Cdn-Firearms Digest Sunday, October 3 2010 Volume 14 : Number 115 In this issue: Calgary Herald - Several blocks downtown Calgary remain closed Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down Re: Allan Rock Congratulates David Johnston *NFR* Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down G&M - Police charge two teens in connection with school shooting G&M - Caledon man wanted on weapons charges eludes police again Re: Perfect posturing - Susan Riley Man Who Police Questioned About Gun Says His Rights Were Violated Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 11:15:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Calgary Herald - Several blocks downtown Calgary remain closed http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Several+blocks+downtown+Calgary+remain+closed+following+overnight/3617041/story.html Several blocks downtown Calgary remain closed following overnight shooting Four people arrested as police continue investigation By Jamie Komarnicki, Calgary Herald October 3, 2010 10:05 AM CALGARY - Police are investigating after an overnight shooting in the downtown that has closed down several streets. Around 3:30 a.m., officers responded to a call of shots being fired in the Eau Claire area. Several other calls came in within minutes and a total of 20 units from across Calgary responded. Officers arrested four people, who are currently being interviewed in connection with the shooting. Several witnesses are also being interviewed by police. Two vehicles with bullet holes have been recovered. Police also found a number of bullet casings scattered around the area. "We're doing a search to see if we can find anymore evidence related to this offence or offences," said duty inspector Keith Cain. There are no reports of any injuries at this time. Officers remain on the scene, which is blocked off by police tape. jkomarnicki@calgaryherald.com letters@theherald.canwest.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:20:07 -0600 From: 10x@telus.net Subject: Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down I am saying EXACTLY THAT! It states very clearly in the Canadian Firearms Safety Course Manual and tests that a trigger lock is the minimum standard of disabling a firearm that is acceptable for storage in the home. If that is the case then why should not a trigger lock be acceptable as a minimum standard of disabling a firearm while it is being transported. Neither the law or the regulations state any minimum standard of disablement while transporting so the standard of the trigger lock applies. If she does not have the key to the trigger lock and has no license then everything is legal. If she does have the key and NO license then that is "unauthorized access" and she can be charged under section 91 and 92 of the criminal code. Her husband can be charged as well for "safe storage" infractions. Please note that the "safe storage" laws and regulations have transformed into "unauthorized access" charges. The laws are for safe storage and safe transportation - the charges are for not having the proper licenses. As for your speculation - that is all it is is speculation. What "might happen" hasn't happened and folks are still given the benefit of doubt in Canada. Our gun laws are not so much stupid as they are illogical and vague. BTW: the girlfriend of a well known miscreant with a firearms prohibition did have a firearms license and guns. The guns were never used in a crime, nor was there any "unauthorized access" proven. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111907 It is too bad that many law enforcement personal do NOT understand the laws regarding safe storage and transportation. A very signficant number of Members of Parliament don't either. At 10:06 PM 10/2/2010 -0400, you wrote: >i'm sorry but this makes absolutely no sense at all. your saying this guys >wife, with no pol, pal or any type of licence can charge around town with >her husbands guns as long as they have trigger locks on them? this is >beyond ludicrous. what's to stop her from stopping, unlocking them and >suddenly ( pardon my french) taking a pms spell and going postal ? or a >reversal, if the wife has the licence and her hubby happens to be a >gangbanger unknown to the law who decides to off his competition? > >if this is the law then it shows how truly stupid our gun laws are > >----- Original Message ----- >From: <10x@telus.net> >To: >Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2010 8:49 PM >Subject: Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down > >> At 05:48 AM 10/2/2010 -0700, you wrote: >> >>>http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/103659789.html >>> >>>Gun transfer triggers take-down >>> >>>By Chris Bush - Nanaimo News Bulletin >>>Published: September 23, 2010 2:00 PM >>> >>>Nanaimo Mounties responded with guns drawn after a woman handed her >>>husband his shotgun Thursday. >>> >>>The incident happened shortly before 11 a.m. when a woman, running >>>errands at Country Club Centre, parked her car and discovered her >>>husband's shotgun in the vehicle. >>> >>>She called for him to come and pick it up, but when he transferred the >>>gun to his pickup, a passerby took notice of the weapon and called >>>police. >>> >>>Officers stopped the truck on the Island Highway's southbound lanes near >>>the Dorman Road intersection, blocked traffic and ordered the man out of >>>his truck with guns drawn. >>> >>>It turned out the lever-action shotgun was properly registered and there >>>was no malice or intent to do any harm. >>> >>>Police removed the handcuffs and returned the gun to the man, who put it >>>back in his truck and left the scene. >>> >>>"They're more embarrassed than anything else," said Const. Gary O'Brien, >>>Nanaimo RCMP spokesman. "They'll probably think twice next time before >>>going shopping and leaving firearms in the car." >>> >>>Police have yet to determine if any charges are pending from the >>>incident. >>> >>>"The question is how was it being transported and why," said >>>O'Brien. "You can't just transport firearms without proper >>>authorization." >> >> >> Actually you can. If there is a trigger lock on the gun and it is out >> of sight then a wife without a Firearms license can transport the gun >> as the trigger lock disables the gun - same as the trigger lock is the >> minimum standard to disable a gun for storage at home. A spouse is >> present in both cases. (see Canadian Firearms Safety Course for minimum >> storage rules). >> >> It is the R.C.M.P. who should be embarrassed and possibly laying charges >> against the person who called in the complaint if there was NO CRIME >> BEING COMMITTED. IT was a waste of officers time and the money to >> answer the call - taking the officers attention away from real criminal >> matters. >> >> If I were the victim (The gun owner in this case) I would be filing a >> complaint for false arrest with the RCMP. The man is very lucky he did >> not get tasered. >> >> >> >> > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 08:58:31 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: Allan Rock Congratulates David Johnston *NFR* hahahahahhahahah my thoughts exactly but you know the system operates on BS so perhaps its all BS in any account? ed/on - ----- Original Message ----- From: <10x@telus.net> To: Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2010 11:14 PM Subject: Re: Allan Rock Congratulates David Johnston *NFR* > At 10:08 AM 10/2/2010 -0600, you wrote: > >>http://www.media.uottawa.ca/mediaroom/news-details_2037.html >> >>Allan Rock Congratulates David Johnston on >> >>His Appointment as Canada's Next Governor >> >>OTTAWA, July 8, 2010 - University of Ottawa President Allan Rock today >>expressed delight and extended warmest congratulations to David Johnston >>following the Prime Minister's announcement that President Johnston is to >>be the 28th Governor General of Canada. >> >>"David Johnston is an inspired choice for the office of Governor General >>of Canada," said Allan Rock. "It has been my very great privilege to know >>and work with David Johnston in various capacities over many years. I am >>proud to call him a friend. He has a deep commitment to Canada and a >>strong sense of public service. He is an outstanding scholar and a >>remarkable Canadian, who will carry out this new and important role with >>energy and distinction." > > An endorsement by Mr. Rock is not a good thing. > Already I'm suspicious of this man's intentions. > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 09:02:23 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down Its government policy it doesn't have to make sense. The gun is NOT in storage it is in TRANSPORT which is a whole different kettle of fish. ed/on - ----- Original Message ----- From: "tliner" To: Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2010 10:06 PM Subject: Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down > i'm sorry but this makes absolutely no sense at all. your saying this > guys wife, with no pol, pal or any type of licence can charge around > town with her husbands guns as long as they have trigger locks on them? > > this is beyond ludicrous. what's to stop her from stopping, unlocking > them and suddenly ( pardon my french) taking a pms spell and going > postal? or a reversal, if the wife has the licence and her hubby happens > to be a gangbanger unknown to the law who decides to off his competition? > > if this is the law then it shows how truly stupid our gun laws are > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <10x@telus.net> > To: > Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2010 8:49 PM > Subject: Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down > >> At 05:48 AM 10/2/2010 -0700, you wrote: >> >>>http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/103659789.html >>> >>>Gun transfer triggers take-down >>> >>>By Chris Bush - Nanaimo News Bulletin >>>Published: September 23, 2010 2:00 PM >>> >>>Nanaimo Mounties responded with guns drawn after a woman handed her >>>husband his shotgun Thursday. >>> >>>The incident happened shortly before 11 a.m. when a woman, running >>>errands at Country Club Centre, parked her car and discovered her >>>husband's shotgun in the vehicle. >>> >>>She called for him to come and pick it up, but when he transferred the >>>gun to his pickup, a passerby took notice of the weapon and called >>>police. >>> >>>Officers stopped the truck on the Island Highway's southbound lanes near >>>the Dorman Road intersection, blocked traffic and ordered the man out of >>>his truck with guns drawn. >>> >>>It turned out the lever-action shotgun was properly registered and there >>>was no malice or intent to do any harm. >>> >>>Police removed the handcuffs and returned the gun to the man, who put it >>>back in his truck and left the scene. >>> >>>"They're more embarrassed than anything else," said Const. Gary O'Brien, >>>Nanaimo RCMP spokesman. "They'll probably think twice next time before >>>going shopping and leaving firearms in the car." >>> >>>Police have yet to determine if any charges are pending from the >>>incident. >>> >>>"The question is how was it being transported and why," said >>>O'Brien. "You can't just transport firearms without proper >>>authorization." >> >> >> Actually you can. If there is a trigger lock on the gun and it is out of >> sight then a wife without a Firearms license can transport the gun as >> the trigger lock disables the gun - same as the trigger lock is the >> minimum standard to disable a gun for storage at home. A spouse is >> present in both cases. (see Canadian Firearms Safety Course for minimum >> storage rules). >> >> It is the R.C.M.P. who should be embarrassed and possibly laying charges >> against the person who called in the complaint if there was NO CRIME >> BEING COMMITTED. IT was a waste of officers time and the money to >> answer the call - taking the officers attention away from real criminal >> matters. >> >> If I were the victim (The gun owner in this case) I would be filing a >> complaint for false arrest with the RCMP. The man is very lucky he did >> not get tasered. >> ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 10:23:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: G&M - Police charge two teens in connection with school shooting http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/police-charge-two-teens-in-connection-with-school-shooting/article1738045/ Police charge two teens in connection with school shooting Adrian Morrow, Carys Mills and Jill Mahoney Toronto Globe and Mail Update Published Friday, Oct. 01, 2010 2:11PM EDT Two 17-year-old boys have been charged in connection with a shooting inside a downtown Toronto high school Thursday that left another boy with a minor injury. The suspected shooter and the weapon, however, have not been tracked down, police said Friday. The gunfire happened around 1 p.m. Three teenaged boys were in a stairwell at Central Technical School when one of them got into a fight with another group of teens. One of them fired a gun, and everyone ran from the scene. Two boys from the first group were later arrested at the school. A third, the target of the shooting, was taken into custody that evening off-campus. All three were questioned but released without charges. Detective Chris Chilvers said the victim's injuries were minor, consisting of a slight burn mark from the gunshot. On Friday, police picked up two other boys and charged them with conspiracy to commit aggravated assault and obstruction of justice. Another boy, believed to have fired the gun, was still unaccounted for. We still have someone out there with a firearm, Det. Chilvers said. He declined to release any information on the wanted man, or say whether the boys charged were students at the school. A spokeswoman for the Toronto District School Board said the victim and the two others originally questioned by police are not current students at the school. She could not confirm if they had ever attended the school but said they were in the building on a school-related matter, which she said she could not disclose. They weren't intruding, Kelly Baker said. She could not confirm whether they had signed in at the schools office. The shooting happened as students were getting ready for their annual Terry Fox Run. Many students were on the field when the high school near Bathurst and Harbord went into lockdown just after 1 p.m. They were quickly moved to the schools gym by run organizers and hall monitors, said principal Sheryl Freeman. Two teams of police officers, who happened to be at the school for the run, helped usher students into classrooms and the library. Sarah Karim, 17, was on her way back from lunch when a group of males came running down the stairwell, shoving her and her friends out of the way. The Grade 12 student said she thought its just fooling around or something. She wasn't worried by the lockdown either, assuming it was a drill. But 20 minutes later she heard a shell casing had been found. That's scary, that they ran by us, said Ms. Karim, adding that she thinks the group consisted of the suspects. She and her classmates were let out of the school at about 4:30 p.m. Two nearby schools, King Edward Public School and Harbord Collegiate Institute, were in a less serious form of lockdown while police conducted their search. Constable Tony Vella said the incident was very serious. Any time there's a shooting within a school we're looking at thousands [or] hundreds of students, this is taken very seriously, he said. Only a few months ago a mistrial was declared in the shooting death of C.W. Jefferys student Jordan Manners, whose death inspired an inquiry and resulted in police officers being stationed in the city's secondary schools. City Councillor Adam Vaughan agrees the shooting, which came on the heels of a double-homicide by gun fire in the city's west end, is worrying. There are a lot of young people in the city who think if they have a gun tucked in their belt, they're suddenly safe, he said. However, he and Annie Kidder, executive director People for Education, say that metal detectors and tight security at schools isn't the answer. We have to be careful of an instinctive reaction to lock schools doors, said Ms. Kidder. She said having more adults in schools who can reach students before this type of trouble is what's important. Parents waited anxiously outside the school for hours. Michelle Alcaidinho waited for hours to see her daughter, Samantha, and relied on text messages to know she was okay. She started to cry as she ran to hug her Grade 10 daughter after the lockdown. Somebody was saying it was three-and-a-half hours of lockdown, it seemed like a lifetime, she said. But she's here now. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 10:18:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: G&M - Caledon man wanted on weapons charges eludes police again http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/caledon-man-wanted-on-weapons-charges-eludes-police-again/article1736769/ Caledon man wanted on weapons charges eludes police again Adrian Morrow Globe and Mail Update (Includes correction) Published Thursday, Sep. 30, 2010 10:40PM EDT Last updated Friday, Oct. 01, 2010 4:42PM EDT For the third time, a man accused of threatening people with a firearm last week eluded police. Heavily armed OPP officers descended on a house in Vaughan Thursday, searching for Ermal Syla, a 30-year-old Caledon resident wanted on weapons charges. Last Friday, police were called to a rural residence in Caledon for reports he was uttering threats. He had a gun, but did not fire it, police said. Not finding him there, police went looking for him at a house in Bolton. They shut the street down and locked students inside several nearby schools. The man, however, wasn't there either. On Thursday evening, they used a search warrant to look for him at the house in Vaughan, near Pine Valley Drive and Pine York Avenue, equipped with automatic weapons and sniffer dogs. Neighbours already in their homes were asked to stay there; those on the street were asked to stay clear of the area. Police did not release any information on whether they had found anything or made an arrest. By 11 p.m., however, they had come up empty-handed. Editor's Note: An earlier version of this online story carried the headline "OPP arrest Caledon man on weapons charges." The man was not arrested. This version of the story has been corrected. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 10:45:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Rob Sciuk Subject: Re: Perfect posturing - Susan Riley Lee wrote: > Bruce posited: > > > I hope you pointed out that people *DO* oppose licensing, as being the > > most onerous and draconian part of the Firearms Act? > > I don't have the flowery script coined by our most ardent prose-people. > But I gave it my all. Sorry to jump in on this thread, gentlemen, but it occurs to me that we must use caution in stating publicly simply that we "oppose licensing". This, while true, has some nuance to it, which can if used correctly can strengthen our argument -- let me explain: - As has been pointed out on many occasions, the CFA brought changes to the CCC (sec 91/92) which make simple firearm posession illegal. - The previous FAC certificate allowed continued posession in the expiration of the certificate, but it must be renewed before coming into posession of new firearms. On consideration, the FAC is an ingenious compromise which didn't criminalize us, but has every public safety "tool" which the CFA/licensing claims to have invented. - The CCC changes were pre-requisite to allowing federal jurisdiction in what up until those changes was a simple property (Provincial) matter. Under criminal law, the feds could claim jurisdiction, and the Liberals were only too happy to criminalize us. So basically the differences between the FAC and the CFA licensing regime were purely PUNITIVE to the responsible firearms community. Ok, most of us understand these "subtle nuances", and we realize what the Liberals have done to Canada with the CFA. What I'm suggesting is that when we speak publicly to the great unwashed, is that we attempt to show how the "PREVIOUS REGIME'S LICENSE the FAC" is superior in every way to the current licensing regime because it doesn't unfairly criminalize firearm owners. This is a different message than "we oppose licensing" ... but the net effect is to educate just why we oppose the CFA's license. Iggy has spoken publicly about "reforms" directed at Sec 91/92 ... of course all he's talking about is you get one infraction free. But if he's discussing it, its on the table. WE NEED TO DUMP Sec 91/92 of CCC. In the battle, we cannot simply "oppose licensing" and retain the high ground, but we can certainly demonstrate why the "previous regime's license" made so much sense. ... It's all in the packaging. While noone wants to make Kim Campbell look like a legislative genius, it is clear to me that whoever came up with FAC - 77/91 knew what they were doing and had no desire to classify us as criminals. It makes Chretien/Rock et al look like idiots. So I guess I'm suggesting that we start working on getting the public to understand which "licensing" system works, and which one doesn't. The FAC reversion is achievable if it is carefully orchestrated. Cheers, Rob. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 10:45:58 -0600 From: Joe Gingrich Subject: Man Who Police Questioned About Gun Says His Rights Were Violated http://www.kirotv.com/news/25233137/detail.html Man Who Police Questioned About Gun In Starbucks Says His Rights Were Violated Kevin McCarty KIRO 7 Eyewitness News SPANAWAY, Wash. -- A Spanaway man said his rights were violated by Pierce County sheriff's deputies after he walked into a Starbucks wearing a handgun and was asked for identification. Tom Brewster said he carries a pistol with him just about everywhere he goes, so when he stopped by a Starbucks in Spanaway a couple of days ago, as he does every day, he was armed, as he is every day. "Soon as I got in line, the sheriff's officer approached me from behind and asked, 'Is that a gun? I'm going to need to see your ID,'" Brewster said. Brewster refused to comply. He said that being asked by a sheriff's deputy simply because he was carrying a firearm was a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment generally protects U.S. citizens against unreasonable search and seizure. "If you're not committing any crimes they have no business asking you to identify yourself," Brewster said. Brewster likened the incident to something that would happen in Nazi Germany. Pierce County Sheriff's Department Spokesman Ed Troyed said in a situation like Brewster's, deputies have the right to identify anyone who poses a potential threat. "The problem here isn't that he was carrying the gun, it was that he was uncooperative and made a big deal about it," Troyer said. "His rights weren't violated. We have the right, as police, to ask questions and to make sure the public's safe and to make sure baristas are safe. I mean, Maurice Clemmons walked into a coffee shop carrying guns." Coincidentally, Starbucks coffee shops have become sites of contention in the issue of openly carrying arms. Open-carry advocates have gathered at Starbucks locations to exercise their right to carry guns. Starbucks has said it's OK with that, despite the fact that others have protested. Brewster said he plans to be back at Starbucks this weekend. "I was there today, I'll be there tomorrow and probably next week," he said. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 09:37:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down - --- On Sat, 10/2/10, tliner wrote: > From: tliner > Subject: Re: Nanaimo News Bulletin - Gun transfer triggers take-down > To: cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca > Received: Saturday, October 2, 2010, 10:06 PM > i'm sorry but this makes absolutely > no sense at all. your saying this guys > wife, with no pol, pal or any type of licence can charge > around town with > her husbands guns as long as they have trigger locks on > them? this is > beyond ludicrous. what's to stop her from stopping, > unlocking them and > suddenly ( pardon my french) taking a pms spell and going > postal ? or a > reversal, if the wife has the licence and her hubby happens > to be a > gangbanger unknown to the law who decides to off his > competition? > > if this is the law then it shows how truly stupid our gun > laws are Well, as well as having to prove "intent" to possess, I suppose the defence could argue the *ability* to possess, as well. If she doesn't have the keys to the lock, can she really be said to "possess" the firearm? As long as they are otherwise being transported/stored properly, she should be alright. Yours in TYRANNY! Bruce ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #115 *********************************** 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".)