Cdn-Firearms Digest Sunday, February 24 2008 Volume 11 : Number 241 In this issue: CFD content and ammo RE: CFD content Annie's hysterical sound bite Re: CFD content Illegal Policies CFD v.11 #239 Obama Shooting Himself in the Foot with Anti-Gun Stance Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V11 #240 The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Further to nothing in Winnipeg THE CFD ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 09:31:45 -0700 From: "Jim Szpajcher" Subject: CFD content and ammo Lee - Speaking as one without high speed internet, the news collected and presented here is a welcome addition to one's baseline information acquisition. Both my Ruger 10/22 rifle and Ruger Mk II handgun handle Remington .22 Sub-sonic ammo nicely. Jim Szpajcher St. Paul, AB - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Jasper" To: "' Can Firearms Digest'" Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 10:52 PM Subject: CFD content > > Once again I cast my ballot with the guns n gun politics crowd. > > You should not be expected to survey the major media for 'news', Dave, > if we've got a 'puter we can read any of Canada's dailies online. > > Now here's one fer ya'll. > > What current .22 rifle will shoot .22 CB Long ammo? What about .22 Sub > sonics? And what current .22 semi's will cycle this ammo? > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 11:49:30 -0500 From: TONY KATZ Subject: RE: CFD content any bolt action and any semi that can shoot 22 short > Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 00:52:07 -0500 > From: leejasper@amtelecom.net > Subject: CFD content > To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca > > Once again I cast my ballot with the guns n gun politics crowd. > > You should not be expected to survey the major media for 'news', Dave, > if we've got a 'puter we can read any of Canada's dailies online. > > Now here's one fer ya'll. > > What current .22 rifle will shoot .22 CB Long ammo? What about .22 > Subsonics? And what current .22 semi's will cycle this ammo?> >=20 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 12:20:45 -0700 From: "Richard A. Fritze" Subject: Annie's hysterical sound bite Does anyone have a copy of Anne McLellan's hysterical-sounding gibberish from her days as Justice Minister? The context was firearms. I mention that because she sounded that way often. But this one was the high-water mark of her utterances. Anyone who ever heard it should remember it - almost completely unintelligible hysterical gibberish. I plan to add it to my website some day - along with the Chretien Strangler photo. Please contact me directly if you have it. Richard Fritze ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:57:51 -0500 From: Paul Chicoine Subject: Re: CFD content I have an old but in excellent condition Cooey Model 64 semi. It will not cycle subsonics. It shoots everything else. my2¢ - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Jasper" To: "' Can Firearms Digest'" Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 12:52 AM Subject: CFD content > Once again I cast my ballot with the guns n gun politics crowd. > > You should not be expected to survey the major media for 'news', Dave, > if we've got a 'puter we can read any of Canada's dailies online. > > Now here's one fer ya'll. > > What current .22 rifle will shoot .22 CB Long ammo? What about .22 Sub > sonics? And what current .22 semi's will cycle this ammo? > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 12:54:05 -0700 From: "Richard A. Fritze" Subject: Illegal Policies CFD v.11 #239 Ross wrote: "Unless a policy is against the law, there should be no reason why they wont respond unless there is a hidden agenda . . . " A year or so back I inquired with the Edmonton City Police whether their widely-publicized "gun amnesty" of that time had received prior approval from the federal government. The EPS policy, as I recall, was similar to those seen elsewhere in that they would accept firearms with no questions asked [subject to their testing of selected ones for evidence relating to ongoing investigations - if a match was made, all bets were of vis a vis any "amnesty"]. The Criminal Code, s.117.14 reads: Amnesty period 117.14 (1) The Governor in Council may, by order, declare for any purpose referred to in subsection (2) any period as an amnesty period with respect to any weapon, prohibited device, prohibited ammunition, explosive substance or component or part designed exclusively for use in the manufacture of or assembly into an automatic firearm. Purposes of amnesty period (2) An order made under subsection (1) may declare an amnesty period for the purpose of (a) permitting any person in possession of any thing to which the order relates to do anything provided in the order, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, delivering the thing to a peace officer, a firearms officer or a chief firearms officer, registering it, destroying it or otherwise disposing of it; or [. . .] It seemed to me that the EPS had taken the law into its own hands, ie., it had unilaterally suspended a portion of the Criminal Code without proper authorization of The Governor in Council. I thought that, since I had not seen or heard anything from Ottawa announcing or allowing such a suspension of the law, the EPS was breaking the law. I thought, what's next? Amnesty for drunk drivers over Christmas, er, I mean the Festive Season, but only in Hemaruka, Alberta? Which police force might be next with selective enforcement? Does this mean that perhaps the CNR Police will soon be dropping enforcement of other federal statutes too like, say, Transport of Dangerous Goods or the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act? But only for a 2-month period, right? BC Bud in the engineer's lunch! But only until harvest is over! Anyway, when I wrote the Communications Guy at EPS, citing the relevant section of the Criminal Code, and asking if they had sought and received the necessary OinC --- SILENCE. Time and events got in the way of further pursuit but it would have been interesting to hear what the EPS official response would have been. Since it was about getting "evil guns" off the streets, they got away with it. Richard Fritze ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 11:24:36 -0700 From: "Richard A. Fritze" Subject: Obama Shooting Himself in the Foot with Anti-Gun Stance Obama Shooting Himself in the Foot with Anti-Gun Stance Not in Middle America Barack Obama will have a big problem attracting the blue-collar white voters he needs to win the presidency, writes Bob Owens: they like guns and he wants to take their guns away. By Bob Owens February 22, 2008 2:45 PM http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/02/obama_shooting_himself_in_the.php As she clawed for survival against Barack Obama in Wisconsin's Democratic primary this past weekend, Hillary Clinton lamely asserted her Second Amendment bona fides over that of her rival by claiming that she once shot a duck in Arkansas. As pathetic a pander as that tale was, it did serve to point out one gaping weakness in the armor of the Illinois senator, a man who must rely on blue-collar white voters if he hopes to prevail first in the Democratic primaries, and later in the general election. The weakness? Barack Obama's utter disdain of firearms (especially handguns) and a refusal to recognize the rights of law-abiding Americans to own the most common and relied-upon types of firearms. In his answers to the 1998 Illinois State Legislative National Political Awareness Test, Obama said he favored a ban on "the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons." By definition, this would include all pistols ever made, from .22 target pistols used in the Olympics to rarely-fired pistols kept in nightstands and sock drawers for the defense of families, and every pistol in between. Obama's strident stand would also ban all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, whatever their previously legal purpose. In 1999, Obama proposed to make it a felony for the gun owner if a firearm stolen from his residence and used in a crime was not "securely stored" - - effectively negating the homeowner's right to self-defense. That same year, Obama bravely voted "present" on a law that would require teens 15 and older to be tried as adults for firing weapons on or near school grounds. Obama also proposed the idea of banning bus- inesses that sell firearms from operating within five miles of a park or school - restrictions that would treat gun shops worse than "adult" businesses trafficking in pornography. From 1998-2001, Obama sat on the board of directors for the Joyce Foundation, a left-wing group which today funds grants to anti-gun organizations such as the Violence Policy Center (which advocates total handgun prohibition, reinstatement of the Clinton-era "assault weapons" ban, and the ban of other firearms), the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence (which favors the registration of all handguns, seeks to overturn Ohio's "concealed carry" law, ban standard capacity magazines, and ban economical handguns along with many semi-automatic firearms based upon their appearance), and Handgun Free America (which advocates a complete ban on civilian handgun ownership). All of these organizations seek to disarm law-abiding Americans. This is the idea of "change" that they share with Barack Obama. On the federal stage, Obama's brief U.S. Senate career has already seen him vote against a bill (S.397) to protect the firearms industry from those who seek to sue manufacturers, distributors, and importers for the criminal misuse of firearms by criminals, an idea akin to suing car man- ufacturers for damages caused by drunk drivers. Tellingly, Obama's presidential campaign has sought to hide his history of trying to disarm law-abiding Americans. Buried deep in the "Issues" section of Obama's web site under "Additional Issues" is a PDF document that can only be described as an attempt to talk around Obama's real position on firearm ownership. In a section where the campaign claims to "respect" the Second Amendment, the document states: Millions of hunters own and use guns each year. Millions more participate in a variety of shooting sports such as sporting clays, skeet, target, and trap shooting that may not necessarily involve hunting. As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama understands and believes in the constitutional right of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law- abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting. Tellingly, Obama's campaign only addresses the gun rights of hunters and specific shotgun-only shooting sports, and only then in vague terms. At no point does Obama recognize an individual right to own handguns, or explicitly recognize a right for Americans to use a firearm to defend themselves or others. The site explicitly states that Barack Obama recognizes civilian gun ownership for two just purposes, "hunting and target shooting." Hillary Clinton, almost as liberal as Obama on the issue of gun control, could not take advantage of Obama's radical, out-of-the-mainstream position on firearm ownership because she, too, holds many of the same liberal ideas. As America moves toward the general election, however, John McCain will have no such problems in discussing Obama's distrust of his fellow Americans on this issue. McCain is hardly the poster boy for the National Rifle Association, but McCain claims to strongly support gun rights, stating, "Neither justice nor domestic peace are served by holding the innocent responsible for the acts of the criminal," a position diametrically opposed to the record of Obama, who favors outright prohibition of many common civilian firearms. In August 2007, writing at the liberal blog Daily Kos, "BlueDotRedField" shared his lament on Obama's gun control history coming back to haunt him in the diary entry "Obama gunning to lose in 2008": The clear implication of this statement is that Obama believes that Chicago's violent crimes are to be solved at a national level - - since Chicago & IL already have VERY tough gun control laws that have not stopped their crime problems, and to be solved by gun control legislation specifically mentioning the 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" and blaming Bush for that ban's lack of renewal. This statement is very important for those of us lifetime Democrats who not only are more libertarian leaning (especially after 8 years under the imperial presidency of George Bush), are more rural, and who own firearms or have family/friends who do. This state- ment is also the battle cry that figures on the right have been waiting for from Obama just in case he could actually beat out Hillary. [.] Common political wisdom has been that gun control legislation, and specifically the AWB, was [the] key handing the Congress to the right in 1994. Additionally, it played a strong part in the election and re-election of George Bush. Only recently, as we have run more centrist and rural understanding Democrats, were we able to retake Congress and have any chance at countering Bush & Co. in any way. And we stand at a precipice where we can hand it all right back to them. There seems little chance that Barack Obama can hide his real record and views of gun ownership from the American public though November's pres- idential elections. Once his prohibitive views of firearms ownership become known to America's millions of gun owners, they may well decide that a gun-grabbing Barack Obama promises the kind of "change" that they can't believe in. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:33:14 -0700 From: Bill Farion Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V11 #240 Hi, Ruko target ammo will not work my 10-22 reliably. I get to many stovepipe jamms. Winchester and Remmington target ammo works better. Normally use wildcat and get occasional stovepipes. >> >> >>Pretty well any bolt or hinge action single shot will fire the full >>range of .22 rimfire straight cased ammo, with the exception being the >>WMRF because it is long enough that the ammo will impinge on the rifling >>when chambering. >> >>As for SA firing low powered ammo, I have no idea. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:34:04 -0700 From: Dennis & Hazel Young Subject: The Right to Keep and Bear Arms February 23, 2008 The Right to Keep and Bear Arms By Marti Oakley http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_friendly.php?ok=y&p=opedne_marti_oa_080223_the_right_to_keep_an.htm As a person who tends to lean more to the left on most issues, I have to draw the line in the sand when it comes to the 2nd Amendment to our Bill of Rights. This one amendment, more than any other signifies our freedom. This is the marker that separates us from other countries and societies. We have the freedom and the right to keep and bear arms. We have the right to defend ourselves...even from our own government. The repeated calls for repealing the 2nd Amendment, or efforts to diminish its intent, usually come after yet another disturbing incident that was allowed to go totally out of control, and then incessantly broadcast by what is supposed to be our news sources until we reach a point of saturation. This is quickly followed by calls for disarming American's. Let's make one thing perfectly clear here; If someone is intent on killing you or several of you, not having a gun will not stop them. People are poisoned, stabbed, strangled, beaten to death, set on fire and die from multiple causes inflicted by another individual every day of the week. This is not because American's have the right to own guns. I find it odd that more people die each year from drunk drivers than from gun incidents. Yet no one calls for another prohibition. There are no passionate pleas to ban alcohol; no diatribes on how alcohol consumption is killing innocent people. Besides, this might infringe on YOUR rights. The right to keep and bear arms is not the cause of rampage killings. It's the individual who decided to kill other human beings who is the cause. A gun can kill no one until an individual picks it up and uses it. Just like knives can't stab anyone unless someone picks them up and uses them as a weapon. In a fatal car crash resulting from drunk driving..who or what is at fault; the vehicle or the driver? The flaw in all the arguments for banning private gun ownership is that somehow by taking away this right, everything will be just peachy. It won't be. The same individuals who are intent on inflicting injury or death to others will simply find some other means of getting the job done. People are the real threat..not the weapons they choose. Taking away the right to own guns does not and will not reduce that threat. When the Bill of Rights was assembled, the second most important issue to the founders was this right to keep and bear arms. Of all the other rights enumerated, this was paramount in establishing a free society. They also knew that it is only when government has worked secretly against its own people they become afraid of them and seek to disarm them. The 2nd Amendment is the lynchpin of our freedom. As a nation we identify ourselves as free people by virtue of the fact that we can keep and bear arms if we choose to. And it is exactly this reason that so many want to see it repealed. The loss of this right would be psychologically devastating as so many would see it for what it is...the true end of our freedom. Right now the major source for attacks on the 2nd Amendment, are being directed through the United Nations. Yesterday, Senator Obama put a bill on the floor of the senate called the Global Poverty Act. This act would mandate not only a 7% tax on our GDP, but also calls for the banning of small arms. Small arms and weapons includes, hunting rifles and shotguns, not just handguns. Attacks on the 2nd Amendment have come from all quarters. The efforts to paint it as "all liberals want to ban guns, and all conservatives don't" is just more staging. The fact is, our government wants us disarmed; its just that no one wants to be seen as the perpetrator of this unconstitutional infringement on our rights. Using the UN to implement the disarming of America also makes us vulnerable to international law as opposed to our own sovereign laws. International law does not recognize the right of the individual to defend himself, claiming that to do so is a crime in its self. The UN also claims that this ban is necessary to protect women and children, and those who wish to commit suicide. This would be the same UN that sits by idly while hundreds of thousands die as a result of genocide. Where are there concerns about women and children and the suicidal then? While the UN twiddled its thumbs, nearly 500.000 Rwandan's were clubbed or hacked to death with machete's and knives. For some unknown reason the UN has not called for the banning of either machete's or clubs, or even for large knives. The real aim of the Global Poverty Act and its intent to disarm America is to make sure that we have no way to fight back against the planned overthrow of our Republic. And as Americans, we most likely would. For those who disagree with this, don't worry about it. Once the North American Union is established we won't have any rights at all, much less the 2nd Amendment. One of the first things that will be done after the merger is complete is to abolish the bill of rights and then to disarm the public... leaving you completely at the mercy of the military and local law enforcement. I live in central Minnesota which has a heavy Democrat base. In all the speaking I do to groups on various subjects, the issue of gun control invariably comes up. No one that I have come in contact with supports gun control or bans. The idea that "liberals" across the board are in total support of this gross infringement on our Bill of Rights is one of those carefully constructed arguments intended to divide us. It is our government collectively that wants us disarmed, comprised of Democrats and Republicans alike. I am one liberal for sure who will not support any form of gun control or ban, and especially not coming from the UN. Marti Oakley Copyright 2008 Authors Website: http://ppjg.wordpress.com Authors Bio: Political activist. Former op-ed columnist for the St cloud Times in Minnesota. A member of the Times Writer's Group until I resigned in September of 07. Publisher of my own newsletter via email. The Proud Political Junkie's Gazette (PPJ) is now in 30 states and Canada. I am neither Democrat nor Republican. Neither party is representative of the American people. I say what I think, and mean what I say. I am known for being outspoken. I am hopeful that the American public will wake up to what is happening to our beloved country.......little of it is left. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:29:59 -0600 From: "gwsadair" Subject: Further to nothing in Winnipeg Well here are the details so far: The drug bust turned out to be a bust, no drugs just a landlord suspecting there were. A nice test for our drug squad though. The shooting; A male youth, found behind an inner-city home, was still in critical condition Saturday following a shotgun blast to his upper body. The incident is the latest in a string of shootings in the city.And it comes days after Statistics Canada reported Winnipeg is second only behind Vancouver in crimes involving firearms.The overall rate of crime in Canada stayed about the same between 2002 and 2006 but more young people are using guns in crimes, Statistics Canada said in the report released Wednesday. Meanwhile, residents in the 300 block of Home Street in the city's core area got a first-hand sense overnight of the impact of that rising tide of crime involving guns. Just before 1 a.m., police were called to the back lane of the block, close to a Burger King restaurant on Portage Avenue located just across the street from Vimy Ridge Park.Police found a youth with a gunshot wound to his upper body. He was taken to hospital in critical condition. snip..... The landlord was concerned about mold in the basement. The significance about this house was that the tenents were the two 19 year-old Winnipeg men in custody in Montana on drug trafficking charges for trying to traffic exctasy across the border. Absolutely no word on the stabbing Oh and I spent the day ridding my computer of a malicious virus program named VirusHeat. Watch out for this one. It took me 9 hours to kill it and I had to be there the whole time cause it kept trying to open the internet to download more crud. George Adair No one ever said our freedoms would come cheap. Some we must be prepared to fight for, some we must be prepared to die for. Take freedom for granted once and it will be gone forever. 1776 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:19:43 -0700 From: "Bob Lickacz" Subject: THE CFD There has been some discussion as of late with respect to the content of the CFD. I must admit that not all of the articles are of interest to me. I delete these messages as I find I need to. Some of the stuff I have saved is probably close to 10 years old if not older. From the Moderator's point of view, he tries nobly to be all things to all people. Now we know that this is an impossible task. I for one am grateful for all of the articles that appear even though I delete a fair number of them. The reason being it is my choice as to what I save or don't save. I cannot save or even read articles that do not make it to the Digest. I hope that the CFD continues in the fashion it has been. Hunting through any particular Digest for stuff I want to read or save is not difficult and the delete button isn't hard to press, in fact, it is easier than pulling the trigger on a firearm. This was my 2 cents worth, you can always delete the posting if you don't agree. Bob Lickacz ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V11 #241 *********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:d.jordan@sasktel.net 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.