Cdn-Firearms Digest Monday, October 18 1999 Volume 03 : Number 178 In this issue: Lack of Digests Export figures Registration of personal property other than firearms Magazine: Chatelaine Poll Response Dialog w/ EDS Systemhouse Re: Do gun laws make us safer?*Pt II RE-MARKING A FIREARM more on buying firearm-related goods in the US Re: [alert] BCWF ALERT Re: Re-marking a firearm A Rock needs your support! Looking for downloadable "Observations on a One Way Street" Buying in the USA Re: Why Privacy Act Requests? Re: Buying gun stuff in the States Home Invasion IMPORTANT NOTICE: TERMINATION OF SERVICES Firearms Safety Courses ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:11:50 -0600 From: David Parry Subject: Lack of Digests Sorry everyone, but my antique computer broke down again. Anyone have a used computer for sale cheap. Cheers, David Moderator CFD ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:14:06 -0600 From: "The Gayders" Subject: Export figures A friend of mine says that within the last month it was revealed in the media how Canadian firearm and military exports to other nations has gone up a HUGE amount under the Liberals. Can anybody point me to a source which confirms this? Thanx, John A. Gayder ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:28:11 -0600 From: briandrader@canada.com Subject: Registration of personal property other than firearms I'm aware of a few types of property that currently are registered with the feds. Radio gear (ham radios and the like) and aircraft are currently registered with the federal government. The ultralight registry costs $125 and is good for life. If ultralight registration information is found to be incorrect then the Department of Transport (DOT) sends a polite letter asking the owner to update that information - instead of arresting the person as is the current practice for firearm registry violations. I've never heard of aircraft or radio gear being seized simply for a license expiry - blatantly dangerous or malicious usage is the usual reason for confiscation. I believe boats are also registered, but again I'm not aware of anyone's boat, or plane, or radio ever being declared "prohibited" and subject to confiscation. Nor is there a 10-year ban on owning similar items if found guilty of a registry violation, as would be the case for firearm violations under C-68. None of! ! these items of registered property are projectiles, of course - but then again there is no requirement to register a rocket in Canada. A "prohibited" .25 caliber pocket pistol firing a dinky 50 grain bullet at subsonic speeds (under Mach 1) would do a LOT less damage than a 3 kilogram rocket at Mach 2 (roughly 2000 fps) which anyone can purchase (along with fuse and detonator components ;) from the local hobby shop. I might add that although the good folks at DOT regulate many aspects of rocketry, they are quite well-informed and speedy compared to the CFC. A friend of mine recently got approval to import a new technology, composite nitrous oxide/alcohol rocket engine, start to finish, in just a few weeks. Try importing ANY firearm in that time - it can't be done unless you already possess current government permits. Finally, land and most (but not all) vehicles are also registered, but not by the feds. Hope this helps, Brian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:27:59 -0600 From: "boz" Subject: Magazine: Hello to all: I have lost the 4 round magazine for my Parker Hale 30:06. Does anyone out there know where I could obtain a replacement. Thanks Bob Boswell Moderator's Note: Try Great Western Gunparts. DJP ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:28:01 -0600 From: "Mark L Horstead" Subject: Chatelaine Poll Response X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 The following was sent to Chatelaine via their online comments form http://www.chatelaine.com/form/feedback.html (in response to comments in their poll results published at http://www.chatelaine.com/poll/pollres_oct99.html): Regarding your September 1999 topic, "Do gun control laws decrease crime?": I would definitely agree with your comment that this poll "Seems like a clear victory for the anti-gun law proponents, doesn't it?", except for the one small but significant detail. Those of us who oppose the Liberals' firearms legislation are NOT "ant-gun law proponents". We recognize the need for regulation of firearms, and more so than the "average" citizen. We have a double interest in effective firearms laws. Firstly, we are no different than any other person in wanting a safe environment for our loved ones. Secondly, we are tired of being scapegoated by media and politicians alike every time a criminal misuses a firearm. We have been pushing for the type of legislation that would help to achieve this goal of improved safety for decades, but nobody is willing to listen. Our proposal, the National Firearms Association-sponsored Practical Firearms Control System, is actually stricter than the Liberals' sad bill by far but is also simpler, cheaper by a couple of billion dollars, and doesn't contain the human rights abuses that Bill C-68 does. It can be viewed at www.nfa.ca. As far as the "spamming" (and just how do you know/prove this allegation?) - that represents a flaw in your polling system. I have taken part in many such polls, which specifically prevent multiple voting, yet the results have always been the same. Regardless, it's interesting to note that "the other side" could have done the same thing. Are they more "honest"? Are they less imaginative? Or, most likely, are there not that many of them? Heidi Rathjen and Wendy Cukier could only get 138 votes in their favour in all of that time? And that after a very simplistic, emotionally-laden, one sided article by one of them? That alone should tell you something. Run a rebuttal article by Dave Tomlinson, Al Dorans, or Gary Mauser then conduct a similar poll without the multiple-voting flaw and see what the results are. As for one of the last comments, "where even a single fatality could be prevented, the increase in legislation was worth it" (usually expressed as, "if it saves just one life...), how much is this hypothetical "one life" worth? There are between twenty and twenty-five million firearms in Canada today, owned by seven to nine million people. These numbers have been arrived at through several different methods, unlike the government's flawed single telephone poll on which its claim of three million owners and seven million firearms is based on. Under the old system, it cost about $100.00 to register a firearm. If that is multiplied by even the government's ridiculously low number of seven million, you end up with a cost of seven hundred million dollars without even taking into account additional sales of these or new firearms. Now do the math with the higher numbers. And that's only part of the cost. How many women die annually from gunshot wounds (and keep in mind that a firearm is not essential in a murder or suicide; another implement or method could be easily substituted if a firearm was not available)? How many women die annually from breast cancer? How much money is the government going to waste registering firearms (which has never been proven to prevent or solve a crime, by the way)? How much does the government spend on breast cancer research? That should tell you something about how much this government truly cares about women. The firearms legislation is a fraud. Wasting scarce dollars on it rather than spending money where it would do much more good is a crime, and a very serious one in my mind. My first mother-in-law died from breast cancer. My daughter therefore has an increased risk of developing and possibly dying from breast cancer - a far, far greater risk than dying from firearms misuse. Where do you think I would rather see my tax dollars go? How about you? Mark L Horstead ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:28:28 -0600 From: "The Gayders" Subject: Dialog w/ EDS Systemhouse 3-10-99 Dear Sir or Madam, Under the heading "Law of the land", your webpage states: "EDS Systemhouse deploys its global expertise in Canada to help government use technology to combat crime and promote safety in communities. For example, EDS Systemhouse is developing software to register firearms and license gun owners so the Canadian government can better safeguard the population against crimes of violence." As a currently serving front line police officer, I have a question: Please explain eactly how registering guns and their owners will safeguard the population against crimes of violence. As a gun owner, I take great exception to being labled a detriment to safety or responsible for crimes of violence. Sincerely, John A. Gayder RESPONSE FROM EDS: 13-10-99 Mr. Gayder: I was forwarded your email of October 3rd regarding our web page and its discussion of our role in the Canadian Firearms Registration system. While your question regarding the ability of the registration system to better safeguard the population is a valid one, it is also a controversial one that has been discussed on many levels and is therefore, best directed to the federal government and the Ministry of Justice, who initiated the program. EDS Systemhouse is a supplier to the federal government under this program and while we can reiterate our understanding of the government's intent with the program, we cannot speak for them in this matter. Thank you for your interest in our web site and for passing on your comments - they are always welcome. Sincerely, Mary Keating Mary Keating Public Relations EDS Systemhouse (905) 892-0738 Fax: (905) 892-1735 REBUTT: 13-10-99 Ms Keating; Thank you very much for your timely and succinct response. I have contacted the Ministry of Justice on several occasions and they too have been unable or unwilling to answer even the most rudimentary questions about their multimillion-dollar firearm registry. May I suggest the controversy you mention in your response is actually fueled by the many hasty and unfounded assertions heard from many sources, including those found on your web page? I recommend that your organization not embroil itself in the debate by propagating what amounts to (as far as I can determine) a myth about the registry improving public and police safety. Besides, since the entire implementation of the Firearms Act is showing signs of rapid self-destruction (especially the registration of firearms); your organization would be far wiser to adopt a more modest affiliation with it, there-bye avoiding stains from what will inevitably become a tar baby. Sincerely, John A. Gayder St.Catharines, ON ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:28:33 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: Re: Do gun laws make us safer?*Pt II >Why shouldn't someone who felt threatened carry a can of pepper spray for >self-protection? It's illegal, for starters. In Canada, no one can >legally carry any kind of weapon: not pepper spray, not a firearm -- not >even a hat-pin. According to the Canadian government, anyone who carries a >weapon for protection will just have it used against them. How is it that >we can be trained to drive a car, use a computer, even a chain saw, but >not pepper spray? Why does the government believe we are so incompetent? That is incorrect. One may carry a knife which is a TOOL intended for use as a TOOL, and one may USE that tool for self-protection if one is in a state of reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. The tool is not a weapon, so the weapon laws do not apply to it. It BECOMES a weapon when it is USED as a weapon -- but if that happens while the possessor is under attack, the possessor has the right to use anything that comes to hand for self-protection, either to PREVENT the commission of a serious offence, or to defend onesself or another from assault, or prevent an assault. That is the law on self-protection, CC s. 34, 35, 37, and 27. One may, when threatened or attacked (both of which are assault, which is an indictable offence), ARREST the dangerous person. If that person RESISTS ARREST, all of the protections that apply to a police officer are applied to the arresting person -- YOU. That is CC s. 494(1) and (3) plus CC s. 25. David A Tomlinson National President, National Firearms Association Ph: (780)439-1394 Fax: (780)439-4091 natpres@nfa.ca Box 1779, EDMONTON AB, T5J 2P1 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:28:36 -0600 From: Dave Tomlinson Subject: RE-MARKING A FIREARM >I am interested in re-marking my AR-15 with M-16 markings. The words >"AR-15A2 SPORTER II" would be welded over and re-stamped with "M-16A1", and >the words "SAFE-SEMI-FULL" would be stamped around the selector switch. This >is to make it look as close to the military version as possible. The rifle >will remain semi-automatic regardless of the markings (ie. there is no auto >sear hole nor any M-16 parts inside), and the correct serial number and >caliber will be properly indicated. The legislation apparently never considered this problem, so it is silent on it. It IS illegal to alter a Serial number -- but nothing else. If you do this, photograph the firearm before, during, and after the process. Keep careful records, and document EVERYTHING, very step of the way. Make a photocopy of the records file, and keep the records file in a VERY safe place -- preferably NOT in your home. If a dispute arises, submit the photocopies of the records file, and ONLY bring out the originals IN A COURT OF LAW. David A Tomlinson National President, National Firearms Association Ph: (780)439-1394 Fax: (780)439-4091 natpres@nfa.ca Box 1779, EDMONTON AB, T5J 2P1 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:28:40 -0600 From: briandrader@canada.com Subject: more on buying firearm-related goods in the US Peter Kearns may be correct when he says that Canada Customs cannot LEGALLY divulge the contents of your imports to the US authorities, but this doesn't mean that the US authorities won't potentially try to prosecute you for an ITAR violation if you import a firearm from the US. Our lovely spook friends at CSIS can access anything from Customs' database at a keystroke. Since CSIS is legally allowed to break ANY Canadian laws, they are free to divulge any and all information regarding your firearm import to the US authorities. The US authorities could potentially investigate at that point. Chances of a successful prosecution based solely on information provided by CSIS would likely be slim, but if you then went on to register that firearm the registration information could be obtained and used against you. The BATF would already have the serial # to compare. However, this might be a moot point because the ITAR exemption may already be lifted, according to this National Post article: http://www.nationalpost.com/news.asp?f=991009/98643&s2=national Does anyone know whether the ITAR exemption has been lifted only for defence contractors, or whether the exemption has been restored for all Canadians? Cheers, Brian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:13:02 -0600 From: "John B. Holdstock" Subject: Re: [alert] BCWF ALERT Rick: It is really bizarre. The instructions that are sent out to the various detachments specifically says that "no firearm can be returned to the RO unless authorized by the CFO, even if a court order is in place". It looks as though the CFO has put himself above the judiciary. John ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:13:49 -0600 From: "Keith P. de Solla, P.Eng" Subject: Re: Re-marking a firearm The Form 6 is used by anyone wishing to import firearms into the US - generally either a licensed importer (regular FFL only under limited circumstances), or someone moving to the US and wishing to bring firearms into the country. As far as I know AR-15 lower receivers may not be importable into the US at all. - -- Keith P. de Solla kdesolla@shield.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:12:46 -0600 From: Jim Davies Subject: A Rock needs your support! Check out the following URL where there is a chance to give Rock the support he deserves! Some of the choices you can choose from [regarding his future] include "run for leadership" and "return to private life" With only 62 votes tallied when I was there, the winner was "leadership" Make your vote count! http://www.homestead.com/allan_rock/general2.html - -------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:14:06 -0600 From: Larry Soo Subject: Looking for downloadable "Observations on a One Way Street" I'm looking for a copy of "Observations on a One Way Street: The Canadian Firearms Control Debate" by the Ontario Handgun Association. I'm aware of the website version but I would like a version I can easily print-out and/or keep on my palmtop for speedy reference. I find myself forgetting many key points during gun control discussions/debates. ...lars http://www.bc4x4.com http://www.off-road.com/~lhsoo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:13:49 -0600 From: "Ryan Harriman" Subject: Buying in the USA One thing that I was never clear on was what happens if you are buying for personal use? I thought someone told me that if it was personal use you you could declare it on you personal declaration of goods. Also does anyone know what I have to do if I want to export to the US and how do I get one of those import/export permits? Ryan Subject: Re: Buying gun stuff in the States I thought the export permit was only required if the value of the good exceeds 100 U$. mike ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:13:43 -0600 From: Rick Lowe Subject: Re: Why Privacy Act Requests? Bruce Mills said: > OK, under what auspices or regulations can you demand that errors be > corrected? What kind of wording would you use? What actually *can* be > changed, or deleted? Everything but criminal convictions? Anything that > can't be proven to be "true"? How do you prove it isn't? Under what > auspices or regulations can they *refuse* to change things, or can they? Call the Privacy Commissioner at 1-800-267-0441 and get all the answers you require straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak. But make sure you send in your Privacy Act requests as well, rather than just asking "what if" questions. You can't do anything until you have a copy of your records... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:14:06 -0600 From: MJ Subject: Re: Buying gun stuff in the States Yes, they can detain anything for as long as they want. However recent 'education' efforts by yourself and others might be working. I recently received 1K pulled surplus target bullets from a US supplier. Customs had opened the box, classified the contents as: 9306309024 Bullets - - and parts thereof; charged: $0.00 duty and excise tax, $5.24GST and $5.00' handling fee' for the obligatory priviledge of the excercise. Perhaps someone reminded them that they work for RevCan. That 'handling fee' is irritating, especially on an item with less than a loonie of GST. IMHO they've simply electronified the process of slipping the official a fiver to get items thru customs. Is it the Mexican influence on free trade?? mike ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:12:36 -0600 From: "ross" Subject: Home Invasion Recently several young offenders (criminal thugs) performed a home invasion in Ottawa leaving the home owner unable to sleep, and now lives in fear of young people. Our Justice system gives these law breakers bail!! Why? Under Bill C-68 (gun control laws) this is not supposed to happen. Criminals are not supposed to be able to get guns, and the costly registration system would have prevented this (at least thats the what the public has been sold). So it must be true that C-68 is about people control and has nothing to do with Gun control??? I would hope that Just-us Minister Anne Mc lellan is watching this closely. My prediction: Both teens will receive counselling, probation, and community service. Now prove me wrong! J Ross Nepean ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:13:05 -0600 From: "Trowell" Subject: IMPORTANT NOTICE: TERMINATION OF SERVICES IMPORTANT NOTICE: TERMINATION OF SERVICES __________________ October 14, 1999 Due to an overwhelming general lack of interest, in my efforts and initiative, as of November 17, 1999, Interagent Incorporated, while remaining in business, will no longer be offering armed services of any kind whatsoever. As of today's date, consider any outstanding offer to provide such employment or service void and terminated. After 11/17/99, should anyone attempt to offer such services, on behalf of Interagent Incorporated, consider it fraudulent and criminal, unless otherwise notified by me, prior to that date. Authorizations to Carry Restricted or Prohibited Firearms will also be invalidated, as of the same date. Should anyone claim to be Authorized to Carry Restricted or Prohibited firearms, on behalf of Interagent Incorporated, consider it fraudulent and criminal, unless otherwise notified by me, prior to that date. Thank you for your generous support and encouragement. _____________________ Matthew Trowell President Director - Client Services Interagent Incorporated prpinc@sprynet.com ********* END MESSAGE ********* ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:11:47 -0600 From: Steve Grover Subject: Firearms Safety Courses Good Day - Recently in Nova Scotia the administration aspect of the firearms safety course was taken over by our community colleges as dictated by the CFO. They provide the facilities and register the students and we do the lecturing and testing. The manner in which revenues are allocated have become a sore point. Students are paying $50 to take the course. The college tells us that we need 1 instructor for up to 10 students, 2 for 10-19 and 3 for 20-25. They pay us $200 per instructor. We always take 25 at a time, for which they want to pay us $600. Previously, the course was administered by the DNR, who paid us $43 per student. This was a fair arrangement. We have lost about $475 revenue for our club per course based on this new system. The colleges take in half the revenue for making the phone calls and sending off the applications. I am going to try and make a case for allowing our club to adminster our own courses. I understand that in other provinces that is the case. Would you folks in the provinces who self adminster please send me some emails detailing the costs, procedures and time involved in administering the program? We already have excellent facilities at our club where we did the courses for years here in Nova Scotia. Thanks, Steve Grover - email sjg@iname.com ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #178 ********************************** 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.