From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #880 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 owner-cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, August 16 2013 Volume 15 : Number 880 In this issue: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #877 Re: Sen. Wallin- Digest V15 #877 "Breast implants suicide bomb threat: Heathrow on high alert ... 18 Little-Known Gun Facts That Prove That Guns Make Us Safer Unfortunately Canada is only 5 years behind the USA in this.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:40:31 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #877 On 2013-08-15, at 10:00 AM, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 10:01:28 -0600 > From: "Joe Gingrich" > Subject: National police officers gathering in Saskatoon to focus on ... > > ...mental health > > > http://www.thestarphoenix.com/health/National+police+officers+gathering+Sa skatoon+focus/8786141/story.html > > National police officers gathering in Saskatoon to focus on mental health > > By Betty Ann Adam, The Starphoenix > > August 14, 2013 > > > > As health care budgets come under strain, police officers increasingly find > themselves responding to incidents involving people in the midst of mental > health crises. This is unfair both to the patients, the general public and the police. After Saskatoon police pointed out many calls to deal repeatedly with alcoholics could be reduced if there were more treatment beds available that has begun to happen. The same needs to happen with those who require a supervised living situation. > > Such calls can take hours to resolve and involve many officers, said > Saskatoon Police Chief Clive Weighill. "If we can control a scene, time is > on our side. If you get a hostage negotiation, time is our best friend," he > said. > > Such calls often also require officers to spend hours getting a person > admitted to a hospital or addictions facility. > > Weighill estimates half of police calls are not criminal situations. > Instead, they're nuisance calls, neighbour disputes and mental health > related problems. "They're 'people getting along with people' issues that > we're dealing with." > > Members of the public see crime rates falling and wonder why police budgets > are growing, he said. > > "It's because a lot of our time is taken up with these other issues. > > "Across Canada, they're dealing with the same issues. It's got to do with > health and mental health, addictions and services. And they're having > trouble with capacity too." > > There aren't enough beds for all the people who need attention, and waiting > lists leave ill people at loose ends; many revert to their coping habits or > stop using the medications that keep them balanced. The solutions to the > problems are long-term and wide-reaching. They involve increased training > for police, and increased capacity in the mental health care and addictions > treatment systems, Weighill said. Political pressure is needed to re-allocate budgets for this and away from simply increasing police budgets. Currently, It's unfair and un-reasonable for all involved. > > The solutions really mean following problems back to their roots, providing > early childhood interventions and addressing other results and causes of > poverty. Some political correctness slips in here. On the prairies this is a big problem within some parts of the aboriginal communities, where bad lifestyle choices become a way of life for generation after generation. The cultural shift to modernity is being delayed by the fashion of cultural relativism and institutionalized political corruption in reserve governments. > > "We're the ones left dealing with the fallout if those social helps aren't > in place," he said. > > "It's like getting tough on crime. You can lock somebody up all you want but > if you put somebody back in the same environment they came from, you get > what you got before. > > "We're working with social services and health and education in partnerships > on different strategies to turn this ship around, but it's a huge, complex > problem." > > Sky said police boards need to take a public role in supporting the > solutions. > > "In the midst of trauma and crisis, we need a new form of courage. We need > leaders to help us in our shared alarm, our shared concern for public safety > and well being," she said. > > ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:51:04 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: Re: Sen. Wallin- Digest V15 #877 On 2013-08-15, at 10:00 AM, Cdn-Firearms Digest wrote: > Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:55:12 -0600 > From: "Joe Gingrich" > Subject: (Sen. Pamela Wallin's) Report a blow for Sask. > > http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Report+blow+Sask/8786162/story.html > > Report a blow for Sask. > > The Starphoenix > > August 14, 2013 > > Whether or not the RCMP investigation into Saskatchewan Sen. Pamela Wallin's > travel expenses results in any charges or a conviction, there is no doubt > that the revelations made public Tuesday through an external auditor's > report mark a dark day for her home province. The MSM news media is spinning this big time. The Senate Committee changed the definition of allowable expenses in 2012 and then had the accounting firm apply that going back to 2009. Applying a law retroactively is clearly unfair and unreasonable. How can one reasonably be expected to abide by a law or regulation that won't be changed for up to three years in the future? It's un-ethical to expect that of anyone. How much difference that change has made in the total is not clear as it wasn't included in the Report. The Senate Committee that reviews expenses has decided to railroad Senator Pamela Wallin, whose popularity and work load makes the rest look like they are sleeping on the job, compared to her most of them are. She said from the start she would be an "activist Senator". Would that we had more like her. She has more ability than 98 percent plus of those in Parliament. In my opinion, Senator's budgets should be large enough that they can challenge the more partisan House of Commons and Prime Minister's Office and should include an office and researcher/assistant in the home area they represent. Thus they could represent citizens that the P.M.O. have decided not to. Under present budgets this is even difficult for M.P.s to do. Too much power rests in too few hands in Ottawa. As we've all learned over the last 22 years. The expenses in question are largely about travel to and from Saskatchewan from Ottawa and or Toronto. The media makes it sound as if it were vacations. It is a Charter violation for a government to attempt to apply a criminal law retro-actively and justifiably so. Apparently, this doesn't apply to civil law but it is unfair and unethical. If the government or your employer changed what was allowed as an expense and applied that retroactively everyone would be guilty and/or bankrupt. By turning the Report over to the RCMP (who aren't known to be aware or careful of Charter Rights at times) is Senator Wallin placed in legal jeopardy based on an expense definition that changed retroactively? Clearly, it would be difficult to prove intent but the game here seems to be a scapegoat to distract from a closer scrutiny of the Senate). (One of the criticisms of C-17/C-68 is that it devalued the value and enjoyment of personal property by retroactively designating lawfully acquired firearms to be prohibited. By the subterfuge of "grandfathering" the government sidesteps how unreasonable and without foundation this move was.) She has the personal resources to write a cheque for whatever amount is decided on. And she will do so. If, for example, as she maintains, stopping overnight at her condo in Toronto allowed her to arrive in Saskatoon earlier in the day and not have to drive two hours to Wadena late at night and in whatever road and weather conditions e.i. winter, that seems reasonable to me. That the new 2012 definition required only direct Ottawa to Saskatoon or Ottawa direct connection flight Toronto to Saskatoon to be allowed as an expense don't seem as a big issue to me. Parliamentarians from the West who travel long distances from Ottawa have a larger cost to travel than the others. I'm more interested in what we get for the money. To read and or download the 85 page actual Accountant's report ,it is posted down the page on this link. It doesn't have all the media spin. http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/08/13/stephen-harpers-defence-of-pamela- wallin-leaves-him-on-hot-seat-after-damning-audit-report/ Senator Wallin is self-confident and capable of defending herself better than most on Parliament Hill as this SunnewsTV clip show. If she sits as an Independent Senator the Conservative caucus may end up having to answer to her questions in the future. http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/news/868018287001/wallin-slams -expense-audit-process/2601435218001 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 21:14:58 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: "Breast implants suicide bomb threat: Heathrow on high alert ... ...over “credible” intelligence"? All right guys, remember to only squeeze gently, you wouldn't want to set anything off... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breast-implants-suicide-bomb-threat-2 172911 Breast implants suicide bomb threat: Heathrow on high alert over “credible” intelligence 16 Aug 2013 00:00 Security has been beefed up after intelligence al-Qaeda is plotting attacks on airlines flying out of London Getty Images Heathrow Airport is on high terror alert amid fears women suicide bombers are ready to strike with ­explosives concealed in breast implants. Security checks have been beefed up after “credible” intelligence that al-Qaeda is plotting attacks on airlines flying out of London. One staff member said: “There are genuine fears over this. "We have been told to pay particular attention to females who may have concealed hidden explosives in their breasts. “This is particularly difficult for us to pick up but we are on a very high state of alert. “It’s led to long queues here at Heathrow – much longer than usual at this time of the year. “But because it’s the summer holiday season, no one has complained.” Al-Qaeda’s chief bomb-maker Ibrahim al-Asiri is understood to have developed the method of foiling airport scanners by concealing ­explosives in an implant or bodily cavity. It is also feared there is no shortage of ­volunteers willing to take part in an atrocity after hundreds of extremists recently escaped from prison in Pakistan. Explosives expert Andy Oppenheimer said: “There is a great fear that al-Qaeda are planning on using internal devices to try and get through airport scanners. "These explosives could be in breast implants.” Device: Silicon breast implants Getty Images Another specialist, who asked not to be named, said breast implant bombs could be set off by injecting another liquid. The expert added: “Both are very difficult to pick up with current technology and they are petrified al-Qaeda are a step ahead here. “It’s pretty top secret and potentially very grisly and ghastly.” Independent security analyst Paul Beaver said: “There are currently deeply serious concerns over body cavities and implants of all kinds – including breast implants – being used to hide explosives. "It is taking longer to get through Heathrow and other airports in Europe and North America because of these fears. “They are taking longer to screen people and there is definitely some sort of profiling going on. “The general alert state remains the same in the UK but overseas, the recent Pakistan prison breakouts and foiled attacks in Yemen are raising fears of a new jihadist wave of violence.” Terrorists are believed to be plotting attacks with the explosive pentaerythritol tetranitrate, or PETN. Limited: Airport bodyscanners Getty Images It is also feared they may have ­developed an undetectable liquid explosive that could be soaked into clothing. For a suicide bomber sat in a window seat it would take only a relatively small blast to blow a lethal hole in a plane’s fuselage. Mr Beaver added: “The terrorist is getting clever, but so are detection methods. “The fact we know about the new methods suggests there are detection and counter-measure options. “Implant bombs are a one-way ticket anyway so the suicide bomber won’t care what the trigger might be. "It would have to be simple and straightforward – perhaps electrical.” A Heathrow Airport spokesman said: “We don’t comment on specific security measures.” Scans won't detect them: Expert view by Philip Baum, Editor of Security International The possibility of medically implanted explosives is a concern to the industry. There are two main ways of initiating a detonation – by chemical reaction or radio controlled detonators. The problem is another reason why we should be using behavioural analysis as the primary detection method to screen people at airports. Body scanners are good at identifying things outside the body but not inside. Whether or not implants would make effective explosive devices in passenger planes is also questionable. The examples we have seen haven’t quite had the impact those behind them might have hoped for. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, August 15, 2013 10:42 pm From: "Dennis R. Young" Subject: 18 Little-Known Gun Facts That Prove That Guns Make Us Safer 18 Little-Known Gun Facts That Prove That Guns Make Us Safer By Michael Snyder, The American Dream August 14, 2013 http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/08/michael-snyder/is-there-any-doubt-that-guns-make-us-safer/ The American people deserve to know the truth about gun control. Passing strict gun control laws will not make us all safer. In fact, as you will read about below, even a study conducted at Harvard found that the more guns a nation has the less crime it tends to have. In other words, there is a very strong positive correlation between more guns and less crime. This is the exact opposite of what the mainstream media would have us believe, but it makes sense. You see, the reality is that criminals really, really, really don't want to get shot. When you pass strict gun control laws, you take the fear of getting shot away and criminals tend to flourish. Just look at what is going on in America today. The places with the highest crime rates are the major cities where strict gun control laws have been passed. In some of those cities the police are so overwhelmed that they have announced that they simply won't even bother responding to certain kinds of crime anymore. The truth is that the government cannot protect us adequately, and that is one reason why millions of preppers are arming themselves and gun sales have been setting new records year after year. Unfortunately, the mainstream media and many of our politicians seem absolutely obsessed with trying to restrict our constitutional right to own guns. They are waging a relentless campaign to try to convince the American people that guns are bad. But is that actually the case? Of course not. The following are 18 little-known gun facts that prove that guns make us safer. #1 Over the past 20 years, gun sales have absolutely exploded, but homicides with firearms are down 39 percent during that time and "other crimes with firearms" are down 69 percent. #2 A study published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policydiscovered that nations that have more guns tend to have less crime. #3 The nine European nations with the lowest rate of gun ownership rate have a combined murder rate that is three times greater than the nine European nation with the highest rate of gun ownership. #4 Almost every mass shooting that has occurred in the United States since 1950 has taken place in a state with strict gun control laws. With just one exception, every public mass shooting in the USA since at least 1950 has taken place where citizens are banned from carrying guns. Despite strict gun regulations, Europe has had three of the worst six school shootings. #5 The United States is #1 in the world in gun ownership, and yet it is only 28th in the world in gun murders per 100,000 people. #6 The violent crime rate in the United States actually fell from 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992 to 386.3 per 100,000 in 2011. During that same time period, the murder rate fell from 9.3 per 100,000 to 4.7 per 100,000. #7 Approximately 200,000 women in the United States use guns to protect themselves against sexual crime every single year. #8 Overall, guns in the United States are used 80 times more often to prevent crime than they are to take lives. #9 The number of unintentional fatalities due to firearms declined by 58 percent between 1991 and 2011. #10 Despite the very strict ban on guns in the UK, the overall rate of violent crime in the UK is about 4 times higher than it is in the United States. In one recent year, there were 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the UK. In the United States, there were only 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people during that same year. Do we really want to be more like the UK? #11 The UK has approximately 125 percent more rape victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. #12 The UK has approximately 133 percent more assault victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. #13 The UK has the fourth highest burglary rate in the EU. #14 The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU. #15 Down in Australia, gun murders increased by about 19 percent and armed robberies increased by about 69 percent after a gun ban was instituted. #16 The city of Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States. So has this reduced crime? Of course not. As I wrote about recently, the murder rate in Chicago was about 17 percent higher in 2012 than it was in 2011, and Chicago is now considered to be "the deadliest global city". If you can believe it, there were about as many murders in Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire nation of Japan. #17 After the city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring every home to have a gun, the crime rate dropped by more than 50 percent over the course of the next 23 years and there was an 89% decline in burglaries. #18 According to Gun Owners of America, the governments of the world slaughtered more than 170 million of their own people during the 20th century. The vast majority of those people had been disarmed by their own governments prior to being slaughtered. Sadly, you rarely hear any facts like these on the mainstream news networks. Instead, they give countless amounts of air time to the radicals that are obsessed with gun control. And did you know that there is now an official propaganda manual that has been put out for gun control advocates? This manual actually encourages gun control advocates to emotionally exploit major shooting incidents to advance the cause of gun control. Democratic strategists have drafted a how-to manual on manipulating the public's emotions toward gun control in the aftermath of a major shooting. "A high-profile gun-violence incident temporarily draws more people into the conversation about gun violence," asserts the guide. "We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence." The 80-page document titled "Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging," also urges gun-control advocates use images of frightening-looking guns and shooting scenes to make their point. "The most powerful time to communicate is when concern and emotions are running at their peak," the guide insists. "The debate over gun violence in America is periodically punctuated by high-profile gun violence incidents including Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tucson, the Trayvon Martin killing, Aurora and Oak Creek. When an incident such as these attracts sustained media attention, it creates a unique climate for our communications efforts." You can read the rest of that manual right here. So will those pushing gun control win, or will the American people be able to see through the propaganda and insist on keeping their constitutional right to bear arms? Reprinted with permission from The American Dream ------------------------------ Date: Fri, August 16, 2013 5:41 am From: "mikeack" Subject: Unfortunately Canada is only 5 years behind the USA in this.... http://www.policestateusa.com/archives/144 How to serve a warrant: 1972 versus today, by Lt. Harry Thomas The transformation of law enforcement in my lifetime August 15, 2013UncategorizedLt. Harry Thomas This past week I was over on Officer.com trying to convince some hot-headed, patriot-hating young cops that the Constitution is actually the law of the land. I failed. One of them refers to open carriers as “attention whores.” I was denounced as a traitor to law enforcement for insisting that gun owners actually have rights that LEO’s are legally and morally bound to respect. It got me thinking about the great gulf that separates the law enforcement profession that I knew as compared to the one that exists today. I never thought I’d be one of those geezers that says, “I just don’t understand this younger generation today!” But the fact is, I am, and I don’t. I offer this retrospective and comparison: HOW TO SERVE A WARRANT 1972 1) The warrant officer at your station gives you a warrant for someone who lives on your beat. It’s for an old drug possession beef. The suspect has no criminal history. Ho-hum. 2) You go to the location. You knock on the door. If no one answers, you leave and come back another time. If your man answers the door, you either arrest him or cite him to court. If you know he’s there (TV is on, curtains move as he peeks out the window at you, etc.) but he won’t answer the door, you call another car to watch the back while you go in the front and get him. If he submits, fine. If he resists you thump him (tasers are years in the future). If he goes for a weapon you shoot him. Fairly simple, no? PLAN B: THE CRIME IS SERIOUS, OR THE SUSPECT IS KNOWN TO BE DANGEROUS 1) Bring a few more cops. 2) Bring shotguns.* *The only full-autos that your department owns are a row of 1921 Thompson sub-machine guns with 50 round drum magazines, and, strangely enough, a single M-3 greasegun, that are standing in a rack in the armory at the Criminal Investigation Section (detective bureau). The last time that one of them was deployed was in the late 1950’s at a late-night stakeout inside a closed Kroger grocery store where a gun battle occurred between stakeout officers and a gang of professional burglars and safecrackers. One of your department’s last old cigar-chewing detectives from the gangster era used the chopper to fatally ventilate the bad guys. The old chatterguns have never been fired for effect since, and never will be again. You are not qualified on them, and know no one in your 1000 man department who is. If, through some miracle, you were to be qualified on one of the old warhorses, the thought of taking one to a warrant service would never even occur to you, and the chances of you being able to sign one out for that purpose would be nil anyway. Cops use alley sweepers, not trench brooms. HOW TO SERVE A WARRANT TODAY 1) The warrant officer at your station gives you a warrant for someone who lives on your beat. It’s for an old drug possession beef. The suspect has no criminal history. Drug possession! This guy is obviously a degenerate, and threatens the very fabric of civilization! There’s no time to lose! 2) You and your pals put on black ninja outfits. You put black bags over your heads with little slits for your eyes. Now you can do anything you want and no one can identify you afterwards. Hey, it works for the PLO and the IRA, right? You call all of the schools within a fifty mile radius and tell them to go on lockdown. 3) You ride to the scene in an armored personnel carrier (yes, I said an armored personnel carrier!). 4) When you arrive, you jump out and storm the house, bristling with weapons that were, at one time, only used on foreign battlefields to engage implacable enemies of the United States and its interests. Now they’re used against this country’s civilian population. 5) The family’s elderly Labrador, who is now approaching you, tail wagging, is obviously there to guard the drug kingpin’s stash, and presents a grave danger to law enforcement personnel. Hose him with your M-16, or MP5, or whatever squirt gun your agency issues. That way the neighbors will see what a baaaaadass you are. 6) Don’t knock on the door…that’s for sissies. Take it down with a battering ram. Run in and cuss a lot, like they do in those cool movies. Prone everybody out on the floor. When the family’s other dog gets excited and starts barking, blow him away like you did the other one. Do it in front of the kids. That way they’ll learn that this country’s laws must be respected! 7) There are lots of news cameras outside because you called them ahead of time and told them to be there. March your prisoner out and look really grim. Now everyone watching the news can see your armored personnel carrier (yes, I said ARMORED PERSONNEL CARRIER!) and they can see how awesome you are in your Ninja outfit. 8) Make sure your department spokesman is there to give an exciting account of your great victory. That way the pretty girl with too much hair mousse can do a “BREAKING NEWS” story about how you’ve struck a stunning blow to the international drug trade. Now, there are people who are going to think I’m being facetious here. I’m not. Since the early 80’s, the use of SWAT teams in civilian law enforcement has increased about 1500%. No, those two zeros are not a typo. At least FORTY completely innocent American citizens have been shot to death by rogue police, either because incompetent law enforcement officials hit the wrong address, or because startled homeowners attempted to defend themselves against the masked strangers violently entering their homes and were gunned down. One of them, Kathryn Johnston of Atlanta, was 92 years old. I well remember the first time my agency pulled one of these stunts and scared an innocent old lady damned near to death. Our chief did the one thing in his career that I actually admired. He sent down word that if any of our personnel ever again kicked down an innocent citizen’s door, that they should send back the search warrant return with their badge pinned to it since they wouldn’t be needing it anymore. It never happened again. How did this happen? How did we go, in a few short years, from a beat cop knocking on a door to a full scale military assault reminiscent of Iwo Jima, over somebody selling somebody else a bag of weed? It’s because of the biggest failed social experiment in this country’s history, the Drug War. I was around in the days of yore when the first drug forfeiture programs started. If you could prove that a guy’s stuff was purchased with the proceeds of drug trafficking, you could take the stuff. It was a great idea, and it hit these guys where they lived. And for a few years the law chugged along that way. Then law enforcement administrators started thinking about just how much plunder there really was out there. That thing about proving that the guy’s stuff came from drug proceeds was a real drag. They said, “HEY! We have a great idea. Let’s take people’s stuff WITHOUT proving that it came from drug proceeds!!” And they did. The law was changed. Law enforcement didn’t need to convict people of anything. They didn’t even have to CHARGE them with anything. They could just take the stuff! The way it was explained to me in training was that the stuff was being treated as a separate entity, independent of its owner. In other words, the guy wasn’t being charged with a crime. His car, or his house, or his cash was being charged with a crime. Stuff could now commit crimes, and be convicted of them. A cop could hold a trial at the side of the road, convict someone’s money of drug trafficking, and then put the money in jail. Agencies scrambled to create drug “interdiction” units to patrol their expressways, such as the I-75 corridor from Florida to Michigan which runs through my city. Their mandate? Steal money. In my agency, our higher-ups got so addicted to stolen money that there wasn’t enough in our city to satisfy them. They cut some kind of a deal with our county sheriff and got a team of our guys commissioned as deputy sheriffs. Now they could patrol our expressways all the way to the county line, miles outside city limits. They’re still doing it. Just last week I drove I-74 into Ohio, and sure enough, there was a Cincinnati police unit just over the state line, nowhere near the city limits, watching for anyone who meets the “profile.” His mandate? Steal money. The only way the victim can get his money back is to sue the agency and try to prove it DIDN’T come from drug proceeds. So much for due process and the presumption of innocence. Oftentimes the cost of taking legal action exceeds the amount of money that was taken, so the victim just gives up. This is what agencies count on. Life is GOOD for law enforcement agencies! The only difference between them and pirates is the absence of an ocean. Highway robbery is back in vogue, literally! So what to do with all that dough? No government agency ever returns money to the treasury. If they have any left at the end of the budget year they have a shopping spree. What shall we buy? TOYS!!! SWAT was the latest fad. Buy SWAT stuff! Soon agencies all over the country were buying military hardware that had never before been needed or used in civilian law enforcement (this was before Congress passed laws allowing the military to GIVE surplus hardware to the cops). Questions were raised. SWAT is a legitimate concept, and is needed in cases of barricaded persons, hostage situations, etc. But most agencies, even big ones, go for months and sometimes years without experiencing such events. The toys gathered dust. Officials and concerned taxpayers asked, “What do you NEED this stuff for?” No need? CREATE a need! And that’s why things that used to be handled in a low-key, non-confrontational way by street-savvy beat cops now require SWAT intervention, including routine service of warrants for insignificant and non-violent offenses. Are we better off? You decide. Lieutenant Harry Thomas is retired from the police department of Cincinnati, Ohio. A former member of the boards of the National Rifle Association and the Ohio Gun Collectors Association, he was twice the victim of assassination attempts by his own superiors for his stance in support of gun ownership and against police excesses. He now resides in the Greater Indianapolis area. Written by: Lt. Harry Thomas on August 15, 2013. Last revised by: PSUSA, our reviewer, on August 16, 2013. Lt. Harry Thomas About Lt. Harry Thomas Lieutenant Harry Thomas is retired from the police department of Cincinnati, Ohio. A former member of the boards of the National Rifle Association and the Ohio Gun Collectors Association, he was twice the victim of assassination attempts by his own superiors for his stance in support of gun ownership and against police excesses. He now resides in the Greater Indianapolis area. -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) Rural Family Physician, Sherbrooke, NS mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca "Hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst". ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #880 *********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@scorpion.bogend.ca Moderator 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".)