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 #828 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 Wednesday, January 14 2004 Volume 06 : Number 828 In this issue: B.C. Tory MP to run as a Liberal RE: I,m laughing so hard i,m gonna pee myself Re: Firearms lesson No. 1: Gun isn't a hammer: Re: Western Producer - Gun registry not expected to get nixed Rocky and Bullwinkle For PM and Attorney General "Gun Deaths" Inquiring minds want to know WHY ARE THESE GUN REGISTRY COSTS BEING HIDDEN FROM PARLIAMENT? The Oscar Lacombe Campaign FW: Where is your "FACT SHEET ON EXPORTING A FIREARM"? Subject: Target stores RE: Subject: Target stores ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:32:08 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1 Subject: RE: I,m laughing so hard i,m gonna pee myself Alan Harper alan__harper@cogeco.ca SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM ************************* >From: "ross" >Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca >To: undisclosed-recipients: ; >Subject: I,m laughing so hard i,m gonna pee myself >Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 14:09:17 -0600 (CST) > >COUNCILLOR WANTS GUN FINES >- >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >-- >- ---- >A Toronto councillor wants the city to dig deep into the wallets of >gun-toting criminals. >Councillor Brian Ashton yesterday complained that since the federal >government has not imposed a tough mandatory sentence for bandits captured >with illegal guns, the city should look at trying to penalize them. > > >WHAT A MAROON... this elected spokesthingy wants criminals to pony up and >pay a fine for being caught with a gun in the commission of a crime. >here is how it works. The criminal feeling bad at having no money takes a >doese of "guiltplex" (the provne guilt reliever) and then buys another >unregistered gun to relieve hius sense of guilt, and robs another mac,s >milk >and a bank to insure he has enough money to apy off his fine. >Feeling remorseful, the criminal then turns over huis funds to the city who >issues a guilt free receipt. Finding himself now destitute and broke for >having paid his fine, and with the "guiltplex" now wearing off, the pistol >toting punk rolls a few civvies and steals their cash and watches to put >some food on the table and to buy that most expensive remorse drug called >Guiltplex. > >He will of course feel so bad after taking his next dose that he will >immediately turn the illegal firearm on himself and meet his maker. >The city sensing another crime has been committed (against the law to >commit >suicide) sends the poor dead punks estate a fine to be paid from his >proceeds of crime for having committed a criminal act with a gun. >Yes boys and girls.."GUILTPLEX" a proven way to rid society of all sorts of >miscreants from punk to politicians. > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoi n.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:40:16 -0600 (CST) From: "Trigger Mortis" Subject: Re: Firearms lesson No. 1: Gun isn't a hammer: This guy should have used his head to smash the window. It sounds like it is full of concrete. Alan Harper alan__harper@cogeco.ca SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM ************************* > > Firearms lesson No. 1: Gun isn't a hammer: Officer's pistol fired when >he > > hit window > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---- > > A Montreal police officer who used his service pistol to smash a car >window > > probably caused it to accidentally discharge, an internal investigation >by > > the force shows. > > Police don't believe there was anything wrong with the service weapon, >the > > new semi-automatic 9-millimetre Walther P99 Quick Action pistol >Montreal > > police officers use. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin .msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:41:25 -0600 (CST) From: Jim Powlesland Subject: Re: Western Producer - Gun registry not expected to get nixed On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1 wrote: > http://www.producer.com/articles/20040108/news/20040108news09.html Gun registry not expected to get nixed this document web posted: Thursday January 8, 2004 20040108p19 By Barry Wilson Ottawa bureau Critics of the federal gun registry say the new Liberal cabinet has a perfect opportunity to use a promised review of programs, spending and value-for-money to scrap or radically reform the controversial firearms program. But they are not holding their breath. "If this government and its much touted program and spending review do not wrestle this program to the ground, then this whole exercise will be shown to be a charade," said Manitoba Canadian Alliance MP and justice critic Vic Toews. "The program is fundamentally flawed and that is not just my judgment but the judgment of the auditor general. But as finance minister, Paul Martin wrote the cheques that kept the registry afloat so I do not expect him to scuttle it now." Gun control advocate Wendy Cukier from Ryerson University in Toronto, president of the Canadian Coalition for Gun Control, puts her expectation of no change in a more positive light. She noted that Martin voted for various gun control bills and funded the firearms program even as the cost was escalating through the 1990s from the initially promised $2 million net to hundreds of millions of dollars. "I see Mr. Martin as a supporter of the program," she said. "All programs are being reviewed, not just the gun legislation, and if it is value for money, I think they will find that the decline in the rates of robberies and suicides using long guns will be convincing evidence." The speculation that the expensive and controversial gun registry might be killed arose after Martin announced after his Dec. 12 swearing-in as prime minister that all programs and spending approvals by the previous Liberal government under prime minister Jean Chrtien would be reviewed. He seemed to be targeting programs and projects near and dear to Chrtien and the gun registry would qualify. In a year-end interview with Global Television, Martin confirmed it would be reviewed but dampened any speculation it would be scrapped. He said "everybody was very, very upset about the escalation in costs" in the gun registry program. "And there's a great deal of good in the gun registry if you talk to the police forces across the country," said Martin. "So what's really important is to get those costs, those ongoing costs, down." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:42:37 -0600 (CST) From: "Todd Birch" Subject: Rocky and Bullwinkle For PM and Attorney General Sounds good to me! Could Rocky and Bullwinkle do worse? At least as cartoon characters they have the excuse of not being smart enough to recognize when something doesn't work or can't. Definition of insanity: doing something time and again expecting different results each time. The Canadian government in action! Lets form a committee, a study group, commission a white paper, hold a parliamentary inquiry, a national referendum to tell us what we already know - it ain't gonna work! Lets spend more money to justify the money we've already spent, etc., etc. Todd Birch ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:43:48 -0600 (CST) From: John Howat Subject: "Gun Deaths" >Professor Tim Quigley (Facts show new firearms program worthwhile SP, Jan. >8) quoted a statistic of 131 firearm deaths in 1989 (peak) compared to 32 >deaths in 2002. > > Death is death so that is a quotation of little value. The question must be "How many lives were taken unlawfully in 1989 compared with the numbers taken unlawfully in 2002" and a second question should be "What proportion of the victims were themselves involved in major crime" Cheers John Howat. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:45:02 -0600 (CST) From: "Linda J." Subject: Inquiring minds want to know Information for Ross et al, and the "Inquiring minds" from digest #821.... As you all know, the responses to the survey were less than admirable on the part of the RFC. Many of you chose to debate whether to respond or not, instead of actually responding and letting your voice be heard. The survey responses that were received, were so convoluted in themselves, that tallying any kind of coherent response is a major undertaking. Admittedly, the questions were not structured as well as we would have liked, because we rushed this first survey. I had approached a few trusted RFC members for assistance in compiling the responses, but again, no one was interested in helping or could not help because of their own commitments, leaving it all on my own shoulders. The tally of the responses is not yet complete, and "may have to be abandoned" (possibly replaced with a new poll) because of the convoluted nature of the responses. There were too many long (but constructive) responses in the "comments" part. In addition, I prepared a poll with several questions trying to get a better idea for the answer to the question with less working time on my part (multiple choice was easier as it did not permit convoluted long responses). The poll actually received more responses than the survey, but still does not give a great picture of "what does the RFC want". The poll can still be accessed temporarily at: http://members.shaw.ca/freefall7/politics.html but will be shut down in the next few days and replaced with a new one, which I am hoping you will all take time to participate in. The only survey question that produced a reasonably clear response was the first one, which resulted in a high number indicating that they "would accept" either a license or a certificate, with specific criteria and obvious modifications to the current system. Politically, it is fair to say that there probably will be some form of license or permit to own a firearm. As for myself, I am still going ahead and working behind scenes. In saying that, I do have to correct you yet again on one point Ross (et al). You have said "ostensibly so some unnamed mentor could carry the info back to the Liberals" This statement is INCORRECT. MAKE NO MISTAKE - - it is ME who will be doing any speaking and sharing of information I have gathered with Ottawa, and not some unknown, unnamed person. No information has been shared as yet. No message has been taken to Ottawa as yet. This IS in the works (these things can be very slow). I will give you additional details when the time is right, but the doors "have" opened. I now have direct access to policy and decision makers. I have attempted to explain numerous times that this is MY survey, that it is ME asking the question. "I am one of you." I have made past reference to a mentor, but that person can be referred to more accurately as a "personal coach". One that has taught me much about politics, and how things are done in the political arena. I specifically created a personal web site, so that anyone who wanted to know "who I am", and wanted to know more about me, would be able to do so. That web site is at: http://members.shaw.ca/freefall7 Ottawa deals with groups, spokespersons, and associations. Time does not permit negotiating with hundreds of individuals with varied views and suggestions. So THE question I have for ALL OF YOU at this time, is whether or not I have your support to take these or the results of a better survey and your comments to Ottawa? We finally have an opportunity to have our concerns addressed and opinions considered. Let's not lose it. May I speak on your behalf and carry your message after we consolidate our position? Do you have a problem with one individual (me) carrying YOUR messages to Ottawa, or can/will you support me? Please take time to review my web site, to confirm yet again who I am. If you answer via the digest, will you please "copy" me also at: freefall7@shaw.ca . Linda Jordan ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:46:32 -0600 (CST) From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1