Cdn-Firearms Digest Monday, June 30 2008 Volume 11 : Number 611 In this issue: Re: NRA Sues to Overturn San Francisco's Handgun Ban RE: 16 Accidentally Wounded by French Military in Shooting Demo "... political reality ..." What didn't change Re: New on the political front ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:59:48 -0600 From: Med Crotteau Subject: Re: NRA Sues to Overturn San Francisco's Handgun Ban We're Canadian, eh..?? (Re Als comments below.) Yep, thats what we is. I'd hope that we are still plugging Along, and whittling away at C-68, and it's USELESS Crime Bill, though. At least the RFOA, here in Alberta is trying! Thank God, for you others who are still with us, and the Memories of Gordon Hitchen, and those Galant types like AOB, Kearns, Blue et al. I Hope i said that correctly. And i especially like the part where Big Al sez, Quick........ Decisive and i'll add Action. Oh wait, he's talking about them Damn Yankees! We Canadians have a chance to Hang a Licking on that Ignorant Mayor, of TO, and i believe he deserves it, if we can find a Leader in Canada, ( TO Gun Club ), who are willing & able to do the Homework, to implement the Correct procedure and get us Gun Owners into Court, against him! Draconian Law, might fit C-68, because i am still wondering about the Shooting of three people in Ft. Mc. Murray, last week, and No Official Recognition, yet..?? Why is there No Hue & Cry, about this..?? Could it be, that it is purported to be a Wild West Shootout, Cars instead of Horses, and that doesn't happen in Canada, because C-68 is supposed to keep Bad Guns, from Undesirables. Oh hell, i forgot, it's the Lawful Gun owners, that are targeted by the Govnment! Mind you, they aren't Bruce Montague, Brian Ward etc., and other Canadian Gun Owners, who Do Not Shoot, People. These BAD GUN owners, got lots of Proganda. "RIP JACK GENTLES" Some of us remember the Sealed Search Warrant, Jack! We are celebrating "Canada Day," tomorrow, and i'm afraid that i don't have much Enthusiasm, about it! I support CUFOA, now Officially called Canadian "Unlicensed" Firearms Owners Ass'n., The Morning Glory Rebellion, which i Stamp on Canadian Currency, the RFOA, and any other Organization, that is "Active against C-68". Med Crotteau now living in Edmonton. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vladyslav Strashko" To: Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 11:36 PM Subject: Re: NRA Sues to Overturn San Francisco's Handgun Ban > Before you go to court, you have to do a homework. I read some major cases > for DC case from NRA and they did their job. By the way, most of the stuff > came from England law itself and can be applicable for Canada. > > > Al Muir wrote: >> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 20:35:58 -0600 >> From: Joe Gingrich >> Subject: NRA Sues to Overturn San Francisco's Handgun Ban >> >> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,373122,00.html >> >> NRA Sues to Overturn San Francisco's Handgun Ban >> >> Friday, June 27, 2008 >> >> SAN FRANCISCO - The National Rifle Association sued the city of San >> Francisco on Friday to overturn its handgun ban in public housing, a day >> after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a handgun ban in the nation's >> capital. > > Quick, decisive and to the point. A 180 degree difference from most > Canadian gun owner groups. Come on now, do we really want an NRA type > organization in Canada? Na, I think we want a "political reality" we got > here by steps and we have to get out that way type group. Excuse me, I > have > to go to the bathroom, I think I am going to get sick again. > > Al > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:16:59 -0400 From: "Mark L Horstead" Subject: RE: 16 Accidentally Wounded by French Military in Shooting Demo > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca > [mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca] On Behalf Of > Joe Gingrich > Sent: 30-Jun-08 03:08 > To: Canadian Firearms Digest > Subject: 16 Accidentally Wounded by French Military in Shooting Demo > > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,373502,00.html > The soldier who fired the shots has been detained, Lemaire > said. He said the injuries were likely an accident but that > it could have been a "criminal act." I do not like to speculate in the absence of all pertinent facts, BUT: - - Blank and live ammunition are not easy to confuse. It would have been blatantly obvious to the shooter what he was loading into his magazines. - - I know of no automatic/semi/selective fire personal weapons that will function without a blank firing adaptor (BFA), which essentially plugs the muzzle of the weapon to ensure that gases cycle the action. The result of firing the first live round with a BFA attached should be obvious. This would indicate that, not only did this person load his magazine with live rounds, but he also left his BFA off. - - Our BFAs are painted bright yellow. Even if they were not, it's pretty obvious to all whether or not one has one on one's weapon or not. I find it difficult to imagine that nobody else noticed that he entered this activity without a BFA and failed to correct this - unless it was intentionally removed immediately prior to firing. - - Somebody drew the activity's ammunition from the ammunition facility. Both that person and the issuer should have verified exactly what it was at that point, and then again before being issued to the participants. - - Normal engagement for such a scenario would be double taps, or possibly (yet unlikely) short bursts for suppression. I find it hard to imagine that the shooter could not realize by at least the second round of the first double tap or short burst that he was firing live rounds vice blanks. Little things like recoil, target effects, etcetera do tend to give it away. - - We would not have weapons pointed in the direction of spectators in any such demonstration. The French Army may be different in that regard, but I doubt it. And even if I found myself in such a scenario, I would not be taking deliberate aim at any. It's so obviously not a good thing to do. Yes, this could be an "accident", but too many serious examples of negligence by several people would have had to happen for it to be an accident. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:14:19 -0700 From: "Todd Birch" Subject: "... political reality ..." Al Clarification, please. You lost me in your comment. Was it 'tongue-in-cheek' or are you serious? I'd love to see an NRA-type organization in Canada. Pity that their mandate does not permit operation outside of the US. They have their finger on the political pulse of their law makers and keep people informed. US gun owners would likely be in a worse situation than we are if not for them. The 'political reality' of our situation is pathetic as we bounce from election to election, the 'football' in a never ending game of party politics. The recent decision by the US Supremes gives them ammunition to go after state officials that flout the constitutional rights supported by the interpreters of the law. The more the NRA wins these fights, the more we benefit. Our gun laws are often a mere half-step behind the Americans insofar as what's legal, safe and suitable for private ownership. I love the fact that Barret came out with their long range rifle in .416 to get around the Governator's ban on the .50 BMG in private hands. The US gun lobby actually works within and without their system. TB ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:10:36 -0400 From: "Al Muir" Subject: What didn't change > In this issue: > re: what's new > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:02:54 -0600 > From: Joe Gingrich > Subject: re: what's new > > There may be a topic(s) of discussion in this information. > > Yours in Tyranny, > > Joe Gingrich > White Fox > > - - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 09:57:47 -0300 > From: "M.J. Ackermann, MD" > Subject: New on the political front With the fall back position of " political reality" there is not much to discuss. The CONS do what they want to do and we accept it because " political reality" demands we do so. One would think that our jobs as representatives of gun owners would be to shape " political reality" as we did when opposing the Liberals Firearms Act but the CONS Firearms Act is untouchable. The Firearms Advisory Committee represent me no more then Wendy does. Al ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:19:45 -0400 From: "Al Muir" Subject: Re: New on the political front > Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:54:13 -0700 (PDT) > From: Bruce Mills > Subject: Re: New on the political front > > - --- On Sat, 6/28/08, M.J. Ackermann, MD wrote: > >> From: M.J. Ackermann, MD >> Subject: New on the political front >> To: cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca >> Received: Saturday, June 28, 2008, 8:57 AM >> As you may know, I am on Stockwell Day's Canadian >> Firearm Advisory >> Committee. >> >> I have listed on the SMSA web page the latest developments >> on the >> political scene for your information. Please feel free to >> distribute far >> and wide. >> >> http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/mikeack/What%27s_New.html >> >> FYI > > - -POLs are now renewable!! One of the biggest gripes the old-timers had > was > that they couldn't renew, but had to get a course and go for a PAL. That > gripe has been addressed. To renew a POL, visit the CFC web page . On the > left is a link to Forms . At the top of this page you will read: > > What was their rationale for not renewing POLS in the first place? FA s > 67 seems pretty clear to me: > > 67. (1) A chief firearms officer may > renew a licence, authorization to carry or > authorization to transport in the same manner > and in the same circumstances in which a > licence, authorization to carry or > authorization to transport may be issued. > > As long as the POL holder still meets all the criteria they did when they > originally obtained their POL, it should be renewable ad infinitum. > > > - -New CFSC/CRFSC Course Manuals are in the offing!! They will be > distributed shortly. > Bruce wrote: > What changes have been made, and how do they benefit gun owners? > > Not to seem mean-spirited here, but this all sounds like so much > cheerleading to me, all flash and no substance. Bruce, most of us have been far to polite in allowing this stuff to go unchallenged for so long. In a struggle of such importance holding hands and pretending everything is fine is getting us nowhere fast. There are times for Chamberlin's and times for Churchill's. Al ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V11 #611 *********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@scorpion.bogend.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:drg.jordan@sasktel.net List owner: mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca FAQ list: http://www.canfirearms/Skeeter/Faq/cfd-faq1.html Web Site: http://www.canfirearms.ca CFDigest Archives: http://www.canfirearms.ca/archives To unsubscribe from _all_ the lists, put the next four lines in a message and mailto:majordomo@scorpion.bogend.ca unsubscribe cdn-firearms-digest unsubscribe cdn-firearms-chat unsubscribe cdn-firearms end (To subscribe, use "subscribe" instead of "unsubscribe".)