Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, October 1 2010 Volume 14 : Number 109 In this issue: Re: TorStar - Police seek witnesses in west-end shooting deaths Re: TorStar - Man shot dead in confrontation with police Re: Harper's AudGen epitomizes the Toronto urban elite Re: Harper's AudGen epitomizes the Toronto urban elite Gun violence at GTA schools since 2000 - TheStar FW: Trusting the gun registry is dangerous! Column: Inside Harperland - The Ottawa Citizen PMO calls Harperland author a 'Liberal sympathizer' *NFR* Reply and response from Calgary Herald (Naomi Lakritz) ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 05:34:24 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: TorStar - Police seek witnesses in west-end shooting deaths At 03:10 PM 9/30/2010 -0700, you wrote: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/868355--police-seek-witnesses-in-west-end-shooting-deaths > >Police seek witnesses in west-end shooting deaths > >Published On Thu Sep 30 2010 > >Two young men are dead following a shooting in the city's west end >Wednesday night. > >Police found the victims near a highrise building at 1765 Weston Rd. when >they responded to reports of multiple gunshots just before 10:30 p.m. The Firearms owners licensing system failed to stop the perpetrator of this crime from getting a gun. Had the firearms licensing system stopped the miscreant who had decided to kill these two - would the miscreant have resorted to other leas specific means like a bomb, or arson? (Remember folks, the largest mass murder in Canada was an arson - Wagon Wheel nightclub in Montreal - there was no call for controls on Zippo windproof lighters, hockey sticks, coat hangers, and gasoline...) The bottom line - the current firearms act fails to stop the violent acts of individuals. It is time to stop blaming the tool used and blame the individual who decided to take another persons life. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 05:47:01 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: TorStar - Man shot dead in confrontation with police At 03:15 PM 9/30/2010 -0700, you wrote: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/crime/article/867756--man-shot-dead-in-confrontation-with-police > >Man shot dead in confrontation with police > >Published On Wed Sep 29 2010 > >He was trying to turn his life around. Instead, the 26-year-old man is >dead and his brother is facing weapons charges following a police raid and >shooting in Etobicoke early Wednesday. > >At around 1:30 a.m., the Toronto gangs task force and emergency task force >were on the scene at 11 Dunbloor Rd., in the Bloor St. and Dundas St. W. >area. A confrontation ensued and the man was fatally shot in a third-floor >unit of the upscale apartment tower. > >A police firearm was discharged during the execution of a search warrant, >the province's Special Investigations Unit said. One subject officer and >14 witness officers are at the centre of its probe. > >The victim was identified as 26-year-old Eric Osawe by childhood friend >Antonius Clarke, who has been acting as a spokesperson for the Osawes. > >Clarke said the family is devastated. >Clarke said Osawe was looking for a fresh start after previous run-ins >with the law. > >He had been turning his life around, Clarke said. >Many building residents said they heard yelling, then a single gunshot. >Ebony Osawe, 23, of Toronto is charged with possession of a firearm, >careless storage of a firearm, unauthorized possession of a firearm and >careless storage of ammunition and dangerous weapons. 1) The firearms Act has failed one more time. Did police check the address for guns? Did police chekc to see if these guys had licenses? If these suspects had guns and no licenses, exactly how did the firearms act enhance the safety of the officers? 2) These are EXACTLY the same charges that a licensed firearms owner would face the moment a firearms license expires and they are still in possession of firearms. The criminal penalties are the same. 3) The police officer who pulled the trigger is going to have to live with this for the rest of his/her life. It is not an easky decision to kill another human being. If it was easy then some 2 million licensed gun owners and as many as 2 million unlicensed gun owners will kill a lot more folk. They don't do that. 4) the Police were doing their jobs. There was a "confrontation". We do not know the threat or extent of the confrontation or whether the shot was deliberate - fired in self defense - or an accident. Either way the police officer does not deserve a trail and conviction in the media. 5) and if the victim was looking for a "fresh start", why was he assocciating with family members who were engaging in criminl activity? If a person knows of criminal activity and does not act, then that person becomes an accessory or an acomplice. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 06:21:02 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: Harper's AudGen epitomizes the Toronto urban elite At 10:24 PM 9/30/2010 -0400, you wrote: >The comment was made on the CFD: > >> Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto >> urban elite" >> >> "Most, if not all university types are far left wing radicals." > >'Upon what rock solid foundation' is that conclusion based? > >After haunting the halls of several august establishments of post >> Abstract > >> http://www.jstor.org/pss/2112062 > >> A longitudinal study of 1961 alumni shows that in the years since >> graduation, they have moved away from Democratic political >> affiliation towards "independence," while the net loss among >> Republicans was quite small. This points to support for the statement "a conservative is a Liberal who has been mugged"... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 08:33:49 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: Harper's AudGen epitomizes the Toronto urban elite This may ? be true but on the other hand I have spoken with some professers here in Hamilton and college teachers(Mohawk college when I attended there 26 years ago ) as well and they ALL seem to be lefties.? The worst of it is ? they extend THEIR vues to their students who then become lefties as well. ed/on - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Jasper" To: "Canadian Firearms Digest" Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:24 PM Subject: Re: Harper's AudGen epitomizes the Toronto urban elite > The comment was made on the CFD: > >> Subject: "Harper appointed AudGen epitomizes the 'despised' Toronto >> urban elite" >> >> "Most, if not all university types are far left wing radicals." > > 'Upon what rock solid foundation' is that conclusion based? > > After haunting the halls of several august establishments of post > pubescent learning, I can report that the political persuasion of > members of their 'communities of learning' is representative of the > general population. > > One of the greater predictors of affiliation is one's parents views. > > I can report that many younguns undergo a bit of a transformation when > they begin to discover the world does not operate quite as > simplistically as Ma and Pa claimed. > > Many discover that the world isn't quite as 'black and white' as they > thought. > > I only found one study on Google. > > Political change among college alumni. > >> Abstract > >> http://www.jstor.org/pss/2112062 > >> A longitudinal study of 1961 alumni shows that in the years since >> graduation, they have moved away from Democratic political >> affiliation towards "independence," while the net loss among >> Republicans was quite small. However, the alumni were far more likely >> to describe themselves as "liberal" than they were to describe their >> parents with the same term. The "independents" were more likely to be >> sympathetic with both black and student movements than were either >> the Democrats or the Republicans. Even "conservative independents" >> were more "radical" than conservative Democrats or Republicans. >> Change from Democratic preference among one's parents to >> "Independence" correlated with attendance at elite universities and >> liberal arts colleges. > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 10:18:15 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: Gun violence at GTA schools since 2000 - TheStar Gun violence at GTA schools since 2000 Oct 01 2010 > http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/869050--gun-violence-at-gta-schools-since-2000 May 28, 1975: Michael Slobodian, 16, kills a teacher, fatally injures a student and wounds 13 others before killing himself at Brampton’s Centennial Secondary School. Feb. 26, 1990: A jilted 17-year-old shoots three teenagers, including his ex-girlfriend, at General Brock High School in Burlington. All three survive. Oct. 20, 1994: Two guidance counsellors wounded at Brockton High School in Toronto by a mature student attending the school. April 27, 1998: Boy, 15, fires pellet gun into the pool area at Harbord Collegiate, near Bathurst and Bloor Sts. A teacher and a lifeguard are hit. Sept. 27, 1999: Alvin Brown, 23, seriously wounded outside Shoreham Public School, near Steeles Ave. W. and Jane St. in Toronto. Feb. 5, 2000: Dwayne Williams, 20, shot in back and leg at Toronto's Lester B. Pearson Collegiate. Nov. 9, 2005: A Grade 12 student at Chinguacousy Secondary School in Brampton wounded while sitting in his car in school parking lot. May 23, 2007: Jordan Manners, 15, killed at C.W. Jefferys secondary school in Toronto. Sept 16, 2008: Student, 17, wounded at Toronto’s Bendale Business and Technical Institute. Sept. 30, 2010: Central Technical School on Bathurst St. in Toronto - -- Submit your Letter Letters must include full name, address and all phone numbers of sender (daytime, evening and cellphone). Street names and phone numbers will not be published. We reserve the right to edit letters, which typically run 50-150 words. Please note: We get many more letters than we have space to print. Due to the volume, we unfortunately cannot acknowledge every submission. Letters to the Editor E-Mail to: lettertoed@thestar.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, October 1, 2010 9:45 am From: "Dennis & Hazel Young" Subject: FW: Trusting the gun registry is dangerous! Forwarded with permission. - ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Re: Trusting the gun registry is dangerous! From: "Bruce Atchison - author" Date: Thu, September 30, 2010 5:10 pm To: decline@pteradon.tera-byte.com - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Don; Here's the letter again. By the way, I wrote the same to Cop Talk. I'm disgusted with those officers who consulted the gun registry before going to that call of a distraught drunk last midnight and trusted its info was correct. What would have happened if the registry said the man didn't have guns and they went in assuming that? We might be mourning a couple gullible cops who figured the government-controlled gun registry knew everything. It's only a matter of time before police officers die because they foolishly trusted the government's database. How long will law-abiding citizens suffer being labeled as criminals while the real miscrients smuggle in guns from the states and cary out crimes. When, not if, an officer is shot by somebody who didn't register like a good little boy or girl, I'm sure naive liberals will still insist the registry must be strengthened. and more of our privacy must be invaded. Sincerely, Bruce Atchison - author of When a Man Loves a Rabbit and Deliverance from Jericho. www.bruceatchison.blogspot.com www.bruceatchison.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 10:42:47 -0400 From: Lee Jasper Subject: Column: Inside Harperland - The Ottawa Citizen Inside Harperland By Susan Riley, The Ottawa Citizen October 1, 2010 7:50 AM http://www.ottawacitizen.com/columnists/Inside+Harperland/3606365/story.html The Prime Minister's Office is, predictably, dismissing Lawrence Martin's fascinating new book -- Harperland: The Politics of Control -- as the work of a Liberal sympathizer. This ignores Martin's crusading pursuit of past Liberal misdeeds, from Shawinigate to the sponsorship scandal, but, also, the intriguing fact that most of the author's sources are former intimates of Stephen Harper's. And they're speaking on the record. "Former" is the operative word, of course. No one who wants to keep their job, or pursue a career in the capital, can afford to be openly critical of this wary, self-protective prime minister. Public Safety Minister Vic Toews illustrated the approved technique recently, when asked about federal funding for hockey arenas: "Whatever the leader said, I stand by what the leader said." Perhaps the most prominent "former" is Calgary academic Tom Flanagan, who worked closely with Harper over 15 years and served as chief of staff when Harper led the short-lived Canadian Alliance. Lately, with Flanagan being an independent-minded CBC pundit, the two are not so chummy. Flanagan is also author of a candid, readable account of Harper's rise to power, called Harper's Team -- a book that, Martin reveals, the prime minister's office asked Flanagan not to publish. Flanagan refused but did excise certain anecdotes. Still, the overall tone of his book is not disapproving of Harper, or of his hard-nosed tactics. The problem, Flanagan told Martin, "wasn't that I revealed anything harmful, just that I had written the book at all." This attempt to stifle Flanagan's book was especially surprising, given that, when Flanagan was writing his earlier, critical book on Preston Manning, Waiting for the Wave, Harper was feeding him information from his perch within Manning's office. Flanagan describes his old friend as "a virtual silent co-author of that book." But then double standards are hardly novel in politics -- and neither are control freaks. What distinguishes Harper is the intensity of his partisanship and the extent of his control, "the most massive centralization of power by any government in history," Martin argues. He provides ample evidence, much on the public record. As to partisanship, Harper was at it again Thursday -- accusing Liberals of engaging in a vendetta against innocent duck-hunters. The prime minister's former chief of staff, academic Ian Brodie, tells Martin that Harper's intense dislike of Liberals is a reaction to the Chrétien/Trudeau dismissive attitude towards western Canada, and to Liberal attempts to portray Reformers as bug-eyed lunatics. Rod Love, long-time aide to former Alberta premier Ralph Klein -- and no shrinking violet when it comes to hardball politics -- told Martin this hatred "was just burned into (Harper's) psyche. So when he came to power it was payback time." Martin quotes another former senior advisor to Harper, Keith Beardsley, who says Harper "hates the Liberal party and I would say his aim from day one -- and I don't think anyone would disagree -- was to break the brand." Finally, David Emerson, the Liberal-turned-Conservative cabinet minister, tells Martin he was shocked at how "viscerally" Harper's people loathed their political opposition. "Sometimes, it was just startling to me." Other long-time associates confirm to Martin the widely held view of Harper as a loner -- close friend John Weissenberger describes him as "an introvert and an intellectual". Others confirm a tendency to be sullen, profane, and impatient some days, but witty and conversational others. Whatever his mood, everyone fears his wrath. In a telling anecdote, Gerry Nicholls, who worked with Harper years ago at the National Citizens Coalition, remembers disagreeing with his boss about wording on a proposed billboard and calling to tell him his thinking. Harper's reply: "I don't give a (expletive) what you think." Adds Flanagan:"He doesn't repose trust easily. He's always got his antennae up. His first reaction to almost anything new is negative. Its a personality trait." Tim Powers, a well-liked Tory lobbyist, adds that Harper admired Chrétien's toughness and "understood that, to be successful, you can never take your foot off the throat of your opponent." This portrait, remember, emerges mostly in testimony from Harper's friends -- not from the supposed "liberal" media. Nor is the picture entirely negative. As Emerson testifies, Harper runs impressively disciplined cabinet meetings, especially compared to the endless, unproductive gabfests presided over by Paul Martin. And he almost single-handedly re-invented and reinvigorated conservatism. That said, he doesn't emerge as a likeable, or high-minded leader in Harperland. In fact, it is stunning that so many insiders would speak so candidly (if carefully) to someone supposedly in the enemy camp, especially while Harper still wields power. Just don't blame the messenger. Martin was only holding the tape recorder. - -- -- Two visceral comments by readers: Harper is a twisted punishment fetishist. He is bent on hurting, oppressing, overpowering, and controlling everyone. Harper is not a stable person. I think he has mental problems which scare me. [Remember, this is the reporter who penned the insightful article 'Perfect posturing [on the gun registry]' posted to the CFD on Sept. 19th] - -- Susan Riley writes on national politics. E-mail: sriley.work@gmail.com Letters Editor; letters@thecitizen.canwest.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, October 1, 2010 9:38 am From: "Dennis & Hazel Young" Subject: PMO calls Harperland author a 'Liberal sympathizer' *NFR* NATIONAL POST - OCTOBER 1, 2010 Don Martin: Tories disagree with new book too much to read it http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/01/don-martin-tories-disagree-with-new-book-too-much-to-read-it/ The noisy detonations triggered by a new political book entitled Harperland have mostly been low-calibre blasts between uninformed sides. The media have lifted a couple semi-interesting quotes from Lawrence Martin's just-published glimpse inside Stephen Harper's political empire, the Prime Minister's Office has responded with a furious misguided smear and television show hosts, of which I am struggling to be one this week on CTV, bring both sides together for a lively exchange of disagreement. What's been missing in most of the commentary so far is anybody who's actually READ the book. By reading it, I don't mean a 45-minute, on-deadline skimming of the contents, although Mr. Martin, being wise to the scoop-starved ways of fellow journalists, issued a cheat sheet guiding media to the juicy bits. Dimitris Soudas, the PMO director of communications, hasn't received or read the book, but that small detail didn't stop him from writing it off as a vendetta launched by a Liberal lapdog columnist, which will come as news to Jean Chretien, who wasn't impressed with Mr. Martin's two candid biographies on his Liberal political career. So far the main PMO objection has been in response to coverage dwelling far too heavily on one potential response had the Governor-General refused Prime Minister Harper's 2008 prorogation request and set up his government for a coalition takedown. Asked about alternatives to her denial, former communications director Kory Teneycke allowed: "Well, among them, The Queen." Now that's a far cry from some back-pocket Plan B to fire the viceregal and go to her monarch Mommy for another ruling. Besides, anyone who knows Mr. Teneycke, as I do, would know that was a classic flippant comment from a guy who undoubtedly shrugged while advancing a theoretical possibility to a serious question. It doesn't do Mr. Martin justice to isolate one open-to- interpretation quote and end discussion about a book which may contain important insight. I'll let you know after this weekend by reading it myself, provided the Ryder Cup is boring and the weather stays wet. Nor does the PMO do itself any favors by attacking a book it hasn't read, which only bolsters the prevailing view their boss is a rabidly angry partisan who tolerates no lip from all lesser mortals. After all, Mr. Martin comes to an interesting conclusion if you jump to the last page first, of which I am guilty as charged. "He was one of the more talented Canadian political leaders to come along in decades. His range of knowledge, the precision of his mind, his degree of discipline, his capacity to strategize, to work his way through whatever maze stood before him was of an unusually high standard." Gosh, Larry Martin, you sound like a Conservative lapdog to me. dmartin@nationalpost.com - -------------------------------- CALGARY HERALD - OCTOBER 1, 2010 PMO calls Harperland author a 'Liberal sympathizer' BY MARK KENNEDY, POSTMEDIA NEWS OCTOBER 1, 2010 http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calls+Harperland+author+Liberal+sympathizer/3606895/story.html The Prime Minister's Office has lashed out at the author of a new book on Stephen Harper, accusing the veteran journalist of being a "big-L Liberal sympathizer." The book, by Lawrence Martin, paints a picture of how Harper has imposed "an ironclad system of control" during his four years in power and has proven to be a "Conservative success story." Entitled Harperland: The Politics of Control, it is the first major book that reviews in detail how Harper has taken such a tight grip of the federal political landscape since becoming prime minister. Among the book's revelations are that Harper considered going straight to the Queen if the Governor General refused his request in 2008 for prorogation to avert his government from being toppled in the House of Commons. The Prime Minister's Office said Thursday that segment of the book, based on an interview with a former senior Harper aide, is false. Dimitri Soudas, director of communications to Harper, said he had not read the book, but added that Martin is a "known biographer for previous Liberal prime ministers. The bottom line is that whether it's through his columns or his opinions, it's a well-known fact that he's a big-L Liberal sympathizer." Soudas brushed aside the charge that Harper is overly controlling, saying that the PM has had the responsibility to ensure the government implements the "right decisions" in response to the global economic recession. Martin responded Thursday with a defence of his journalistic credibility. "I find the shoot-the-messenger stuff amusing. These are the same Conservatives who were cheering me on when I was one of the journalists leading the charge against the Chretien Liberals on Shawinigate and their dictatorial style of governance." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 15:34:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Rob Sciuk Subject: Reply and response from Calgary Herald (Naomi Lakritz) ... RE: Long-gun registry on target for safety by Naomi Lakritz (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 15:30:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Rob Sciuk To: "Lakritz, Naomi (CAL Herald)" Subject: RE: Long-gun registry on target for safety by Naomi Lakritz On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Lakritz, Naomi (CAL Herald) wrote: > Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 12:26:06 -0500 > From: "Lakritz, Naomi (CAL Herald)" > To: Rob Sciuk > Subject: RE: Long-gun registry on target for safety by Naomi Lakritz > > Thank you for your letter. May I assume from your last paragraph that > you believe the RCMP are out to lunch too, as they compare gun licensing > to vehicle licensing, too? Your letter does not address my main point, > which is that if the police say they need this registry as a way to make > their own jobs safer, why would you deny them that? > > Naomi Lakritz > Letters Editor > Calgary Herald > (403) 235-7557 > Dear Naomi, The chiefs and the rank and file officers differ on the value of the registry, and it seems that the CACP were the recipients of large donations for their gala last year from CGI, the consultancy in charge of the firearms registry. Their ethics commissioner resigned over it. Clearly, *THEY* can be bought and they have no credibility in my view. (See Globe and Mail April 9 2009 -- Christie Blatchford attached.) The RCMP are now in charge of the registry, and they receive funding specifically for that purpose, so *THEY* support it. All of the real public safety mechanisms affect the human element, and are provided by licensing. Moreover, licensing adds nothing over the previous regime's FAC which had the same safety courses, letters of reference, spousal or parental permission and ability to revoke ownership via an 800 number. The previous regime did not criminalize reponsible firearm owners, and enjoyed the consent of the governed, which the CFA/registry does not. If you want to express an opinion on the law, then you should be intimately aware of the regulations persuant, and how they work (or in this case DON'T work) to promote public safety. Registration is a fool's placebo, and adds nothing, zero, zilch, nada in the way of public safety benefits. None have ever been demonstrated, nor will they ever. I am a pistol safety instructor, international handgun rifle and shotgun competitor, club safety director, holster instructor, and hunter. I am affected by this draconian law, and my opinion is informed, because I am one paper ommission away from a prison sentence. Now, without regurgitating the rhetoric, hybperbole and outright lies of the coalition for gun control, and their puppet organizations, speak specifically to the laws and the regulations, and show me how they make Canadians safer -- if you can. Personally I doubt it, but still you have an opinion, and feel free to express it without concern for those who may not share your views. Oh, and the CFA was initially rationalized to Parliament by exaggerating the rates of firearm homicide by an order of magnitude. Attached to this letter is a letter from the Acting Head of the RCMP (JPR Murray) to the Justice Department to correct a misleading statistic which was used to justify a law which should never have passed. Nothing was done, and 15 years later, we are still having a debate which should never have been needed. I do not speak frivolously, but yes, I do aboslutely disagree with Wendy Cukier and her ilk, the Chiefs, the RCMP and the Liberal Party of Canada, who will be forever linked to this debacle. I believe that you hold your opinion because you believe some of the deliberately misleading "information" from those who are held up as EXPERTS, but we who are affected by this law know better than most how insidious it is. Respectfully, Robert S. Sciuk ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #109 *********************************** 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".)