Cdn-Firearms Digest Tuesday, September 28 2010 Volume 14 : Number 101 In this issue: Re: CTV Montreal - Police union protests $35 M in budget cuts "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban-" "Re: right to the means to hunt" - Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #99 Re: Harper's quote - Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #99 Re: Tracking of 'old' firearm purchases Re: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto..." Re: CTV Montreal - Police union protests $35 M in budget cuts Re: "right to the means to hunt" - Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #99 Re: Calgary Herald - Letter - Reveal all CALGARY HERALD: Pro-gun registry crowd stooped low to make case Red Deer man mistakenly fires rifle, kills family cat CALGARY HERALD: Some global warming facts Cameron should learn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 20:51:36 -0700 From: Bob Subject: Re: CTV Montreal - Police union protests $35 M in budget cuts On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:05:47 -0600 (CST), you wrote: |>Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:13:03 -0400 |>From: "mred" |>Subject: Re: CTV Montreal - Police union protests $35 M in budget cuts |> |>Quebec has the highest rate of crime and corruption in Canada according |>to a recent McLeans magazine .. Oh, I doubt if they are allowed to know even that much from these clandestine "cajuns". They do have a lot of clout, but they charge a lot for their services..... Say you wanna buy parts for a Ruger .22 MKII/III, or any Ruger, almost nobody in Canada does that, and Snapshot/Pitre, charge about 4X the factory price, or you can fill out the forms yourself, because Ruger has stopped ship[ping to Canada some 2 years ago.....you have to go through Snapshots, even for a catalog.... Weird enough for you.... |>This will only encourage criminals to move to Quebec and leave the rest }>of us alone.:) Sure,.....but WHO is are the Criminals.... HAMC's Mum's Boucher/Dorval or La Surete de Quebeque/Quebec.... Meanwhile, none of these guys have registered firearms and PALs...they have NO problems there.....but we do.......now how does that add up???? Bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:31:18 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban-" Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban elite" > Is Johnston fair-minded unlike Canadian judges and "neutral" courts? > > http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Colleagues+laud/3578863/story.html > > Colleagues laud new Gov. Gen. > > By Tobi Cohen, Postmedia News > September 25, 2010 > > The beaming man in the dark suit worked his way with difficulty through a > mob of adoring fans, stopping to sign autographs and pose for cellphone > snapshots under the protective gaze of a towering bodyguard. > > The Harvard graduate and lifelong educator began his career > as a professor at Queen's University in 1966 before moving on to the > University of Toronto, the University of Western Ontario and McGill > University, where he served as principal and vice-chancellor. > David and Sharon Johnston, who were high-school sweethearts, have five > daughters. > > Deborah is a lawyer with Justice Canada; Alex is a lawyer in Ontario > Premier Dalton McGuinty's office; Sharon Jr. is a physician and assistant > professor of medicine at the University of Ottawa; Jenifer, an economist > at Environment Canada; and Catherine (Sam), holds a PhD in education from > Harvard University. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 23:51:08 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: "Re: right to the means to hunt" - Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #99 Ed, the point is at the time of the signing of the Treaties, late 1800s, the Indians were using firearms and had been doing so for some time. The purpose of the Treaty was to guarantee what was a time honoured practice/custom/right at the time it was signed. It does not say anything about before the white man arrived. Small settlements and the fur trade and fishing off the Grand Banks had gone on for centuries. It was only when large numbers of settlers were being brought in to raise grain and livestock for the international markets that this became an issue. Horses were a widely used advancement, too. They were from the Spanish explorer/conquerors of the 1500 to 1800s. Your point that technology adopted from white explorers/fur traders and settlers changed the aboriginals from stone age hunters and fishers is an interesting one historically and culturally, but it's not relevant to the Constitutional Right to Hunt and thus indirectly to the means to hunt. On 27-Sep-10, at 5:05 PM, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:33:39 -0400 > From: "mred" > Subject: Re: FSIN wants registry exemption > > - ----- Original Message ----- > From: <10x@telus.net> > To: > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 10:56 AM > Subject: Re: FSIN wants registry exemption > >> At 03:51 PM 9/25/2010 -0400, you wrote: > >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Joe Gingrich" >>> To: "undisclosed-recipients:" >>> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 11:57 AM >>> Subject: FSIN wants registry exemption >>> > http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/FSIN+wants+registry+exemption/ > 3572169/story.html > >> The treaties entrenched their treaty rights at the time the treaty >> was >> signed - not before the European invaders stole their country from >> them. >> >> Like it or not their treaties are one of the best arguments we >> have that >> the entire firearms act is NOT constitional. >> >> Like it or not Native Americans covered by treaty have the same >> rights to >> bear arms as we do under common law. >> >> You would see their rights extinguished? > > > Get a life ~! No where did I say that their rights should be > "extinguished ". > > Those are YOUR words - all I said is if they want to hunt and > gather as described in their treaties they should do it like their > ancestors did not like the white man did. > > I did NOT say they couldn't hunt and gather , what I said was they > should do it like their ancestors did, not like the white man. > > Not one treaty says that they should use guns for hunting, or nets for > fishing, especially commercially. > > They used spears or dams to catch fish. Bows and arrows, or drives > in, the case of buffalo (bison) hence the location name "Buffalo Jump" > out west. > > And if their so called "rights " are going to help us in the" > bearing of arms for our defense "? - and the rest of the Constitutional > claptrap ?, when is it going to start helping us.? > > Yes they have the same rights as we do as long as they register and > get an FAC - NOTHING wrong with that ~! > > But to hunt with guns is NOT in their ancestry, they were stone age > people when the white man stole their land (no argument there) and they > were so far advanced they never even developed the wheel~!!!!!! > > Just please explain to me where the "equality under the law starts"? > > ed/on > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:01:09 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: Re: Harper's quote - Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #99 This is a really nice quote... so could we get him to say the same thing today? The Conservatives are allowing morally innocent citizens to be prosecuted for victimless crimes. They ought to be requiring their Fed. Prosecutors, as a matter of disclosure, to present the Auditor General's Report/(authors) stating there is no evidence to support C-17/C-68, at every trial. Not doing that is unprofessional conduct both morally and legally. It's like allowing medical procedures to be done based on witchcraft rather than medical science. On 27-Sep-10, at 5:05 PM, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Stephen Harper on Bill C-68 - January 2002 > > There has been some confusion as to my position on gun control. I > would like to make it clear that I would repeal the Liberal's gun > registry. I personally have always opposed bill C-68 and the Liberal > approach to gun > control. > > The confusion comes because in the first vote in the House of Commons on > Bill C-68. I voted in support, because an initial poll suggested that a > majority of my constituents supported it. I discussed this vote > with Mr. Manning and he agreed that my constituency's wishes needed to > be respected. > > I conducted a second, larger and more scientific poll of my constituents > following much public and media discussion and found things had > changed - 60 per cent of respondents in my riding opposed the Bill. > I therefore voted against Bill C-68 in the final vote in the House of > Commons. > > I was and still am in total agreement with the statement made in the > House of Commons by former Reform Leader Preston Manning on June, 13, > 1995: > "Bill C-68, if passed into law, will not be a good law. It will be a bad > law, a blight on the legislative record of the government, a law that > fails the three great tests of constitutionality, of effectiveness > and of democratic consent of the governed. What should be the fate of a > bad law? > > It should be repealed..." C-68 has proven to be a bad law and has > created a bureaucratic nightmare for both gun owners and the > government. > > As Leader of the Official Opposition I will use all the powers afforded > to me as Leader and continue our party's fight to repeal Bill C-68 and > replace it with a firearms control system that is cost effective and > respects the rights of Canadians to own and use firearms responsibly. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:17:31 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: Tracking of 'old' firearm purchases At 10:29 PM 9/27/2010 -0400, you wrote: >I have mentioned on previous occasions that 'underground' gun owners >should not be surprised if they receive a 'knock' on their door because >their paperwork is in disarray. > >The fattened police budgets many have cheered as their wallets were >pilfered, can easily afford scads of police people going through years of >archived files. > >I noticed these comments in the John Dixon article of old, recently >posted by Len. I live in a community of 6500 people. All fo the police are very aware of my interest in firearms. Over the years a number of them have called me for information on 12(4) and 12(5) rifles that were sold by a local gunshop over twenty years ago. The calls arise from an officer going over the gunshop F.A.C sales records books and picking out prohibited rifles that are NOT in the current registry. Their questions were usually to the effect of who in the community would be likely to currently possess these guns and if I would be kind enough to help them in their investigation. One officer also called within days of a gunshow that I put on asking if any individual had been offering specific (unique and memorable) guns for sale that had been stolen from a local residence several years before. I helped them to the best of my ability - which was zero - as I had no idea of who has or had these guns and some of the individuals mentioned as original purchasers were dead or had long since left the community. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:49:53 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto..." Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban elite" Most, if not all university types are far left wing radicals. ed/on - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Jasper" To: "Canadian Firearms Digest" Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 12:31 AM Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban-" > Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban > elite" > >> Is Johnston fair-minded unlike Canadian judges and "neutral" courts? >> >> http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Colleagues+laud/3578863/story.html >> >> Colleagues laud new Gov. Gen. >> >> By Tobi Cohen, Postmedia News >> September 25, 2010 >> >> The beaming man in the dark suit worked his way with difficulty through >> a mob of adoring fans, stopping to sign autographs and pose for >> cellphone snapshots under the protective gaze of a towering bodyguard. >> >> The Harvard graduate and lifelong educator began his career >> as a professor at Queen's University in 1966 before moving on to the >> University of Toronto, the University of Western Ontario and McGill >> University, where he served as principal and vice-chancellor. > >> David and Sharon Johnston, who were high-school sweethearts, have five >> daughters. >> >> Deborah is a lawyer with Justice Canada; Alex is a lawyer in Ontario >> Premier Dalton McGuinty's office; Sharon Jr. is a physician and >> assistant professor of medicine at the University of Ottawa; Jenifer, >> an economist at Environment Canada; and Catherine (Sam), holds a PhD in >> education from Harvard University. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:59:03 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: CTV Montreal - Police union protests $35 M in budget cuts - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob" To: Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 11:51 PM Subject: Re: CTV Montreal - Police union protests $35 M in budget cuts > On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:05:47 -0600 (CST), you wrote: > > > Sure,.....but WHO is are the Criminals.... HAMC's Mum's > Boucher/Dorval or La Surete de Quebeque/Quebec.... > > Meanwhile, none of these guys have registered firearms and > PALs...they have NO problems there.....but we do.......now how does that > add up???? > > Bob Well commom knowledge is that the Surete is the most corrupt police force in Canada and Hamilton Ontario's police come in second. I havent read Mc Leans mag yet so Im not sure exactly what it says. ed/on ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 08:12:56 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: "right to the means to hunt" - Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #99 - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry James Fillo" To: Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 1:51 AM Subject: "Re: right to the means to hunt" - Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #99 > Ed, the point is at the time of the signing of the Treaties, late 1800s, > the Indians were using firearms and had been doing so for some time. For the sake of argument then ? lets say that you are correct. If so ? then they should be restricted to flintlock or percussion guns as they were the ones that the whites came into Canada with originally. This would satisfy your point that they should be allowed to use guns, as this goes way back to when whitey came into North America. thus establishing the past use of guns for Natives. There were no modern weapons extant, as we know them today , originally.. ed/on ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:00:41 -0700 From: Bob Subject: Re: Calgary Herald - Letter - Reveal all On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 22:55:40 -0600 (CST), you wrote: |>------------------------------ |>Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:42:30 -0700 (PDT) |>From: Bruce Mills |>Subject: Calgary Herald - Letter - Reveal all |>http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/letters/Reveal/3581212/story.html |> |>By Zach & Ann Sopa, |>Calgary Herald September 26, 2010 |> |>Re: "Off target vote. But time to move on," and "Transparency needed," |>Editorials, Sept. 23. |> |>We are in general agreement with your two editorials but make an |>observation on each. We don't see how requiring firearms to be registered |>criminalizes anyone. Failing to comply may, but that is the gun owner's |>choice. It does in high fallutin sense of the queen's english Supreme Court laws and Guk definitions....which really means nothing much in the common sense world, if you happen to live in one. What Licensing and Registration really means, is a reference to the adage licensing/registration leads to confiscation, and IT DOES, it's just a matter of time before they send some dull witted goons posing as anything from jehovah witness, to welcome wagons, so they can get a foothold in your door.... Once inside your place they will ask you if you own a gun, which they already know because of the previous CPIC search they have done. If you lie, they'll charge you with lying to Police/Peace Officer and obstructing their search and endangering a police officers life during a search. If you admit you have a h/gun they will find one that fits a Section 28 of 86(12) or 84(12) and subsection 119 (ammo) of poor/improperstorage laws.... they will get an arrest warrant from their cherry picked gun-hating moron judge and they will confiscate you h/gun property and whatever else they can GRAB from you......they like all kinds of things, and their court payola is a good backup in case they loose, and they usually do in Home Invasion gungrabs. Remember you are dealing with pigs and bulls wereas some are just as fuzzy as a rat, so being nice/courteous to them may win you some brownie points in Court and will have your case dismissed, and you can eventually get your knackered guns back in about a year. "Failing to comply" is a CUFOA and other Charter concept, but the para/military polease gun gabbers just laugh at those. Ask me how I know....been there done that! ThanX Bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, September 28, 2010 8:29 am From: "Dennis & Hazel Young" Subject: CALGARY HERALD: Pro-gun registry crowd stooped low to make case CALGARY HERALD - SEPTEMBER 28, 2010 Pro-gun registry crowd stooped low to make case By Rob Breakenridge, For The Calgary Herald http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/registry+crowd+stooped+make+case/3588031/story.html Proponents of the national long-gun registry may have, for now, carried the day, but let's disabuse ourselves of any notion they have claimed the moral high ground. Many registry defenders have displayed an unprecedented level of sanctimony, and yet still have the nerve to accuse the other side of appealing to emotion. It is insufficient -- and frankly, irrational -- to simply cite gun-related tragedies and let that stand as an argument for the gun registry. Yet, through this entire debate, that's exactly what happened. How often, not just over the past few months but over the past 15 years, have we heard the invocation of the Montreal massacre in selling and now defending the long-gun registry? There is no evidence or logic to suggest that the existence of the registry would have made an iota of difference in that horrendous tragedy. To then claim the registry -- which would not and could not have stopped Marc Lepine -- is a "monument" to the 14 women he murdered, is to try to link support for the registry to compassion for the victims. In other words, those who would scrap the registry may as well be urinating on the graves of these women. Once we arrive at that point, we've long surpassed any pretence of rational debate. It's just as craven -- and even more bizarre -- for registry proponents to invoke more recent tragedies. The Dawson College shootings, which left one student dead and nearly 20 injured, has been cited repeatedly in this debate. Survivors have been vocal in demanding MPs save the registry. Yet, gunman Kimveer Gill had legally registered his weapons. One survivor, though, went so far as to claim the registry "was probably one of the reasons that the killing was limited that day." However, the killing was "limited" only because two police officers were on the scene for an unrelated reason and responded when they heard gunshots. It should say something about the weakness of the pro-registry position that it would need to be buttressed by such obvious falsehoods. The appeal to emotion featured prominently on the day of the fateful vote on the registry last week. Reporters were tipped off that within the Liberal caucus meeting, MP Scott Simms had emotionally discussed his father's suicide -- a tragedy that apparently convinced him to support the registry. Mind you, Simms's support was already decided for him by his leader's decision to whip the caucus vote. The obvious point once again is that the registry did not prevent Simms's father from using a long gun to take his own life. The closest thing to an evidence-based argument from the pro-registry side is the study done by the National Public Health Institute of Quebec. It argues that the murder rate fell faster in the period following the 1998 implementation of Bill C-68, which mandated long-gun registration. They then conclude that the registry saves an average of 300 lives a year. There are some obvious flaws in such logic: their "no registry" scenario does not factor in other methods governments might have employed to fight crime. It also overlooks the fact that between 1991 and 2004, the homicide rate in the U. S fell by 44 per cent as compared with the 36 per cent decline in Canada. Clearly there are factors not exclusive to our country. There is also the simple fact that the registry didn't come into effect until 2001 and it didn't become mandatory until 2003. Interestingly, after years of decline, the homicide rate increased by 12 per cent in 2004 and then by another four per cent in 2005. Also, from 2002 to 2008, the rate of firearm homicides increased by 24 per cent. Factor in the fact that 1998 and 1999 saw 30-year lows in the murder rate, and you're left with a much more complicated picture. But why should we expect anything complicated from the "we're saving lives" crowd? My sentiments are obviously with those seeking an end to the registry, but there is a legitimate debate to be had. Portraying one side of that debate as having blood on its hands is shameful and has no place in Canadian discourse. The Rob Breakenridge Show airs weekdays from 9 to 11 p.m. on AM770 CHQR rob.breakenridge@corusent.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, September 28, 2010 8:31 am From: "Dennis & Hazel Young" Subject: Red Deer man mistakenly fires rifle, kills family cat QUOTABLE QUOTE: RCMP Cpl. Kathe Deheer: "If you hear something, call the police and let the police investigate." CALGARY HERALD - SEPTEMBER 28, 2010 Red Deer man mistakenly fires rifle, kills family cat By Jason van Rassel, http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Deer+mistakenly+fires+rifle+kills+family/3588057/story.html Residents of a Red Deer neighbourhood escaped injury when a neighbour accidentally fired a rifle inside his home, but the stray bullet killed his family's cat. It happened at 6:15 a.m. Sunday on McCullough Crescent on Red Deer's south side. Police have laid firearms charges against the man. Investigators said the accused was inside his house and loaded a rifle after hearing what he believed was a suspicious noise in the home. The RCMP said the man stumbled while walking through the house, inadvertently pulling the trigger and firing a shot that fatally wounded the family cat, which was in another room. The bullet continued through an exterior wall of the house before hitting a neighbouring home. Investigators said the bullet missed the man's wife and children, residents living in a basement suite, as well as people in the neighbouring house. Although police said alcohol played a role in the incident, they didn't elaborate on what led the man to arm himself. "Some of that forms the evidence that makes up the case," Cpl. Kathe Deheer said. Police alleged the accused was not licensed to own a gun, and that it wasn't stored according to federal regulations. "If firearms are stored properly, locked away and out of mind, somebody isn't as apt to grab a firearm when they hear a noise," Deheer said. "If you hear something, call the police and let the police investigate." Daryl Brownell, 31, has been charged with careless use of a firearm, careless storage of a firearm, possession of a dangerous weapon and unauthorized possession of a firearm. Brownell is scheduled to appear in court on Oct. 13. Follow this reporter on Twitter @JasonvanRassel jvanrassel@calgaryherald.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, September 28, 2010 8:35 am From: "Dennis & Hazel Young" Subject: CALGARY HERALD: Some global warming facts Cameron should learn *NFR* Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca CALGARY HERALD - SEPTEMBER 28, 2010 Some global warming facts Cameron should learn By Paul Stanway http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Some+global+warming+facts+Cameron+should+learn/3588030/story.html Get ready for a week of take-no-prisoners debate on the oilsands, as moviemaker James Cameron descends on Alberta to decide whether we're recklessly contributing to the destruction of the planet. Of course, I'm writing this on Monday and I'm assuming he's going to be here. (Earlier this year he famously vowed to take part in a public debate with those who have questions about a man-made climate catastrophe: "I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads," Cameron vowed. The "boneheads" showed up, Cameron did not.) So to cut through the storm of rhetoric we're likely to hear this week, it seems to me there are two separate issues for Albertans to get their heads around. First off, there's no question that oilsands development has had, and will continue to have, a major impact on the environment. It has to be properly managed, with regard for Alberta's future and the health and welfare of those living in the oilsands region. There are no deniers on this -- no bonehead Albertans who believe it would be just fine to leave our kids a monstrous environmental legacy. There is a vigorous debate over what constitutes responsible development and how we achieve it -- and that is as it should be. But there are also those who believe the oilsands must be "stopped." They are not interested in responsible development. They want no development, and their rationale is the quasi-religious belief that humankind has become a blight on the planet and is driving rapid, destructive changes in the global climate. We're assured that the time for legitimate argument is over. The science is "settled" and if you still have questions you are a "denier" -- a word deliberately coopted to equate uncertainty about climate science with denial of the Holocaust, with all the reprehensible moral baggage that implies. The problem, though, is history. If you are of a certain age you can probably recall the climate change debate being touted as "settled" in the 1970s. At the time we were inundated with newspaper articles and television documentaries about a climate catastrophe that would change the world. Except it wasn't global warming, it was global cooling and the likely onset of a new ice age. I was reminded of this recently when a reader e-mailed me an almost 40-year-old article from the Times of London. An interview with Prof. Hubert Lamb, then the director of climate research at Britain's University of East Anglia -- which in recent years has become one of the most important centres for global warming research. Lamb claimed we had seen "the best" of the warming period that followed the last ice age. "We are on a definite downhill course for the next two centuries. The last 20 years of this century will be progressively colder. After that the climate may warm up again, but only for a short period of decades." Average temperatures had been falling since 1944 and he was one of a number of scientists who saw in this an underlying cooling trend. Such catastrophic predictions are always popular -- call it the Nostradamus effect -- and a looming ice age caught the media and public imagination . . . for a while. In 1975 the cooling trend reversed, and over the past couple of decades the view of many scientists -- not all -- reversed with it, concluding that the underlying trend is one of global warming caused in large part by human activity. I'm not a scientist and don't pretend to be an expert on climate change, but I mention this because it's surely important to set some historical context for a debate that covers the whole globe and hundreds if not thousands of years of time. And history suggests we should always be cautious in suggesting any scientific debate is "settled." There's a good example of how unsettled this debate actually is in the reaction to the latest State of the Climate report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) -- the world's largest gatherer of climate information. Alberta Oil magazine finds comfort in the report's conclusion that the extreme weather many places saw in 2009 (baseball-sized hail and 107 km/h winds in Calgary) was not the result of human activity (as routinely suggested by the CBC). "Such seasonal extremes most certainly were not the result of human-induced climate change," says the NOAA. So this report supports Cameron's "deniers"? Well, no. It also grandly claims "people have spent thousands of years building a society for one climate and now a new one is being created -- one that's warmer and more extreme." Yet as critics of the NOAA have pointed out, even relatively recent human history records something different -- "The Medieval Warm Period" (a thriving wine industry in southern England, for example), followed by "The Little Ice Age" (widespread crop failures and skating on a frozen Thames River in London). We know climate changes, but why that happens remains unclear. Remember that this week when we are told the debate is over. Paul Stanway is an Albert a journalist . His column runs every Tuesday ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #101 *********************************** 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".)