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 #809 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 Friday, December 23 2005 Volume 08 : Number 809 In this issue: Lockdown ends in Georgian Bay school Court okays pocket searches at customs checks Majority ruling goes too far Ruling backs smoking law Re: Ruling backs smoking law Re: Car Signs Re: Lockdown ends in Georgian Bay school Famous sayings for activists Re. Policy #81 East shuns the Right Letter: Liberal gun policies don't stop criminals ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:21:18 -0600 (CST) From: "Bruce Mills" Subject: Lockdown ends in Georgian Bay school http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20051222/midland_school_lock down_051222/20051222/?hub=TorontoHome Lockdown ends in Georgian Bay school CTV.ca News Staff Thu. Dec. 22 2005 4:08 PM ET A lockdown has ended at a school in the Georgian Bay community of Midland after police determined that reports of a handgun on campus were false. Midland Secondary School was declared safe by the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) after police searched the building, but found nothing. Police learned that a handgun was spotted on school grounds just before 9 a.m. on Thursday. For several hours OPP officers surrounded and blocked access to the building while students and teachers remained locked inside classrooms. A woman locked inside Midland Secondary School told CTV News that a similar incident locked down the school in October. Somewhere between 800 and 1000 students attend the school. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:38:26 -0600 (CST) From: "Bruce Mills" Subject: Court okays pocket searches at customs checks http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Arti cle_Type1&c=Article&cid=1135205412513&call_pageid=968332188492&col=96879397 2154&t=TS_Home Court okays pocket searches at customs checks Man at border had counterfeit bills Will face new trial following acquittal CURT RUSH STAFF REPORTER Dec. 22, 2005. 04:45 AM Canada Customs inspectors can ask people to empty their pockets at border crossings, the Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled. The court has ordered a new trial for a man acquitted last year on charges of possessing counterfeit currency. Yesterday's decision restores the right to pocket inspections, overturning a trial judge's ruling last year that they were a form of unconstitutional search and seizure. Justice Harry LaForme, writing for a unanimous three-judge panel, said pocket searches are nothing more than routine screening. He described them as "within the legitimate purpose of border crossings," which does not raise charter of rights issues. According to the Customs Act, "an officer may search any person who has arrived in Canada ..." He stipulated, however, that searches must be done by a person of the same sex. The decision also orders a new trial for Dwight Adrian Hudson, who was acquitted of charges of carrying counterfeit currency across the border in May 2003 after a trial judge ruled the search that found the bogus cash was not within the rights of customs officers. Hudson had been trying to cross the border at the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie. He was with his 2-year-old son and two friends. Hudson had court-ordered access to his son and written permission from the mother to take the child into the United States. However, he was refused entry into the U.S. because he did not have a birth certificate for the child and was turned back to Canada Customs. When he tried to re-enter Canada, agents ordered everyone out of the vehicle. Canada Customs agents had been warned by U.S. border security about suspicions it had about possible child abduction. During the following inspection, Hudson turned his pockets inside out and five crumpled $50 bills appeared on the table. The customs officer believed the bills to be counterfeit and, upon further examination, Hudson was arrested for possession of counterfeit money and given his rights to counsel. Said LaForme in his ruling: "The search did not amount to more than the routine questioning that every traveller undergoes at a border crossing into Canada. "In the circumstances of the case, no charter rights were breached." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:38:58 -0600 (CST) From: "Bruce Mills" Subject: Majority ruling goes too far http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Arti cle_Type1&c=Article&cid=1135205412576&call_pageid=968332188774&col=96835011 6467 Majority ruling goes too far Dec. 22, 2005. 01:00 AM In its 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada yesterday redefined indecency to use harm, rather than community standards, as the key yardstick. But in a sharply worded dissent, Justices Michel Bastarache and Louis LeBel said the majority decision goes too far. "It constitutes an unwarranted break with the most important principles of our past decisions regarding indecency," the two dissenters wrote. Yesterday's ruling dealt with two Montreal cases in which swingers club operators James Kouri and Jean-Paul Labaye were charged with keeping a bawdy house under similar circumstances. Defining indecency has always been difficult, and judges have wrestled over the issue for a century and more, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote for the majority. "Over time, courts increasingly came to recognize that morals and taste were subjective, arbitrary and unworkable in the criminal context and that a diverse society would function only with a generous measure of tolerance for minority mores and practices." Bad taste, violation of religious or moral standards or even public disgust aren't by themselves enough to make something indecent, McLachlin wrote. The sex acts cited in the two Montreal cases didn't come close to being harmful enough to be criminal, the majority found. The dissenting judges said the key question should be whether the conduct in question offends "the standard of tolerance of the contemporary Canadian community." Bastarache and LeBel wrote that harm should not be the main ingredient in determining indecency. "We are convinced that this new approach strips of all relevance the social values that the Canadian community as a whole believes should be protected." In the Kouri case, the dissenting judges said the commercial nature of the premises and ease with which any member of the general public was able to gain access to the club and witness the sexual acts "on the dance floor" are relevant to deciding if an indecent act occurred. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:39:18 -0600 (CST) From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Majordomo User) Subject: Ruling backs smoking law http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Arti cle_Type1&c=Article&cid=1135119019084&call_pageid=968256289824&col=96834221 2737 Ruling backs smoking law Court snuffs out bar owner's constitutional challenge of bylaw City says now-defunct business posed as club to skirt ban ISABEL TEOTONIO STAFF REPORTER Dec. 21, 2005. 01:00 AM An Ontario Court of Justice has dismissed a restaurant's attempt to skirt the city's smoking bylaw by operating as a phony private club, according to the city's public health department. After a lengthy battle with the city, the now defunct Carlos Murphy's restaurant last week withdrew its constitutional challenge of the bylaw and pleaded guilty to permitting smoking in a public place, said Rob Colvin, the department's manager of healthy environments. The court levied a $4,500 fine against the restaurant for failing to stop people from lighting up. The maximum fine is $5,000. "It's definitely a positive step," said Colvin, yesterday. "The real benefit we see is sending out the message to other bar operators that if they're thinking they can get around the bylaw by masquerading as a private club, it's just not going to work and there will be penalties." Neither the restaurateur, nor his lawyer, could be reached for comment. According to the department, Carlos Murphy's, which used to be located on Kingston Rd. until it closed in the spring, was one of the first establishments charged when the June 2004 ban on smoking in bars took effect. That ban didn't extend to private clubs. The restaurant was also one of the first to try to get around the bylaw, by saying it was a branch of the Heritage Bicycle Club. The club, originally started by a group in Hamilton, sold branch memberships to bar owners across Toronto, said Colvin. In turn, patrons could purchase daily or annual memberships cards. Or so they thought. "It was just a total sham," said Colvin, adding he knows of about six restaurants that purchased the bogus branch memberships. All six businesses were charged under the no-smoking bylaw. Five either abandoned attempts to operate as private clubs and simply paid the fine, or took their cases to court, where they were convicted and fined. However, the owner of Carlos Murphy's launched a constitutional challenge, questioning the city's authority to determine whether or not an establishment is a private club. In order for an establishment to be considered a "private club," it must operate solely for the benefit and pleasure of its members and direct its publicity and advertisements to its members, said Colvin. Also, it must be incorporated and non-profit - a major hurdle for restaurateurs. John Filion, chair of the city's board of health, said he believed the case was the last to wind its way through the courts using the defence that it was a private club. "I think everyone has gotten the message that these clubs are clearly illegal and if you try to go this route you'll be taken to court and be fined," said Filion, who's also a city councillor. He noted the province's sweeping ban on smoking in public places, including private clubs, takes effect on May 31. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:03:35 -0600 (CST) From: "Bruce Mills" Subject: Re: Ruling backs smoking law - ----- Original Message ----- > said Rob Colvin, the department's manager of healthy environments. Doesn't this scare the crap out of anyone? What constitutes a "healthy environment"? Who gets to decide? Where does it apply to? Geroge Orwell was a piker... Yours in Liberty, Bruce Hamilton Ontario Ban Liberals, Not Guns! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:56:08 -0600 (CST) From: "Al Muir" Subject: Re: Car Signs > Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:17:46 -0600 (CST) > From: Steve Stubley > Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V8 #806 -- Car Sign > > Nick wrote: > > {My question: Would this be legal? Is there something under the > Elections Act that would prohibit this, or any other pertinent > legislation? How about bumper stickers? Anyone else got any similar > ideas?} > > For the last four years or so, all of my vehicles bear a sticker saying : > "Piss off a Liberal - Buy a Gun" > > All the reaction I have received has been positive, and I have never been > "hassled" by anyone in authority because of these stickers. > "Ban > Liberals - Not Handguns!" (thanks Bruce, et al) > > Steve Stubley Steve; here's an over the top one for those that are prone to pushing the limits. Not myself mind you, I never push limits. One could get in as much trouble as they wanted to with this one, when the mud really begins to fly after Christmas "Liberals - Thieves; Liberal Voters - Accomplices" Al Hunting is not a sport, it's a way of life. To all digest subcribers; Merry Christmas and the Best in the New Year to you and yours. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 00:35:18 -0600 (CST) From: 10x <10x@telus.net> Subject: Re: Lockdown ends in Georgian Bay school At 10:21 PM 12/22/05 -0600, you wrote: > > >http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20051222/midland_school_loc k >down_051222/20051222/?hub=TorontoHome > >Lockdown ends in Georgian Bay school > >CTV.ca News Staff >Thu. Dec. 22 2005 4:08 PM ET > >A lockdown has ended at a school in the Georgian Bay community of Midland >after police determined that reports of a handgun on campus were false. > >Midland Secondary School was declared safe by the Ontario Provincial Police >(OPP) after police searched the building, but found nothing. > >Police learned that a handgun was spotted on school grounds just before 9 >a.m. on Thursday. For several hours OPP officers surrounded and blocked >access to the building while students and teachers remained locked inside >classrooms. > >A woman locked inside Midland Secondary School told CTV News that a similar >incident locked down the school in October. > >Somewhere between 800 and 1000 students attend the school. Will there be a mischief charge against the person who reported that they saw a handgun, and wasted police resources? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 11:44:17 -0600 (CST) From: Lee Jasper Subject: Famous sayings for activists Don't know that I've seen these before. > The right to be let alone - the most comprehensive of rights. -- > Louis D. Brandies, Olmstead v. the United States, 1928. > > Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence > of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from public > councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are > rewarded, because they flatter people, in order to betray them. -- > Justice Joseph Story ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 11:44:34 -0600 (CST) From: Lee Jasper Subject: Re. Policy #81 As published in the Oct. 29th, #559 CFD, you may recall from that in my June 24, 2005 letter to Harper and others, I stated: > B. The March 2005 CPC Policy statement #81 refers to "repealing Canada's > costly gun registry legislation" and announces the introduction of "a > 'certification' screening system for all those wishing to acquire > firearms legally". > > C. On May 3, 2005, CPC House Leader Jay Hill was quoted in the Robson > Valley Times stating, "Handguns would still need to be registered, but > we would scrap the long gun registry," said Hill. "You can't go halfway > on this thing, you can't maintain the registry that has happened, you > scrap the whole thing." I asked: > 3. It seems House Leader Hill has misspoken. Repealing 'the registry' > seems quite inclusive. How can the CPC rationally repeal the long gun > CFRS registry and not the 'restricted' or RWRS registry which is also > held within the CFRS? What is the 'universal registry' if not both? > > 4. In light of the two recent Breitkreuz releases which only confirms > 'long held popular belief' and statements by Herb Gray in the House many > years ago, will you confirm that the 'restricted' registry will be > retained under a CPC government? I guess Garry B's statement about returning gun laws to pre 1995 means the 'restricted registry' with all its imperfections will remain. Paul commented: >>a certification screening system for all those wishing to >>> acquire firearms legally; > > I certainly hope this implies something like the FAC system of get one when > you need one. The end of mandatory licensing for ownership and to hell with > the firearm registry. I had previously asked: > 1. Why is there no allowance for alternatively certifying experienced > gun owners in policy #81? This was promised by the federal government in > 1995. I refer to Rock's guarantee that all experienced owners would be 'grandfathered' into PALs. You may recall that most CFOs refused to accept the feds intentions. > (Do you know that as of Dec. 31, 2003, 35,733 firearm owners across > Canada have been alternately certified into PALs by provincial and > federal CFOs)? [Plus 514 in 2004] So what's the payoff for all the AOBs and GOMs? > 2. With no such 'grandfathering' provisions (as per FA s. 7(4)(a)), how > will all pre 1979 CFSC owners including those who held Ontario > grandfathered FACs in 1990, 1995 and 1998, qualify for 'certification > screening'? > > (In his 2002 and 2004 leadership campaigns, Ontario's Jim Flaherty > assured Ontario gun owners they would be 'grandfathered' into PALs if > they had completed Hunter Safety training, held an Outdoors Card or had > been previously issued a POL). (Do you know that gun owner licencing is > actually conducted by provincial CFOs or federal CFOs on behalf of some > provinces, in partnership with the CAFC)? I also reminded Stephen and others: > 5. I am somewhat aware of the constitutional sharing of powers between > the federal and provincial governments. What assurance does the CPC have > that provincial jurisdictions (especially Ontario) will co-operate with > policy #81 and not pursue their own licencing/registration protocols as > they did in respect of licencing issues in 1995? In a genaeral letter, Garry B. has stated: > We promise to repeal Bill C-68 and return gun laws to the way they > were before 1995. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 11:44:52 -0600 (CST) From: Lee Jasper Subject: East shuns the Right Jim commented to the East Coast chap with some suggestion that voters east of MB were perhaps lacking in social intelligence or simply masochistic. Let's examine this paranoia. It has been oft stated that the PC Party of Ontario is the 'natural governing Party of Ontario'. Led by the PC's George Drew, 1943 - 48; Thomas Kennedy, 1948 - 49; Leslie Frost, 1949 - 61; John Robarts, 1961 - 71 and Bill Davis, 1971 - 85. Unfortunately, this successful run was followed by PC leaders Frank Miller, Feb. 1985 - June 85 (interrupted by 10 years of Liberal and NDP rule). Then we experienced Mike Harris, 1995 - April 02 and Slick Ernie Eves, April 2002 - Oct. '03. We'll come back to Harris. From 1948 to 2005, we have had PC gov'ts in power for all except 12 of those 62 years. Since 1905, Ontario has had PC gov'ts for some 75 years. So why has Ont. rejected the federal Reform, Alliance and CPC? Back to Harris. Mike Harris convinced Ontarians that there was a 'different' kind of Conservatism than what most Ontario voters found acceptable. Mike Harris boasted to all how he won an election on a platform written on a paper napkin in a coffee shop. For those Tories who soundly supported John P. and Bill Davis and their Big Blue Machine, the Harris Common Sense Revolution meant the end of 'traditional' Conservatism. Harris's ramming 'his' brand of Conservatism down everyone's throat along with his "It's my way or the highway" mentality is a significant contributor to why Preston Manning, Stockwell Day and now Stephen Harper have not gained the support of large blocks of voters in Ontario. Especially in the multi-cultural GTA. 'Mean' Mike picked on all the less well connected in Ontario society. (Social assistance recipients, disabled, etc.). The federal electoral trend has been the converse. There's an old axiom. Ontarians vote for PCs to the 'manage' the Province and for Liberals to 'lead' the Nation. (I realize many in the RFC believe these soothsayers must be smoking something awfully potent). Starting with the 1935 federal election; a cursory review indicates that we've had a succession of Liberal, Liberal, Lib, Lib, Lib, Conservative, Conserv, Conserv gov'ts, followed by Lib, Lib, Lib, Lib, Lib, Conserv; Lib, Conserv (Mulroney won record 211 seats), Conserv (Mulroney later retired as most reviled PM); Lib (Campbell decimated - 2 seats), Lib, Lib, Lib - - - maybe it IS time for the swing to occur. (But on two previous occasions, the Libs have served for 5 consecutive terms). In the past 71 years, the Libs have governed for 55 years, the PCs 16. The image makers toyed with Preston's thick glasses and changed his hair style. Stockwell attempted to be hip in a wet suit on a PWC? Stephen whose Forced smile lacks warmth and is paired with his steely gaze. While the image consultants have put a smile on his face and softened the football helmet hairdo, they haven't fixed the eyes. Federally, many Ontarians felt short changed by Joe (Who) Clark, 'Lyin' Brian Mulroney and Kim (She screwed herself to the top and later out of a sure PC election victory) Campbell. (Ooooops, there goes the women's vote, Brian). Fool me once shame on me . . . No doubt there will come a time when memories will fade. All I can suggest to Stephen Harper is to turn down the volume, turn off the rhetoric and watch some old tapes of Bill Davis on the campaign trail. Listen to some of Bill's speeches, Stephen. Discontinue the self righteous condemnation and start 'quietly' telling the populace how you'd govern. Offer 'proactive' solutions to resolve the violence against women issue to that constituency. (You really need to gain support here). How would the CPC solve the inner city crime and violence problem? What have you to offer working people to counteract Buzz Hargrove's dishing his NDP Party for the Liberals. And both Martin and the CPC need be wary of the tax cut race to the bottom. Ontario has lived that false dream and still faces numerous social deficits from that bitter experiment. There ain't no free lunch. But there's always hope Let's just make sure old skeletons are not dragged out of the closet to chase away potential skittish voters. - -------------- "To be Prime Minister of Canada, you need the hide of a rhinoceros, the morals of St. Francis, the patience of Job, the wisdom of Solomon, the strength of Hercules, the leadership of Napoleon, the magnetism of a Beatle and the subtlety of Machiavelli." -- Lester Pearson, 1964. Everybody was against him - but the people, John Diefenbaker liked to say. "Honest John," the populist Conservative from Saskatchewan. "Dief the Chief" was our favourite son for many years. "The art of politics is learning to walk with your back to the wall, your elbows high, and a smile on your face. It's a survival game played under the glare of lights. If you don't learn that you're quickly finished. It's damn tough and you can't complain; you just have to take it and give it back. The press wants to get you. The opposition wants to get you. Even some of the bureaucrats want to get you. They all may have an interest in making you look bad and they all have ambitions of their own." -- Jean Chrétien, 1985. Le petite gar. The Shawinigan Strangler. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 11:45:52 -0600 (CST) From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Majordomo User) Subject: Letter: Liberal gun policies don't stop criminals PUBLICATION: The Record (Kitchener, Cambridge and Waterloo) DATE: 2005.12.23 EDITION: Final SECTION: OPINION PAGE: A10 COLUMN: LETTER OF THE DAY BYLINE: Bruce Broderick WORD COUNT: 250 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Liberal gun policies don't stop criminals - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ As an irate taxpayer, I feel I must comment on the constant abuse of our tax dollars by the Liberal party of Canada. When I read that approximately $2 billion plus has been spent on the so- called gun registry and now the Liberal party wants to spend another $800,000 or more for a further registry or so-called ban of owning guns, etc., it makes me wonder about the minds of the politicians in the Liberal party. As many writers have previously mentioned, it is not the owners of registered guns who the government has to be concerned about, but rather the guns that are smuggled into this country and sold on the black market to criminals. I suggest the government has little or no control over this aspect of the use of guns. I think the government has to identify the manufacturers of the guns and the countries that allow the export of guns to Canada and then try to find out how these guns are being distributed in Canada. This, obviously, is, not an easy task because there are too many avenues of entry into Canada. The Liberals are, once again, trying to win votes by attempting to placate the public (because of the many shootings that have and are taking place in Canada) by stating they will enact more legislation to try to stop the distribution of guns. I hope that Canadians will kick the Liberals out of office on Jan. 23. Surely, in view of all the financial scandals involving the Liberal party of Canada, no sane Canadian would vote Liberal. Bruce Broderick Guelph ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V8 #809 ********************************** 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.