From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #904 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 Thursday, September 5 2013 Volume 15 : Number 904 In this issue: [Fwd: Are Gun Control Proponents Flat-Earthers?] "Freeman-on-the-Land" movement "RCMP seize massive arsenal" Five separate stabbings incidents in Toronto overnight Gun Control Does Not Prevent Violent Crimes TORONTO STAR: Fur trapping taps into rising demand ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, September 3, 2013 9:14 am From: decline@pteradon.tera-byte.com Subject: [Fwd: Are Gun Control Proponents Flat-Earthers?] But just as in Canada, the "gun control" industry is in the billions of dollars. Well in excess of two billion according to CBC some three years ago. Enforcement costs and the purchase of GEVs (Gun Eating Vehicles) and their staff of hundreds (NWEST alone costs many millions a year to "enforce" the licensing on law abiding property owners) and the RCMP now spends much of its time simply monitoring lawful people rather than going after criminals. One would expect an honest and complete audit would reveal the costs of C-68 Firearms Act is easily in the realm of 500 million per year including enforcement costs and acts like the RCMP attack on evacuated homes in High River and Slave Lake further victimizing the victims. Who knows what lesser similar attacks have occured. And to what end? NONE of these people violated were criminals or had any violent past, they were simply property owners now being victimized further by what appears to be an out of control police force. In the meantime real criminals laugh all the way to their next home invasion, mugging, rape, or murder. It makes us wonder what the priorities of our government really are. Now the "investigation" and perhaps prosecution will cost millions more. It never ends ad infinitum. People would do well to consider that the right of self defense of life, family, and property, is a natural right. It is NOT up to the government to legislate when or how you can defend yourself from attack by 2 legged violent criminal elements, or four legged predators. We well remember the statement of Judge Don Demetrick in a ruling while dismissing "possession" (of a disabled war souvenir) charges against an elderly military veteran: "Those present-day Canadians who believe giving police and military forces a monopoly on firearms brings security for private citizens should perhaps look to past history and present world events such as Nazi Germany of the past and Bosnia of the present." Edmonton Journal Tuesday March 16, 2004 And in a more recent ruling: The refusal of a firearms licence application could jeopardize seriously an applicant’s life, liberty and personal security. In the coniferous forests of rural Canada humans sometimes need firearms for self-protection against four-legged predators such as cougars or bears and occasionally perish in needless avoidable tragedy for lack of a firearm. Similarly in the concrete jungles of urban Canada ordinary persons sometimes urgently require a firearm for use in lawful self-protection against the lethal attack of two-legged predators such as homicidal rapists or robbers, and of those mentally ill persons who on rare occasion engage in mass homicide for no rational reason. Decent but defenceless urbanites die annually in Canada as innocent victims of criminal or mentally deranged violence in circumstances where their timely and lawful use of a firearm could have prevented or reduced the tragedy.” Judge Don Demetrick And to quote Christopher diAmani: "And to deny me (or Ms. Pogson) the right of self-protection from two-legged predators is even more absurd. As the local constable said to me at a recent public event, should some criminal decide to do me harm, even if I managed to dial 911 and the good constable left the town IMMEDIATELY, I’d be dead for at least 20 minutes before he looked upon my cooling corpse." It is really little different in cities. When seconds count, the police are minutes (or hours) away. Just ask Ian Thomson, who saved his life and that of his animals from fire bombing masked maniacs shouting death threats, by retrieving his pistol from his safe and firing WARNING shots to drive them off, rather than shooting them as he had every right to do. Instead he was prosecuted viciously and nearly bankrupted but for the support he got from the honest firearms community for his defense of defending his life, animals, and home. He was treated MUCH worse by our "justice" and laws, than those who attempted to murder him. Look up the horror on your internet search. It is well documented. In the meantime our politicians who still push the vicious gun laws are nothing more than hypocrites. While we are effectively denied the means to protect ourselves these same politicians, who tell us we do not have the the right, have ARMED bodyguards paid for with OUR tax money. Don Klein Secretary Valley Rifle Club (Inc 1972) Member CSSA Member NFA Member Conservative Party of Canada Member Rural Crime Watch BCC members, judiciary, legal, honest media, and other concerned parties. ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Are Gun Control Proponents Flat-Earthers? From: "Dennis R. Young" Date: Mon, September 2, 2013 10:43 pm To: "FIREARMS DIGEST" -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are Gun Control Proponents Flat-Earthers? By AWR Hawkins Published on Friday, August 30, 2013 http://www.ammoland.com/2013/08/are-gun-control-proponents-flat-earthers/#axzz2dnkWbYeR Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- As scholarly studies and international violent crime stats mount to show no correlation between gun control and less violent crime, gun control proponents ignore the science and continue pushing more gun control and more gun bans. Are gun control proponents flat-earthers? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:32:58 -0600 From: "Joe Gingrich" Subject: "Freeman-on-the-Land" movement http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t8930 "Freeman-on-the-Land" movement http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Freed+from+government+isolated+from+society/8861655/story.html Freed from government or isolated from society? Movement attracts more followers By Dene Moore, The Canadian Press September 3, 2013 He introduces himself as "Brian Arthur of the Alexander family," and before he'll answer any questions, he asks a reporter to declare that she is not a government employee. He drives without a licence and does not pay income tax. Brian Alexander is a selfproclaimed Freeman-on-the-Land and one of a growing number of Canadian followers of the so-called "sovereign citizen" or "Natural Persons" movement. Adherents have "freed" themselves from what they see as an overbearing government that has overstepped its bounds. "People can't afford to live and they're basically destroying society, in our view," Alexander said during a lengthy interview at his home in Kamloops, B.C. "They've created it themselves. Most of us are peaceful. We paid our taxes, we love our country and all that but when they start pushing at you, you tend to start asking questions and that's where this whole movement comes from." Alexander says violence is not advocated and has no place in the movement, but one official who has followed the rise of the sovereign citizen movement in Canada says there have been a number of confrontations in B.C. and elsewhere during routine traffic stops or legal proceedings. "We've seen that escalation already," said Ron Usher, of the Society of B.C. Notaries. Notaries have found themselves embroiled as many Freemen attach inexplicable importance to having notaries authorize documents the Freemen have invented to declare their status. "What we've seen over the last year is an increasing level of frustration, an increasing level of desperation. People just don't like the idea that someone isn't going to help them with their fantasy," Usher said, noting the society discourages its members from signing the "nonsensical" legal documents. "They're very confrontational. We've had a number of instances now where they've needed to call police or security," Usher said. There have been a number of "hard takedowns" by police in B.C. involving Freemen who refuse to have a driver's licence and, sometimes, automobile insurance. The Law Society of B.C. and B.C. Notaries have both issued warnings about Freemen, which the law society said in a bulletin last year may number as many as 30,000 in Canada. "Since one of the tenets of the Freeman-on-the-Land movement is an unrestricted right to possess and use firearms, they raise significant safety and security concerns," read the bulletin, which advises lawyers who come across Freemen to take appropriate security measures. RCMP and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police are developing awareness materials for frontline officers, and the movement is the subject of upcoming policing seminars in Vancouver and Toronto. "The RCMP is aware of the Freeman-on-the-Land ideology and the interaction that some police jurisdictions have had with individuals who follow this movement. Additionally, in recent years, the RCMP has received correspondence directly from followers of this movement," RCMP spokeswoman Julie Gagnon said in an email. "Individuals associated to this movement are a concern because some followers advocate violence to promote their views and this may involve violence toward police officers. There are officer safety concerns when dealing with followers of this movement during routine police interaction." There's no indication that they pose a threat to the general public, Gagnon said. In the United States, the FBI considers the movement a domestic terror threat, and a 2011 FBI report cited several cases where followers clashed with law enforcement, including the 2010 shootings of two Arkansas officers during a routine traffic stop. If there is a guru of the Freeman movement in Canada these days it's a man named Dean Clifford from Manitoba. In June, about 80 people paid to hear Clifford spread the sovereign gospel at a seminar in Victoria and tickets are now available on his website to another scheduled for Toronto this November. Alexander, 43, has become a pseudo-spokesman in B.C. after running - ironically - for provincial and municipal office under the Freeman banner. A self-employed father of a teenage boy, he speaks emotionally about the plight soldiers have faced upon their return from Afghanistan and with frustration about the degradation of the environment. And he appears to genuinely disagree with the use of violence or threats in the name of the cause. "Yes, there has been the odd person here and there that has actually fought back and done some stupid things, but those are individuals. And to paint all Freemen as terrorists, it would be the same as painting all Frenchmen FLQ or all Germans Nazis. It's kind of ridiculous," he said. While in the United States the movement has a large following on the far right and among white supremacists, in Canada it has found sympathizers among First Nations, in B.C. in particular, where some have come together under the banner of the "Sovereign Squamish Government." The Squamish group claims to distribute its own licence plates and one Ontario Freeman is recruiting his own police force with an online video appeal for the Canadian Common Corps of Peace Officers. The sovereign citizen's campaign in Canada, however, focuses on the courts, and a quick search of court documents involving Freemen reveals a litany of cases from the East Coast to the West, ranging from the bizarre to the criminal. "It appeals to the angry male whose life isn't working out very well," said Usher. "You get this spiral of legal mess that the only person that's benefited is the person who's taken their money for the seminar teaching them how to do all this. It looks like desperate people spending their last nickel on bad advice." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:58:18 -0600 From: Rocky7 Subject: "RCMP seize massive arsenal" This story sounds like another example of Gun Journalism: ------------- The Journalist's Guide to Gun Violence Coverage Guns are a sad fact of life in American culture and are a major topic in modern journalism. A good Journalist has a duty to get involved and make a difference in this important societal debate. By following certain guidelines, the concerned Journalist can be assured of having the maximum impact on this shameful problem. The first principle to remember is that subtle use of terminology can covertly influence the reader. Adjectives should be chosen for maximum anti-gun effect. When describing a gun, attach terms like "automatic," "semi-automatic," "large caliber," "deadly," "high powered," or "powerful". Almost any gun can be described by one or more of these terms. More than two guns should be called an "arsenal". Try to include the term "assault weapon" if at all possible. This can be combined with any of the terms above for best results. Nobody actually knows what an assault weapon is, so you cannot be criticized for this usage. Your local anti-gun organization can provide you with a list of the latest buzz-words like "junk guns," "Saturday Night Specials," and "the criminal's weapon of choice". Don't worry about getting technical details right. Many a reporter has accidentally written about semi-automatic revolvers or committed other minor errors. Since most people know little about guns, this is not a problem. Only the gun nuts will complain and they don't count. The emotional content of your article is much more important than the factual details, since people are more easily influenced through their emotions than through logic. Broadcast Journalists should have a file tape showing a machine gun firing on full automatic. Run this video while describing "automatic" weapons used in a crime or confiscated by police. At the least, a large graphic of a handgun should be displayed behind the on-air personality when reading any crime story. Do not waste words describing criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Instead of calling them burglar, rapist, murderer, or repeat offender, simply use the term "gunman". This helps the public associate all forms of crime and violence with the possession of guns. Whenever drug dealers are arrested, guns are usually confiscated by the police. Mention the type and number of guns more prominently than the type and quantity of drugs. Include the number of rounds of ammunition seized, since the number will seem large to those who know little about guns. Obviously, the drug dealers who had the guns should now be called "gunmen". Political discussions on gun control legislation usually involve pro-gun organizations. Always refer to these organizations as "the gun lobby". If space permits, mention how much money the gun lobby has spent to influence political campaigns and describe their legislative lobbying efforts as "arm twisting" or "threats". Gun owners must never be seen in a positive light. Do not mention that these misguided individuals may actually be well educated, or have respectable jobs and healthy families. They should be called "gun nuts" if possible or simply gun owners at best. Mention details about their clothing, especially if they are wearing hunting clothes or hats. Mention the simplistic slogans on their bumper stickers to show that their intelligence level is low. Many gun owners drive pickup trucks, hunt and live in rural areas. Use these details to help portray them as ignorant rednecks. Don't use the word "hunt". Always say that they "kill" animals. Don't be afraid to interview these people, they are harmless even though we don't portray them that way. Try to solicit comments that can be taken out of context to show them in the worst possible light. Never question the effectiveness of gun control laws or proposals. Guns are evil and kill people. Removing guns from society can only be good. Nobody really uses guns for legitimate self-defense, especially women or children. Any stories about armed self-defense must be minimized or suppressed. Be careful about criticizing the police for responding slowly to 911 calls for help. It is best if the public feels like the police can be relied upon to protect them at all times. If people are buying guns to protect their families, you are not doing your job. Emphasize stories where people kill family members and/or themselves with guns. It is important to make the public feel like they could lose control and start killing at any moment if they have a gun in the house. Any story where a child misuses a gun is front page material. View every shooting as an event to be exploited. Always include emotional quotes from the victim's family if possible. If they are not available, the perpetrator's family will do nicely. The quote must blame the tragedy on the availability of guns. Photos or video of grieving family members are worth a thousand facts. Most people will accept the assertion that guns cause crime. It is much easier than believing that some people deliberately choose to harm others. Your story should include terms like "tragic" or "preventable" and mention the current toll of gun violence in your city or state. Good reporters always know exactly how many gun deaths have occurred in their area since the first of the year. List two or three previous incidents of gun violence to give the impression of a continuing crime wave. Little space should be devoted to shootings where criminals kill each other. Although these deaths greatly inflate the annual gun violence numbers, they distract from the basic mission of urging law abiding citizens to give up their guns. Do not dig too deeply into the reasons behind shootings. The fact that a gun was involved is the major point, unless someone under 18 is affected, in which case the child angle is now of equal importance. Any article about gun violence should include quotes from anti-gun organizations or politicians. One quote should say that we must do something "for the children". Anti-gun spokespersons should be called "activists" or "advocates". If your employer wishes to appear unbiased, you can include one token quote from a gun lobby group to show that you are being fair. The anti-gun statements should be accepted as fact. The gun lobby statement can be denigrated by including text like, "according to gun lobbyist Jones." Fortunately, statements from anti-gun organizations come in short sound bites that are perfect for generating an emotional response in the reader or viewer. Gun lobby statements usually contain boring facts that are easy to ignore. Feel secure in your advocacy journalism. The vast majority of your fellow Journalists support your activism. The nation will be a better place when only the police and military have guns. Remember that you are doing it for the children so the end justifies the means. Eventually, the government will have a monopoly on power. Don't worry about the right to freedom of the press, just contact me then for more helpful hints. Professor Michael Brown School of Journalism, Brady Chair Vancouver College of Liberal Arts Political Satire, copyright 1999, Michael Brown. May be reproduced freely in its full and complete form. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:04:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Five separate stabbings incidents in Toronto overnight http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/08/31/five_separate_stabbing_incidents_in_toronto_on_friday_night.html?NewsWatchCanada.ca News / Crime Five separate stabbings incidents in Toronto overnight Five people were stabbed in five hours By: Alex Nino Gheciu News reporter, Published on Sat Aug 31 2013 There were five stabbings in as many hours across the city — from Kingston Rd. in the east to Jane St. in the west — at the start of the long weekend, and a Toronto police officer is warning that blades may actually be bloodier than bullets. “A lot of times knives end up causing more damage than bullets, unfortunately,” Det. Marlin Bond said Saturday. “When bullets actually hit somebody, it almost cauterizes the wounds as it passes through. But with a knife, it severs the arteries and people end up bleeding out more quickly.” The first stabbing happened outside a sports bar on Kingston Rd. just after 11 p.m. Friday. The victim was soon in stable condition in hospital. Soon after, a man was stabbed in the chest on Eglinton Ave. W., near Dufferin St. In the third incident, a man in his 20s was in serious but stable condition after being stabbed in the Dundas St. E. and Victoria St. area. Around 3 a.m. Saturday, a man was taken to hospital with non-life-threatening injuries after being stabbed near Yonge St. and Sheppard Ave. W. One male was arrested in relation to that incident. Just after 4 a.m., a person received minor injuries after being stabbed on Emmett Ave., near Jane St. and Eglinton Ave. W. Bond said alcohol consumption due to warmer weather might also play a slight role in the increased violence as we all savour the Labour Day long weekend. “People are obviously out and about more in summertime than they are during colder weather,” he said. “Alcohol may be a root cause of it. People go out and have some drinks and get involved in situations where they might do things more readily than if they were sober.” With files from Kim Magi ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:26:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Gun Control Does Not Prevent Violent Crimes http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/gun-control-does-not-prevent-vi olent-crimes-according-harvard-study-1?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium =feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+opposingviews%2Fmain+%28Opposing+Views+-+Issues%2C+Experts%2C+Answers%29 Gun Control Does Not Prevent Violent Crimes According to Harvard Study By Doris Quintanilla, Mon, September 02, 2013 Despite what many would think, less guns does not equal less deaths. At least, according to a new study released by Harvard. The university recently published a study that looked at the relationship between gun ownership, gun laws, violent crimes and suicide rates across the world and concluded that less guns does not equal less deaths and more guns does not equal more deaths. The study, conducted by Don B. Kates, an American criminologist and lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Canadian criminologist and professor, also found that while the United States has a higher gun ownership than other countries and also has high murder rates, it is not an accurate depiction of what is going on in the rest of the world. In fact, this is quite the opposite with other countries. The study compares other developed countries with high gun ownership rates, including Norway, Finland, Germany, France and Denmark. These countries all have significantly lower murder rates than the U.S. “In other words,” states Guns.com, “the high murder rate of the U,S. is the exception, not the rule, when comparing homicide rates to gun ownership rates.” In a comparison between Russia and the U.S. shows that while Russia has a very low gun ownership in the 1990s, murder rates in that country were almost triple of those in the U.S. As for previous studies that brought up evidence of high gun ownership resulting in high murder rates, Kates and Mauser say that such evidence was acquired through incorrect or misleading information. For example, one study that looked at England’s strict gun control in the 1990s and low murder rates failed to see that the country already had low murder rates prior to the strict gun control, according to Guns.com. The study remains that while there is a correlation between higher gun control and crime rates, there are other factors to be considered. Violent crimes still occur, even with lower gun ownership as other weapons are used in the killings as substitutions. This study is not the first to refute claims of stricter gun control leads to less violent crimes. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences also released studies in 2003 and 2004 respectively, with similar conclusions. Sources: Guns.com, Harvard Law ------------------------------ Date: Tue, September 3, 2013 5:34 pm From: "Dennis R. Young" Subject: TORONTO STAR: Fur trapping taps into rising demand TORONTO STAR: Fur trapping taps into rising demand As the demand for fur in Asia soars, prices are on the rise - so too are the number of Ontarians registering for trapping licenses By: Leslie Scrivener Feature writer, Published on Sun Sep 01 2013 http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/09/01/fur_trapping_taps_into_rising _demand.html For trapper Howard Noseworthy, it's the solitude and call of nature that lures him into the bush in search of beaver, bobcat and muskrat. "There's a feeling of independence and self sufficiency," says Noseworthy, who also works for Fur Harvesters Auction Inc. in North Bay. "It's understanding nature and being outside in all seasons and all weather." Trappers are not in the business for the money, he says. But they soon may be. The number of Ontarians registering for trapping licenses is rising, up 10 per cent last year. A similar increase is expected this year as the price of fur pelts reaches record highs. Some 8,700 trappers, including 1,200 natives, are now licensed in Ontario - the highest numbers since the mid-1980s. The Ministry of Natural Resources last week announced a new youth fur-trapping program, to extend the trapping license to children aged 12 to 15. The idea is to educate and encourage youngsters to value a pastime that is part of the "cultural fabric of Canada," as the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters said in a statement. Animal protection groups greeted the announcement with horror, saying engaging children in the business of trapping animals is "shameful" and a "desperate ploy" to help save what they see as an industry in decline. Training children sends the message, as one said, that "it's OK to cause suffering." "We are absolutely outraged this has been approved," says Lesley Fox, executive director of the Association for the Protection of Fur-Bearing Animals, in Vancouver. The way she reads reports on fur production, numbers are in decline, she says. "We're not talking about a booming industry," she says. "I think trappers are in trouble and they are desperate to bring in new blood. This is a scheme I don't think children are going to be interested in." In northern Ontario, however, there's a sense that commercial fur trapping has rebounded. And now, with fur prices soaring, "it's worthwhile to be a trapper once again," says Noseworthy. Herman Jansen, the former CEO of the Toronto-based North American Fur Auctions Inc., the largest seller of wild furs in the world, says prices have tripled and in some cases quadrupled in two decades. "(In the) early '90s we had a tough time. Right now we are going through a boom." The revitalized market is driven by the renewed taste for fur in fashion - it's popular in the trimming used in down coats such as those made by Canada Goose. China's growing middle class has a taste for luxury goods, as do consumers in South Korea and Russia. China is now the biggest buyer of mink fur in the world. When the price of mink goes up, the price of other fur follows, says Alan Herscovici, executive vice president of the Fur Council of Canada. Twenty years ago, a mink pelt was $20; now it's fetching about $100. Canadian fur exports, about $143 million in 1992, were $706 million last year. "That's why trappers and fur farmers are feeling optimistic," he adds. Differences in perceptions of the vitality of the industry likely have to do with data collection. "Unfortunately, Statistics Canada has stopped compiling and publishing wild fur production figures since 2010," he says, "which is when we started seeing wild fur prices beginning to rise again." The Fur Council is asking that the federal government return to collecting fur statistics. Fetching top dollar There was record attendance, some 700 buyers - a number that's nearly doubled in the last three years - at the North American Fur Auctions Inc. sale this year. Some $900 million in furs was sold this year; about $100 million of which were wild furs, numbers not seen since the 1980s. Expecting even more international buyers this season, the auction is expanding its sales room by 50 per cent. Among the animals fetching top dollar at the June Toronto auction were 300,000 muskrat, selling, as the fur auction put it, at the "unbelievable, historically high" rate of $14.02 for regular quality pelts. (Not long ago, muskrat pelts fetched $2.) The biggest seller is raccoon, and the Fur Auction will have sold about one million this year, the highest in memory, averaging about $50 a pelt, up from $12 in the early '90s. Top coyote pelts at the June fur auction in North Bay fetched $100, top beaver fur sold for $66, while "average" quality beaver sold for about $27. Fur-trapping groups describe their members as "stewards of the land" and they promote wild fur trapping as environmentally sound and sustainable. "They are not burly mountain men," says Herscovici. "They could be your kid's school teacher, an accountant, people who trap on the weekend. People are getting involved with hunting and trapping as a way to get back in touch with the land and the things we have lost." And some suggest a trapper treads has a lighter ecological footprint than most city dwellers. New technology for traps - body-gripping, foothold and snare - are "humane," they argue, and their use is required under international agreements. Animal protection groups say the opposite. "Few industries have as much blood on their hands as the Canadian fur trade, which causes the suffering and death of more than 3.3 million animals each year for a product few people want and nobody needs," says the Association for the Protection of Fur-Bearing Animals website. "I find it irritating when they bring in things that have long been illegal or are not being used," says Robin Horwath, general manager of the Ontario Fur Managers Federation, the Sault Ste. Marie organization that trains and licenses trappers. "It's a marketing device to support their cause." Trappers are not immune to an animal's pain, he says. "We all have feelings too and the last thing we want to do is see an animal suffer. "We've moved into the modern era of humane dispatching. If there is no trapping, these animals are going to overpopulate and that's when disease sets in." Some traps have rubber on the jaws and have to be checked every 24 hours so animals can be removed and relocated, he says. Body-gripping traps have to "render them unconscious in 45 seconds." As the Asian market for fur increases animal advocacy organizations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are developing new education campaigns and engaging celebrities to spread their message in China, just as they have done in Europe and North America for decades. They say flat out there is no humane way to trap an animal. Far from being a renewable industry, "fur is an environmental disaster," says PETA's Ashley Byrne. People in Canada and the U.S. are wearing less fur, says Byrne, from PETA's New York office, and popular labels such as Calvin Klein, Abercrombie & Fitch and Tommy Hilfiger refuse to sell real fur. "The younger generation is just opposed to fur." (The fur industry says just the opposite: that young people are more "open-minded" about wearing fur.) Says Byrne: "It's about as popular as a cold sore." ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V15 #904 *********************************** 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".)