From: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V8 #300 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 Saturday, August 6 2005 Volume 08 : Number 300 In this issue: Commentary: Second Amendment is the People's Life Insurance Re: Dale Blue Re: Commentary: Second Amendment is the People's Life Insurance Letter to National Post (unpub) ... Re: wendy gets more press Ottawa Office Re: wendy gets more press ottawa office Re: Bend Over, It's Ont. Hydro! Re: Ottawa Office Re: Ottawa Office ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 23:44:40 -0600 (CST) From: "Bruce Mills" Subject: Commentary: Second Amendment is the People's Life Insurance http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?issue=08-05-05&storyID=22024 Commentary: Second Amendment is the People's Life Insurance By ALEC DAWSON Friday, August 5, 2005 People who bear firearms have a legal, moral, and financial responsibility for the terminal resting place of every projectile that is fired. Our rights come with real responsibilities. As a firearms instructor, I am well aware of the flagrant and common ignorance regarding firearm ownership. Often people who keep firearms for self defense do not bother undergoing the training and practice sessions required for proficiency. Firearms education is on a dangerous decline in large part due to the disinformation published by the media and Hollywood. The problem is compounded by the elimination of firearms education in the schools. With today's "no tolerance" policies you cannot so much as wear a T-shirt depicting a firearm, let alone teach firearm safety in our schools. It may be difficult for many to believe but marksmanship was a sport for which you could earn a letter in high school. It would be irresponsible to abandon our means of self defense because of accidents. Automobile accidents cause far more death and injury than firearm accidents, yet no one is rallying for "car control." Your editorial, entitled "Guns Make Murder Too Easy," suggests a course of corrective action that is ill-advised to those who wish to preserve liberty and freedom. It is this sort of feel-good, sentimental thinking that can unleash the worst sort of unintended consequences. Gun control is foolhardy at best and down right sinister at worst. The Second Amendment.America's Original Homeland Security The Founding Fathers of this great union fully understood the dangers that a standing army posed to the citizens this nation. They fully understood that if the people were to remain free, they had to be armed. So important was this concept that they enshrined it in Amendment II of the Bill of Rights: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. With the adoption of the Militia Act of 1792, every "free able-bodied white male citizen" between the ages of 18 and 45 was required to enroll in the militia. The important key here is that the militia was not the army. The militia consisted of the able-bodied voting citizens of the United States. In a word, the militia consisted of the People. Let's fast forward to the 20th century. During that century alone 170 million people were murdered at the hands of their own governments. In all cases, draconian gun control measures were instituted prior to the fleecing of the populaces. The people willingly disarmed themselves (in the name of safety/security), placing full faith in the governments that would later come to slaughter them. These people learned the lesson . at the wrong end of the barrel. Where do we stand today? Self proclaimed "liberal" legislators, commentators, and organizations have been engaged in a long standing campaign to persuade the American people that they would be better off leaving the responsibility of using lethal force to the "authorities." Most of us, fortunate enough to have been raised here, have no true understanding of what it is like to be under the heel of an oppressive government. Such restrictions on these lethal instruments seem reasonable to average couch potato. After all, when was the last time anybody needed an AR-15 to fend of Federal troops from raping and pillaging their home town? In 1932, the U.S. Army (led by MacArthur, Eisenhower, and Patton under the direct orders of President Hoover) cleared out and burned the encampments in Washington D.C. of 15,000 destitute World War I veterans and their families, injuring hundreds and killing several. From 1942 to 1945 120,000 Japanese Americans were involuntarily incarcerated in concentration camps "for their own protection." In 1970, a contingent of 28 Ohio National Guardsmen opened fire, on students of Kent State University who were conducting a peaceful protest of the Vietnam War, injuring several, and killing four. In Philadelphia during 1985, 11 people, including five children, were killed by the U.S. police, when a bomb was dropped on the house containing members of MOVE. In April of 1993, 74 men, women, and children were shot and/or incinerated in Waco at the hands of federal agents who were attempting to infringe on their constitutional rights. One has to wonder where the guardians of freedom are after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the developer in Kelo v. The City of New London. In that 5-4 ruling, the court ruled that local governments have the authority to declare eminent domain on a private property and award it to different private property for development. They completely redefined "public use" in the last clause of the Fifth Amendment in a way that renders it meaningless. On top of that, the legislative branch, Congress, has been too busy reauthorizing the Patriot Act (a blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment) to bother keeping the judicial branch in check. Congress has exercised its constitutional powers of impeachment against a Supreme Court justice only once in our 231 year history (1805, associate Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Chase). Folks, our Founding Fathers' legislature would have had those five justices impeached and summarily shot on grounds of treason. Let me be clear. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. We must keep a close eye and tight reign on our legislatures (both state and federal). For it is they who wield considerable clout to either preserve or harm our constitutional republic. Those who would usurp our freedom and liberty will walk amongst us as wolves disguised as sheep. Necessarily, they will attempt to persuade us to relinquish our arms in the name of greater security and safety. Our Founding Fathers' message is clear. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision. It is the People's ultimate life insurance policy. To do away with it, is to invite oppression and genocide. They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - -Benjamin Franklin Alec Dawson is an NRA-certified firearms instructor in Orange, Calif. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 23:45:02 -0600 (CST) From: Christopher di Armani Subject: Re: Dale Blue At 10:11 AM 2005.08.05, you wrote: >Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 10:49:13 -0600 (CST) >From: "Cliff & Darlene" >Subject: Dale Blue > >Dale Layton Blue was born at Hardisty, Alberta on September 6, 1944 and >passed away suddenly on December 23, 2004. Thanks very much Cliff. Yours in Liberty, Christopher di Armani christopher@diArmani.com Our poison-tipped pens are greater than the mightiest of swords - diArmani.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 07:38:52 -0600 (CST) From: "mred" Subject: Re: Commentary: Second Amendment is the People's Life Insurance - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Mills" > http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?issue=08-05-05&storyID=22024 > > Commentary: Second Amendment is the People's Life Insurance > > By ALEC DAWSON > Friday, August 5, 2005 > > In 1932, the U.S. Army (led by MacArthur, Eisenhower, and Patton under the > direct orders of > President Hoover) cleared out and burned the encampments in Washington > D.C. of 15,000 destitute > World War I veterans and their families, injuring hundreds and killing > several. From 1942 to 1945 > 120,000 Japanese Americans were involuntarily incarcerated in > concentration camps "for their own > protection." In 1970, a contingent of 28 Ohio National Guardsmen opened > fire, on students of Kent > State University who were conducting a peaceful protest of the Vietnam > War, injuring several, and > killing four. In Philadelphia during 1985, 11 people, including five > children, were killed by the > U.S. police, when a bomb was dropped on the house containing members of > MOVE. In April of 1993, 74 > men, women, and children were shot and/or incinerated in Waco at the hands > of federal agents who > were attempting to infringe on their constitutional rights. Thanks for the reminder! here in Kanuckistan we should not forget Bruce Montague ?, another gun owner in Toronto who was strip searched in public while legally hunting ?and then there was another incident in the Yukon or NW terriitories if I recall where police overstepped their authority?Cant remember the names , sorry. There are probably many more not brought out to public knowledge. We DONT have the benefit of a second amendment so we therefore ARE on the downhill stretch to mass murder by our government, paricularly when the so-called minister of Just -us , Annie, get your gun , McLellan stated that those who do not support the statists are enemies of the state. ed/ontario ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 07:39:11 -0600 (CST) From: "Robert S. Sciuk" Subject: Letter to National Post (unpub) ... No Fly List and the 'culture of security'. (fwd) Dear Sir/Madame, I read of Transport Minister Jean LaPierre's announcment of Canada's new "culture of security" with more than a little scepticism. We'll just have to wait and see if it can match the efficacy of Safety Minister Ann McLellan's "culture of safety" brought into being with the firearms registry, and we all know just how well that little gem worked out. I get very nervous any time I hear any of the federal cabinet ministers use the word 'culture', and its close second cousin the overworn catch phrase 'Canadian Values'. It seems that the federal Liberals have taken ownership of those now utterly meaningless phrases as if they are the sole proprietor of the national crown jewels. Yawn! Sincerely, Robert S. Sciuk Oshawa, Ont. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 08:18:04 -0600 (CST) From: 10x <10x@telus.net> Subject: Re: wendy gets more press At 12:44 PM 8/5/05 -0600, you wrote: > > >Ms. Cuckier did very poorly on her interview. > >DOESNT REALLY MATTER IF SHE DID GOOD OR BAD...SHE GOT THE RPESS, WE DIDNT , >HER POINT OF VIEW IS OUT THERE, OURS IS NOT > >It is begining to be obvious >that the firearms act that was supposed to end these violent acts isn't >working. It is obvious that criminals who are willing to threaten, >injure, or kill other people ignore the firearms act and the requirements >for a firearms license and gun registration. >The firearms act is directed at the law abiding and serves to restrict and >hinder the law abiding from owning and useing firearms in a safe and >lawfull manner yet criminals seem to have ready access to firearms and are >willing to use them. > > >PREACHING TO THE CHOIR.. WE KNOW IT DOESNT WORK, THEY KNOW IT DOESNT WORK >(THE GOVMT THAT IS), THE PUBLIC UNTIL YOU LEAD THEM TO THE FACT IT DOESNT >WORK WONT MOBE OR WHINE ABOUT IT FOR CHANGE > >Ms. Cuckier blames "lax gun laws" in the United States for the firearms >crime in Toronto. Maybe it is those miscreants who think it is acceptable >to threaten other folks, use force, and are willing to shoot at other >people who should be blamed for these horrible acts. > >AGAIN PREACHING TO THE CHOIR..GET SOME SOUND BYTES ON THE CTV OR MEDIA BYTES >IN THE PAPER, GET INTERVIEWED > >The bottom line, the firearms act isn't about criminals or stopping >violence, it is about keeping those folks with legally purchased and held >12(3) and 12(5) firearms to gun ranges and using thes firearms in a safe >and legal manner. > >The firearms act has failed miserably to reduce crime and violence! > >And there are several firearms groups claiming national representation of >firearms owners in Canada. > >THER ARE MANY GROUPS EACH WITH THEIR OWN NICHE MARKET SO TO SPEAK. THE FOCUS >ON THEIR OWN AGENDA. A NATIONAL OFFICE IN OTTAWA DEFENDING OUR RIGHTS IS >WHAT IS REQUIRED. THESE SAME GROUPS CAN STILL FUNCTION IN THEIR NICHE AREAS >AND DO A DAMN FINE JOB. THEY CAN BECOME MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL OFFICE IF >THEY WISH, WHICH IN NO WAY DIMINISHES THEIR AGENDA >The diferences between firearms owners groups have to be resolved before >there can be a true national office. > >I HAVE SEEN LITTLE OF THESE GFROUPS GETING THE SAME PRESS AS WENDY, OR HER >VARIOUS ILKS AND SHILLS. SO TO THE CANADIAN PUBLIC THESE GROUPS ARE TO A >LARGE EXTENT INVISIBLE. > >CANADIANS AS A GROUP HAVE RIGHTS, WE HAVE LET THESE RIGHTS BE USURPED BY THE >VARIOUS FORMS OF GOVERNMENT. WE MUST NOW MOVE TO STOP THIS OR WE WONT HAVE >ANY RIGHTS LEFT. > >APOLOGIES FOR THE CAPS, MY DARN KEYBOARD IS STUCK FOR GOOD NOW. NEXT WEEK A >NEW KEYBOARD I PROMISE. All very well to advocate a national office or an individual who can speak for the firearms community, but will the media even consider contacting this person. In the past the media has seldom interviewed those who lead firearms users groups, instead choosing to interview a member of the public who is opposed to the firearms act and on a rant. I made a point of taping news casts where firearms owners reactions were interviewed from 1991 to 1995. Leaders from firearms groups were seldom interviewed and the majority of interviews broadcast were of members of the public ranting against the act. It seemed they picked the angriest, or least well informed. The infamous broadcast of Mr. Rock at the Shaw Conference Centre in Calgary illustrates this best. Mr. Rock was interviewed, members of the audience were give "sound bytes" and a couple of angry folks who were standing outside on the street were interviewed. Possibly there were no "leaders" of the firearms community there. Possibly they were not invited. Or maybe the media just ignored those folks and focused on the folks who were the angriest. Just remember the media has an agenda too and picks and chooses who gets to be interviewed, then edits their words to manipulate the tone and message. The media is well aware they have been mislead regarding the firearms act. They are slowly changing their position. And maybe one day they will contact the folks in the firearms community who have some inkling of what the firearms act is all about and how it is failing to meet the promises made by the liberals who support it. As for the firearms act hitting the iceberg of non compliance, the act has never left port. It is sitting tied to the dock burning fuel at full while about one half of the gun owners in Canada ignored it and DID NOT GET A FIREARMS LICENSE. And those with criminal intent ignore it completely. In conclusion, the media is in the business of selling adverting. There is a bias attached to the media. We have to change this bias. We have to educate all firearms owners about the nasty things awaiting them, and very likely all Canadians, in the firearms act. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 08:18:38 -0600 (CST) From: "ross" Subject: Ottawa Office folks my definition of an Ottawa Office is this. A group of well organuized individuals who are well spoken well read and are capable of representing all shooters in Canada to dump C-68. Do we need a speaker..yep, do we need a exedcutive yep again...do we need a treasurer ye and a secretary yep we need all that , abnd it is this group i call the "office". And do i believe it needs to be in Ottawa yes absolutely. "You always eat better when you are at the table" the table is in Ottawa, not out west or out east. The problems began in ottawa, and as such this is where the fix is. do we need actualy have an edifice where we pay rent right off the bat. no it can be done out of a spare room or basement until we grow. One thing we do need is a individual who is very strong on public speaking, knows what has been going on, and is not politically correct. My visoon of such a person would be female, if none are avilable then male, and their credentials should be well documented. Not that a degree makes a patriot, it just makes it harder for the media and the anti's to trash someone who is qualified. So here we are. Ther has been precious little discussion as to going forward with this, if ther is to be no concensus, then I may go at it myself, incorporate as required , jump through the hoops and do what I must. so ets see exactly where the rfc stands now... if you are with us, we will need funds to get articles of incorporation up and running, and other setup expenses. if not, then bury your guns boys and girls because you wont long be keeping them a few years at best, then gone..thats the way the gun grabbing train is heading. like it or not. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 08:55:35 -0600 (CST) From: "Bruce Mills" Subject: Re: wendy gets more press - ----- Original Message ----- From: 10x <10x@telus.net> > I made a point of taping news casts where firearms owners reactions were > interviewed from 1991 to 1995. Do you still have these? Might be interesting in a historical research kinda way... > Leaders from firearms groups were seldom interviewed Well, depending on whose news show it was, they might not have had access to a pro-gun "leader" of the time. > And maybe one day they will contact the folks in the firearms community who > have some inkling of what the firearms act is all about and how it is > failing to meet the promises made by the liberals who support it. And monkeys will fly out my butt. The media doesn't go looking for people, unless they are already some sort of "name" - someone who is, or has made themselves, the "top man in the field". That's what Wendy has done. She has put a lot of effort into *making* herself the "top man in the field". Don't forget, despite all her lies and manipulation, she *is* a professor of communication, and she has put this to good use over the years. Our "guy" would have to do much the same - put out news releases and hold press conferences, submit oped pieces and letters to the editor, in grate volume. We would have to demand equal time - because they sure as hell aren't just going to give it to us! > In conclusion, the media is in the business of selling adverting. There is > a bias attached to the media. > We have to change this bias. Which we have been doing, slowly, over time. We hve had much more "success" in the print media, but we still have a long ways to go when it comes to television news. As Peter Kent said, there is a definite anti-tory, and anti-gun, bias in the liberal dominated media. And he should know. > We have to educate all firearms owners about the nasty things awaiting > them, and very likely all Canadians, in the firearms act. I've given up trying, because if I can't convince the supposedly intelligent people here, what good is trying to teach Joe Gunowner something new? Liberty is wasted on you, Bruce Hamilton Ontario ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 09:04:26 -0600 (CST) From: "ross" Subject: ottawa office From: Linda FreefallCrusader Subject: Re: WENDY GETTING MORE PRESS HOW COME WE DONT John Ross wrote: *** in case it has been lost on everyone, we have no effective pr to counter this, the press have no one they can call, all the current groups certainly arent being called. for this reason and this reason alone we need an ottawa Office **** NO, NON, NYET, John... It is NOT an "Ottawa office" that we need. It is a 'single voice, a single speaker" that we need. Wendy is a 'single speaker'. Emile is a 'single speaker'. Does the RFC have a 'single speaker'? No, non, nyet.... INCORRECT LINDA .. Wendy has ryerson college wherein she calls home, along with the resources that such college offer her.. So yes, we need a speaker and we require a presence in Ottawa. Laws are made in ottawa, not out west or EAst, but Ottawa, that is where the table is set. If you want to be fed (have access, be counted and considered and have influence), you had better be at the table or you risk being marginialized. Anyone who doubts this need only look to the current groups to see how effective they have been from afar. Out of sight..out of mind When you have to begin flying people in from all over Canada to be at a gvt sponsored event, you begin to establish the "wine and dine" culture , and this in the past led to a sense of entitlement, and hence the problems we have with one group already; aside from this, it costs serious coin to fly everyone in. I would doubt we will be awash in dolars to start, so each dollar must be spent wisely. I dont want that. we have screwed ourselves once already, and it will not be allowed to happen again. Time is much too short . Either we do this right, or it does not get off the ground. I must add this point... When the original NFA was started under Bill Jones (before it was sold to western interests, there were quite a few MP's who were quite open with us and supported our work, as they at that time believed in the same freedoms we do and the same rights we do. It was their leanred opinion that to be effective to be able to pidgeon hole an MP or Minister you need to be on site. Bill Jones was a regular sight on parliament hill. Some MP feared him, some loved him, but he was there, he made a difference, the NFA of that time prevented even more draconian measures from being enacted because they were there. The membership at that time was about 40,000 paid up of which i was a charter member. The office was small.on Bayview Ave., you had to step outside to change your mind, but it worked. Computers then were in their infancy and quite unwieldy. today that changes with SOHO. One thing does not change. In any fight, you must be within range of your enemy. Standoff is ok to a point, but such distances do not allow you to see the ebb and flow of the battle. It was amazing how many "midnight deliveries" of plain brown envelopes were being stuffed into the mailbox of the Ottawa office at that time. would thesame volume have been sent by mail out west? In any event, i cannot say more in support of an Ottawa office than what I have. If it is to be anywhere but Ottawa, I must take my leave as any such effort will not get us the desired result. The distances are too great. This is not a my way or the highway thing, this is based on solid experience fighting gun laws for over 25 years. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 15:43:12 -0600 (CST) From: "Julie McNeice" Subject: Re: Bend Over, It's Ont. Hydro! In NWT its' different, too (power costs): Total KWH 571 @ 11.72 cents/KWH = $66.92 for July. "Higher purchase power costs" $16.21, "rate adjustments" $6.14, NTPC 1996 Snare Cascades hydro addition $3.03, Municipal/franchise assessment $2.63, GST $7.70 for total $117.63. So we know what its' like to be screwed - what else has that got to do with guns? Julie McNeice :-) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 15:44:08 -0600 (CST) From: "mred" Subject: Re: Ottawa Office - ----- Original Message ----- From: "ross" > folks my definition of an Ottawa Office is this. Sounds like a higjhly intelligent discourse and plan to me . ed/ontarioo ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 15:44:35 -0600 (CST) From: Keith Subject: Re: Ottawa Office My hearty congratulations to you. A small operation at startup, well thought out plan with clear objectives, business plan, missions statement and set of rules to guide the project forward sit very well here. One of the issues I had with Prof. Dorans project was the lack of the supporting planning. His idea was excellent, just impossible to sell to the rank and file who question the use of their meager funds without a business plan etc. A clear plan is much easier to sell and to support. I also agree that in this day and age a female is much more difficult to ignore by the bureaucracy. Perhaps someone from the shooting sports an Olympic participant with communications or marketing skills? Also the location is Ottawa!!. Much easier to deal with someone when you can sit on their desk to get their attention than wait for returned phone calls. As to the media interviewing them If they are in Ottawa and make a high profile they will be SOUGHT OUT for interviews. The media does look for balance and in the absence of a second accessible voice will print the version most easily available. Keith Hoback ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V8 #300 ********************************** 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.