Cdn-Firearms Digest Saturday, July 3 2010 Volume 13 : Number 941 In this issue: An armed society makes for a polite society RE: regarding: the G-20 Re: PSA Test The 5-Metre regulation that wasn't - Timeline Re:4 counts of weapons charges- Cdn-Firearms Digest V13 #940 "The one about the UN" Re: An armed society makes for a polite society Laurier’s vision being dimmed by the lie of multiculturalism ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 21:27:28 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: An armed society makes for a polite society [Only in the U.S.A]? (According to Snopes.com the origin of this item is 'Undetermined') This Ad Was Posted to Craig's List Personals: To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me in Downtown Savannah night before last. Date: 05-27-09, 1:43 AM EST. I can only hope that you somehow come across this rather important message. I am the guy wearing the black Burberry jacket that you demanded that I hand over, shortly after you pulled the knife on my girlfriend, threatening our lives and me. You also asked for my girlfriend's purse and earrings. First, I'd like to apologize for your embarrassment when I drew my pistol after you took my Jacket. The evening was not that cold, and I was wearing the jacket for a reason. My girlfriend had just bought me that Kimber Model 1911 .45 ACP pistol for my birthday, and we had picked up a shoulder holster for it that very evening. Obviously you agree that it is a very Intimidating weapon when pointed at your head wasn't it? You just about wet yourself. I know it probably wasn't fun walking back to wherever you'd come from, bare footed, since I made you leave your shoes, cell phone, and wallet with me. [That prevented you from calling or running to your buddies to come help mug us again]. After I called your mother, or "Momma" as you had her listed in your cell, I explained the entire episode of what you'd done. Then I went and filled up my gas tank as well as four other people's at the gas station on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons and was extremely grateful! I gave your shoes to a homeless guy outside Vinnie Van Go Go's, along with all the cash in your wallet. [That made his day]! I then threw your wallet into the big pink "pimp mobile" that was parked at the curb ... after I broke the windshield and side window and keyed the entire driver's side of the car. Later, I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cell phone. Ma Bell just now shut down the line, although I only used the phone for a little over a day now, so what's going on with that? Earlier, I managed to get in two threatening phone calls to the DA's office and one to the FBI, while mentioning President Obama as my possible target. The FBI guy seemed really intense and we had a nice long chat (I guess while he traced your phone number etc.). In a way, perhaps I should apologize for not killing you ... but I feel this type of retribution is a far more appropriate punishment for your threatened crime. I wish you well as you try to sort through some of these rather immediate pressing issues you’ll have to deal with, and can only hope that you have the opportunity to reflect upon, and perhaps reconsider, the career path you've chosen to pursue in life. Remember, next time you might not be so lucky. Have a good day! Thoughtfully yours, Alex P.S. Remember this motto. --- An armed society makes for a more civil society! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/mugger.asp - - DRGJ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 22:09:20 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: RE: regarding: the G-20 Alan reported: > "planted" in the crowd to cause "troubles." > > Gasp! You mean agent provocateurs????? Check out this web site. It > seems the agents were tripped up by their boots (please excuse the pun): > > The Toronto G20 Riot Fraud: Undercover Police engaged in Purposeful > Provocation At Tax Payers' Expense > > http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19928 (Check out the link for graphic photos of the 'boots'). Is it any wonder Blair and now even McGuinty are falling all over themselves like blubbering idiots trying to explain the 5-metre 'law' which wasn't really a 'law' in respect of the police arrest powers near the fence. Blair insists that an internal Toronto police review will suffice; McGuinty says, "Nyet" to an Inquiry. Let's hope the CCLA and Press won't the issues get buried. The poelease stand by while the property damage is enacted and then later in the day, and the next, run roughshod over 'legitimate' protesters. Reminds one of the OPP kneecapping of OPSEU picketers at Queens Park on March 18, 1996. Some additional G20 details at: > http://2010.mediacoop.ca/ See the Tommy Taylor arrest and detention details. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 22:43:00 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: Re: PSA Test Todd's wry comment: > "Get checked guys - regularly!" Alan offered: > The last time I had my prostate checked, I asked the doctor to do it > again with a different finger, because I wanted a second opinion. I wouldn't touch that line. . . . Todd later reported: > Best to get a 'second opinion' besides the other finger ...... I can report that due to an errant PSA blood test I had the dubious pleasure of experiencing the dreaded 'scope' several months ago. Due to another 'complaint' my physician suggested that since I would already be 'out', I might as well have a endoscopy performed. The surgeon had a delightful sense of humour and assured me that 'different' scopes would be used for the esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Apparently the PSA test yields numerous false positives and CATScans, MRIs and a Colonoscopy would be in order before any surgical procedures are undertaken. I hope I have all the 'scopies' correct. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 23:22:31 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: The 5-Metre regulation that wasn't - Timeline A timeline on the G20 five-metre rule that didn’t exist Adam Radwanski http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/adam-radwanski/a-timeline-on-the-g20-five-metre-rule-that-didnt-exist/article1626001/ From Friday's Globe and Mail Published on Thursday, Jul. 01, 2010 7:36PM EDT Last updated on Thursday, Jul. 01, 2010 10:44PM EDT The story around a G20 security regulation quietly passed by the Ontario government has continually changed. Both the province and Toronto police now acknowledge there was no rule that people merely passing by the summit’s security fence were required to submit to searches and identification checks, and could be arrested if they failed to comply. But how the law was misinterpreted by police, and why the public was allowed to believe until the summit’s conclusion that it was still being enforced, remains shrouded in confusion. What follows is a timeline of the secret law that wasn’t, taking into account the recent revelation that police were finally told by the province – after at least a couple of arrests – that they were wrongly interpreting the regulation they themselves had asked for. June 2: On the request of Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, Dalton McGuinty's cabinet approves a temporary regulation affecting the Public Works Protection Act. Its aim is to ensure that police are legally authorized to search and demand identification of anyone attempting to enter the security perimeter in downtown Toronto during the G20 summit. There is no announcement. June 16: The regulation is quietly posted on the government's e-Laws website, but passes unnoticed. (It's not slated to be published in the Ontario Gazette until July 3.) June 22: When explicitly asked by The Globe and Mail which laws provide for the security measures taken during the G20, two spokespeople for the Integrated G20 Security Unit – including at least one member of the Toronto police – fail to mention the Public Works Protection Act. June 24: The regulation first comes to light, as at least two activists are arrested under the Public Works Protection Act. Neither appears to have been trying to enter the perimeter. In both cases, police cite a rule that extends their identification and search powers to five metres outside the security fence. June 25: It's widely reported that, under the provincial regulation, individuals passing by up to five metres outside the security fence can be arrested by police if they fail to show identification or consent to a search. (The regulation, on first glance, appears to confirm this power.) June 25: At a news conference, Chief Blair says, “The five-metre zone around the fence is for the protection of the security barrier.” June 25: In an interview, Mr. McGuinty seems to confirm a major change to the law by referring to “something extraordinary happening inside our province,” while affirming his faith in Chief Blair. ***June 25: Police realize they'd misinterpreted the regulation, and the “five metres” actually refers to an area inside the fence. (It’s later reported that it was the province that informed them – see below.) June 26-27: Despite continued media coverage of the “five-metre” rule, no attempt is made by either the province or the police to make clear that it doesn't exist. As a result, Torontonians and visitors remain under the impression that they can be arrested just for passing by the security fence without identification. June 27: To counter complaints that Ontarians weren't made aware of the new law, the government directs reporters to an advertisement taken out by Toronto police in some newspapers prior to the summit. The ad, titled “What you need to know about the G20 Summit,” makes no mention of the Public Works Protection Act, any recent provincial decisions, or a five-metre rule. June 28: When contacted, the Premier’s Office discusses the five-metre rule without indicating that it didn't actually exist. June 29: Chief Blair acknowledges that the five-metre rule never existed, but hints that he didn't correct the record because he “was trying to keep the criminals out.” June 29: When asked by The Globe and Mail whether any action was taken by the government to get police to stop wrongly enforcing the regulation, a provincial spokesperson responds: “The application of the regulation over the weekend was operational in nature, and we do not interfere in police operational decisions.” The spokesperson also insists “the language of the regulation is very clear.” June 29: Another government official acknowledges that the regulation was “confusing,” but says that – despite contradictory video evidence – the government does not believe there were any arrests under the non-existent rule. June 30: The Police Services Board tells The Globe and Mail that, in fact, it was the province that informed police on June 25 – following the arrests – that the regulation was being wrongly interpreted. That, at least, is the version of events as it currently stands. Given the number of times that the official accounts have shifted over the past week, it may well change again before long. Note: ‘No extra powers’ granted to police during G20 summit: Liberals Jun 30 2010 Jesse McLean, Robert Benzie and Tanya Talaga Staff Reporters > http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/830030--no-ext ra-powers-granted-to-police-during-g20-summit-liberals?bn=1 > Laura Blondeau, an aide to Community Safety Minister Rick Bartolucci, > said Tuesday [June 22(?)] that only areas within the security perimeter > immediately around the summit were affected by “being designated > public lands” from June 21 until Monday. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 22:28:12 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: Re:4 counts of weapons charges- Cdn-Firearms Digest V13 #940 This guy sounds like a drug dealer from Alberta trying to set up in business here. Being black makes him stand out in such a small city, especially in the more aboriginal populated areas that are noted for street gang activity. The news of our economy has meant other crime groups are trying to set up shop here. If they do, the number of street shootings will jump dramatically. The aboriginal street gangs usually use knives but the black gangs from down east and the Asian gangs from Calgary/ Vancouver/Wpg. favour pistols. And they are willing to fight for turf. I'm given to understand in Alberta they've pushed the aboriginal gangs outside of the bigger cities back to rural and Reserve areas. I'd heard that 'Jamaican Posse' members from Toronto have been spotted by police in Saskatoon. There was a mysterious arrest in a Shopper's Drug Mart one night recently. Very quick, very quiet, very carefully done. No one called them. Likely there was an outstanding warrant. Don't know if he was from down east but he fit the profile. What the dealers did in Fort Mac, they'll try here as well. Though with such small population centres even in Regina or Saskatoon, newcomers are easily spotted by their rivals as well as the police. Remember that even in Alberta, 30 Somalis have been murdered in Alberta within the last seven years trying to break into other gangs turf. But they still keep sending the out West. Newspaper articles unless it is a lengthy trial coverage piece only print a precis of what went on. I'd trust the police on this one. It's not like this guy is a long time member of the local PPC/IPSC or bulls eye pistol shooters club. The police are fighting a losing battle but are at least able to slow down the progress oF organized crime somewhat. I'm sure the guy in the article will get a light sentence. The system doesn't crack (pun) down on these guys until they have a long record. If political correctness hadn't corrupted the Justice system to the degree it has the police and the community could put up a much more effective bulwark against this. Hey, I'm a dreamer, old enough to remember when the police worked for us and were our friends, we were a team. The old Saskatchewan way back in say...the 20th Century :) Larry On 2-Jul-10, at 9:31 PM, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 12:56:48 -0700 (PDT) > From: Bruce Mills > Subject: Re: Calgary man convicted after traffic stop finds gun > > - --- On Wed, 6/30/10, Joe Gingrich wrote: > >> A 22-year-old Calgary man was convicted Tuesday of four >> weapons-related charges and one count of possession of criminal >> proceeds resulting from a routine traffic stop on the west side of >> Saskatoon that uncovered a stash of more than $15,000 in cash. > > What is a "routine traffic stop", exactly? > >> A lone city police officer stopped the car -- a Volkswagon >> which had been rented with Tarcisyo's credit card -- just before >> noon on Sept. 12, 2008, a few minutes after noticing two men >> greeting each other on the street next to where it was parked >> in the 200 block of Avenue D south, the trial heard. > > How does this constitute "reasonable and probable grounds" for a > traffic stop? > > Yours in TYRANNY! > Bruce > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 23:15:49 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: "The one about the UN" The best of Brit satire. In a way this also explains why no one would choose to have a G-20 meeting at the UN. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW4FTAcwL0k&feature=player_embedded ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2010 07:51:30 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: An armed society makes for a polite society An oldie but good one. thanks for the reminder..ed/on - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Jasper" To: "Canadian Firearms Digest" Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:27 PM Subject: An armed society makes for a polite society > [Only in the U.S.A]? > > (According to Snopes.com the origin of this item is 'Undetermined') > > This Ad Was Posted to Craig's List Personals: > > > To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me in Downtown Savannah night before last. > > Date: 05-27-09, 1:43 AM EST. > > I can only hope that you somehow come across this rather important > message. > > I am the guy wearing the black Burberry jacket that you demanded that I > hand over, shortly after you pulled the knife on my girlfriend, > threatening our lives and me. > > You also asked for my girlfriend's purse and earrings. > > First, I'd like to apologize for your embarrassment when I drew my > pistol after you took my Jacket. The evening was not that cold, and I > was wearing the jacket for a reason. > > My girlfriend had just bought me that Kimber Model 1911 .45 ACP pistol > for my birthday, and we had picked up a shoulder holster for it that > very evening. > > Obviously you agree that it is a very Intimidating weapon when pointed > at your head wasn't it? You just about wet yourself. > > I know it probably wasn't fun walking back to wherever you'd come from, > bare footed, since I made you leave your shoes, cell phone, and wallet > with me. [That prevented you from calling or running to your buddies to > come help mug us again]. > > After I called your mother, or "Momma" as you had her listed in your > cell, I explained the entire episode of what you'd done. Then I went and > filled up my gas tank as well as four other people's at the gas station > on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons > and was extremely grateful! > > I gave your shoes to a homeless guy outside Vinnie Van Go Go's, along > with all the cash in your wallet. [That made his day]! > > I then threw your wallet into the big pink "pimp mobile" that was parked > at the curb ... after I broke the windshield and side window and keyed > the entire driver's side of the car. > > Later, I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cell phone. Ma > Bell just now shut down the line, although I only used the phone for a > little over a day now, so what's going on with that? > > Earlier, I managed to get in two threatening phone calls to the DA's > office and one to the FBI, while mentioning President Obama as my > possible target. The FBI guy seemed really intense and we had a nice > long chat (I guess while he traced your phone number etc.). > > In a way, perhaps I should apologize for not killing you ... but I feel > this type of retribution is a far more appropriate punishment for your > threatened crime. I wish you well as you try to sort through some of > these rather immediate pressing issues you’ll have to deal with, and > can only hope that you have the opportunity to reflect upon, and perhaps > reconsider, the career path you've chosen to pursue in life. > > Remember, next time you might not be so lucky. > > Have a good day! > > Thoughtfully yours, > > Alex > > P.S. Remember this motto. > --- An armed society makes for a more civil society! > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/mugger.asp > > - DRGJ > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2010 10:40:11 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: Laurier’s vision being dimmed by the lie of multiculturalism [A decent post-Canada Day piece I thought , , , then I read the comment. Sounds like two gun owners - yes it is; no it ain't]. Laurier’s vision being dimmed by the lie of multiculturalism By SALIM MANSUR, QMI Agency http://www.lfpress.com/comment/columnists/salim_mansur/2010/07/02/14585916.html On this Canada Day weekend, there could well be as many perspectives as there are those who might pause to reflect upon their country’s well-being. Mine is one shaped by the education and experiences of an immigrant since I landed in Toronto nearly four decades ago. I am reminded of that famous verse from Sir Walter Scott’s long narrative poem, The Lay of the Last Minstrel, which begins, “Breathes there the man, with soul so dead,/Who never to himself hath said,/This is my own, my native land!” This verse is a rebuke of such wretched individuals who have little or no love for their country. My generation and after, however, came of age hearing words from John Lennon’s song Imagine — “Imagine there’s no countries/It isn’t hard to do” — as the anthem of the boomer era drilled into our heads. Scott’s verse and Lennon’s lyrics could well be taken as markers for the drift in sentiments of many Canadians over the past 100 years, and what they might indicate for the country’s future. This weekend in 1910, Sir Wilfrid Laurier was in the 14th year of his tenure as prime minister. He spoke about and represented in federal politics the ideal of a united, free and prosperous Canada. Laurier’s vision expressed in a speech to the Ottawa Canadian Club in January 1904 has since been cited frequently. He viewed the country’s history as heroic and claimed, “It is Canada that shall fill the 20th century.” Yet more importantly, and perhaps more critically relevant in 2010 than in 1910, was Laurier’s insistence immigrants to Canada become Canadians and assimilate its deeply embedded culture of individual freedom and respect for tradition as handed down by Britain. Given his origin, Laurier was uniquely situated to speak of a united Canada as he had, according to the historian Michael Bliss, “transcended his ethnic and cultural roots.” Laurier was, as his biographer Joseph Schull called him, “the first Canadian.” Laurier belonged to an age not too long ago when a people could readily, as Scott did a century earlier, unashamedly express love for the country that was their home. But in the period since Canada’s centennial year in 1967, the politics of multiculturalism joined with Lennon’s sentiments have contributed to widening ethnic divisions in a country of immigrants that Laurier devoted his political life to reconciling. However charitably we consider the good intentions that launched multiculturalism as a policy for Canada in its second century, the consequences — especially when examined since the events of Sept. 11, 2001 — have increasingly undermined the ideal of Canadian unity. The worm inside the doctrine of multiculturalism is the lie that all cultures are equally embracing of individual freedom and democracy. The concerted assault by Islamists on the West and its values is proof of this lie. Moreover, multiculturalism by reinforcing hyphenated identities among Canadians keeps alive divided loyalties which Laurier denounced. He said, “Any man who says he is a Canadian, but something else also, isn’t a Canadian at all.” Multiculturalism demonstrably promotes politics based on ethnic loyalties in a multiethnic country — countries built by immigrants arriving from different parts of the world are by definition multiethnic and not multicultural — and, thereby, sharpens ethnic quarrels it was supposed to dissolve. Laurier’s voice from a century ago was a warning of the greatness that beckoned Canada could well be squandered if we failed to leave behind our ethnic origins as Canadians. As “the first Canadian,” Laurier would have recoiled at the thought of multiculturalism, and if we are to realize his vision in a new century, then we need to liberate ourselves from the lie with which multiculturalism amplifies our differences and greatly threatens the unity of our country. Comment This is a fantasy, Prof. Mansur. In the first place, Laurier wasn't an immigrant, and he had been an initial opponent of confederation itself. "Canadians" of his era were British subjects; Canada's wasn't independent; and he had been dead for a generation before it such a thing as Canadian citizenship even existed. When the war came in 1914, that initial flood of enlistment wasn't Canadians going off to fight for Canada - it consisted overwhelmingly of immigrants from the British Isles returning to fight for Britain by the most expedient method possible - but joining the Canadian Army, which its own commanders viewed as simply an adjunct to the British Army. Multiculturalism was an accomplished fact in Canada a long, long time ago. Graham, July 3rd 2010, 7:35am - --- I checked: The second child of Carolus Laurier and Marcelle Martineau, Wilfrid Laurier was born in Saint-Lin, Canada East (today called Saint-Lin-Laurentides, Quebec) on 20 November 1841. Laurier was the 7th generation of his family in Canada. His ancestor François Cottineau, dit Champlaurier came to Canada from Saint-Claud, France. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfrid_Laurier Did I miss something; where does Mansur write that Laurier was an immigrant? Also in Wiki: He is well known for his policies of conciliation, expanding Confederation, and compromise between French and English Canada. His vision for Canada was a land of individual liberty and decentralized federalism. He also argued for an English-French partnership in Canada. "I have had before me as a pillar of fire," he said, "a policy of true Canadianism, of moderation, of reconciliation." And he passionately defended individual liberty, "Canada is free and freedom is its nationality," and "Nothing will prevent me from continuing my task of preserving at all cost our civil liberty." And this twist: On 29 July 1910, while in Saskatoon to attend the opening of the University of Saskatchewan, he bought a newspaper from a young John Diefenbaker, a future Conservative Prime Minister. The young Diefenbaker, recognizing the Prime Minister, shared his ideas for the country and amused him. He inquired about the young man's business and expressed the hope that he would be a great man someday. The boy ended the conversation by saying, "Well, Mr. Prime Minister, I can't waste any more time on you. I must get back to work."[5] ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V13 #941 *********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@scorpion.bogend.ca Moderator's email: mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca 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".)