Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, October 20 1999 Volume 03 : Number 182 In this issue: Sale of gun licences slow in province Journalists are the target London Free Press Article RE: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #181 3 part series on the history of the Machine Gun Forwarded Post ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 12:49:17 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Sale of gun licences slow in province PUBLICATION: The Saskatoon StarPhoenix DATE: 99.10.15 SECTION: Local PAGE: A11 SOURCE: Saskatchewan News Network; Regina Leader-Post BYLINE: McMurchy, Tyler DATELINE: Regina Sale of gun licences slow in province; 100,000 still need proper document Fewer than 4,000 people in Saskatchewan have been licensed in the first 10 months under the new gun control legislation, leaving an estimated 100,000 gun owners to sign up within the next 14 months, according to the federal Justice Department. According to numbers released Thursday, only 3,738 people in Saskatchewan purchased licences between Dec. 1, 1998 and Sept. 30 to possess guns under the new system. By the end of September, there were just under 20,000 people licensed in total, but more than three-quarters of those had purchased firearm acquisition certificates (FACs) under the old system. The Justice Department estimates there are about 100,000 more gun owners in the province who will require licences by the deadline of Jan. 1, 2001. The numbers released Thursday show Saskatchewan gun owners have been slow to get licences under the new system, despite a reduced rate now in effect for those getting one of the two types of licences. Under the new system, a person can be considered licensed if they have either a "possession and acquisition" licence - which applies to people who intend to acquire more firearms, either by purchasing or as gifts - or a "possession only" licence, for people with one or more guns who don't want to add to an existing collection. The Justice Department believes about two-thirds of gun owners will get the possession-only licence, which has been available at a price of $10 since the new system came into effect last December. That price will rise to $45 after Dec. 1, but the approaching deadline hasn't been much of an incentive for people to get their licences, said Keith Serry, a spokesperson for the chief firearms officer of the province. "It is slower than expected," Serry said. "A lot of that can be attributed to a lack of public knowledge about what they're required to do." Serry said most gun owners know they have to register their guns by Jan. 1, 2003, but many may not realize that anyone who owns a gun is required to buy a licence by Jan. 1, 2001. "We deal with it every day. We deal with people talking to our area firearms officers, not knowing the distinction between registration and licensing," Serry said. He admitted the unpopularity of the new gun laws was likely the reason some people were not getting licensed. "There are people who know full well (they have to be licensed) and are making their decision based on other factors," he said. Across the country, the numbers aren't much better. About 170,000 gun owners have purchased licences under the new system, and 2.5 million more will be required to. Serry said firearms officials have their work cut out for them if they want to have every Canadian gun owner licensed by 2001. He said a public information campaign about to be launched should help. "There'll be a big increase in the amount of work to do, no doubt about that," he said. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:08:46 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Journalists are the target PUBLICATION: The Guardian (Charlottetown) DATE: 1999.10.20 EDITION: FINAL SECTION: Editorial PAGE: A6 COLUMN: Dalton Camp BYLINE: Dalton Camp SOURCE: The Guardian (Charlottetown) Journalists are the target The editor of my morning provincial paper has received a letter (with attachments) from Prof. Al Dorans, director of operations in the Ottawa office of the Canadian Institute for Legislative Action (CILA). The institute is a child of the Recreational Firearms Community (RFC), which purports to represent some or all of ``Canada's seven million firearms owners,'' to quote Dorans. Dorans begins: ``This letter is to inform you that the Canadian Institute for Legislative Action (CILA) is currently implementing the CILA Media Accountability Project. This project has been developed in response to widely discrepant (sic) Canadian press coverage on the gun control issue and to numerous complaints from angry firearms owners.'' Dorans goes on to explain the purpose of the institute's media accountability exercise: ``The project seeks to identify and honour the first-rate members of the Canadian media who are a credit to the profession of journalism. It also seeks to identify and sanction those who consistently villify members of Canada's recreational firearms community with biased, prejudiced and discriminatory remarks. CILA is asking Canada's 7 million firearms owners to be the eyes and ears of justice in this country.'' We are not made aware of Dorans' field of academic expertise, but are left to marvel at his insouicance. Canadian journalism, in all its aspects - newspapers, radio, television, magazines - is to be assayed for its willingness or unwillingness ``to report the truth,'' its accuracy or inaccuracy ``in reporting the facts'' or the publication of substantiated or unsubstantiated ``facts and opinion.'' These specifics are the professor's own and they form the criteria by which Canada's journalists are to be judged by gun owners. Their votes are to be mailed or e-mailed or phoned. The five winners and losers in each media category will be made public - Dorans promises - ``at some appropriate time in the future.'' (His academic field may be politics.) This is an unsettling and disturbing development, one that will strike fear and trembling in the breast of those who labour for media barons for a pittance. It is obvious that reputations will hang in the balance, awaiting the dread of judgment day. Imagine, if you will, the worst of all possibilities, were you a journalist: that the gun owners poll would name you as one of the five ``best members of the print media.'' Or in the top five ``best TV personalities.'' One might be tempted to quit work or leave the country, until the Doomsday Book has been made public by the institute. Still, it is the journalist's hard duty to stand his (or her) ground, even at the risk of being endorsed by seven million gun owners. This does not mean the journalist need be docile and take the risk of such endorsement lying down. This occurred to me, as I reflected upon my own prospects in the gun lobby poll. It was then that a strategy evolved by which I might protect my journalistic integrity and my freedom to express my opinion, however biased. That strategy would be to appeal to readers for protection. I have not, at any time, asked anything of anyone other than for indulgence and patience. But perhaps I could now ask a small favour: Would readers mind taking a moment or two in order to participate in Dorans' poll? I am humbly asking their support by asking they name me among the five worst, if not very worst, in the print media poll. No need to be a gun owner, or even to trouble to think of four other ``worst members of the print media,'' a simple plump vote for me alone would be of maximum assistance in my ambition to make the gun lobby enemies list. Is that too much to ask? Dorans' explanatory note to gun owners says his poll was inspired by a 1997 CTV Sunday Edition program during which host Mike Duffy - according to Dorans - ``stated that the reporting of the news in this country is so left-leaning, Liberal and biased'' that he (Duffy) was ashamed. This view was shared by the national affairs columnist for the Ottawa Sun, and also by Diane Francis, author of Fighting for Canada , who, Dorans recalled, ``claimed the problem in this country is that we have a second-rate media.'' Anyway, Dorans has fired an opening shot across the bow of my editor's desk. The voice and the methodology are familiar and fully consistent with the mentality of the gun owners of the land, for better or worse, but invariably worse. One wonders where the money comes from to mount so ludicrous and embarrassing a campaign. There must be money for everything these days. But if they don't pick Diane Francis as the gun lobby's best friend in print, we'll know the contest was rigged. Dalton Camp is a political commentator based in New Brunswick. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:08:36 -0600 From: "Jean-Francois Avon" Subject: London Free Press Article ========== via the Hon. Breitkreuz mailing list ================ PUBLICATION: The London Free Press DATE: 99.10.19 SECTION: News PAGE: A11 SOURCE: SUN MEDIA OTTAWA BUREAU BYLINE: MARK DUNN DATELINE: OTTAWA POLICE PUSH TOUGHER LAWS - --------- text excerpt ---------- The only new twist to the police association 's annual wish list and lobby campaign is the new law it wants to deter people from disarming police officers. "We believe it's a very grave offence if an individual attempts to get a police officer's firearm because what normally follows from that is, in fact, a murder," Obst said. He couldn't provide recent statistics, but noted that of 22 police officers murdered on the job in Ontario in the past 25 years, three were killed with their own revolvers. Obst said trying to disarm a police officer under existing laws amounts to assault, but Crowns tend to plea bargain the assault charge down to nothing. - ---------------------------------- ========== end of Breitkreuz post ================ Isn't it interesting: The text say: >[snip] what normally follows from that [policeman being disarmed] is, in > fact, a murder, [snip] Later, it say that in the past 25 years, of the 22 murdered on the job, 3 were killed with thier own revolver. So, 3 on 22 (or, 13.6%) qualify as "what normally follows", normalcy. I wonder who's their statisticians... Ciao jfa ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:08:33 -0600 From: "Paul Meyer" Subject: RE: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #181 >> In 1997, 401 suicides were completed in Alberta. Nearly 20% of these > involved the use of a firearm. 2 > Nationally, Alberta ranks first among the provinces in the > percentage of > homes with guns (39%).3 A bit of arithmetic for y'all: Nearly 20% of the 401 suicides in Alberta were by firearms: that's less than 80. Let's call it 80. The total number of firearms suicides in Canada in a given year is about 1100. Thus, Alberta has about 7.3 percent of the firearms suicides in the country. BUT Alberta has 9 percent of the population of the country (Government of Canada web site, 1996 population figures.) Soooo...higher rates of gun ownership results in a LOWER suicide rate by firearms. QED. > A home with a gun is 5 times more likely to be the scene of a > suicide and 3 > times more likely to be the scene of a murder than a home > without a gun 5 Both of the studies that published these statistics failed to differentiate between firearms owned by law-abiding citizens and firearms owned illegally by criminals. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that pimps and drug dealers are more likely to be shot in their homes (by other drug dealers or the police) than someone not involved in illicit activities. Surprise! Drug dealers and pimps often have guns in their homes! > 95% of all deaths in Alberta in 1997 involving firearms were > intentional. 1 So the firearms safety course ARE working. Accidents have been nearly eliminated. This is a GOOD thing. Ideally 100 percent of firearms deaths would be intentional. Duh! And lastly (caution, politically incorrect question coming up here...) What proportion of the victims in the child deaths and suicides in these statistics are Native Canadians? Given that Bill C-68 essentially exempts Native from licensing requirements, how will the billion-dollar registry affect Alberta's statistics? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:08:53 -0600 From: "Boudreau, Marcel" Subject: 3 part series on the history of the Machine Gun Coming up on 1 November on Discovery Channel: Machine Gun - History Down The Barrel Of A Gun: White Smoking Devil. A 3 part mini-series showing on 1, 8 and 15 November (and other repeat times during the week). It'll be on at 11:00 PM Atlantic time. Check your local TV guide or the internet. URL for info on the first part of the series is: http://exn.ca/onair/index.cfm?TimeSlot=1999%2D11%2D01%2022%3A00%3A00 Marcel Boudreau Web master for the Atlantic Marksmen Association http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Recreation/AMA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 12:09:03 -0600 From: ":-)" <[a1b01082@axion.net]> Subject: Forwarded Post > I am forwarding this post I received in it's entirety. It is a MUST read, > for everyone in this fight. Even though it comes from the US, the message > is one that can be expressed worldwide. And for those in on the debate for > and against advertising -- read carefully the text of the speech below. > This is the type of message that needs to get out, the one that the real > fighters are aiming for. Want to save a life? Want to save a child? > Ignorance can harm, but educate and the rewards will be endless. All the > court fights, all the challenges, really mean nothing if the public is not > educated, and fights the debate with their emotional tactics caused by > their ignorance. It is the ignorance that needs to be fought, and the > court battles and the letters to the editor just aren't sufficient when > that ignorance is so widespread. READ the following in it's entirety, and > think on the message it holds. > LJ > (Thanks Norm) > --------------------------- > http://thePentagon.com/FullBookJacket > http://GunsSaveLives.org > > -----Original Message----- > From: Edward L. Patrick > To: Undisclosed > Date: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 12:25 AM > Subject: Wye Mills/Chesapeake College - After Action Report > > > All: > > This edition of the Governor's Smart Gun Task Force was held at > Chesapeake College. > > It was a nice venue, but there were only about 40 people in the > huge auditorium. The committee was fully staffed, with the exception > of Ann-Marie Doory and the good Doctor Emeritus from JHU. There were > about a half-dozen reporters and several cameras, but I believe one > belonged to the College, and the other to MPT Channel 16. > > Testimony was the same format. Every speaker was limited to 5 minutes. > There were about 18 or 20 speakers, and I was about number 14. Our > side outnumbered the other side by about three to one in this venue. > > A local sheriff spoke out in favor of the governor and "smart" guns. > The most moving testimony from the other side came from a mother who > had been around guns and hunted, and whose sons has taken hunter safety > training, yet one son killed the daughter when handling a pistol > belonging to his aunt that he discovered at Christmas while at the > grandparent's house. (In short, no gun pulls its own trigger, and > this story, despite the obvious tragedy, suffers from certain > defects in continuity and logic.) > > After I spoke, a gentleman two rows behind me thanked me for my > testimony. A few minutes later, he stepped forward for an "open > mike" session, and spoke about firearms education. After the forum > was over, I found out that this man, dressed in a shirt and worn > blue jeans was, in fact, A MARYLAND STATE TROOPER and a Glock armorer. > I told him that I hoped that there would be no reprisals for his > testimony, since he said his lieutenant was also in attendance. > > All in all, the audience gave the committee a pretty good licking, > and the content of the testimony was weighted heavily toward > gun education in the schools. > > Others in attendance thanked me for my testimony. There were at > least two people present from MSRPA. I also heard one person give > details of the hammer murders committed in the vicinity when a > teen killed his mother, stepfather, and stepbrother. This is a > case I am looking into myself, and it's good to see that, even as > far away as Howard County is from Wye River, these people are on > the same page with me. > > There was applause after every speech at Maryland Shock Trauma last > Tuesday night. Tonight, only one speech drew applause in the > auditorium. > > Below is the entire text of that speech, word for word. > -- > > Good evening. > > My name is Ed Patrick and I represent the Maryland Citizens Defense League. > > If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. > > Truer words have never been spoken, yet there is a certain aspect to > education that has escaped this committee and the governor. > > As the father of three children ranging in age from toddler to teen, > it amazed me how the first three words of each child seemed to be, > Ma-ma, Da-da,...McDonalds. > > One reason for this is the billion dollars spent on advertising by > McDonalds each year. Another reason is that American kids watch too > much television. > > I dare say that even the governor knows the meaning of the word, > Pokemon. > > I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, that if you do not spend dollars > toward firearms education, then you are supporting the high costs of > ignorance, by abandoning the children of Maryland to the relentless > marketing influences of movies, television, and video games. These > industries spend far more money marketing violence and death than > McDonalds will ever spend promoting French fries. > > So what is it that Hollywood is teaching our children about guns? > > Take the situation comedy where a female employee finds a pistol and > points it at all of her colleagues in the office while they duck behind > their desks. Ha, ha. Very funny. > > How about the gritty, in-your-face crime drama where a cop demonstrates > to the camera that he knows enough about guns to keep his finger out of > the trigger guard, but not enough to keep from sticking the muzzle > against the temple of his brother and threatening to shoot. > > Or maybe its a popular TV show about angels in which a Luger is made > safe by removing the magazine but the weapon is never cleared. This > show prompted my 12 year-old son to say, Dad, theres a bullet still > in the pistol. My son was already 30 minutes ahead of the script. > > Hollywood believes this type of garbage programming is a money maker. > While responsible gunowners cringe and change the channel, I suggest > throwing the tube out the window. > > Yes, Hollywood is teaching kids about guns, but no, theyre not doing > a good job. > > We have been told that you cannot gun proof a child, yet Ive never > heard anyone say that you cannot knife proof a child. While many > emotional arguments have been presented about the dangers of guns in > the home, why is it that we never hear about the cutting or stabbing > deaths of children? While one might reason that a gun is the more > lethal weapon, how is it that kitchen drawers and counters filled with > knives are not being abused by kids? What is it about a gun in the back > of a closet that makes it more fascinating than the carving knife on the > kitchen counter? > > I believe, as responsible gun owners do, that this is a learned behavior. > Like bigotry and hatred, irresponsible and reckless behavior patterns > must be learned. They are not carried in childrens genes. > > Parents may not want to bring guns into their homes, but Hollywood brings > reckless gun-slinging into the living room each and every day, where > children, in turn, bring what they know onto the streets and into the > schools. While only half of American households are armed with guns, > almost all households are armed with television. > > In answer to the gun education of Hollywood, the State of Maryland is > doing nothing, except throw up its hands in the face of social ills to > go after the evil gun. Unwilling to prosecute Dad because his pistol > was improperly stored, legislators now want to make political hay by > drafting laws that throw this same grieving father into a jail cell with > rapists, drug dealers and murderers. Rather than fighting fire with fire > and combating the lethal instructions kids are receiving every day, > Governor Glendening prefers to tell the Assembly that he will dictate > technology. > > My question is, Why? > > The standard argument is always put forth, If it saves just one life. > Well, ladies and gentlemen, it would save 40,000 lives a year if the > national speed limit was only 2 miles per hour. They are not just > statistics, they are people, yet 40,000 is the number of them we sacrifice > on the altar of transportation every year in order to have the freedom > of movement that has made us the envy of the world. > > The cost of ignorance is enormous, yet you represent a committee of > political gentry, unanswerable to the voting public, that has been > appointed to determine what mandated technology can be foisted upon us > peasants to address your perception of the problem of child gun violence. > > Strangely, gun crime -- even in the schools -- has been dropping for years. > Murder and violence is down. Despite the fact that Marylanders were > Americas most-robbed citizens in 95, 96, and 97, even Lieutenant > Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend reported during the 98 election > campaign that violent crime in Maryland fell at nearly twice the national > average in the previous year. > > With crime dropping continuously since 1993, why is there so much clamoring > now for new legislation? A much more cost-effective solution for the > taxpayers of Maryland would be to inoculate every Kindergartner in the > state with these four phrases: > > STOP! > DONT TOUCH! > LEAVE THE AREA! > TELL AN ADULT! > > For this, and many other reasons, the doctors, engineers, entrepreneurs, > and rocket scientists of the Maryland Citizens Defense League oppose this > Orwellian mandate for smart gun technology. > > > Thank you. > -- > > Ed > > P.S., Someone did mention missing Sandy Abrams and John Josselyn. Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #182 ********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:parry@ionline.net List owner: mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca FAQ list: http://www.magma.ca/~asd/cfd-faq1.html and http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Faq/cfd-faq1.html Web Site: http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/homepage.html FTP Site: ftp://teapot.usask.ca/pub/cdn-firearms/ Digest Back-issues: by FTP (cd pub/cdn-firearms/Digests), or visit the Cdn-Firearms web site (above), or put the next command in a message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca get cdn-firearms-digest v03.n022 end (022 is the digest issue number and 03 is the volume) To unsubscribe from _all_ the lists, put the next five lines in a message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca unsubscribe cdn-firearms-digest unsubscribe cdn-firearms-alert unsubscribe cdn-firearms-chat unsubscribe cdn-firearms end (To subscribe, use "subscribe" instead of "unsubscribe".) If you find this service valuable, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the freenet we use: Saskatoon Free-Net Assoc., 1702 20th St. West, Saskatoon SK S7M OZ9 Phone: (306) 382-7070 modem lines: (306) 956-3700 and (306) 956-3701 Home page: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/ National Firearms Association (N.F.A.) Box 4384, Station C Calgary AB T2T 5N2 ph.: (403) 640-1110 fax: (403) 640-1144 mailto:nfainfo@nfa.ca Web site: http://www.nfa.ca/ DONATIONS GRATEFULLY ACCEPTED! Automatic, monthly donations may be made to the N.F.A. by sending postdated cheques, or your Visa/MasterCard number and expiry date, to the Membership address above, along with the amount you would like to donate: $5, $10, or another amount. Automatic donations may be cancelled at any time. N.F.A. memberships: families: $40; seniors: $25; individuals: $30; businesses: $50. Included are regular issues of the N.F.A. newsletter Point Blank, as well as magazines like "Canadian Sportsman". Add just $4.75 per person for $5,000,000 insurance! Clubs: get associate memberships for just $3 per member ($40 minimum) and members will be still eligible for $5,000,000 liability insurance for just $4.75 each! These e-mail digests are free to everyone, and are made possible by the efforts of countless volunteers. Permission is granted to copy and distribute this digest as long as it not altered.