. Police say the women were furious about missing a flight on Friday because they couldn't find the airport and in frustration one said something about pulling a gun. No weapon was found. The women have been released and are due in court November 10th. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 12:18:28 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: South Africa: One man, one gun, states new law http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=3D15&click_id=3D13&art_id=3Dct200309281= 04127540G520820&set_id=3D1 One man, one gun, states new law September 28 2003 at 10:41AM By Edwin Naidu More than two million gun owners in South Africa will have to take stringent competency tests when reapplying for their licences in terms of the country's new firearm law that comes into effect this year. In terms of the Firearms Control Act, all existing and new gun owners will have to apply for licences, with private individuals allowed to own one firearm for protection. Owners of additional weapons would have to sell them through a registered gunshop or hand them over to the police for disposal. The South African Police Service has started training designated firearms officers at stations throughout the country. 'We are determined to cut down on the number of guns in the country' Currently a licence can be obtained from the central firearms registry via a gun dealer but the laws about to come into effect require applicants to apply for a gun licence from an accredited training authority. The applicant must meet certain requirements, including an as yet-to-be-developed competency test, and prove they have the temperament to manage a weapon. They must also have a safe to keep it in. Gun owners will be tested on their knowledge of the 145 sections of the act. As with the recent conversion to card format driving licences, the process will be phased in for existing gun owners over a period of about five years. Police spokesperson Andrew Lesch said in terms of the act, a licence would be issued at an accredited institution which provides practical and theoretical training, and the police would do a comprehensive background check on the applicant, especially the person's "tendency to become violent". The police will also conduct interviews with neighbours or family to help determine the applicant's suitability to hold a licence. The guidelines for ordinary gun owners look likely to become a source of dispute He said although no date had been set police would like the law to come into effect as soon as possible, preferably before the end of the year. Sheena Duncan of Gunfree South Africa welcomed initiatives to reduce the number of weapons in the country and said the law would make it difficult for people to obtain a firearm. Lesley Xinwa, spokesperson for Safety and Security Minister Charles Nqakula, said there would be an awareness campaign outlining the goals of the law. "We are determined to cut down on the number of guns in the country." The law has infuriated firearm owners, according to Martin Wood, spokesperson for the South African Gunowners' Association. He said the police did not have the capacity to make the law work. "There will be chaos when the act kicks in because police have not been open in their dealings with gun owners... they do not have the support of firearm owners and have been operating in a unilateral way," he said. Wood said a backlog at the central firearms registry in Pretoria had already affected tens of thousands of applicants for gun licences. "How are they expected to handle implementing the new law, which requires additional work, when they cannot cope with the current load?" he asked. He said previously it had taken three weeks for a licence to be granted. Recently, some members of the association had waited more than four months for applications to be processed. "No one knows why licences are being refused... the current situation does not augur well for the time the new laws come into effect, there is bound to be confusion," he said. Lesch said backlogs in issuing of licences were due to stricter measures taken because the police had been ordered by the courts to be more careful in checking out the applicants. The police have been held responsible in a number of instances for issuing weapons to people who have used them in violent disputes. Lesch said since July organisations, including sporting and hunting groups and people who used weapons in the course of work, had to apply for accreditation. Lesch confirmed gun owners had expressed unhappiness over aspects of the law but said there were opportunities during drafting of the legislation for public input. "We've done a lot of work already on the law. "It is a learning process but to say there will be chaos is unfair as we have received support from many quarters." He said although the act was comprehensive, and available in only English and Afrikaans, police did not expect an applicant to know everything it contained but at least to show a basic understanding of it. The police, security, legal, justice and correctional services sector education and training authority is in the process of developing standards for the accreditation of training for gun owners. The South African Qualifications Authority has also developed a training manual for policemen but the guidelines for ordinary gun owners look likely to become a source of dispute. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V6 #529 ********************************** 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@cogeco.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.