Cdn-Firearms Digest Monday, October 11 2010 Volume 14 : Number 130 In this issue: No room for common sense and numeracy in the Media LETTER - Re: Private Members Bill [Fwd: Only in Canada, you say] "Political correctness threatens our Rights, our Liberties" Re: Time to pack it in? Re: Time to pack it in? RE: Breitkreuz replaced on SECU Timmins Daily Press - Snide's Remarks column: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:00:20 -0700 From: "Mike Cianci" Subject: No room for common sense and numeracy in the Media Is there no room for common sense, numeracy, investigative reporting and academic integrity in the media in Canada? The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police claim the police use the Firearms Registry 11000 times a day. Is this number credible? 11,000 times a day is 4.015 million times each year, more than once for every nine men women and children in Canada. (Pop about 33.7 million.) Each year, almost 12% percent of the people in Canada are suspected firearm misuse perpetrators? Baloney! The registry tells the Police if there are possibly firearms in a residence. It does not tell them there are no firearms in a residence, as the four murdered RCMP officers in Alberta found out, the RCMP officer in Prince George who lost her leg, shot through the door by a suspected pedophile, the police officer murdered in Laval again shot the door, this time the perpetrator had lost his license. The list goes on and on. I am puzzled by the fact that the members of the media, who use numbers like this, never check their credibility with the rank and file Police Officers who actually occasionally access the Registry. The number is at best extremely misleading and at worst completely dishonest. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police is a purely political organization. Their statements are never based on the practical reality faced by ordinary police officers. The firearms licensing system contains the names and addresses of potential firearm owners. Ignoring hair splitting, the Registry is redundant! Mike Cianci ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 13:04:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: LETTER - Re: Private Members Bill [A letter posted to CGN, which has supposedly been sent to major news outlets across the country. We'll see if it gets printed/aired] September 15, 2010 Re: Private Members Bill 'Hoeppner' Long Gun Registry Many Canadians will find themselves in a quandary over the recent media reports and political posturing relating to the Hoeppner Bill which calls for abolition of the long gun registry and ONLY the long gun registry. As a life member of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, I find myself disagreeing with the current Chiefs leadership and I also notice that the Canadian Police Association has altered their position as they too now support retention of the registry. That is not surprising when one considers that political and organizational leadership in large urban centres, i.e. Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, influences the majority of members, in both organizations. (It is interesting to note that two of Canada's leading innovative Chiefs, Rick Hanson of Calgary and Julian Fantino of Ontario, and many street level police personnel have made it quite clear that the registry is not supported). While I once believed that common sense would prevail in our federal political process the most recent pressure-influenced political manipulation and caucus whipping does taint ones outlook. To be clear, I was once but am no longer a member of any federal political party. It should be noted that my opposition to this long gun registry goes back to the introduction of Bill C-68 at a time when we already had acceptable laws for Firearms Acquisition and safe storage. At that time, I was quite vocal in stating that (1) it allowed police too much power re: search and seizure and (2) the data base could be compromised, thus permitting criminals (through unscrupulous employees) to "gun shop" on line via the Canadian Police Information Centre and (3) that the cost would eventually overshadow any benefit to law enforcement and (4) the registry development monies would be better spent by enhancing police budgets for additional staff and equipment. There is not satisfaction in now stating that most of the comments have rung true! My October 27th, 1998 editorial in the Calgary Herald, titled "Gun registration will fail to prevent tragedies" remains valid. Many years ago, L.H. Nicholson one of our very respected and astute former RCMP Commissioners was on the mark when he encouraged the federal government of the day to abandon any thought of enlarging the 1934 small arms registry to include long guns. His comments remain true today. Perhaps this is why many folks I have encountered in Alberta and Saskatchewan have no intention of every registering their long guns. If detected, they are lawbreakers but they are prepared to face the legal system rather than have their personal property recorded in a government controlled database. Some estimate that one third to one half of the long guns in possession of, hunters, farmers and ranchers may be unrecorded. It is now quite common to see quotes from various police leaders and community groups concerning the Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, the Toronto shootings, or the Mayerthorpe, Alberta murders of the RCMP members. Even though some police leaders try to put a positive spin on these cases, I fail to see where any registry, save perhaps one for criminals and the mentally unbalanced, would have prevented any of these atrocities. Regardless of the upcoming registry vote, the proliferation of gangs with illegal weapons will continue unabated. If the Bloc, the NDPs and the Liberals decide to kill this Bill, then some Provincial leaders (Alberta included) should undertake a complete study for "opting-out" possibilities. Recent and past political flip-flopping along with MP manipulation certainly does little to enhance my confidence in the decision making process. We should all encourage our elected representatives to stand firm, to think for themselves and vote "freely" in line with their constituent's wishes! Regardless of the outcome, I suspect that this issue will remain alive. Sincerely, Robert H.D. Head Assistant Commissioner - RCMP(rtd.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, October 11, 2010 11:49 am From: howard@bogend.ca Subject: [Fwd: Only in Canada, you say] - ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Only in Canada, you say From: "Julie A. McNeice" Date: Sat, October 2, 2010 9:37 pm To: owner-cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note, our "new laws", as opposed to "medieval laws" which gave us the right to defend our property. Vigilante grocer vs. career criminal and justice system By Sam Pazzano, QMI Agency TORONTO - "Vigilante grocer" David Chen should have stayed behind the counter and not tackled the career criminal, crack addict who had stolen from him, the Crown says. Chen used excessive force in beating, tying up and throwing the petty thief into the back of a van, the prosecution states in a court document obtained by QMI Agency. "Citizens no longer have a legal duty to apprehend felons pursuant to 'hue and cry.' Instead, we rely on and expect the police to fulfil their statutory duty to enforce the law and frown upon citizens pursuing 'vigilante' justice," states the Crown in written arguments opposing Chen's constitutional challenge of the powers of citizen's arrest. The 36-year-old Chinatown storekeeper - who was hailed in May 2009 as a hero - will go on trial Monday for assaulting and forcibly confining Anthony Bennett who made a habit of stealing from Chen and other hard-working merchants in his community. Last summer, Bennett, 52, pleaded guilty to stealing from the Lucky Moose as well as King Flower and Plant, adding to his lengthy rap sheet of 43 convictions over his 30-year crime spree. But when told he'd be a Crown witness in this case, the judge gave him a break and reduced his jail sentence from a proposed three months to just 30 days. Chen's lawyer Peter Lindsay is asking the court to strike down a section of the Criminal Code as "too narrow" because Chen would have had to catch Bennett in the act of pilfering the plants in order to legally arrest him. The incident that led to Chen being charged, took place one hour after Bennett was videotaped stealing plants. After recognizing Bennett from the video, the grocer chased him down. The Crown alleges Chen and two others used unnecessary force by binding the victim by the wrists and ankles "for the purposes of an 'arrest' after already hitting him and taking control of him. "It appeared that (Chen and the two others) were engaged in a beating and abduction of Mr. Bennett. Their conduct was unreasonable and unnecessary for the purposes of a citizen's arrest," Crown attorney Chris Webb states. "Society has changed since the middle ages. For example, the medieval punishment for theft was very severe. Anyone convicted of stealing a shilling or more could be hanged. People found guilty of minor theft could have their hands or ears cut off, be branded with hot irons or shamed in the stocks or whipped through the streets." Bennett should not have been so harshly treated by Chen and others for a misdemeanor, Webb argues. The power of citizen's arrest should arise only in "urgent situations posing an immediate danger," says Webb. There's also no evidence that Bennett had to be arrested "to establish his identity" as the plant thief, the Crown argues. Chen and his co-accused have evidence that Bennett "is notorious" for stealing from Chinatown stores, so his immediate arrest is unwarranted, the prosecution states. sam.pazzano@sunmedia.ca This article from: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2010/10/02/15559121.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:05:17 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: "Political correctness threatens our Rights, our Liberties" "Political correctness threatens our Rights, our Liberties"- Peter Worthington http://www.ottawasun.com/comment/columnists/peter_worthington/2010/10/08/15630916.html ======================================================================== An interesting observation. Self-censorship is the greatest sin. Does your conscience allow the other section 2. Freedoms to also wither and die? Charter of Rights and Freedoms "2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association." Citizens exercising their sovereign, natural rights, that is much feared by the bureaucracy. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:08:02 -0600 (CST) From: "Howard R. Hamilton" Subject: Re: Time to pack it in? Gentlemen: I am feeling your pain, and wondering if the "socialist utopia" predicted by George Orwell is not well on the way to becoming reality. There may only be one or two generations left that even know anything outside of the "box of 1984". > Re: Time to pack it in? > > Indeed these are 'times that try men's (& women's) souls'. > > Indeed the Supreme Court decison that denied Bruce & Donna Montague even > the opportunity to make our constitutional argument was a major > disappointment. > > Indeed the betrayal by Mr. Hareper & the Concervatives' endoresent of > licencing is a major letdown. Both of these events are major set-backs for those of us who think that rights belong to the individuals, and are to be protected by the state, and not vise versa. > However, all is NOT dome & gloom. > > During the recent media extravaganza over Bill C-391, several journalist > began to point out that the real problem is licencing. Although a good thing, this may be too little too late. > And the good news is that Bill C-391 was defeated. How is this good news. The one icon that the masses understood lives on to pollute their minds. If C-391 had passed, the anti's would have had a loss that would have shaken some of their hangers ons off of their wagon. As it is, they are celebrating another victory. This is bad news of a very high pr type. > We DO live to fight another day. > > Sincerely, > > Eduardo > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bruce Mills > Date: Saturday, September 25, 2010 8:11 am > Subject: Time to pack it in? > >> I'm wondering if the time has come for me to pack it all in. I am wondering the same thing. CFD readership is down to less than 700 members, from a high of over 2000. The main contributors keep fighting with each other, and general attrition has removed a lot of them as well. On top of it all, the position of moderator is soon to be empty, and I do not have the time to fill in. >> The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the Montague case, the dirty >> tactics of the anti-gun extremists leading up to the vote, and >> the vote itself, among other things, have me thinking if it's worth all >> the effort I put into this. It might be that we will have to live out the little bit of our lives left, and let the anti's take the day. Then there will be several generations of slavery before our children's children start to fight back again. And theirs will be a hard painful fight. >> I've been doing this for 15 years now, give or take, and on an almost >> daily basis for the past 10 - and where have we gotten? >> >> What hope is there left? Where there is life, there is hope. It may be misplaced, but there is always hope. >> "It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are >> fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up >> but with life itself." >> - From The Declaration of Arbroath, 1320. So, here is the question: Is there anyone out there who would feel motivated enough to step up to the plate and take on a part time position moderating the CFD? Due to health and other reasons, the current moderators will probably not be around much longer. I do not have time to do the job. If there is no one willing to take on the position, other options will have to be explored, including the end of the CFD. BUZ - -- ___ Howard R. Hamilton | Life is best when a o__ o__ | |\ howard.hamilton@bogend.ca | little exercise is /| /\ | |X\ www.bogend.com | followed by a glass / > o <\ | |XX\ (306) 286-3379 | of a good red wine. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 18:41:28 -0400 From: "mred" Subject: Re: Time to pack it in? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Howard R. Hamilton" Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:08 PM Subject: Re: Time to pack it in? > Gentlemen: > So, here is the question: Is there anyone out there who would feel > motivated enough to step up to the plate and take on a part time > position moderating the CFD? Due to health and other reasons, the > current moderators will probably not be around much longer. I do not > have time to do the job. If there is no one willing to take on the > position, other options will have to be explored, including the end of > the CFD. > > BUZ > > -- > ___ Howard R. Hamilton | Life is best when a > o__ o__ | |\ howard.hamilton@bogend.ca | little exercise is > /| /\ | |X\ www.bogend.com | followed by a glass > / > o <\ | |XX\ (306) 286-3379 | of a good red wine. Most of the members are at an age now where Mother Nature tells us what to do and it will be difficult finding a replacement . The younger ones are too busy working and us old farts are on the way out, through attrition Maybe this is the master plan of the Liberals and the CPC ? Wait until we give up due to infirmities or die off one by one until they get what they want ?? It wouldn't surprise me one bit that that is the grand plan. ed/on ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:23:55 +0000 From: Trigger Mortis Subject: RE: Breitkreuz replaced on SECU I have reached the conclusion, regrettably, that the only party that is our friend is the Libertarian Party, and so I joined. Gun control is an issue that nobody wants to put to bed, no politicians that is. It is a political football that can be used to score points, no matter which side you are on. My $.02 worth. Alan Harper alan__harper@hotmail.com SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM [NOTE: AsstMod-RAM: Allan, I agree 100%, but voting for the Libertarian Party will just split the Vote and let the Lieberal Party win. The Lieberals ruled for Election after Election by US voting for the Reform Party, then the Alliance. (Even Alberta's Wildrose Party has eliminiated Firearm Law Reforms scrapped from their Party Line.) "IF" every fence-sitting Firearms Owner were to become Politically Active and Get Out and Vote Libertarian, that would be different, but spliting the Vote this "Next" Election by Voting Libertarian (if that's what you are suggesting) will result in another Minority Lieberal Government with NDP/Bloc support re: Firearms Act and that would be the END of all our Firearms, and whatever rights we have left, if any. Yes, the Conservatives are playing with us and just using us and are not really our Friends, but letting the Lieberals slip up the middle by splitting the Vote will not work! That's what has got us to where we are now. That's my $.02 worth] ************************* > Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:38:14 -0400 > From: leejasper@amtelecom.net > To: cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca > Subject: Breitkreuz replaced on SECU > > Dennis posted: > > > SASKATOON STAR PHOENIX - OCTOBER 9, 2010 > > And one final federal tidbit. > > http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/lagged+Krawetz+makes+flub/3648860/story.html > > > > Conservative Garry Breitkreuz,the longtime Yorkton-Melville > > MP known for his implacable fight against the federal gun > > registry, has been replaced as chair of the House of Commons > > committee on public safety and security. > > I was going to comment some time back that it was critical for the > aspirations of Canuck gun owners - that all/most of the participants > in this last smozzle over C-391 - from all quarters - be pastured out. > > It's the same old crap from all the protagonists - and they're all > playing losing hands. > > I have zero confidence in any of the main players, starting with > Breitkreuz. Any progressive organization would have replaced its > negotiating team a long time ago. > > Breitkreuz has clearly shown his political smarts over his cuddle with > CSSA as his Bill was coming out, willingness to accept the handgun gift, > changing the ingredients in his 'all-party support' C-301, etc. By any > imagination, it was not ripe for the times. (Not to mention his welshing > on MPs Gold Plated pensions). > > Methinks the man needs an epiphany and to seek a new challenge. > > It's awfully disconcerting when someone like the NDP's Joe Comartin > starts to make more sense regarding Canada's gun laws than leading-light > CPC MPs. > > Frankly, reading the minutes to the SECU committee examining C-391 was > uninspiring. > > On top of the somewhat leaderless committee, the whole rationale behind > the 'private members' bill approach seems to verify Harper's 'not really > supportive' stance for gun owners. > > I understand that a 'government bill' provides much more avenue for > debate, significantly more time for study, debate, etc. and little > chance of being scuttled by something like Mark Holland's motion to > shelve further committee debate of C-391. > > Read the mindless debate from CPC members on the SECU committee about > 'what police reports' where being requested by a Holland motion for the > RCMP reports - which severely abbreviated the testimony of Tony > Bernardo. Talk about a bunch of dummies. > > Just another slight-of-hand from the Harperland Crew to bait gun owners > into thinking the CPC was working in their interests. Keep the those > cheques rolling in! > > Do some Googling on Private Members vs. Gov't Bills. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:43:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Timmins Daily Press - Snide's Remarks column: http://www.timminspress.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2794672 Snide's Remarks column: Voters won’t forget registry Posted 1 hour ago The long-gun registry is an example of government legislation with good intentions, that isn't effective in the real world. The creation of Bill C-68 was sparked by one of the most hideous crimes in Canada's history: The Montreal Massacre. On Dec. 6, 1989, Marc Lépine, age 25, shot and killed 28 people at École Polytechnique in Montreal. Lépine killed 14 women and four men in about 20 minutes before turning the gun on himself. He also injured 10 more women. His attacks were carried out using a legally obtained Mini-14 rifle and a hunting knife. In terms of mass murders in Canada, The Montreal Massacre ranks second in the number of fatalities. (The worst was the Air India bombing in June 1985, where 329 people 278 Canadians were killed.) One of the reasons the Montreal Massacre was so shocking is the fact such crimes are not commonplace in Canada. Before the 1989 tragedy, the largest mass murder in Canada involving guns was a case in 1975. Thirteen people were killed after being forced into a storage room at the Gargantua night club in Montreal. Some were shot, but most suffocated when the building was set on fire. Since the long-gun registry was established, there have been other mass murders involving guns. In 1996 in Vernon, B.C., Mark Chahal shot and killed nine people, including his estranged wife, before committing suicide. The biggest mass murder in recent memory was the Bandido slayings in April 2006 near Shedden, Ont. Eight people were killed in the outlaw biker-related incident. Canada is not immune to mass murder, and it never will be regardless of how many laws and regulations are created. In Lépine's case, however, the warped motivation behind his crimes played a major role in the urban-led call for gun control. He specifically targeted women in his assaults, claiming that he was "fighting feminism." In the first room an armed Lépine entered at the university, he separated the women from the men. He shot all nine women, killing six. As the '90s began, one of the great debates was the motives behind the attack. Was it representative of wider spread violence against women, or was it an isolated incident involving a lone madman? Some blamed violence in the media, particularly movies, television programs and video games. Social issues were examined, such as the impact of poverty, isolation and alienation, particularly in immigrant communities. The federal government was under immense pressure at the time to do something, so Bill C-68 was written and passed. It was pretty much a knee-jerk political reaction to Lépine's crimes. But was it the right reaction? Gun violence has not disappeared since the registry was established. Even before Bill C-68, Canada had some of the strictest gun control legislation in the world. Police response to the Montreal Massacre was heavily criticized at the time. When the first officers arrived on the scene, they established a perimeter around the building before entering. Several women were killed by Lépine during this time period. Emergency protocol has changed since 1989. For example, officers handling the Dawson College shooting in 2006 earned praise. After one person was killed by a gunman, immediate intervention was credited to limiting the loss of life. The long-gun registry bureaucratically targets hunters and farmers (who commonly keep shotguns to protect livestock and crops from predators and other four-legged threats). It is an issue that divides urban and rural Canadians and always will be. For gun owners, the registry is largely a duplication of a process that has already been undertaken, and the information has already been provided, background checks have been made, and safety classes taken. One good thing that came from the new regulations, which deserves to be mentioned, is increased scrutiny to weapons and ammunition storage and transportation. By and large, however, the money that has been spent on the long-gun registry could have been better spent in other areas such as preventative and educational programs fighting violence against women, increased funding for frontline police at the national, provincial and local levels, and targeting illegally obtained weapons (which are most commonly used in crime). The federal Conservatives recently tried to eliminate the long-gun registry, and failed. Oh well, that's democracy. The rural side lost. It's time to move on. Canadians remain split on this issue, and always will be. The most recent attempt by the New Democrats to revisit the issue is more about trying to save face in rural Canada than anything else. The Conservatives stand on one side of the issue, and the Liberals firmly on one side. Voters, even if they disagree, can respect that. The NDP, however, are trying to suck and blow at the same time. They would be better off letting the issue peter out, rather than rubbing salt in the wounds of gun owners by keeping it in the headlines. There are other, more pressing matters that deserve Parliament's attention. Save the gun-registry issue for the next federal election. Northern and rural voters certainly won't forget. Wayne Snider is the city editor for The Daily Press. Contact the writer at news@thedailypress.ca. Snide's Remarks is now on Facebook. Join the Northern Crew, become a friend of Snide's Remarks on. Link to past columns, leave comments and share opinions. Copyright 2010 Timmins Daily Press ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V14 #130 *********************************** 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".)