From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #173 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Sender: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Errors-To: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Precedence: normal Cdn-Firearms Digest Tuesday, July 10 2012 Volume 15 : Number 173 In this issue: Defence lawyer Solomon Friedman on the UN Arms Trade Treaty RE: TEAM CSSA Special Report, July 6, 2012 Re: Another Passing Condolences re: mandatory minimum sentences item Canada is "deeply disappointed" about Iran's big role at UN arms Re: TEAM CSSA Special Report, July 6, 2012 regarding: Another Passing Re: Another Passing Another passing Geese gassed to avoid bird strikes Toews may head to Manitoba court Why does Canada still have a hate speech law? *NFR* EDITORIAL: Alberta farmer punished for defending his property Re: Another Passing ARMS TRADE TREATY NEWS - JULY 10TH ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, July 9, 2012 6:30 pm From: "todd rudderham" Subject: Defence lawyer Solomon Friedman on the UN Arms Trade Treaty http://firearmslaw.ca/blog/ Defence lawyer Solomon Friedman on the UN Arms Trade Treaty Posted on July 4, 2012 by Solomon Ottawa defence lawyer Solomon Friedman discusses the proposed United Nations Arms Trade Treaty with host Brian Lilley. Solomon explains the potential domestic, criminal law implications of any such treaty and warns that Canada should tread lightly on this issue. Originally aired July 2, 2012: ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 19:12:39 -0600 From: "Todd Brown" Subject: RE: TEAM CSSA Special Report, July 6, 2012 Something that should go along with that is the definitions of 'Firearm' and 'Weapon' need to be changed,...because a firearm is specifically defined as a weapon in the CCC. I do not know about any of you, but none of my firearms are weapons , unless I use them as such. These definitions were changed at the onset of C-68, to give legal reason for sec. 91 & 92 to be brought in. Todd Brown Concerned Gun Owners of Alberta Co-founder CGOA bvhunting@xplornet.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 20:21:30 -0700 (PDT) From: "bletchleypark@rogers.com" Subject: Re: Another Passing Howard, Please accept�our deepest condolences. Your loss is ours too. Each man of honour, vision and integrity that leaves us makes this world a sadder place. Peter & Nancy ========================================= From: "BUZ@bogend.ca" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 1969 7:00:00 PM Subject: Another Passing My father passed away yesterday. He was a staunch believer that the gun laws were bad and that C-68 in its entirety must go. I am going to miss him. BUZ Howard R. Hamilton PS The CFD service will probably be sporadic over the next couple days, as I deal with the aftermath. ================================== Hello Members. While Howard is dealing with the loss, I will be volunteering again for a week or so and keep The Digest up to date. AsstMod: RAM Roger ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:37:54 -0700 From: Todd Birch Subject: Condolences Buz Heartfelt condolences on the passing of your father. Continuance of the fight you have waged for so long on behalf of so many is the best tribute you could offer him. " I miss him for what was, what might have been and what will never be." anonymous ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:45:22 -0700 From: Todd Birch Subject: re: mandatory minimum sentences item Do I hear the husky rasp of Rod Serling and the theme from the "Twilight Zone" ..... ? If there is any basis in reality for this story, then we have entered into the Orwellian realm of the "Thought Police" - the crime being the expression of the willingness to sell a non-existent firearm to an agent of 'Big Brother'. This is right out of a Cold War NKVD/Stasi spy thriller, and I feel the need to find and fondle my .22 PPK ....... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, July 9, 2012 11:05 pm From: "Dennis R. Young" Subject: Canada is "deeply disappointed" about Iran's big role at UN arms Canada peeved about Iran's big role at UN arms conference Updated 6:43 pm, July 9th, 2012 BY KRISTY KIRKUP | QMI AGENCY http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/world/archives/2012/07/20120709-172632.html OTTAWA - Canada remained silent when Iran was given a key role in United Nations arms trade treaty talks and then complained afterwards, QMI Agency has learned. Last week, Asian countries elected Iran to a top regional post at the UN Arms Trade Treaty conference. Canada could have forced a vote to express displeasure but decided against it. "Rather than further delay the conference, we did not call a vote, which we would have lost," a government source said. "Instead we decided to concentrate on the substance of the conference. We expressed our concerns directly to the president of the conference." Rick Roth, a spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, said Canada is "deeply disappointed" Iran was chosen as one of the vice-presidents of the conference. He said Canada will continue to work with its "like-minded partners to ensure that Iran does not obstruct the development of an international treaty." Other countries participating in the conference include Japan, Egypt, Kenya, Nigeria, Japan and South Korea. Negotiations are slated to wrap up on July 27. UN Watch, a Geneva-based group that monitors the international organization, wants UN chief Ban Ki-moon to condemn the selection of Iran. "He should remind the conference that the Security Council has imposed four rounds of sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt its prohibited nuclear program, and that Iran continues to defy the international community through illegal arms shipments to the murderous Assad regime," executive director Hillel Neuer said. Iran has an appalling human rights record and was elected even though it illegally supplied weapons to Syria, where Bashar al-Assad's regime is currently massacring its own citizens who are demonstrating for democracy. Fox News also reported Monday that "the prospect of Iran using its embassy in Canada to mobilize Islamic Republic loyalists to attack the U.S. is raising alarm among terrorism experts." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 02:21:33 -0300 From: Al Muir Subject: Re: TEAM CSSA Special Report, July 6, 2012 Thank you for the correction Mr Torino. I now understand that the CSSA prefers a playful nibble on the Conservatives ass rather then a kiss but the end result is unlicensed gun owners are screwed regardless of nibble or kiss. Given that I am not sure what point you are trying to make as you have not answered 10X's question or refuted the CSSA eariler post on the subject that I outlined to refresh his memory. This more later business should be wearing thin even to the most trusting of us. Al > Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:34:03 -0400 > From: Steve Torino > Subject: RE: TEAM CSSA Special Report, July 6, 2012 > > One bite at a time please > > Many Thanks > > Steve > >> Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 00:57:39 -0300 >> From: allistermuir@eastlink.ca >> To: cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca >> Subject: Re: TEAM CSSA Special Report, July 6, 2012 >> >> > Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2012 11:39:54 -0600 >> > From: 10x@telus.net >> > Subject: Re: TEAM CSSA Special Report, July 6, 2012 >> > >> > The question remains. When will the CSSA start to eat the real >> > elephant in >> > the room - Licensing and the legal liablity faced by gun owners under >> > section 91 (and 92) of the Crimnal code of Canada? >> > Couple sections 91 and 92 of the criminal code of Canada with the >> > powers granted the minister in charge of the Firearms act under >> >section 117 of the firearms act and the powers granted the C.F.O.s >> >under other sections of the firearms act and you have some very nasty >> > surprises for licensed gun owners. >> >> You may have missed the CSSA's plea posted on this forum to not rock the >> boat with the Conservatives. They have been told by the Conservatives >> that they might not get elected again if they do anything substantial. >> The CSSA supported that position. The Conservative's think they have >> washed their bottom enough with the end of registration of long guns >> and the CSSA agrees enough to kiss it. >> >> > Has the resgistry gone away yet? No! The data is still there, the >> > personal infromation of every gun owner in Canada just waiting for an >> > order by the courts so it can be handed over to the Quebec >> >government - all without the permission of those citizens who have >> >personal information in the gun registry. >> > >> > It is some democracy and some rule of law that Canadians live under. >> > Apparently the law is plastic and means what the C.F.O.s say it means >> > (reference to the Ontario C.F.O. and the refusal to destroy gun >> > registry records) >> > >> > By avoiding the legal liabilities of the gun licensing system and all >> > those who are not in compliance the C.S.S.A. has dropped the ball. >> >> To continue with the anology it is not only the ball they have dropped >> butt our collective pants. To pull them back up point out in your >> letters etc. that they do not speak for you. Right now they claim that >> they do. >> >> Al ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 23:56:03 -0600 From: "Joe Gingrich" Subject: regarding: Another Passing Date: Mon, July 9, 2012 12:41 am From: BUZ@bogend.ca, CFD@bogend.ca, List@bogend.ca, owner@bogend.ca Subject: Another Passing My father passed away yesterday. He was a staunch believer that the gun laws were bad and that C-68 in its entirety must go. I am going to miss him. BUZ Howard R. Hamilton PS The CFD service will probably be sporadic over the next couple days, as I deal with the aftermath. - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- My condolences to you and your family, Howard. Joe Gingrich White Fox ============================================ ****AsstMod-RAM: I have volunteered until Howard can return. I will get The Digest out twice every day on time. Roger *** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 02:06:37 -0600 (MDT) From: Jim Szpajcher Subject: Re: Another Passing I, too, add my voice in condolence. As each of us comes, there is a time for each of us to go. While you father had a good run, there is abundant reason to grieve. Gift yourself with expressing the sorrow that a chapter in your life has ended, and - when you have done - keep in mind that your father has not gone away he has gone ahead. Keep him fondly in your thoughts, and celebrate his life as you move forward. He deserves all of that. Jim Szpajcher St. Paul, AB ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 07:17:10 -0400 From: JULES SOBRIAN Subject: Another passing >My father passed away yesterday. I join all followers of the digest in offering my condolences. Jules ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 07:12:05 -0600 From: "Joe Gingrich" Subject: Geese gassed to avoid bird strikes http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/10/hundreds-geese-gathered-up-to-be-gassed-in-ny-to-avoid-bird-strikes/?intcmp=trending Hundreds of geese gathered up to be gassed in NY to avoid bird strikes Published July 10, 2012 New York Post NEW YORK - The Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge yesterday was the worst place to be a Canada goose. Federal officials rounded up about 700 of the birds from the area to be euthanized in hopes of cutting down on the strikes with passenger jets that have forced emergency landings from JFK and La Guardia Airports. The action also ended a two-year dispute between the US Department of Agriculture and the National Parks Service over removing the birds. "We could not afford to sit back and wait for a catastrophe to occur before cutting through bureaucratic red tape between federal agencies," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-NY, who pushed the feds for the removal. "We are finally taking action to help reduce bird strikes and save lives," she said. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 07:42:17 -0600 From: "Joe Gingrich" Subject: Toews may head to Manitoba court http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Toews+head+Manitoba+court/6908935/story.html Toews may head to Manitoba court By Bruce Owen, Winnipeg Free Press July 10, 2012 Public Safety Minister Vic Toews is destined for a new job on Manitoba's highest court, sources say. There are nine judges on the Manitoba Court of Appeal - one works part time - but one is due to retire shortly when he hits the compulsory retirement age of 75. There is also one opening on the Court of Queen's Bench that needs filling. Sources say Toews is in line for the Court of Appeal opening, but it's an appointment that does not have to be made immediately. Judges on the Appeal Court and Queen's Bench are federally appointed through the Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Canada. The Queen's Bench and Appeal Court vacancies are to be filled at the same time. This is the second time it has been said the senior Manitoba cabinet minister is in line for appointment to the bench. The last time was four years ago, when justice sources said he was to fill a Queen's Bench opening. However, Toews continued to serve in cabinet under Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Toews has been justice minister and minister responsible for the Treasury Board. Before entering provincial politics in the mid-'90s, Toews was a provincial Crown attorney specializing in constitutional law. He made the jump to federal politics in 2000. Recently, Toews said he had no plans to retire when asked if he'll run in the 2015 federal election. "I keep hearing all the time that I'm retiring, and your newspaper is the one that keeps on saying it," he said. "Also, I have to sort of shrug my shoulders and say, 'You must know something that I don't know.' That's all I can say." Toews garnered public criticism earlier this year after introducing what's been dubbed an Internet snooping bill. He told a Liberal MP in the House of Commons in February he could either stand with the government in support of Bill C-30, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act, or "with the child pornographers." The bill, which would require telecommunications companies to hand over customer information to police without a court order, was swiftly sent to committee, where it could be reworked. The fallout from Toews' comment and the bill resulted in the Vikileaks affair in which details of his divorce were released on Twitter. More recently, it was rumoured he would be part of a cabinet shuffle following the resignation of International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda, who leaves office at the end of the month. Oda has been replaced by Ontario MP Julian Fantino. Harper told an Alberta radio host this week he's holding off on a wider cabinet shuffle until next year ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:31:23 -0600 From: "Joe Gingrich" Subject: Why does Canada still have a hate speech law? *NFR* http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/does+Canada+still+have+hate+speech/6908930/story.html Why does Canada still have a hate speech law? By Andrew Coyne, The StarPhoenix July 10, 2012 Hardly was there time to celebrate the demise of Section 13, the infamous provision of the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibiting "communication of hate messages," before we were reminded this was not the only unwarranted restriction on freedom of speech on the books. Section 319.2 of the Criminal Code, for example, forbidding the "willful" promotion of hatred "against any identifiable group," is currently getting a workout in a Regina courtroom in the case of Terry Tremaine, a sometime math lecturer and avowed neo-Nazi. While Tremaine will have available to him the sorts of due process rights denied to those hauled before the human rights tribunals - the defence of truth among them - the end result is much the same: The suppression of speech society finds objectionable, for the sole reason that it is objectionable. If convicted, he faces up to two years in jail. The National Post, in an editorial, made the case that such prosecutions only provide a platform for the promotion of the very ideas that were supposedly so toxic as to require suppression. In the age of the Internet, moreover, only a tiny fraction of such material is ever likely to be caught in the state's web, raising questions as to what, if anything, is being achieved. But these are practical arguments. I want to raise a more fundamental objection. Societies that maintain such laws, after all, are making a statement about who and what they are, the sorts of principles they value and why. I'll make the customary disclaimer here: Freedom of speech is indeed not absolute. But the classical exceptions developed over the centuries - libel, fraud and so on - typically find justification in the concept of harm. It isn't enough that the speech is considered offensive. It must be shown to have caused, or be likely to cause, some demonstrable harm to some identifiable person. This begins from the recognition of what an extraordinary thing it is, in a free society, for the state to stop up people's mouths. Speech is not merely useful for debating political ideas. It is innate to us as human beings, built into our very thought processes. To prevent us from speaking is the next thing to preventing us from thinking. The burden of proof must therefore be on those who would seek to restrict freedom of speech, and not on those who wish merely to enjoy that freedom. And that burden must be a heavy one. How heavy? In a criminal trial, as everyone knows, the accused enjoys the presumption of innocence. The state is required to prove his guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." What is more, there are no exceptions. Often the law requires the courts to weigh one principle against another, most famously via the charter's "reasonable limits" clause. But in a criminal trial, the requirement to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt is absolute. To deprive someone of their freedom of speech is perhaps not so grave a matter as to deprive them of their physical liberty. But it is not that far off. It is defensible in certain limited cases, and only with the most rigorous justification. The harm asserted, therefore, cannot be vague or subjective. It must be of a kind that others can agree is harm. That is why the classical exceptions have tended to focus on individuals, and on the more tangible forms of harm. Physical injury is an obvious example. And indeed, the ban on hate speech is often justified by invoking the threat of violence. But there are other areas of the Criminal Code to deal with that. For example, Section 319.1, the section just before the one in dispute, outlaws inciting hatred against an identifiable group "where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace." The purpose of 319.2, then, can only be to cover cases where no such breach is likely. Is there another kind of harm that would justify its imposition? Hurt feelings, as I've said, aren't enough. All sorts of things can cause subjective offence, with no objective basis for distinguishing between them. Attempts have been made to draw an analogy to libel, on the grounds that hate speech amounts to defamation of an entire group. But the broader and more abstract the claim of harm, the harder it is to show. Probably the strongest case is that recently made by the American legal theorist Jeremy Waldron, in his book The Harm in Hate Speech. Hate speech, he argues, is nothing less than an assault on the dignity of the targeted groups, robbing them of the "implicit assurance" a just society owes to all of its citizens - that they are accepted as members of that society. Without such assurance, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, for them to participate fully in the community. I can see that applying, in a society where such views were dominant. But a handful of neo-Nazis? How is anyone's membership in society threatened because somebody, somewhere, has an Adolf Hitler decoder ring? Perhaps it might be argued that it is only the law that prevents the few from becoming the many, that in its absence, hatred would be not the exception, but the rule. Yet that is not the experience of free societies. Rather, it is in backward dictatorships that hatred of minorities is most virulent. How, indeed, does the impulse arise to protect vulnerable groups in this way except amid the general climate of tolerance of others that is the very basis of freedom of speech? Is it the ban on hate speech, then, that protects them, or the broader absence of such limits? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, July 10, 2012 8:39 am From: "Dennis R. Young" Subject: EDITORIAL: Alberta farmer punished for defending his property CALGARY HERALD JULY 9, 2012 Editorial: In the crosshairs of justice Alberta farmer punished for defending his property http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/Editorial+crosshairs+justice/6907504/story.html The case of central Alberta farmer Brian Knight should be a warning to would-be thieves not to mess around with rural people who have guns. Instead, it has turned into a warning to farmers to never shoot buckshot into the rear ends of bad guys, even in isolated areas with longer police response times. In 2009, Knight pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing bodily harm for superficially wounding a would-be thief with birdshot fired from his 12-gauge shotgun after the man tried to steal an all-terrain vehicle from Knight's property. In a case of topsy-turvy justice, Knight got 90 days and the wannabe crook got 30. Knight recently had his sentence overturned on appeal. Instead of doing 90 days in the slammer, he has to do 50 hours of community service and will be on probation for three months. Chief Justice Catherine Fraser and Justices Elizabeth McFadyen and Clifton O'Brien of the Alberta Court of Appeal called the 90-day jail sentence "unfit." Knight's lawyer, Balfour Der, wanted the court to go one step further and give him a discharge, thus removing any criminal record. The judges refused, saying the reduced sentence "adequately reflects the gravity of this offence and Knight's degree of responsibility for it," and also "serves to underline that his conduct in discharging his loaded shotgun was, in all the circumstances, criminal in nature and, contrary to the view of some, unjustified." In our view, the court should have given Knight more slack. He never planned this, or wanted it. His wife and kids were scared out of their wits, he was pumping with adrenalin, the nearest RCMP detachment was 30 minutes away in Lacombe, and a guy was stealing his property in the middle of the night. Knight gave chase in his vehicle, hit the ATV when it swerved in front of him, and shot at the guy as he ran off. Should he have let the guy steal his property and waited for the police to show up to investigate? Possibly. But he did what he felt he had to do in tense circumstances with no one else around. Living in a rural area is not the same as yelling for help in the city. Knight's case also raises the issue of mandatory minimum sentencing. Knight was originally charged with using a firearm in the commission of an offence, which carries a one-year minimum jail term. Rather than taking his chances, Knight pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing bodily harm, which carried a lesser penalty, but still involved a criminal record. The Harper government might want to rethink this. On the one hand, the government is lessening penalties for self-defence; on the other, it is prescribing mandatory minimums for going too far. Knight might have had his case resolved more fairly if judges were granted more discretion at the outset. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 14:47:07 -0400 From: tliner Subject: Re: Another Passing you have my sincere condolences on the passing of your father - ----- Original Message ----- From: ; ; ; Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 8:41 PM Subject: Another Passing > My father passed away yesterday. > > He was a staunch believer that the gun laws were bad and that C-68 in its > entirety must go. I am going to miss him. > > BUZ > Howard R. Hamilton > > PS The CFD service will probably be sporadic over the next couple days, > as I deal with the aftermath. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, July 10, 2012 12:51 pm From: "Dennis R. Young" Subject: ARMS TRADE TREATY NEWS - JULY 10TH Why the world needs an arms treaty Reuters Blogs (blog) This telling statistic helps explain why diplomats, experts and arms control activists are in New York this month at a U.N.-hosted conference aimed at working out a treaty to regulate a vast market that so far has fewer rules than the trade in bananas ... http://blogs.reuters.com/bernddebusmann/2012/07/09/why-the-world-needs-an-arms-treaty/ Is Obama Ready To Sign U.N.'s Gun-Grab Treaty? Investor's Business Daily The United Nations puts the finishing touches on an Arms Trade Treaty backed by the Obama administration that threatens our Second Amendment rights. http://news.investors.com/article/617568/201207091910/arms-treaty-a-global-gun-grab-grab-treaty.htm Ammunition - the Next Round in Arms Trade Control AllAfrica.com It aims to rectify the paucity of controls on international weapons transfers and usher in an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) for conventional weapons. "From [the Democratic Republic of] Congo to Libya, from Syria to Mali, all have suffered from the ... See all stories on this topic > http://allafrica.com/stories/201207091951.html UN Arms Trade Treaty's Criteria for Transfers Pose Problems for the US Heritage.org The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) will likely enumerate criteria that will be easy to expand in ways that the U.S. cannot control. If the ATT is to exist, it should be based on a commitment by willing and democratic signatories to develop effective ... http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/07/the-un-arms-trade-treatys-criteria-for-transfers-pose-problems-for-the-us Pakistan calls for comprehensive conventional arms trade treaty at UN DAWN.com UNITED NATIONS: Pakistan has called for a comprehensive conventional arms trade treaty that strikes a correct balance between motivations for production and acquisition of such arms. "The history and politics of arms regulation dictate a comprehensive ... http://dawn.com/2012/07/10/pakistan-calls-for-comprehensive-conventional-arms-trade-treaty-at-un/ Time to curb the illicit global arms trade MinnPost.com After three years of preparations, diplomats from the United States and more than 100 other countries are meeting at the United Nations in New York to work out a new legally binding, global arms trade treaty by a July 27 deadline. The goal is to ... http://www.minnpost.com/christian-science-monitor/2012/07/time-curb-illicit-global-arms-trade The Hidden Costs of The Arms Trade Treaty AmmoLand.com (press release) This pie-in-the-sky dream of the weapons-prohibitionists will cost money! Lots of it and all of it from USA tax payers... See all stories on this topic > http://www.ammoland.com/2012/07/09/the-hidden-costs-of-the-arms-trade-treat=y/#axzz208jWU3GG United Nations Begins Arms Trade Treaty Negotiations AmmoLand.com (press release) New York, NY --(Ammoland.com)- Following a delay over the status of the Palestinians, the United Nations has opened a discussion that proponents hope will lead to the adoption of an international arms trade treaty that is opposed by gun rights ... http://www.ammoland.com/2012/07/09/united-nations-begins-arms-trade-treaty-negotiations/#axzz20EKYflb7 Watch out for the 'small, print' in U.N. arms trade treaty United Nations July 10, 2012 By: Dave Workman http://www.examiner.com/article/watch-out-for-the-small-print-u-n-arms-trade-treaty UN Arms Trade Treaty Still Not A US Gun Grab - The Truth About Guns Once again, I've checked with our contacts at the United Nations. You might not want to hear this, but the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is not a threat to U.S. citizens' ... www.thetruthaboutguns.com/.../u-n-arms-trade-treaty-still-not-... ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #173 *********************************** 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".)