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 #817 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, January 12 2004 Volume 06 : Number 817 In this issue: and on and on... Column: GUN CONTROL OUT OF CONTROL Editor (The government will only tinker.) Editorial: Can Paul Martin stop the gun battle and win the West? Letter: Responsible gun owners are no threat Column: Will the real Paul Martin soon stand up? Thumbs Up To Al Koenig, president of the Calgary Police Association Column: MARTIN 'THE FISCAL CONSERVATIVE' A FAIRY TALE Editorial: SCRAP THE REGISTRY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:10:09 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Ackermann Subject: and on and on... Dead dog gets Christmas card from PM Globe and Mail Victoria =97 A dead golden retriever named Gregg mysteriously ended up on the federal Liberal party membership list, entitling the pooch to a Christmas card from Prime Minister Paul Martin and invitations to party functions, the dog's owner said Friday. The Christmas card from Paul Martin came two years ago as did invitations to at least three Liberal party functions in the Victoria area, including one nomination meeting, said the dead dog's 81-year-old owner. The Liberal party cards and letters were addressed to Gregg Buchanan, but the only Gregg who ever lived at that address was a dog who died five years ago, the dog's confused owner said. "At the time I was baffled by the whole thing," said the man who didn't want to be identified. "I just thought they made a mistake somewhere." The dog received two invitations from B.C.'s Young Liberals to attend meetings at the University of Victoria, he said. The man said he is not a member of any political party. He said he decided to make his dog's political status public after speculation about Liberal party memberships began swirling after recent raids on the offices of two provincial Liberal ministerial aides. Liberal party officials in Vancouver could not be reached for comment about the dog. - -- = M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) Rural Family Physician, Sherbrooke, NS Secretary, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 13, 120 Cameron Rd. Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 My email: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca My Bio: http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/mikeack/mikeack.htm SMSA URL: www.smsa.ca "Hope for the best, but plan for the worst". ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:12:04 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Column: GUN CONTROL OUT OF CONTROL PUBLICATION: The London Free Press DATE: 2004.01.12 EDITION: Final SECTION: Opinion Pages PAGE: A9 BYLINE: LINDA WILLIAMSON, SPECIAL TO THE FREE PRESS Sun Media Newspapers. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- GUN CONTROL OUT OF CONTROL - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- That grinding sound you hear is the Paul Martin juggernaut shifting and stalling on the issue of guns and crime. We all know the Martin machine is going to spend the next few pre-election months combing through the books for waste -- a feel-good exercise designed to enhance the new PM's old reputation as a good fiscal manager. We know from Auditor General Sheila Fraser that the biggest waste right now is the gun registry, whose costs will soon hit $1 billion -- nearly 500 times the original estimate of $2 million. Hence Martin's acknowledgement, in announcing his priorities for Parliament's return on Feb. 2, that "There have been a number of problems (with the registry) and these problems have got to be looked at and . . . dealt with." The best way those problems could be dealt with is by scrapping the registry. But Martin won't do that. "We are committed to gun control and we are committed to the registration of weapons," he insisted, establishing once again his credentials as the man who is all things to all people. There you have an eloquent summation of both the gun problem and the political problem in this country. So Martin is "committed to gun control." Who isn't? What seems to have escaped his notice is that guns are out of control (just like the registry's costs) -- and no nice list of registered gun owners is going to fix that. Martin need only pick up a newspaper at random to see what I mean. As we closed out 2003, Toronto's murder total had reached 64, nearly half of those gun murders. Most remain unsolved; almost all are believed to be gang-related. Witnesses to such crimes are either criminals or gang-terrorized neighbourhood residents, who understandably have little confidence that our justice system will protect them if they rat the gangsters out. Gun crimes overall were up sharply -- 35 per cent. Most, if not all, of the weapons used in those crimes were illegally obtained, unregistered handguns. Meanwhile, in Acton on Dec. 31, a 15-year-old boy was shot dead in his father's home and a 17-year-old friend charged. Two rifles were seized from the home -- both of them legally registered. The point is clear: the registry had no bearing on any of these murders. Police across Canada could give Martin an earful on how that $1 billion could be better spent. (So could customs officers, who are powerless to stop a flood of guns and drugs in the mail.) So, what will Martin do? As with the other hot-button issues, such as same-sex marriage, he'll make enough noise to signal his deep concern, then avoid doing anything concrete about it before the spring election. That way, he'll placate millions of gun registry critics without offending all those who still naively believe it's a useful tool in restricting gun crime. And if he does it right, he might even succeed in swiping one of the opposition Conservative party's strongest potential platform planks -- just as he did before the 2000 campaign, when he announced huge tax cuts, a steal from the Alliance playbook. I can see the 2004 Grit campaign now: "Vote Liberal and we'll make sensible, safe reforms to the gun laws; vote Conservative and those gun nuts will have us all packing heat." Meanwhile, the illegal guns will keep coming and the shooters will go on laughing at our cops and courts. If Martin was truly committed to stopping gun crime, he could make one simple change, with relatively little cost or fuss: Impose a mandatory minimum prison sentence of 10 years on anyone who commits a crime with a gun, and a mandatory five years on anyone caught with an illegally obtained gun. No plea-bargains, no deals. It would be bold, it would offend intellectuals who tell us crime is down and jails don't work, but it would finally be effective "gun control." Alas, he won't dare do it. C'mon Paul, prove me wrong. Make my day. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:13:10 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Editor (The government will only tinker.) PUBLICATION: The Edmonton Sun DATE: 2004.01.12 EDITION: Final SECTION: Editorial/Opinion PAGE: 10 COLUMN: Mailbag IT IS interesting to see the position that Prime Minister Paul Martin has put himself in by committing to Canadians to review and cancel all ineffective government program spending. The credibility of his new leadership is now at stake. This is because the most publicized and well- known government money pit is the dysfunctional billion-dollar gun registry program. Millions of voters and taxpaying Canadians are aware of this expensive, ineffective program. If it escapes being scrapped it will undermine the credibility of Martin's promised review and start him off as an incompetent leader. Seems like the obvious move would be to scrap this program along with the array of other losers. Jim Thomson Editor (The government will only tinker.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:14:24 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Editorial: Can Paul Martin stop the gun battle and win the West? PUBLICATION: Edmonton Journal DATE: 2004.01.11 EDITION: Final SECTION: Opinion PAGE: A12 SOURCE: The Edmonton Journal - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Can Paul Martin stop the gun battle and win the West? - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Prime Minister Paul Martin is caught in the crossfire over Canada's controversial firearms registry. It's clear he'll not find political safety for long by ducking behind vague promises of a review. On one side is a majority of Western Canadians who are steadfastly opposed to the registry. They see it as a symbol of how Western opinions are ignored by Ottawa, as a colossal waste of taxpayers' money and as an assault on their individual rights. The registry is a rallying point for feelings of western alienation and challenges Martin's commitment to give the region a greater say in how the country is run. On the other side is a Canadian public acutely aware of violent crime and firearm safety, demanding some sort of gun control to make them feel more secure. Support for the registry is strongest in Ontario and Quebec -- traditional Liberal strongholds. With an election looming and the cost of the registry expected to surpass $1 billion this year, Martin can't afford to dither. The $1-billion cost is a far cry from the number tossed about when the registry was announced by the Chretien government in 1995. At that point, the program was projected to cost $85 million to set up and $20 million a year to run. Annual operating costs are now budgeted at $118 million. The program, which took effect Dec. 1, 1998, required that all gun owners be licensed by Jan. 1, 2003, and that all firearms be registered by June 30, 2003. As of the deadline, 6.4 million firearms had been registered. Unfortunately for those who favour more rather than less gun control -- and the matter is politically as much a rural-urban split as an regional one -- the spiralling costs of an imperfect registry have played into the hands of gun enthusiasts. They have been able to shift the focus of the debate away from the merits of registering rifles and shotguns, and make the matter a question of government waste -- a ground on which it is much easier to build consensus. Clearly, Martin must seize control of the debate and refocus it on the rules surrounding weapon ownership. As a former justice minister, Edmonton MP Anne McLellan bears some responsibility for the debacle. When she was appointed to the portfolio in charge of the firearms program in June 1997, less than $50 million had been spent on the registry. By early 2002, when she left the portfolio in a cabinet shuffle, the registry's total cost was approaching $700 million and annual expenditures were running at $125 million a year. After last month's cabinet shuffle, McLellan -- now public safety minister - -- is back in charge of the firearms registry and this time looks as if she's prepared to do something. She has asked minister of state Albina Guarnieri to review the registry, with a view toward cutting costs and boosting compliance. But by announcing the reviews, Ottawa also has raised expectations the days of the registry are numbered. An Ipsos-Reid poll released in mid-December showed 55 per cent of Canadians believe the registry should be scrapped because it is badly organized, ineffective and too expensive. But the poll said a remarkable 43 per cent wish it to continue despite its problems -- and it made no attempt to determine how many registry opponents want a different mechanism for controlling shotgun and rifle ownership. Opposition to the registry was highest in Alberta and British Columbia, at 67 per cent each, and in Saskatchewan/Manitoba, at 62 per cent. An October poll done for Alliance MP Garry Breitkreuz -- the party's justice critic -- by Calgary pollster JMCK Polling reached similar conclusions. But JMCK went farther by asking Canadians if they would favour scrapping the federal registry and replacing it with provincial gun control programs. When given that option, 55 per cent said they were in favour and 34 per cent opposed. Steve Patten, a University of Alberta political science professor, said leaving gun control to the provinces isn't an option because it would lead to varying levels of gun control across the country. And while abandoning the registry would undoubtedly score political points for Martin in the West, he is unlikely to do so because it would be an admission of political failure and an absolute waste of the nearly $1 billion that has already been spent. "The people who are strongly opposed to gun control aren't going to be voting Liberal anyway," said Patten. Instead, Martin hopes to win over the support of Canadians "who are somewhat against gun control and who are flabbergasted that something that was supposed to cost a few million (dollars) is now costing a billion." There are no quick and easy answers to Martin's dilemma. "There are upsides and downsides no matter which direction he heads. It's one of those issues where if he is aggressive in changes and tries to please anti-registry people, then he angers those who want gun control. And although they're not as vocal, there are lots of Canadians who do," Patten said. "They've got to do some radical reform, but maintain the appearance of being committed to the principle" of gun control. Patten said the government is likely to make managerial changes at the registry and perhaps pare down the types of guns that must be recorded, dropping firearms such as hunting rifles. In the end, however, Martin may discover there is no solution that will satisfy both schools of Canadian opinion on firearms after five years of polarizing debate. He has his work cut out. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:15:29 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Letter: Responsible gun owners are no threat PUBLICATION: Vancouver Sun DATE: 2004.01.12 EDITION: Final SECTION: Editorial PAGE: A9 BYLINE: Warren Wall SOURCE: Vancouver Sun ILLUSTRATION: Photo: Warren Wall - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Responsible gun owners are no threat - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Re: The best 'review' of the gun registry is to scrap it entirely, Editorial, Jan. 8 Thank you so much for finally telling Canadians something that gun owners have desperately felt for many years: We are law-abiding, honest citizens, and are not a threat to anyone. Canada has a proud firearms tradition. Unlike some countries, our gun history is not based on violence, but on responsibility and personal achievement. Our sport shooters have won many medals, and our hunters have helped to pay for many animal protection programs, including B.C.'s highly successful "bear smart" program to reduce needless bear destruction. For a while there, the federal government had us believing that every Canadian feared and loathed us for no better reason than we owned guns. We are tracked under criminal law. Nearly one billion dollars has been spent, including many millions to sell the registry to people, to make them believe that their husbands, sons and daughters are a risk. Thank you so much for stating that we are not criminals at all, and treating us as such does nothing to improve anyone's safety. If the government spent as much effort tracking real criminals, perhaps many innocent people would be alive today. Warren Wall Vancouver ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:16:36 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Column: Will the real Paul Martin soon stand up? PUBLICATION: The Daily News (Halifax) DATE: 2004.01.11 SECTION: Perspective PAGE: 18 BYLINE: Kimber, Stephen - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Will the real Paul Martin soon stand up? - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- While he's been in charge for only slightly longer than Britney Spears was married, this is probably as good a time as any to take initial stock of what's changed under Paul Martin, what hasn't. The good news in our de facto one-party state is that our Liberal overseers do change foremen - and feet - occasionally, allowing the party to pretend it's different. The new brooms can sweep out embarrassments to which their predecessors were wedded. Like the federal advertising sponsorship program, which had become an out-of-control boondoggle for well-connected Liberal ad agencies. Or undertake take-no-prisoners reviews of the operations of a few too-sacred cows. Like the federal gun registry, a good idea gone badly off-track. Or reverse course on a matter of principle that's become pigheadedness. Like the Chretien government's cancellation of the replacement program for Canada's decrepit Sea King helicopters. At the same time, of course, a new government can muckle on to some popular unfulfilled promises of its predecessor and actually follow through - decriminalizing possession of (even) small(er) amounts of marijuana, for example, or appointing an independent ethics commissioner, or changing the rules so generic drug companies can export AIDS drugs to poor countries more easily. It can also use the time to sneak through some less popular pledges of the gone-government, like a $4.4-billion corporate tax cut. Paul Martin's government has done all that. But that amounts to little more than sopping up the gravy of the past. What has Paul Martin cooked up on his own? Precious little. His new deal for cities, one of the few real promises of his coronation , is ... well, it isn't. While Martin insists the $4.8 billion a year he promised municipalities isn't dead, the mechanisms and the timing - the how and the when - remains to be determined. That's because he says the country's finances are in worse shape than he expected. Which, considering he spent most of the past decade as finance minister, is disconcerting. More likely, Martin's re-re-invention as Mr. Slice and Dice is part of a downsize-government agenda whose real dimensions won't become transparent until he's safely back in Sussex Drive after the election. Neither will his plans for making nice with the Yanks. In his first month in office, Martin has played confound and confuse on cross-border issues - bobbing on the American decision to block Canadian companies from Iraqi reconstruction and weaving on the question of participation in the U.S. missile defence shield. If we have learned anything from Paul Martin's first 30 days in office, it is that we still haven't learned much about where he really wants to take us. Stay tuned. Stephen.Kimber@ukings.ns.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:17:43 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Thumbs Up To Al Koenig, president of the Calgary Police Association PUBLICATION: Times Colonist (Victoria) DATE: 2004.01.11 EDITION: Final SECTION: Monitor/Comment PAGE: D2 SOURCE: Times Colonist - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Thumbs Up - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- To Al Koenig, president of the Calgary Police Association for calling the billion-dollar gun registry a failure that should be abandoned. He's a cop and he knows it doesn't do a thing to deal with violent crime. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:18:53 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Column: MARTIN 'THE FISCAL CONSERVATIVE' A FAIRY TALE PUBLICATION: The Winnipeg Sun DATE: 2004.01.11 EDITION: Final SECTION: Comment PAGE: C3 ILLUSTRATION: photo by CP A TRUE LIBERAL Paul Martin has spent and taxed like the 'best' of them. BYLINE: TOM BRODBECK - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- MARTIN 'THE FISCAL CONSERVATIVE' A FAIRY TALE - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- The only problem with Prime Minister Paul Martin's declarations that he wants to "change how things are done" in Ottawa -- an admission that there are a lot of things wrong with how our federal government is run -- is that he's had the second most powerful job on Parliament Hill for the better part of the past 10 years. It would be one thing for a newly minted prime minister to make such a bold statement and to pledge change, having not been part of the mismanagement of the past decade. But Martin was the guy signing the cheques all these years. And, next to former prime minister Jean Chretien, the medium-sized guy from Montreal was the most powerful man in government. To say there are many things wrong with how business is done in Ottawa is an admission of guilt. Martin has played a large role in deciding how things are run on Parliament Hill. If he didn't like them then, he could have changed them -- or at least fought to have them changed. Most importantly, Martin controlled the money -- or failed to control the money. It was on his watch that billions were flushed down the toilet on such ill-fated government schemes as the gun registry and the human resources "billion-dollar boondoggle." Martin allowed ministries to run wild with taxpayers' cash, providing no control or discipline on how massive amounts of money were squandered. When the Liberal's gun registry was plagued with cost-overrun after cost-overrun -- jumping to nearly $1 billion from what was supposed to cost only a few million -- Martin did nothing. He was not looking our for taxpayers' interest. He approved the expenditures. The same goes for the hundreds of millions that were spent in human resources grants that failed to meet program criteria or just got "lost." Bureaucrats were "breaking just about every rule in the book" and Martin allowed it to happen. Remember the home-heating rebates that went out to dead people? Paul Martin. It was his job to oversee how our money was being spent, and he failed. Let's go back to 1993. The Liberals and their Red Book, written in part by Martin, promised to get rid of the GST. They didn't. And Martin was the finance minister throughout. Government pledged to balance the books but did it largely through tax increases and massive cuts to the provinces in transfer payments. There was little in the way of line-by-line budgetary cuts. All this nonsense about Martin being a fiscal conservative is a fairy tale. If he was the budget cutter everyone says he was, why did he table several budgets with massive spending increases in his final years as finance minister? He tabled a budget in 2001 that had a 10% overall spending increase and no debt-repayment provisions. In 2000 he brought in a budget with a 7% overall spending increase -- more than twice the rate of inflation. (What happened to 2001? Oh, yeah, Martin didn't table a budget for that year. He didn't think he had to.) If that's fiscal conservatism, NDP Leader Jack Layton is in big trouble. Martin brought in a 1.5-cent "deficit reduction" gas tax in the mid-1990s. The tax is still there, even though the deficit's gone. Martin brought in the airport tax. He saw the employment-insurance surplus balloon by the billions, giving only a pittance back to those who pay the premiums. And his so-called $100-billion tax cut is made up in large part by indexing tax rates and increasing tax credits. It's not really a $100-billion tax "cut." So how did this guy ever get the reputation of being a fiscal conservative? Beats me. Paul Martin is a Liberal. He spends like a Liberal and taxes like a Liberal. Pierre Trudeau would have been awfully proud of Paul Martin. And I'll bet you doughnuts to dollars, Martin's legacy will continue. We'll see it in his first budget as prime minister. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:19:52 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Editorial: SCRAP THE REGISTRY PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Sun DATE: 2004.01.11 EDITION: Final SECTION: Comment PAGE: C1 BYLINE: OTTAWA SUN COLUMN: Editorial - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- SCRAP THE REGISTRY - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Paul Martin's handling of the ill-fated long-gun registry will be a big test of the leadership abilities of Canada's new prime minister. Martin should cut his losses and kill the registry, a $2-million plan that soared to $1 billion. This is not to say gun control isn't necessary. But the registry is not the way to do it, as it fails to address the real problem -- criminals who use guns to kill, rob and intimidate. The long-gun registry targets hunters and farmers, who use their rifles and shotguns for sport hunting and pest control, respectively. They pose few threats. It is a difficult political issue for Martin because the registry has polarized the country, largely along rural and urban lines. A rural Saskatchewan farmer who goes to bed with his doors unlocked doesn't understand the concerns of a resident of Toronto, where gun crimes are in the news almost daily. Similarly, city residents don't understand that long guns are often among a farmer's necessary tools. The challenge for the review of the gun registry, headed by Minister of State for Civil Preparedness Albina Guarnieri, is to find a way to mollify both sets of constituents. With Guarnieri an advocate of gun control and rural Liberal MPs including southwestern Ontario's Paul Steckle (Huron-Bruce) and Rose-Marie Ur (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex) expected to join her team, a compromise may be possible. That won't be easy. But the focus must be on the real source of gun crimes - -- smuggled weapons. Instead of spending $1 billion on registering long guns of law-abiding citizens, some of that money would go a long way to improving security at our borders to stem the flow of contraband handguns. And with reports of some guns arriving via postal services, surveillance of mail coming into Canada must be greatly expanded from the 5% currently X-rayed or inspected. One senior government official said last week the gun registry legislation is not "a meaningful law," adding that "if we're going to spend this money, maybe there is a better way of spending it or siphoning some off to areas which need it." Most provinces and territories, including Alberta and British Columbia, have refused to comply with the legislation, which came into force last year. Only one person has been convicted under the new law of failing to register a gun, and there are estimates that more than 1 million guns are not registered. When a viable alternative to this mess is outlined, it should be implemented and the registry scrapped. We'd be loath to discover that the prime minister's talk of a review and overhaul is simply a way to stall a controversial issue until after the next federal election. Getting public support for increased border security and mail surveillance is Martin's job. With good legislation, it's doable. With bad, it's impossible. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V6 #817 ********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:moderator@hitchen.org 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.