From: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V9 #554 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, June 23 2006 Volume 09 : Number 554 In this issue: Police found a loaded .38-calibre handgun, a .32-calibre Armed, violent, wanted by police; Column: The fast and the foolish Re: Lorne Gunter Column: Gun owners not breathing easy yet Letter: Reform gun control Re: licensing vs registration ... My letter to the Ottawa Citizen Re: licencing vs registration, et al Re: Column: The fast and the foolish ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 09:57:18 -0600 (CST) From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Majordomo User) Subject: Police found a loaded .38-calibre handgun, a .32-calibre PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Sun DATE: 2006.06.23 EDITION: Final SECTION: News PAGE: 22 BYLINE: SUN STAFF WORD COUNT: 108 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ GUN, DRUG, CASH RAPS FOLLOW TOWNHOME STANDOFF - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Four people face a string of charges related to guns, drugs and criminal cash after a standoff at a Gloucester townhouse. All were fingered by the Ottawa police Firearms Task Force. Police entered a home on Bethamy Lane after a three-hour standoff with one resident late Wednesday. They found a loaded .38-calibre handgun, a .32-calibre handgun, cocaine and cash. Elias El-Feghali, 49, is charged with 13 criminal offences, including 10 gun-related charges, possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, possession of the proceeds of crime and obstructing justice. Patrick El-Feghali, 21, of Ottawa, is charged with 13 offences -- 10 firearm-related charges and the same additional charges Elias faces. Pierre Aubin, 43, of Ottawa, faces 10 charges related to the illegal possession, use and storage of restricted and prohibited firearms and ammunition. Melanie Fortin, 30, of Gatineau, is charged with 10 offences, all gun-related. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 09:57:38 -0600 (CST) From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Majordomo User) Subject: Armed, violent, wanted by police; PUBLICATION: The Chronicle-Herald DATE: 2006.06.23 SECTION: Front PAGE: A1 BYLINE: Dan Arsenault Crime Reporter ILLUSTRATION: James Bernard Melvin (Contributed) WORD COUNT: 671 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Armed, violent, wanted by police; Investigators won't say if man suspect in murder - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A man police are seeking in the killing of a young Beechville man Tuesday recently finished a prison sentence marred by violence and once warned the National Parole Board he'd be "40 times worse" after his release, The Chronicle Herald has learned. James Bernard Melvin, 24, is thought to be armed and dangerous. He was released from a Quebec prison May 17 after serving every day of a five-year sentence for drug and weapons crimes, assault and uttering threats. Police would not confirm that Mr. Melvin is the man they seek, but two independent sources said he is wanted in the death of Wayne Nicholas Marriott, 21, who was gunned down late Tuesday evening outside his home at 25 Sheppards Run in Beechville Estates, off St. Margarets Bay Road. "All we're saying is, we're looking at several possible suspects in the shooting," said Const. Joe Taplin of Halifax RCMP. Halifax Regional Police issued a release Thursday asking for the public's help in finding Mr. Melvin for an alleged breach of a recognizance, Const. Jeff Carr said. He refused to say whether police believe Mr. Melvin had anything to do with the Marriott killing. He said police have had a warrant out for Mr. Melvin's arrest since June 16 but issued their call for the public's assistance Thursday because they feel he could be dangerous. "Information recently has been received by Halifax Regional Police indicating he may be armed," Const. Carr said. "This is a public safety thing." Police describe Mr. Melvin as white and six-foot-three and 170 pounds, with brown or blond hair and blue eyes. Const. Carr asks anyone who sees Mr. Melvin not to approach him but to call police at 490-5016 or Crime Stoppers anonymously at 1-800-222-8477. Mr. Marriott was declared dead on arrival at hospital Tuesday night after he and another man, identified by sources as Jeremy Alvin LeBlanc, 24, were shot at about 10:50 p.m. They had just arrived home in Mr. Marriott's blue Dodge Ram truck when an unknown number of shots rang out. Mr. LeBlanc was arrested Wednesday morning as he was leaving a Halifax hospital with his arm in a sling but he was soon released without being charged. Late Wednesday at a St. Margarets Bay Road location, investigators recovered a stolen Plymouth Voyageur that fit the description of a vehicle seen leaving the murder scene. A small section of Sheppards Run was still closed to traffic Thursday as the police investigation continued. "Forensic identification people in our firearms section are on scene doing a reconstruction to determine the trajectory of the bullets and possibly how many firearms were used," Const. Taplin said. Mr. Melvin was originally imprisoned at the Atlantic Institution in Renous, N.B., but was transferred to Quebec after the National Parole Board said he was the leader of a gang of Renous inmates called the Spryfield Mob. The parole board said he also hospitalized three prisoners he attacked with a hockey stick, sold drugs in prison and issued a contract to kill another prisoner. Under law, an inmate has to be released after serving two-thirds of his sentence unless the parole board believes he is a threat to commit an offence causing serious harm before the last third of his sentence expires. Mr. Melvin failed to earn parole on those grounds in July 2004 and again last year. In last year's hearing, he complained about not being freed the year before. Parole board documents quote him saying: "I got a big mouth, I made threats, but I did not act on them. I am a drug addict to heroin and when I will get out, I will be 40 times worse." Mr. Melvin is the son of James Edward Melvin, 45, a self-described former Hell's Angel who was just paroled from prison in mid-May after serving 12 years of a 22-year sentence for high-level drug trafficking, assaulting a peace officer and other crimes. The senior Mr. Melvin could not be reached Thursday at his pawn shop, Sprytown Fast Cash, and did not respond to messages left there. Mr. Marriott's obituary says he was the son of Darrell Marriott and Cindy (Zwicker) Marriott and had a sister, Amy. His funeral will be held at the Atlantic Funeral Home on Bayers Road in Halifax at 3 p.m. Saturday. The murder is the second this year in metro Halifax. In early March, Kerri-Lea Dixon, 12, was found dead in the Beaver Bank Road home of 43-year-old Daniel Webster Secord, who had killed her and then himself.( ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 10:16:45 -0600 (CST) From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Majordomo User) Subject: Column: The fast and the foolish PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Citizen DATE: 2006.06.23 EDITION: Final SECTION: News PNAME: Arguments PAGE: A13 COLUMN: Dan Gardner BYLINE: Dan Gardner SOURCE: The Ottawa Citizen WORD COUNT: 891 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The fast and the foolish - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Some time ago, I described the Conservative government's approach to criminal justice as faith-based. Research says it won't work. Criminologists say it's a waste of money. But still the Tories are pushing ahead, unshakably convinced that tougher punishments will cleanse our blood-soaked streets and allow little girls to once again skip carelessly down the sidewalks as they did in days of yore. They know it will work. They've got faith. But the key to faith is honesty. Faith may be contrary to reason and evidence. But it's genuine. People really believe it. If they didn't, it wouldn't be faith. That's why I've always had a soft spot for Justice Minister Vic Toews and others who worship at the altar of punishment. What they say is bunk, but they believe it. So at least it's honest bunk. But then came the new "street racing" legislation. Now I'm beginning to doubt my whole analysis. For the record, I fully agree that street racing is a serious crime. Those who do it should be arrested and punished. Which is precisely what happens now. Any fool who puts purple lights under his car and tears down the street commits the Criminal Code offence of dangerous driving -- a crime punishable by up to five years in a federal prison. If the fool hurts someone while racing, he is subject to a maximum of 10 years in prison. If he kills someone, he may be incarcerated for up to 14 years. In theory, Mr. Toews's bill will create a new crime called "street racing." In theory. In reality, it will do nothing more than increase some of the maximum sentences for dangerous driving when racing is involved. If there is bodily harm, the maximum will rise from 10 years to 14. If someone is killed, the maximum will increase from 14 years to life (with parole, so the increase really isn't much). Street racers will also lose their driver's licences for various periods, which can happen now under provincial laws. This bill is dumb for any number of reasons. There is the absurdity of thinking that callow young fans of thunderous car stereos and reckless late-night driving are the sort of people who assiduously monitor the latest Criminal Code amendments. And there is the even sillier idea that people who are not deterred by the significant risk of dying in a horrible crash will be deterred by a marginal increase in the sentence they may receive in the unlikely event that they are caught. But these particular idiocies are not what got me questioning my earlier analysis. What really sets this dumb bill apart from the other dumb bills is the increase in the maximum penalties. It's the first Tory bill to make such a change its centerpiece. And it's an odd thing to do because maximum sentences don't mean much. They are rarely imposed; for many charges, they are never imposed. There's a good reason for that. The maximum sentences in the Criminal Code are a ridiculous mish-mash. Many are left over from the days of hanging and flogging. Others reflect momentary panics long forgotten. An astonishing number are completely unreasonable -- steal a cow and the maximum is 10 years -- and so judges and lawyers simply ignore them. (No government has ever dared to straighten out this mess because such an exercise in good sense would require lowering many absurdly high maximums, which would enrage the know-nothing journalists who love to fulminate about the unconscionable softness of the system. Better to pretend there's no problem.) This suggests there's much less to the street racing bill than meets the eye. After all, if existing maximum sentences are rarely or never imposed, what do you suppose happens when those sentences are raised? Nothing, of course. And that's how things have worked in practice. "Historically, there has been no corresponding increase in sentences even when the maximum penalties are raised," one observer wrote in 1994. Boosting maximums is just for show. The Liberals did it all the time. It was a handy way of dealing with demands for tougher laws that the public servants told them -- correctly -- would be expensive and useless. But the Liberals didn't want to stand up and say tougher punishments are expensive and useless. So they boosted the maximums. You want tougher laws? How's that grab ya? It was silly and pointless and the opposition said so repeatedly. The Liberals' response was always the same. The hapless justice minister would stand up and sternly declare that increasing the maximum "sends a message" -- a hoary old cliche politicians use when a policy does absolutely nothing. This Liberal magic trick really bugged supporters of tougher laws. Chief among them was a man by the name of Vic Toews. As Reform justice critic, he wrote the op-ed that I quoted above. But now Justice Minister Vic Toews is doing the very thing he so often denounced the Liberals for doing. And he's taking flak from police and victims' groups, who use the same arguments Mr. Toews once made. His response? "We want to send a very specific message to people," Mr. Toews told CTV. Message received. It reads: The Conservative government will exaggerate the threat of any crime and respond with the same showy but meaningless gestures they criticized while in opposition if it will contribute to accomplishing the one and only goal that really matters, which is winning the next election. This isn't faith-based policy. It's cynical politics. And Mr. Toews is starting to look less like a misguided but honest preacher and a whole lot more like Elmer Gantry. Dan Gardner's column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail: dgardner@thecitizen.canwest.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 10:35:13 -0600 (CST) From: "B&C Beaudoin" Subject: Re: Lorne Gunter Column: Gun owners not breathing easy yet Ed wrote: >Well if the sale of guns from dealers goes to the Feds we are back at=20 >square one again. >It will give hackers an opportunity to hack the lists to see who has = what. >If the CPC requires this registration by the back door so to speak ? we = >have been lied to again this time, by our "friends " in government I was in the firearms business pre-C-68, and back then dealers were = required to record the serial number, FAC number and particulars about = any firearms sale. The records were kept by the dealer for 5 years and = by law were required to be turned into the OPP (In the case of Ontario = businesses) after that. What happened to that data, I'm not sure. Individuals were required to = verify that persons to whom they transferred firearms to were in = possession of a valid FAC - I don't recall if individuals were required = to keep a record of the firearms and FAC numbers, I never did when = selling my privately owned firearms. My point is : The CPC, in rolling back the legislation to pre C-68 status, is not = lying to us in regards to dealers keeping records of firearms = transactions and turning them in to the government.... Better to have the Liberals back? Only if you think you'd be better off = handing in every handgun you own.... Regards, Brad ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:26:39 -0600 (CST) From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Majordomo User) Subject: Letter: Reform gun control PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Citizen DATE: 2006.06.23 EDITION: Final SECTION: News PNAME: Letters PAGE: A11 BYLINE: Damian Kanarek SOURCE: The Ottawa Citizen WORD COUNT: 174 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Reform gun control - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I am increasingly puzzled by the resistance of some lobby groups to the idea of modernizing and streamlining our gun- control systems. For the first time in decades, we have a government that is actually weighing the costs and benefits of individual components of the system. Why is that generating such an outcry? Virtually all of the benefits listed by the outraged gun-control lobbyists are actually associated with the licensing of gun owners, which will remain in place, not the registration of individual firearms. If we can get 95 per cent of the benefits of our paper-based gun-control system with only 10 per cent of the current expenditure, why is that a bad trade? We can spend the rest of the money on front-line policing, something aimed at all types of real crime, not just at the highly contrived, hypothetical situations making up the remaining five per cent of gun registration's benefit list. Damian Kanarek, Toronto ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:26:55 -0600 (CST) From: Rob Sciuk Subject: Re: licensing vs registration ... > Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:48:48 -0600 (CST) > From: "Todd Birch" > Subject: Re: licencing vs registration, et al > > We can yell at each other all we want about the pros and cons of > licensing/registration, etc., but the inescapable reality is that we are > stuck with some form of governmental control whether we like it or not. > Todd, While what you say is true, it occurs that Canadian firearm ownership has come under some serious threats recently, particularly the Liberal's ominous "handgun ban-wagon". The problem with the CFA, as you know, is that it is a "law which keeps on writing itself", and the enabling legislation is quite frankly, our assured death knell by a billion regulatory paper cuts -- eventual, but ultimately complete. It would be helpful to repeal the CFA in its entirety, and start over with the recognition that responsible firearm ownership in Canada is not a problem, whereas criminal mis-use must be deterred. Licensing may be with us forever, but a US style "federal shall-issue" edict (to force the provinces to recognize the rights of responsible persons) would be a possible mitigator, and go hand in hand with a dangerous offender registry. This is in line with Charter rights and could be packaged in a politically positive manner, if done correctly. The anti-license foes amoung *US* are correct in their assertion that simply allowing the state to run us roughshod will only lead to an ultimate ban when the Liberals deem it convenient, unless some real impediments are enacted. Our only hope is a Tory majority ASAP, and some serious lobbying in the meanwhile. Politically speaking, it is easier for the Tories to do nothing or the minimum possible (whereas the Liberals would just go ahead and enact a ban). Todd, your recognition that we cannot afford to simply draw a line in the sand and "demand our rights" is very astute. One must think ahead and determine a method of securing our non-absolute right to own firearms for future generations rather than simply removing ourselves from the political process by becoming both a liability and an irritant to the hand which might feed us. "One may *CHOOSE* not to own a firearm, but we must vigorously defend the right to change our mind!" Cheers, Rob. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:29:49 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Mills Subject: My letter to the Ottawa Citizen Just submitted, not yet printed. Have you written a letter today? - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: The fast and the foolish Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:02:46 -0400 From: Bruce Mills To: Editor - Ottawa Citizen I'm glad that Dan Gardner realizes that trying to tailor Criminal Code sanctions to fit a specific occurrence is nonsensical and dumb. Too bad that he doesn't apply the same logic to similar situations, like "gun control". There were plenty of laws governing the criminal misuse of firearms and other weapons, long before any of these nonsensical and dumb "gun control" laws. If some fool waved a gun around in public, he could be charged with "weapons dangerous", and be imprisoned for up to ten years. If some fool threatens someone by pointing a gun at them, they face imprisonment of up to 5 years. If some fool fires a gun at someone else, they could be charged with "endangerment", liable to imprisonment for up to 14 years. Of course, wounding or actually killing someone are crimes, too, with or without a gun. All so-called "gun control" laws are based on the the absurdity of thinking that criminal thugs prone to the violent misuse of firearms are going to assiduously monitor the latest Criminal Code amendments. And there is the even sillier idea that they will obey any of those extra laws, when they are willing to violently contravene the existing ones. Of course, Gardner shoots himself in his own foot by both using the existing maximum allowable sentences for vehicular charges as justification for branding the new "street racing" laws as "silly", while using the fact that judges rarely, if ever, apply those very maximum penalties, in his attempt to refute the usefulness of the increased maximums imposed by this new law. Dan must need one of those stage actor's mirrors to keep track of all his faces. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:49:23 -0600 (CST) From: "mred" Subject: Re: licencing vs registration, et al - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Birch" > We can yell at each other all we want about the pros and cons of > licensing/registration, etc., but the inescapable reality is that we are > stuck with some form of governmental control whether we like it or not. > > Ranting about the need, effectiveness or legalities of it won't change > that. Things changed after 911 in an unalterable way for the foreseeable > future. It doesn't matter that many of us have fond memories of the > pre-FAC era and beyond. Grand daddy might have been able to waltz into > the general store and buy Jr. a .22 and few boxes of ammo with no eye > brows raised, but outlets now walk you to the check out counter with > your intended purchase - after you've produced a note from your mother > and a thumb print from God. Walking down anything but a remote rural > road with a gun of any kind is sure to bring swift response from some > fearful maven, particularly if there is a school within rifle shot. This > has become the norm. > > As long as we have groups of misguided martyrs planning and staging acts > of terror and gang bangers popping each other on the street, the > perception is that a 'man with a gun' poses a potential threat. It is > going to take a long time to erase this from the public mind, perhaps > not in this generation. > > TB I dont really know how to respond to this ? You are absolutely right of course...but why should my rights be viloted because of some criminal acts . This is the old story of guilty before proven innocent . Its becoming the norm anymore and unless we stand up and dispute this we will certainly be led into complete slavery in a matter of a dozen years or so.. I`m glad I wont be around to see it. The days of being innocent until PROVEN guilty are gone ... Just walk out of any store you can name and if the buzzer goes off when you leave you have to show your purchases? or they seem to think you do. ...yes it is much easier to give up THAT right than it is to go through the hassle of refusing and having them call the cops on you and then being arrested and taken to the thugee holding cells till proven innocent? This is just one example of: "well I didnt do anything wrong so what if they search my purchases >??" Well they dont have the right unless they acttually see you taking a thing, not paying for it and leaving the store. Then they can make a citizens arrest and then call the police. ed/ontario ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:06:47 -0600 (CST) From: "mred" Subject: Re: Column: The fast and the foolish - ----- Original Message ----- > PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Citizen > DATE: 2006.06.23 > EDITION: Final > SECTION: News > PNAME: Arguments > PAGE: A13 > COLUMN: Dan Gardner > BYLINE: Dan Gardner > SOURCE: The Ottawa Citizen > WORD COUNT: 891 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > The fast and the foolish > > > > Dan Gardner's column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. > E-mail: dgardner@thecitizen.canwest.com What this writer doesn't say ? Is that its Liberal appointed Liberal judges who are passing lenient sentences .. If we can dump these rejects from the Russian Gulag and replace them with judges with cohones, who have not been brainwashed/indoctrinated in the Communist/Liberal manifesto then the CPC laws will be felt all the way down the line. This writer doesn't remember Harper saying that the judicial system is overloaded with Liberal judges and it would take some time and legislation to get rid of them. ed/ontario ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V9 #554 ********************************** 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 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.