Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, September 29 2010 Volume 14 : Number 103 In this issue: Re: Red Deer man mistakenly fires rifle, kills family cat Re: Time to pack it in? Re: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto Re: Tracking of 'old' firearm purchases The Link - Column(s) - Bang, Bang, Bang CTV - Ontario court strikes down anti-prostitution laws *NFR* Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #101 Re:"Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised'Toronto..." "Ontario Superior Court-strikes down prostitution law" [Excerpt] Re: Red Deer man mistakenly fires rifle, kills family cat Re: Men convicted in Mountie slayings lose appeal Re: Tracking of 'old' firearm purchases Letter - A Federal Gun Bill - NYTimes.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:54:09 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: Red Deer man mistakenly fires rifle, kills family cat Well some cats I have known deserved that kind of an ending LOL ed/on - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis & Hazel Young" To: "Firearms Digest" Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:31 AM 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. >snipped< > Follow this reporter on Twitter @JasonvanRassel > jvanrassel@calgaryherald.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:58:45 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: Time to pack it in? We lost a favorite gun-owner/poster, with Med Crouteau, I would hate to see Bruce follow? We need to keep CPC feet to the fire and both Bruce and Med have done an admirable job. Lets rally around the flag boys and remember all those Canadians who died so that we could be free and have rights. ed/on - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Jasper" To: "undisclosed-recipients:" Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 10:54 AM Subject: Re: Time to pack it in? > Bruce wrote: > >> Time to pack it in? > I have every expectation of gaining more via the opposition route than > from the gov't side. > > I've always been told it's bad form and bad luck to bow out mid-term. > > You've been a stalwart. . . I'd give it one more election, Bruce. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:37:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto - --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Lee Jasper wrote: > From: Lee Jasper > Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban-" > To: "Canadian Firearms Digest" > Received: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 12:31 AM > 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. GovGen, not AudGen... Yours in TYRANNY! Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:40:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: Tracking of 'old' firearm purchases - --- On Tue, 9/28/10, 10x@telus.net <10x@telus.net> wrote: > 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. I trust you told them to "pound salt"... Yours in TYRANNY! Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:58:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: The Link - Column(s) - Bang, Bang, Bang http://thelinknewspaper.ca/article/322 Bang, Bang, Bang Tom LLewellin & Clay Hemmerich — September 28, 2010 | No Comments The Link Concordia Student Newspaper On Wednesday Sept. 22, the Long Gun Registry survived as Paliament voted down Bill C-391 a motion to kill the law by a slim margin. The Long Gun Registry is still under intense debate. Kill Bill C-391 153 Members of Parliament were for the Long Gun Registry and voted against Bill C-391. Boondoggle was practically coined with the long-gun registry in mind. Its critics argue that it has saved no lives and produced little benefit. But what's been buried in the vast spin this issue has suffered is the fact that the program produced tangible benefits and is an important way of keeping track of weapons, and continues to do so every year in this country. The registrys detractors have been quite successful at pitching long-guns as tools like any other for rural Canadians, undeserving of the scrutiny or hassle of forced registration. However, they're used in domestic homicides 71 per cent of the time, according to Statistics Canada, largely because they're so close at hand. On the other hand, spousal homicide has been trending downwards for the last decade, most likely because of the impact of the gun registry. Canadian police forces consult the database around 11,000 times a day, and are able to respond better to domestic violence calls because of it. The best evidence we have is an RCMP report on the program, commissioned externally and completed in February. Among other things, leaked portions that surfaced last week before Wednesdays vote pointed out that management costs are $3.6 million a year a far cry from the billions of dollars cited by the registrys detractors. In a sign of the partisan brinksmanship contest the debate has turned into, the full contents have been withheld from Parliament and the public since then on an indefinite basis pending translation, according to the CBC. Without all relevant hard data available to policymakers when a vote is occurring, we can't expect them to make smart decisions, and we can't expect the public to pressure them responsibly. Gun control is an agreed upon precept of Canadian society. Seven million rifles and other weapons exist that would be covered under the program, the largest category of licensed firearms in the country. The most substantial piece of data, however, remained conspicuously absent. We should question the motives of a government that practices this kind of strategic information control at such key moments. The same thing has happened with the abolition of the long-form census, the muzzling of federal research scientists and the painstakingly-detailed talking points that every federal agency and employee must dance to on command. The lack of data serves their interests by muddying the waters, exploiting ignorance and stirring discord over an important public safety effort. If data comes along showing that the gun registry is not worth the expense in lives saved and benefits to society, then maybe we should let it go. However, all we really need is to sit down and have a real debate. Until then, the registry should stay in place. Registry Misses Target 151 Members of Parliament were against the Long Gun Registry and voted for Bill C-391. Growing up in Alberta, I never thought of a rifle in a threatening manner. I grew up riding around in my father's pick-up truck with a .22 calibre rifle in the backseat. We used to drive down to an uninhabited piece of land, find a bank and line-up cans to shoot at. Often, we'd see another father/son duo doing the same thing. A rifle wasn't a weapon of mass killing to us. It was a test of patience and due diligence. Make sure no one's in the line of fire. Push the safety when you're done shooting. Point the rifle down to the dirt when you're loading it and never ever point the gun at someone for play or you'll get your ass kicked. There was never a crazy button on the gun that magically transformed the person holding it into a blood-lusting freak, despite what some mainstream media would have you believe. Talking from my own experiences, people seem to be hoplophobic or afraid of guns in the east when compared to the west of Canada, and maybe for good reason. Being affected by such disasters as the 1989 Polytechnique massacre and the Dawson College shooting gives justification to their fear of guns. But it doesn't give reason to put the blame on the laws instead of the troubled individuals that lacked proper counseling and a support base. Although I do feel deeply for victims of the Dawson College shooting, I do feel that pulling on their heartstrings are misguided, especially considering the perpetrator used registered guns. Instead of worrying about who has the guns, we should worry about who can have the guns. Perhaps the substantial amount of money saved after abolishing the bloated law can go into supporting under-funded and neglected Canadian mental health institutions. Perhaps social change starts at the grassroots level of gun laws, like Bill C-68, a law that prohibits the ownership of a gun without a license. To obtain a firearms license, one should have to go through a formal psychological screening. As of now, garnering a firearms license is as easy as downloading a form off of the internet and dropping it off at your nearest governmental office. Everyone seems to forget the most obvious of sayings: guns don't kill people, people kill people. According to numerous news reports, the long-gun registry costs up to a billion dollars to maintain. The law is overkill (no pun intended), and really does not prevent gun crimes from happening. Bill C-68 is a sufficient enough law to point out households with gun owners. Besides, does it really matter what type of gun someone has? This is not a first person shooter game. The average gun holder is not a marksman and each bullet doesn't attribute more or less damage to your health gauge. More education regarding gun safety and gun control should be readily available in forms differing from crime reports and fear-mongering news stories. This article originally appeared in The Link volume 31, Issue 07, published September 28, 2010. letters@thelink.concordia.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:04:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: CTV - Ontario court strikes down anti-prostitution laws *NFR* http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20100928/ontario-anti-prostitution-laws-struck-down-100928/ Ontario court strikes down anti-prostitution laws CTV.ca News Staff Date: Tue. Sep. 28 2010 3:16 PM ET An Ontario court has struck down several key provisions in Canada's anti-prostitution laws, saying they are dangerous to sex-trade workers. A ruling by the Ontario's Superior Court of Justice said the laws against keeping a common bawdy house, communicating for the purposes of prostitution and living on the avails of the trade "are not in accord with the principles of fundamental justice." "These laws, individually and together, force prostitutes to choose between their liberty interest and their right to security of the person as protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms," Justice Susan Himel wrote her in 131-page decision which struck down those provisions. "I find that the danger faced by prostitutes greatly outweighs any harm which may be faced by the public." Dominatrix Terri-Jean Bedford and two other sex-trade workers went to Ontario's Superior Court of Justice to ask the court to rule on the Criminal Code laws relating to prostitution. In an afternoon press conference Bedford said Tuesday was like emancipation day for sex-trade workers. She said it is now up to Prime Minister Stephen Harper to deal with the situation. In her ruling, Himel said Parliament had to "fashion corrective action" to put new laws in place. "It is my view that in the meantime these unconstitutional provisions should be of no force and effect, particularly given the seriousness of the charter violations," Himel wrote. "However, I also recognize that a consequence of this decision may be that unlicensed brothels may be operated, and in a way that may not be in the public interest." The government argued removing the prohibitions without replacing them with new laws would "pose a danger to the public." The decision is subjected to a 30-day stay and the federal government can seek an extension of that period. The struck-down provisions deal with adult prostitution. Prostitution laws dealing with those under the age of 18 remain unaffected. Prostitution is not illegal in Canada, but nearly everything related to it is. The federal government has argued that prostitution is inherently dangerous, no matter where it is carried out. It also argued that striking down the laws would make Canada a sex tourism destination. The Christian Legal Fellowship, which was granted intervenor status, argued that prostitution "offends the conscience of ordinary Canadians." With files from The Canadian Press ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 18:46:34 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #101 - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry James Fillo" To: "undisclosed-recipients:" Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 2:46 PM Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #101 > Ed; > The timeline for the signing of treaties range from > 1725 to 1923. Not much has changed in the realm > of hunting firearms since 1923. No doubt but theres been a few changes since 1725 I would venture? ed/on > What is reasonable is a question that applies to Rights > and not to Privileges. We need more people with Rights > and standing up for that concept. It's not a topic the MSM > will ever raise nor will the political parties(unless citizens > raise it first). > > On 28-Sep-10, at 9:50 AM, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > >> 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 21:15:50 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re:"Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised'Toronto..." At 07:49 AM 9/28/2010 -0400, you wrote: >Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto urban >elite" > > >Most, if not all university types are far left wing radicals. >ed/on The really smart ones are right wing. I am so far left that I appear to be on the right.... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 23:18:29 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: "Ontario Superior Court-strikes down prostitution law" [Excerpt] Subject: "Ontario Superior Court judge strikes down prostitution law" [Excerpt] [Note to Eduardo; hire this gunslinger. A law prof looking for a cause] Ontario Superior Court judge strikes down prostitution law Kirk Makin Globe and Mail Update Published Tuesday, Sep. 28, 2010 1:12PM EDT Last updated Tuesday, Sep. 28, 2010 5:47PM EDT > http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario/ontario-superior-court-judge-strikes-down-prostitution-law/article1730433/ In a landmark decision striking down the core of the controversial law, Ontario Superior Court Judge Susan Himel said that the law forces women to operate their business furtively in an atmosphere of constant secrecy and danger. “We got everything,” the lawyer behind the challenge, Alan Young, yelped as he read the concluding portions of the decision. “We did it!” Mr. Young said that the judge refused to suspend the effect of her decision while the government moves to fill the legislative gap. “It takes effect right now,” he told reporters at Toronto's downtown courthouse. - -- Alan N. Young > http://www.osgoode.yorku.ca/faculty/Young_Alan_N.html Research Associate Professor BA (York), LLB (Osgoode), LLM (Harvard), of the Bar of Ontario E-mail:ayoung@osgoode.yorku.ca Tel: 416-736-5595 Fax: 416-736-5736 Office: ROSS-S828 Assistant: Miriam Spevack, Office ROSS-S805A mspevack@osgoode.yorku.ca Alan Young is Co-Founder and Director of Osgoode’s Innocence Project, which involves LLB students in the investigation of suspected cases of wrongful conviction and imprisonment. He also maintains a small practice specializing in criminal law and procedure that is primarily devoted to challenging state authority to criminalize consensual activity. He has brought constitutional challenges to our gambling, obscenity, bawdy-house and drug laws and for more than a decade has provided free legal services for people whose alternative lifestyles have brought them into conflict with the law. In 1995 he successfully challenged the “drug literature prohibition” in our Criminal Code on the basis that it violated freedom of expression. In 1998 he acted as counsel for the infamous “bondage bungalow” dominatrix. Between 1998 and 2000 he played an integral part in compelling the federal government to take action to recognize the medicinal value of marijuana. He has represented countless numbers of people suffering from AIDS, cancer and multiple sclerosis who had been charged as a result of using marijuana for medicinal purposes. In addition to his work in the area of consensual crime, Professor Young has also provided free legal services to victims of violent crime and to individuals attempting to sue the government for malicious prosecution. He is the author of Justice Defiled: Perverts, Potheads, Serial Killers and Lawyers (Toronto: Key Porter, 2003). Areas of interest: Clinical Education, Criminal Law - -- > http://prostitution.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=003632 Name: Alan Young, LLB, LLM Title: Associate Professor of Law at Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Position: Pro to the question "Should prostitution be legal?" Reasoning: "Sex trade workers have had an enormous fall from grace from the sacred temple harlots of ancient times to the marginalized outcasts exposed to all manner of violence, abuse and ridicule of today.... Every time a prostitute is arrested, two more take her place. There's a bottomless market for their services. I'm sure some cops, lawyers and judges sometimes enter this market, but they can never admit it because it would undercut their authority to arrest, prosecute and punish those who gave them release the day before. Whether one pays to participate in an orgy or to hire the services of a prostitute, I see no reason to bring in the heavy guns of the criminal law. When it comes to sex, I see only one legal rule of any real importance: for sex to be lawful there only needs to be consent, and it should not matter whether consent is secured by direct payment or weeks of expensive courtship with fine dining and false promises." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:24:09 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: Red Deer man mistakenly fires rifle, kills family cat You wrote: >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 The gun owners licensing scheme, the criminal code sanctions against firearms use, and the gun registry did not save the life of the cat. The cat is dead in spite of all the laws regulating guns and owners. And the death of a cat in Red Deer is newsworthy how? Only to underline the failure of the gun registry to protect family pets. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:32:27 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: Men convicted in Mountie slayings lose appeal At 11:15 AM 9/28/2010 -0600, you wrote: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/convicted+Mountie+slayings+lose+appeal/3588938/story.html > >Men convicted in Mountie slayings lose appeal > >By Alexandra Zabjek, Postmedia News >September 28, 2010 > >Their families contend they were the closest thing possible to innocent >bystanders in the massacre. > >But on Monday, the only two men convicted in the 2005 shooting deaths of >four Mounties near Mayerthorpe, Alta., were told they had lost their bid >for shorter prison sentences. Meanwhile the man who sold an illegally held gun to Emrah Bulatci who later used to kill an RCMP officer acting in the line of duty is still free. Emrah Bulatci went to this individuals residence seeking assistance and was ignored. Later on (January 31) our friend the illegal gun salesman was arrested for firing shots at someone in an Urban area. No jail for that either. Methinks that justice has been corrupted here. One RCMP officers life is not worth the same as anothers. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 22:04:17 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: Tracking of 'old' firearm purchases At 02:40 PM 9/28/2010 -0700, you wrote: >--- On Tue, 9/28/10, 10x@telus.net <10x@telus.net> wrote: > >> 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. > >I trust you told them to "pound salt"... My truthful and accurate comment was " I have NO idea of what you are asking and would not even attempt to guess the fate of those guns." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, September 29, 2010 1:38 am From: "David R.G. Jordan" Subject: Letter - A Federal Gun Bill - NYTimes.com Letter A Federal Gun Bill http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/opinion/lweb28guns.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail1=y Published: September 27, 2010 To the Editor: It is regrettable that you oppose federal legislation that will help law enforcement and further empower the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ("Ducking for Cover Before the N.R.A.," editorial, Sept. 18). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act does not make it harder for A.T.F. to pull a corrupt gun dealer's license. In fact, the bill enhances A.T.F. enforcement and oversight powers by authorizing it to issue graduated fines and license suspensions - powers long sought by A.T.F. - as well as to revoke licenses for serious violations or even repeated minor violations. Furthermore, for 20 years the law has required a showing of a wilful violation in order to revoke a firearms retailer's license. This bill, which has strong bipartisan support, does not change that. Lawrence G. Keane Senior V.P. and General Counsel National Shooting Sports Foundation Newtown, Conn., Sept. 20, 2010 - -- -- Referenced articles from the above missive; *Ducking for Cover Before the N.R.A.," editorial, Sept. 18 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/18/opinion/18sat2.html?scp=1&sq=n.r.a.%20editorial&st=cse *Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s941/show - -- -- Letters to the Editor Letters to the editor should only be sent to The Times, and not to other publications. We do not publish open letters or third-party letters. Letters for publication should be no longer than 150 words, must refer to an article that has appeared within the last seven days, and must include the writer's address and phone numbers. No attachments, please. We regret we cannot return or acknowledge unpublished letters. Writers of those letters selected for publication will be notified within a week. Letters may be shortened for space requirements. Send a letter to the editor by e-mailing letters@nytimes.com - -- -- *About Letters Thomas Feyer, the letters editor, gives tips for getting your letter published. Click here for full article. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/23/opinion/23READ.html Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #103 *********************************** 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".)