From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V16 #907 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, September 18 2015 Volume 16 : Number 907 In this issue: http://dennisryoung.ca/recent-posts/ " Canadian Somali Congress participates in a debate on ... Head of firearms group claims Tories backed out of deal Re: Calgary police chief says tough economy, fentanyl could ... Purging America's Heroes Re: Why We Are Angry Old Men Moola said The Fallacy of 'Mr. Harper Could Not Give us Everything We Want' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, September 17, 2015 10:46 pm From: "Dennis Young" Subject: http://dennisryoung.ca/recent-posts/ Dennis Young's Recent Posts: http://dennisryoung.ca/recent-posts/ FIREARMS DIGEST POSTINGS – SEPTEMBER 16, 2015 FAILED: NATIONAL JOURNAL “STUDY” PROMOTING GUN CONTROL IN THE U.S.A. MAGNA CARTA – A DOCUMENTARY BY JOHN ROBSON https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sejdcmmh3A RCMP ATIP – DATA BANK BACKLOGS – SEPTEMBER 12, 2015 -------------------------- Sign up to receive e-mail updates on the day they are posted: http://dennisryoung.ca/ Dennis R. Young Honourary Life Member of the CSSA and the NFA Member of the Calgary RCMP Veterans Association E-Mail: dennisryoung@telus.net Website: http://dennisryoung.ca/ FOR MORE FIREARMS AND OUTDOORS NEWS SUBSCRIBE TO: NFA DAILY MEDIA REPORTS: Send an E-Mail to news@nfa.ca CSSA E-NEWS: http://cssa-cila.org/mailman/listinfo/cssa-cila-e-news_cssa-cila.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 00:36:13 -0600 From: Larry James Fillo Subject: " Canadian Somali Congress participates in a debate on ... ...Alberta Somali deaths" "Uploaded on Jan 15, 2012 Panel debate on the deaths of Canadian Somali men in Alberta. A recent CBC news report indicated that the average rate in our community - one homicide for every 3,000 people - is seventeen times higher than the Alberta average of one in 50,000. This puts the homicide rate in the Edmonton Somali community higher than the national homicide rates in high-risk countries like Panama, Brazil and the Dominican Republic. The vast majority of the homicide cases in this community remain unsolved. One of the main challenges that is preventing the resolution of these outstanding cases is the failure of the City of Edmonton and the Edmonton Police Service to dedicate resources towards the hiring of more homicide detectives. This crucial step would inevitably lead to the resolution of many cases and would go a long way in deterring those that would endanger the lives of Edmontonians. Without this leadership and co-operation from the city, it is difficult for Edmonton Somalis - a mainly working-class community - to come up with the resources necessary to make a sustained turnaround in its fortunes when it comes to the continued loss of its young men to gun violence." ================================================================== https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=158&v=vtH6T0Xw5Fg ================================================================= Mired in political correctness, all the really nice people here sidestep the issue. The EPS would have or could produce, a factual breakdown of the crime, not just homicide and have some facts, which would act as pieces in a puzzle. The EPS is going to know how many were known to be involved in drug gangs. (No mention, for example, of the Somali in Fort Mac shooting up an apartment block and shooting one of the RCMP officers attending the call. She shot and killed him. I remember posting that here as the circumstances were so bizarre. ) An imam from their community addressed that at a service back when the homicides in the Somali community was around 30. According to this it is now 40. Afraid of being called racist, no one will address the Somali culture and how that factors into the problem, compared with other African communities, who don't have as high a rate of homicide. Cultures can change if there is motivation to do so. Without facts, there is no scientific analysis possible. The police Sgt. did state that access to both knives and guns was evident on the homicide rate. Which is more helpful than the P.C. reference to "gun violence". "The racism of low expectations." is the most important sentence, I heard. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, September 18, 2015 5:44 am From: "Bruce Mills" Subject: Head of firearms group claims Tories backed out of deal Head of firearms group claims Tories backed out of deal | Toronto Star Toronto Star News / Canada Head of firearms group claims Tories backed out of deal The National Firearms Assoc. promised to refrain from criticizing C-51 in exchange for a looser firearms bill. Head of firearms group claims Tories backed out of deal Facebook Sheldon Clare claims that the Conservatives backed out of a deal with the National Firearms Association over C-42, a gun ownership bill. The Tories say Clare, who is running as an independent in a B.C. riding, is politically motivated. By: Tonda MacCharles Ottawa Bureau reporter, Published on Wed Sep 16 2015 OTTAWA—The head of the National Firearms Association says the Conservative government did a “deal” with him to quell gun owners’ criticism of Bill C-51 last spring and then betrayed them by not agreeing in exchange to loosen restrictions in a firearms bill. In an online posting to Facebook on Monday and in an interview Wednesday with the Star, NFA president Sheldon Clare said Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney’s office asked his group not to publicly testify to criticize the national security bill, C-51. In exchange, he said, gun owners would see changes made to C-42, a bill amending firearms legislation. A Conservative Party spokesman, Kory Teneycke, whom Clare says was involved peripherally in his contacts with the government last spring, called his accusations “baseless” and the timing politically motivated. Clare is running as an independent candidate in the B.C. riding of Cariboo-Prince George, where a Conservative incumbent is not running for re-election. Clare said he is running on the economy, not on firearms issues because his positions are well known. But he criticized the Conservatives for betraying gun owners. “I found that the Conservative government is not the friend of firearms owners despite what they’re claiming; they’ve had ample opportunity to make a lot of changes, they have not done so; they pay lip service to this part of their so-called base, and when people tell you ‘you have no one else to vote for so suck it up,’ that’s not what works well for me. I don’t like being manipulated.” On Facebook, Clare wrote that the NFA’s opposition last year to C-51 was already established and that other effective critics were going to present the same case, while the Conservative government sought to downplay dissent. “We had been promised that the CPC would give us the four amendments that we sought on C42 if we didn’t go to that hearing.” “We were asked not to be used by the NDP as a stick to beat up the CPC. We agreed and were told that we would be invited to present our amendments on C42—we were not invited. In short, we were lied to by the Conservatives about that deal.” In the interview, Clare said the NFA’s 75,000 members wanted changes C-42 and this was a way to get them. “We looked at this as we could get a gain here. … We got played.” He says the NFA was left to present its position to a couple of MPs at a lunch, but its main objections were never adopted by the Conservatives, who passed the firearms bill with only minor concessions to gun owners’ complaints about paperwork and the powers of chief firearms officers in the provinces. Clare said Teneycke, who had “helped” in the lunchtime presentation of the gun owners’ position to the MPs and is now the chief spokesman for the Conservative Party national campaign, phoned him at the time and said the government thought the group was internally divided and didn’t feel it needed to honour its commitment. “So we weren’t getting these amendments,” Clare said. He said the conversation occurred on the day of the Alberta election, May 5, and he hung up on Teneycke. He said he never revealed the discussions at the time because “there was some hope that this was salvageable.” But now, he says he has been challenged by some NFA members about why he didn’t speak out against C-51, and says there is no more “need” to remain silent. In a statement emailed to the Star, Teneycke said Wednesday: “Mr. Clare is running against the Conservative government, so we’re not surprised he’s making baseless political attacks. The Conservative Government stands by its legislative track-record – including laws supporting law-abiding firearms owners.” Clare, whose term as NFA president ends in 2016, said Teneycke’s comment about internal divisions probably referred to an employee’s “dismissal with cause” that is now the subject of a legal dispute. But the NFA is not divided on its main positions, he said. He said he’s not campaigning on firearms issues because “my positions are well known.” ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 14:27:43 +0000 (UTC) From: Bruce Mills Subject: Re: Calgary police chief says tough economy, fentanyl could ... ...be ... And all without the long gun registry - hard to believe, isn't it? Yours in TYRANNY!Bruce From: Dennis Young To: cfdmod@bogend.ca Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 4:44 AM Subject: Calgary police chief says tough economy, fentanyl could be ... This year alone, the Calgary Police Service's gangs and guns unit has worked on 88 files, dealt with 233 offenders, seized 22 guns, and laid nearly 600 charges, ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:19:40 -0600 From: "Joe Gingrich" Subject: Purging America's Heroes http://buchanan.org/blog/purging-americas-heroes-124073 Purging America’s Heroes By Patrick J. Buchanan Monday - September 14, 2015 With that kumbayah moment at the Capitol in South Carolina, when the Battle Flag of the Confederacy was lowered forever to the cheers and tears of all, a purgation of the detestable relics of evil that permeate American public life began. City leaders in Memphis plan to dig up the body of Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest, who is buried in a city park that once bore his name. A statue of the great cavalrymen will be removed. “Nathan Bedford Forrest is a symbol of bigotry and racism, and those symbols have no place on public property,” said council chairman Myron Lowery, “What we’re doing here in Memphis is no different from what’s happening across the country.” Myron’s got that right. Panicky Democrats are terminating their tradition of Jefferson-Jackson Day dinners, as both presidents were slaveholders. Other slaveholders include Presidents George Washington, James Madison, who authored the Constitution that equated slaves with 3/5ths of a person, James Monroe, of Monroe Doctrine fame, John Tyler, who annexed Texas, and James K. Polk, who tore off half of Mexico. Jefferson, Jackson and Madison are also the names of the state capitals of Missouri, Mississippi and Wisconsin, and Washington is the capital of the United States. Is it not time to change the names of these cities to honor more women and minorities who better reflect our glorious new diversity? Washington, Jefferson and Jackson are on the $1, $2 and $20 bills. Ought they not all be replaced? In Baltimore and Annapolis, calls are heard for the removal of statues of Chief Justice Roger Taney of the Dred Scott decision. In Fairfax County, Virginia, J.E.B. Stuart High may be headed for a name change. Can George Washington and Washington-Lee, rivals of my old high school, be far behind? But it is Statuary Hall, beneath the cupola of the U.S. Capitol, where each state is represented by statues of two of its greatest, that really requires a Memphis-style moral cleansing. Mississippi is represented by Jefferson Davis and Georgia by Alexander Stephens, the president and vice president of the Confederacy; South Carolina by John C. Calhoun, who called slavery a “positive good,” and Confederate Gen. Wade Hampton. Kentucky is represented by slave owner Henry Clay; Florida by Confederate Gen. Edmund Kirby Smith; North Carolina by Confederate colonel and Civil War governor Zebulon Vance; Texas by Stephen Austin and Sam Houston who seceded from Mexico to create a slave republic that joined the United States as a slave state in 1845. Utah is represented by Brigham Young, founder of a Mormon faith that declared black people unfit to belong; Virginia by Robert E. Lee and Washington. California is represented by a statue of Fr. Junipero Serra, who established the missions that became the cities of California and converted and disciplined pagan Indians to Christianity. Among the men revered by the generations that grew up in mid-20th-century America, five categories seem destined for execration: Explorers like Columbus who conquered the indigenous peoples. Slave owners from 1619 to 1865. Statesmen, military leaders, and all associated with the Confederacy. All involved in the dispossession and ethnic cleansing of Native-Americans, like Gens. William Sherman and Phil Sheridan who said, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian,” and acted on that maxim. Lastly, segregationists. There is a move afoot to take the name of Sen. Richard Russell of Georgia, an opponent of civil rights laws, off the Senate Office Building to which it has been affixed for 40 years. As there are thousands of schools, streets, highways, buildings, towns and cities that bear the names of these old heroes and men like them, the purging is going to take decades. Yet, make no mistake, a Great Purge of American heroes of yesteryear is at hand. What did all those named above, who would be Class-A war criminals at the Southern Poverty Law Center, have in common? All were white males. All achieved greatly. All believed that the people whence they came were superior and possessed of a superior faith, Christianity, and hence fit to rule what Rudyard Kipling called the “lesser breeds without the Law.” Acting on a belief in their racial, religious and cultural superiority, they created the greatest nation on earth. And people who got in their way were shoved aside, subjugated, repressed and ruled. As for the Confederates of the Lost Cause, they yielded to superior force only after four years of fighting, but their battle flag has ever after been seen as a banner of rebellion, bravery and defiance. And those tearing down the battle flags, and dumping over the monuments and statues, and sandblasting the names off buildings and schools, what have they ever accomplished? They inherited the America these men built, but are ashamed at how it was built. And now they watch paralyzed as the peoples of the Third World, whom their grandfathers ruled, come to dispossess them of the patrimony for which they feel so guilty. The new barbarians will make short work of them. Share Pat's Columns! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 09:26:35 -0600 (MDT) From: mudman1 Subject: Re: Why We Are Angry Old Men Ed - Thank you for this cogent assessment of the current situation. Harper has, indeed, abandoned his promise to revoke the Liberal Firearms Law. In the meantime, it is useful to look at what has happened in Canada in the larger scheme of things. In the late 1980's/ early 1990's, the West witnessed the decline and collapse of the Soviet Union. To that point, civilian firearms ownership was not deemed to be overmuch of an issue, but after the breakup of the Soviet Empire, virtually every Western Democracy enacted sweeping, repressive firearms legislation. It is my opinion that this was because gun owners were now perceived as the major threat to the governments of the respective states of the West, now that the major external threat had been broken. In the early years of the last decade, as first the United States, then other nations, became involved in Imperial Wars, the attitude of governments has moderated. It is my conviction that the end of the long gun registry in Canada is directly related to Canada's role in Afghanistan: it is difficult to be against guns when daily images of Canada's young men and women carrying them (in the are spread throughout the media. Of course, the situation is not as neat and tidy as that: Max Planck once made an observation to the effect that science advances one funeral at a time, and so it has been for political thought. But Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban and Chretien's Long Gun Registry were seen to be the equivalent of Bush's flawed "Weapons of Mass Destruction" logic. The irony of all this is that CUFOA and millions of gun owners refused to follow the law which restricted firearms ownership - and whether one votes Conservative, Liberal or NDP, these same gun owners will continue to ignore the law. My chief concern is the economic platform of the respective parties. Given the disaster which is unfolding in Alberta (which, so far, appears to only affect the oil sector), I cannot endorse the NDP of any stripe, while the continued deficit spending plans of the Liberals represents a left-ward change in direction which they had only endorsed under pressure from the NDP. It is for this reason that I will be voting for the PC candidate in our constituency. Jim Szpajcher St. Paul, AB. ----- Original Message ----- From: Edward Hudson To: Digest Firearms Sent: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 11:45:11 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Why We Are Angry Old Men Why We Are Angry Old Men Those of us in CUFOA who refuse to submit to the federal firearms licencing requirement and recommend that responsible gun owners "Do not vote for, support, or donate to the Conservatives"(1) have on one online forum been described as: "an association of admitted criminals who make ... law-abiding gun owners look bad ... ." This is an unfortunate commentary on what is suppose to be a place for enlightened discussion and lively exchange of ideas. Our political foes used the tactics of slander and tried to discredit responsible gun owners by portraying us as "angry old men" in the Parliament Hill Fed Up rallies of 1994 and 1998.(2) Twenty years later, we truly are old men, but now we are angry with Stephen Harper for endorsing the Liberals' firearm licensing scheme. In response to our suggestion that firearms owner not vote for Mr. Harper, many commentators cry that the other parties are totally adverse to firearms ownership, that the NDP and the Liberals (and the Greens) will confiscate all of our firearms. They admonish us to accept "the lesser of the evils" and vote for Mr. Harper. To understand our abhorrence of Mr. Harper one needs to understand the pure, unadulterated evil of the 1995 Firearms Act. The firearms licencing mandate makes the mere possession of a firearm in one's own home an illegal act. This licencing mandate was a major reversal of our historic Canadian practice of responsible gun ownership: "The Firearms Act ... provides ... far reaching ... Gun Control in Canada. "Firearm possession/ownership is now, clearly a privilege, not a right."(3) With the firearms licence the Government presumes the authority to decide "the circumstances in which an individual does or does not need firearms to protect the life of that individual ... ."(4) The firearms licence destroys our Right to defend ourselves. Professor Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser University has clearly stated that: "The bureaucrats want to reduce the numbers of gun owners, and eventually eliminate all private ownership of firearms by citizens. "Licencing means that the government has a list with your name on it. You are in their data base. Having a government database creates serious problems.” And most ominously, Dr. Mauser warns: "Ottawa can increasingly tighten up the rules ... Just by arbitrarily tightening up the standards, the government can cause gun ownership to disappear."(5) Professor Joyce Lee Malcolm, author of Guns and Violence, The English Experience, has shown that the United Kingdom has used firearms licencing to eliminate the use of a firearm for self-defense. Of the British situation Dr. Malcolm writes: "The Firearms Act of 1920, which took away the traditional rights of individuals to be armed, was not passed to reduce of prevent armed crime or gun accidents. It was passed because the government was afraid of rebellion and keen to control access to guns." "English governments had long wanted, and finally obtained, complete discretion over which Englishmen might be armed. The old notion that people had a duty to protect themselves and their neighbors ... was reversed." Dr. Malcolm concluded: "Government, in its expanding control of numerous aspects of community life, now found guns inappropriate for individual defense."(6) Professor Malcolm's follow-up research ten years later showed: "The results have not been what proponents of the act wanted. Within a decade of the handgun ban and the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is."(7) When Mr. Harper declares, "we already register gun owners" he egregiously endorses a law that negates our means of self-defence and gives the Government the name and address of every licenced gun owner in Canada. Are we to be so bold to think that we Canadians will not suffer the same fate as the licenced British gun owners? Do we presume to believe we can submit to licencing and somehow not be forced to surrender our firearms to the Government? Licencing under Stephen Harper is not a "lesser evil." Mr. Harper's licensing law will kill us just like it is killing the British. Sincerely, Edward B. Hudson 306-230-8929 References: 1. CUFOA NewsLetter August 2015 Stephen Harper Has Abandoned Firearms Owners www.cufoa.ca/articles/armes/armes_23_july_2015.html 2. John Dixon, Off Target, originally published in the Globe and Mail "If the object of the policy exercise was to appear to be "tougher" on guns than Campbell, it was crucial to advance a policy that would provoke legitimate gun-owners to outrage. Nothing would be more effective in convincing the urban Liberal constituency that Chretien and Rock were taking a tough line on guns than the spectacle of angry old men spouting politically disastrous fury on Parliament Hill." http://www.rkba.ca/off_target.html http://www.canfirearms.ca/archives/text/v12n500-599/v13n537.txt 3. Canadian Firearms Center 2002 National Compliance Strategy; "The Firearms Act ... provides ... far reaching ... Gun Control in Canada. "Firearm possession/ownership is now, clearly a privilege, not a right." In response to Garry Breitkreuz, MP ATI Request #391 on October 25, 2003 http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/ComplianceStrategyandProgram2004-01-22.pdf 4. Section 117, The Firearms Act, chapter 39, Statues of Canada - 1995; p. 54 "The Governor in Council may make regulations (a) regarding the issuance of licenses, ,... 
 (c) prescribing the circumstances in which an individual does or does not need firearms (1) to protect the life of that individual, ... ." http://www.cufoa.ca/articles/armes/armes_12_sept_2013.html#a 5. Professor Gary Mauser, The Federal Firearm Licence Will Destroy Traditional Canada http://www.sfu.ca/~mauser/papers/licencing/Boiling-a-Frog29104.pdf 6. Joyce Lee Malcolm, Guns and Violence, The English Experience, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2002, pp. 162 -163 7. Joyce Lee Malcolm Two, Cautionary Tales of Gun Control, 26 December 2012 www.wsj.com/.../SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 12:10:44 -0700 From: j davies Subject: Moola said > "The hunt is part and parcel of a very bloody, horrific, painful > experience for the bears," Moola said. That's funny, because every day every bear's victims [including people, not that Suzuki cares about them] face a "very bloody, horrific, painful experience." As an expert related, bears are not great killers, but they are great eaters. I think Suzuki and his cabal should do an extended, on the ground, fact-finding tour at every site frequented by bears of any color. Naturally, being gun-hating leftards, they would not have any means of defense...besides their love for Gaia and Justin, that is. Moola. ROFLMAO. You can't make this stuff up. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 13:36:45 -0600 From: Edward Hudson Subject: The Fallacy of 'Mr. Harper Could Not Give us Everything We Want' The Fallacy of 'Mr. Harper Could Not Give us Everything We Want' "People fail to understand that if Harper had given us gun owners everything we asked for in the 1st year of being elected, the remaining non-gunnies would have given him the boot." I hear Firearms Act and the concurrent changes to the Criminal Code that make the mere possession of a firearms illegal. They understand that this law violates our Right to have arms to defend ourselves. These people understand the very serious battle that we are fighting. And they desperately want Mr. Harper to repeal this very unjust law. However, I believe that accepting this "he could not do it all' argument for supporting Mr. Harper now in this election is unsound for two reasons. First, we did not expect Mr. Harper to repeal the Firearms Act when he was first elected in January 2006 with a minority Government. But we surely did expect Mr. Harper to repeal this unjust law when we helped him achieve his "strong, stable, national Conservative majority government"(1) in May 2011. After winning his majority Mr. Harper could have - should have - repealed the Firearms Act. Yes, Mr. Harper surely would have received some serious flak from the people who hate firearms ownership. But he has a majority. And Mr. Harper has used his majority to do exactly what he wanted to do, and all the Opposition could do was complain. Now I realize that neither of these two positions can be "proven". But we have surely seen how Mr. Harper stuffed all sorts of bills into one omnibus package and rammed it through Parliament and survived unscathed. Secondly, I need to point out that we did not 'ask for everything'. We made our desires known, and in exchange for our support, money, and votes Mr. Harper made us a promise. He could have promised less. But Mr. Harper willingly promised to repeal the Firearms Act. And based on his promise we worked our buns off through four elections to get him elected. One does not - should not - repay loyalty and hard work with treachery. We need a leader who will do what he promises to do. Otherwise we are selling our souls to the Devil and going to Hell in the process. We need to get rid of Mr. Harper and elect a truly honourable person to lead the Conservative Party. Sincerely, Edward B. Hudson Reference: 1. Harper: Majority win turns page on uncertainties "a strong, stable, national Conservative majority government" http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-majority-win-turns-page-on-uncertainties-1.991315 ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V16 #907 *********************************** 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".)