Received: by dot.crosswinds.net (mbox republican) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Thu Nov 4 15:57:21 1999) X-From_: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Thu Nov 4 01:08:21 1999 Return-Path: Received: from broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (majordomo@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca [198.169.128.1]) by dot.crosswinds.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA52997 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 01:08:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07634; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:42 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199911040152.TAA07634@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca> X-Authentication-Warning: broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca: majordomo set sender to owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca using -f From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #190 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Errors-To: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Cdn-Firearms Digest Wednesday, November 3 1999 Volume 03 : Number 190 In this issue: BREITKREUZ'S PROPERTY RIGHTS BILL C-237 Breitkreuz won't give up! McLellan's Coordinated Response to Domestic Violence BC Hydro follow-up Here is another CFC situation www.garry-breitkreuz.com Letters to the Editor British Columbia Range Update Paid Verifiers Canadian Criminal Justice: A Primer Today's Province (BC) Canadians do support new gun legislation handgun amnesty extention - correction Cooey Shotguns Who's looking after me?/Letter to the editor ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 19:10:40 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: BREITKREUZ'S PROPERTY RIGHTS BILL C-237 http://www.parl.gc.ca/36/2/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/private/C-237/C-237_1 /C-237TOCE.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 19:10:44 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Breitkreuz won't give up! Translation from French to English Excerpt from Quebec City daily Le Soleil, 28/10/99: "Hunting and Fishing" column by Andre A. Bellemare Breitkreuz won't give up! Garry Breitkreuz, Reform Party MP in the House of Commons in Ottawa for the Saskatchewan riding of Yorkton--Melville, currently seems to be the only politician who is willing to defend the interests of hundreds of thousands of Quebec hunters. Since April 1998, Breitkreuz has tabled in the House 2,009 pages of petitions, bearing 49,914 signatures, demanding the repeal of the federal Firearms Control Act (the former Bill C-68), which "controls" among other things the shotguns and rifles used by law-abiding Quebec hunters. It is disconcerting, to say the least, that a supposed "enemy of the separatists" has to defend Quebeckers' interests in Ottawa, while more than 50 Bloc Quebecois MPs, elected exclusively by the voters of this province to defend us against Ottawa, are as mute as mice about the whole issue. Yesterday once again, Breitkreuz tabled 154 pages of petitions, signed by 3,649 Canadians in eight provinces and a territory, opposing the federal firearms registration process because of its exorbitant costs and its shortcomings. Among the reasons invoked by the signatories of the petitions, the following come up again and again: registering firearms will do nothing to prevent their use by criminals or to solve the problem of violent crime in Canada; most front-line police officers oppose the registration of firearms; and six provinces and two territories, totalling more than half of the country's population, are contesting the registration before the Supreme Court. In the meantime, in Quebec... Unfortunately, there is no point waiting for Lucien Bouchard's Parti Quebecois government to defend the citizens of our province. When he was Bloc Quebecois Leader in Ottawa (after having been federal Environment Minister in a Progressive Conservative government, and Canada's ambassador to Paris), the current President of the Parti Quebecois and Premier of Quebec supported the Liberal Party of Canada of Prime Minister Jean Chretien and federal Justice Minister Allan Rock in getting approval for their bill to "control" firearms everywhere, including Quebec... Private property In the House of Commons yesterday, Breitkreuz also tabled pages of petitions from residents of Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia calling for better protection of property rights in federal statutes. The petitioners say they are worried about the fact that nothing in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms prevents the Canadian government from passing laws denying citizens the right to own, use and enjoy private property, or reducing the value of that property. They are also worried about the fact that nothing in the Charter prevents the federal government from seizing, arbitrarily and without compensation, property that has been lawfully acquired. That is what could happen once Ottawa has identified who owns firearms across the country and exactly what arms they possess... This is why the heads of hunting associations and federations are asking their members to wait until the absolutely last minute to throw themselves into the wolf's jaws, or in other words before registering their firearms and registering themselves as owners of firearms. In the meantime, these hunters' representatives hope Ottawa will amend intelligently certain aspects of the Firearms Control Act and some of the regulations defining the firearms registration process. Garry Breitkreuz hopes, for his part, that he will be able to get the House of Commons to pass his Private Member's Bill amending the Canadian Bill of Rights to increase protection for the right to own property. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:02 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: McLellan's Coordinated Response to Domestic Violence http://canada.justice.gc.ca/News/Communiques/1999/calgary_en.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:02 -0600 From: Myles Bruns Subject: BC Hydro follow-up Thank you to all list members who sent a letter or email to BC Hydro with regard to their ads that accused hunters of vandalism. I understand that Hydro President Michael Costello is responding with a statement that says he has instructed the PR department to change the wording of the ad. I do not feel that this is enough. I feel that Hydro owes responsible BC hunters a public apology. Hunters were slandered, and unless Hydro makes a public apology the perception of hunters will remain a negative one. I encourage you to reply to any correspondence on this issue with a letter/email that says, in effect, "thank you, Mr. Costello, but as a hunter I would like a public apology from BC Hydro for the damage your ad has done." If you haven't yet sent a letter to Mr. Costello, then get going! Demand an apology on behalf of hunters of BC. I am still flogging this issue because I feel strongly that as responsible firearms owners we have to vociferously and relentlessly defend our position. All to often we are marginalized, demonized, etc. in the press, and all too often we take it without raising a sufficient stink. In this case we were successful in having the ad changed for the future (I hope), but we were still made to look like criminals in the first place, and no effort has been made by Hydro to mitigate that damage. So please, send a POLITE but firm letter to Mr. Costello requesting a public apology to all responsible hunters in BC. Mr. Michael Costello, President BC Hydro PO Box 9501, Stn. Terminal Vancouver, BC V6B 4N1 His email address is: michael.costello@bchydro.bc.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:09 -0600 From: rmcreat@istar.ca (Michelle Traver) Subject: Here is another CFC situation Here is yet another situation to add to the growing list of situations. My firearms business is registered to me as a proprietor. As such I am responsible for all that goes on regarding my business, not my business. In September of 1998, I took possession of two restricted firearms from the Burnaby RCMP. The owner of the pistols had lost a court process. The charges were 2 counts of possession of unregistered-restricted firearms and one count of possession of a prohibited weapon (large capacity mag). He was given two options. He could leave them with the Burnaby RCMP for distruction or sell them (stipulation as to how or who sold them was not made). He chose to sell them. He asked me to take possession for the purpose of sale. As my business license allows, I picked up the pistols. I now have a buyer for one of these pistols. The buyer does not want to use a credit card for the transfer so a money order and form must be sent in. So far so good. I got a call from the processing center a week and a half ago telling me they can not process the form because they show my business as the current and only owner of this firearm, not the individual I listed as current owner. The form would have to be sent to the Victoria office for the changes to be completed and that I would get a call. No reference number could be assigned because a file couldn't be opened. A week goes by, no phone call. I phoned to find out the progress. No one knows what I'm talking about, no one knows where this form or the money order is. Now we have a big search for the missing form/money order. Meanwhile, back at the shop, I have a buyer for the second pistol. A Jennings J-22. You guessed it, they have me /my business as its first owner as of Sept. 1998. Const. XXXXXX told me they must refuse to process the registration transfer of this firearm because the serial number was not registered before Feb. 14, 1995. If I don't dispose of it before the amnesty deadline they will issue a letter to the local Police dept. requesting them to take possession of this pistol. With a second person on the line and listening, I questioned him about the government stealing my property, since they have arbitrarily decided my business is the first owner. He stated that if I was referring to any compensation then no there will be no compensation. I told him that, regardless who takes a thing, if that thing does not belong to them and they do not have permission from its owner to take it, the entity taking the thing commits theft. Theft is a violation of the criminal code. He stated that this item is a prohibited firearm. I replied it was not prohibited when the RCMP handed it to me. Thus, under the circumstances, if the government proceeds with this attempt, they will have finalized another violation by creating a retroactive law and acting on that law. To complicate matters even more, as the first owner, it is listed as having been imported by me. There are no papers to this affect. The government has no paperwork of this pistol having been imported in the first place. So a possible ramification down the line is that I could be charged with smuggling restricted firearms. I related this to another person in the Victoria office. Her response was that she couldn't see the government doing that. I have had an opportunity to speak with an area firearms officer about this with respect to the police receiving letters to confiscate the prohibited pistols. He told me that such a request would surely be low on the priority list. However, when he got to the matter, if the owner refused to hand it over he would have no choice but to get a search warrant for the item. A seizure would take place. I asked him about the search and seizure without warrant provision in the new firearms act. He said that would conflict with the Police Act (which is the provincial authority) and that to do so would be a violation of the Charter of Rights, therefor the government can not do that. I told him they have created a retroactive law which is a violation and they have done that. In fact, the search and seizure clauses were still intact within the Act. I asked which Act would take precedent over the other? He said the Federal Act would. So if an officer were to disregard the Federal request and Act based on a Provincial Act, what would be the result? It would go to the Supreme Court for a decision, he said. I am still waiting for satisfaction to this issue. Privacy is a sacred thing, Michelle Traver (owner) SSAC NCBCS Pres. & Spokesperson HACS member, PPLC Assoc. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/9460/index.html 604-253-3311 fax 604-255-2202 1708 E. 1st Ave. Vancouver, BC V5N 1B1 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:51:58 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: www.garry-breitkreuz.com http://www.garry-breitkreuz.com/ English Press Releases: http://www.garry-breitkreuz.com/gbpress.html Communiques de presse: http://www.garry-breitkreuz.com/gbpresse.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:51:55 -0600 From: "Mark Holmes" Subject: Letters to the Editor OFAH FILE: 401-11/828 October 29, 1999 E-mail to standard@cancom.net The Editor The Elliot Lake Standar 14 Hillside N. Elliot Lake, Ontario P5A 1M6 Dear Editor: Cindy Woods is entitled to her opinion on hunting, (re: October 6 editorial) but in expressing herself she does a disservice to her readers and her profession by failing to get her facts straight. She asserts that hunting is only a sport. Wrong. Hunting is a part of our country's heritage and culture. Generations of Canadians have sustained themselves, their families and their communities through hunting, fishing and trapping. Hunting is not just a sport. The law states that it is illegal to allow game meat to spoil. The law aside, most hunters consider wild game meat a treat, and, as such, it is anticipated and treasured. Nutritionists consider game meat to be leaner and healthier as well. Simply put, hunting is tantamount to shopping in nature's supermarket. Woods also regurgitates a plethora of very misleading statistics on firearms, not the least of which is the claim that between 1970 and 1996 an average of 1,385 people die annually from firearms. What she does not go on to explain is that these numbers include criminals or mentally deranged people shot by police. She also fails to put those numbers into perspective. Statistics Canada figures from 1994 indicate 4,995 Canadia women died that year from breast cancer while 39 died from homicide by firearm. We should be spending more on cancer research and less on registering law abiding gun owners who will never be a threat to anyone. ONTARIO FEDERATION OF ANGLERS AND HUNTERS The Editor October 28, 1999 Page Two Woods claims that 77 percent of firearms deaths are suicides. If this number is true, it clearly shows that Canada has some social problems that need addressing, not more firearms controls or confiscation. Instead of wasting millions on registering duck guns, let's put the money into social programs. The claim that rifles and shotguns are used most frequently in crime is wrong. Weapons other than guns are used more often. Knives, lead pipes, baseball bats and fists and boots are used in far more crimes than guns. It should also be noted that legally owned firearms are only rarely used in crimes. Smuggled or stolen guns are the weapons used by criminals. It makes far more sense to focus our law enforcement efforts on the illegal guns rather than legally owned property. Finally, as a person who cares for wildlife, Woods should seriously consider that the very first conservation efforts in Ontario were undertaken by hunters and anglers. Today, it is still the hunting and angling community that shoulders the majority of the financial burden for wildlife protection and management. As well, it is the hunters and anglers who most frequently volunteer their time and their hard earne money to protect and enhance our natural resources. Yours in Conservation, Mark Holmes Communications Specialist ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:24 -0600 From: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: British Columbia Range Update The National Firearms Association has prepared a document specifically designed for British Columbia Gun Clubs and Ranges. We are in the process of mailing this document, with the NFA Legal Opinion on BC Range CLOSURES, to all NFA Member Clubs. We feel that this is not enough -- this issue is just that vital. We want to make sure this information is in the hands of all GUN RANGES in British Columbia. If your Club in not an NFA Member, and you would like this information, please send your mailing address to nfainfo@nfa.ca The National Firearms Association will mail it to your club -- free of charge! Jim Hinter Co-ordinator ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:15 -0600 From: "The Gayders" Subject: Paid Verifiers Look - paid Verifiers, oops - I mean "Area Resource Persons". http://jobs.gc.ca/jobs/p008556e.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:27 -0600 From: "Ronald R. Hofman" Subject: Canadian Criminal Justice: A Primer For those following the Juristat thread, or just plain interested in Canadian Crime stats, I found a neat web site. Check it out: http://www.cjprimer.com/index.htm Ron NFA Member ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:13 -0600 From: rmcreat@istar.ca (Michelle Traver) Subject: Today's Province (BC) Here's to the words "we told you so"; sadly to say. Today's Province, page A12, reports that approximately 1,800 (one third) of 5,500 RCMP Officers did not pass the fiscal year qualifying test for April 1, 1998 to March 31, 1999. 1,500 of those officers didn't qualify because they weren't able to take the test. The other 300 that tested and failed have been given further training and a month to qualify. As a result, officers in New Westminster and Vancouver may not return to duty until they pass the handgun qualification. The reason? When cut backs happen in the RCMP, it is the training that suffers first. Our AG Dosanjh was in Ottawa meeting with the Solicitor-General "and others" to discuss funding for the RCMP in BC. Those of you in BC please correct me if I am wrong; isn't this yet another incident in a series of incidence regarding qualification tests? Hasn't this been plaguing our RCMP, intensely and compounding, for the past twenty years? Maybe longer? The article does not mention whether the other 1,500 officers have been temporarily relieved of their duties until they qualify or not. When will the BC bureaucracy face the reality of where the money is going? Interesting to note that the Federal Government is saying they have a surplus of cash now. BC is also saying it is now in a prosperous position. Anybody else suffering from a sore neck and shoulders due to stress trying to make ends meet? Privacy is a sacred thing, Michelle Traver (owner) SSAC NCBCS Pres. & Spokesperson HACS member, PPLC Assoc. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/9460/index.html 604-253-3311 fax 604-255-2202 1708 E. 1st Ave. Vancouver, BC V5N 1B1 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:04 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Canadians do support new gun legislation PUBLICATION: Edmonton Journal DATE: 1999.10.31 EDITION: FINAL SECTION: Letters PAGE: A15 BYLINE: Wendy Cukier Canadians do support new gun legislation We must respond to a recent letter by Peter Kearns, ``Gun lobby favours sensible firearms control,'' (Letters, Oct. 19) in which he claims that ``the Coalition for Gun Control is funded directly from our tax dollars.'' In fact, we receive no federal government funding. While municipalities and provincial agencies have in the past made small contributions, 90 per cent of our funding has always come from individual donations. While Kearns concedes that most Canadians do in fact support gun control, he claims that they do not support the new law. He appears to be misinformed. In May 1998, Angus Reid conducted a survey specifically measuring support for this legislation, even including a question on universal registration. It found that 78 per cent of Canadians support the new legislation, while approval of gun registration is even higher at 82 per cent. A clear majority in every province also supports registration -- including 65 per cent of Albertans! A multitude of organizations in policing, crime prevention, public health, domestic violence and victims' rights across Canada have endorsed the Coalition for Gun Control's position and wholeheartedly support the new legislation, arguing that licensing and registration are needed to help reduce the risks of firearms falling into the wrong hands. The fundamental question is whether Canadians can really count on the gun lobby to make them safer. Wendy Cukier, President, Coalition for Gun Control, Toronto ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:31 -0600 From: Rudy Hintz Subject: handgun amnesty extention - correction The following should have read that the intent to extend the amnesty has been listed in the Canada Gazette Part 1. If any one wants to respond to the notice they must within 15 days of the posted date. Details of where to send comments are in the notice. The extention is as good as done but will have a final announcement probably after the current deadline passes. The extention is as good as done. If they keep extending the amnesty our guns may rust away before they come and get them. Also the new gunshow regulations are to be delayed until Dec 31, 2000. - ----------- original message ----------- The handgun amnesty has been extended to Dec 31 2000. Just listed in the Canada Gazette website Part 1. http://canada.gc.ca/gazette/homepar1_e.html Vol 133,No 44 pages 70 - 75 The amnesty extention is for prohibited short barreled handguns (105mm or less), 32 cal and 25 cal handguns, 105mm or less barrels, and non-registered restricted handguns. Also listed is amendments to gun show regulations. - ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:36 -0600 From: Scott Manuel Subject: Cooey Shotguns I have 2 Cooey 12 gauge shotguns with full choke, an 840 model and a 37A model. I was wondering where I could find some info on these guns. If someone could forward me an address or an web address, I would greatly appreciate it. Scott Manuel smanuel@nfld.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:52:40 -0600 From: "chris gilmore" Subject: Who's looking after me?/Letter to the editor I just finished reading an article that states "one in three RCMP officers are not qualified to carry a sidearm" in BC. Because of all the cut backs they have not went to the firing range, if they can find one still open in BC, and made sure they are still good enough to carry. Now I am feeling really worried, not only they tell me I can't protect myself, but the ones we hire to aren't qualified. I still remember all the fuss about keeping the guns "properly stored" and how the "home invasions" skyrocketed after the "perps" realized the likelyhood of meeting an armed homeowner was nearly zero. My feelings are this, my home is my "castle" and no one should be allowed to violate my security, not even the Government. It's time for the Canadian people to stand up to the "intrusive" moves of Government that take away our basic human right of self protection. You may not own a gun and that is your right of choice, but I ask you to be aware of the moves the Government is making against the oridinary lawabiding Citizen who does. If the Government can take away personal property without compensation and gets away with it, today it may be guns, tomorrow it will be something maybe from you. I am getting very tired of the apparent "new politically correct" method of making everyone who owns a gun sound like a potential time bomb most likely to commit a crime. Give me a break! I own a car does that make me a "speeder"? Knives are the weapon of choice now days, nearly one third of all homicides are with knives. So what is this facination with getting all Canadians to register their "duck guns" going to accomplish? Fewer homicides? Not likely. My two cents worth, thanks, Chris Gilmore Box 656 Logan Lake, BC VOK-1W0 ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #190 ********************************** 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.n122 end (122 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.