From: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V5 #269 Reply-To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Sender: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Errors-To: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Cdn-Firearms Digest Friday, November 15 2002 Volume 05 : Number 269 In this issue: When guns save lives CFD Message Text Formatting Problems Letter to the Editor Re: Michael Moore buys bullets RE: CFD Message Text Formatting Problems Hunters Beware FW: A message to leftists Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Hunters Beware [cont'd] Re: Registration Re: Hunters Beware Re: On the lighter side A-hunting we will go... Seizures, CSIS and Michael Moore Prosecutions -- CFD v.5 #268 Fwd: thank you ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 23:39:55 -0600 (CST) From: Joe Gingrich Subject: When guns save lives When guns save lives Nov. 8, 2002 Orange County Register Editorial (California) One of the biggest fallacies of gun-control supporters is their idea that guns in and of themselves are an evil that needs to be wiped out. That idea motivates gun controllers to support any number of limitations and regulations geared toward reducing the raw number of guns in the public's hands. But an attack in Laguna Hills recently shows how beneficial gun use can be, when used by potential victims protecting themselves against an armed attacker. Dana Kiefer and her 10-year-old daughter, Hana, were at Ms. Kiefer's parents' house when Dana's ex-husband Eric Kiefer broke into the home wielding a hatchet. Mr. Kiefer had a history of drug abuse and of abusing Ms. Kiefer during their marriage. He had a restraining order placed on him to stay away from her. The court decree didn't stop him from assaulting his ex-wife, and it certainly didn't stop him from breaking into his ex-in-laws' house, grabbing his daughter, then trying to force her to drink some form of caustic liquid, according to news reports. Fortunately, Ms. Kiefer's boyfriend fatally shot Mr. Kiefer with a shotgun, thus ending a confrontation that could have cost five people their lives. It's the latest example of what John R. Lott Jr. calls the underreported story of citizens who use guns to protect themselves from criminals. "When was the last time that you heard the national evening news reporting about a citizen using a gun to save lives?" Mr. Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime," wrote in a newspaper article. "Few realize that people use guns defensively to stop about 2 million crimes a year, according to national surveys." That's an astounding statistic. In a sense, gun-controllers use a utopian argument for banning or limiting guns. They assume that if guns were eliminated, then people who would no longer be able to use them for evil. Therefore, there wouldn't be any need for average citizens to have guns to protect themselves and their families. But guns will always be with us. There are millions of guns in the United States, so it's hard to imagine eliminating them all, especially from criminals. Mr. Kiefer was attacking his ex-wife and daughter with a hatchet. Without guns, the attacker with the biggest knife or strongest physique would succeed. Guns are a great equalizer - which is why even some feminists are coming around to the pro-gun rights argument. An Orange County judge told the Register that the Laguna Hills incident shows that some people who violate restraining orders need to be held in custody until a judge can evaluate their mental health. That's a good point. But it's not enough. Innocent people shouldn't have to risk their lives and the lives of their loved ones by going unarmed and hoping the justice system will get its act together. Guns can save lives. If you doubt that, think about what might have happened to Dana and Hana Kiefer had their household been unarmed. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:00:49 -0600 (CST) From: "Marc Mousseau" Subject: CFD Message Text Formatting Problems Moderator, I have some questions about the formatting of messages on CFD. Why are we getting so many messages with =20 at end of each line? Why are we getting messages that seem to repeat twice? Are these HTML messages? Can anything be done about these odd formatting characters? They really break up the messages and make reading them cumbersome. Does the list support accented characters? If not, can anything be done by the list software to change accented characters to similar non-accented text characters so that they are more easily read? Also, I would like to know the best method to send plain text messages. Should senders manually add line breaks after each line? If so, then how long may the longest lines be. Or should we send plain text without line breaks, with only Returns at the end of each paragraph? Will the list software automatically wrap this sort of text to the proper line length? Any help on this would be appreciated by myself and others. - -- Marc MousseauThis message sent with manual line breaks of less than 75 characters. Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator: I do not know the answer marc. Some of us have put a lot of time intotrying to figur out whay some formatting is not held through transmission. I suspect the Majordomo software tries to reduce space used. My email client (Eudora) has a default of 76 characters per line. The message above is produced exactly as I received it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:43:20 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Ackermann Subject: Letter to the Editor In the 14 November edition of the Toronto Sun I read these words by Police Chief Julian Fantino as he decried the deplorable "Wild West" rash of shooting sprees by T.O.'s gang bangers, "It's really difficult to be out shooting people when you're doing 10 years in the penitentiary. When nothing else works for some of these people, then jail has to be the option. We can't hope to rehabilitate these people and I can't worry about it." = The article states that, "Fantino believes jail is the only way to stop some of these shooters from killing. He wants a minimum 10 year jail sentence for using a firearm while committing an offence. Ottawa isn't interested in changing the laws." Boy, talk about d=E9j=E0-v=FB (sp?). I and the rest of Canada's Responsib= le Firearms Community have been asking for these kinds of laws for over two decades now. We have always been in favour of strict accountability for crimes of violence. But the Canadian government prefers to waste $1.3 billion dollars harassing harmless recreational RFC firearm owners with a worse-than-useless gun registry which drains vital police resources all the while the government refuses to apply the "mandatory consecutive" sentences already in the Criminal Code for use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. It is well documented that the 68 year old Handgun Registry has failed to produce any public safety benefit and so I simply can't understand why the government persists in this folly with the Long Gun Registry. We in the RFC have been standing ready to work with the government to develop a set of sensible, targeted, and cost effective laws that actually attack the criminals who abuse firearms. The government continues to spurn our efforts. The public will pay the price of even more bloodshed and wasted money. Is this what you want? - -- = M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, 4132 Sonora Rd. Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 My email: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca SMSA URL: www.smsa.ca "Hope for the best, but plan for the worst". Source: PUBLICATION: The Toronto Sun = DATE: 2002.11.14 = EDITION: Final = SECTION: News = PAGE: 40 = ILLUSTRATION: 1. photo by Greg Henkenhaf TORONTO POLICE Chief Julian = Fantinos explains the deadly realities of the city's gun problem. 2. photo = SOURCE: BY ROB GRANATSTEIN ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:43:44 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Ackermann Subject: Re: Michael Moore buys bullets Why hasn't Moore been charged under the Firearms Act for acquiring ammunition without an FAC, PAL, or POL? - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, 4132 Sonora Rd. Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 My email: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca SMSA URL: www.smsa.ca "Hope for the best, but plan for the worst". ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:46:31 -0600 (CST) From: "Ed Sieb" Subject: RE: CFD Message Text Formatting Problems I have attempted various formats of sending messages (all in plain text). I've even tried keeping lines to 60 characterrs or less. Nothing helps. This problem appears to happen only with text which I've "cut 'n pasted" from other sources. Let's see if it happens with this message which is all hand-keyed. Ed Sieb Moderator: message exactly as I received it from the server. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:50:30 -0600 (CST) From: Jim Hill Subject: Hunters Beware > Place firearms out of sight in your vehicle either behind the seats and > covered up with other items. Do not wear hunting orange or recognisable Not me. I'm not going to hide the fact that I'm a hunter or going to the range - like it's some dirty little secret to be ashamed of. It is legal to carry your hunting firearms and non restricted firearms uncased in your vehicle in this province - and that's exactly how I will continue to transport them. If they want to see my license or whatever - I will have it for them to look at. If they then decide to search my vehicle, I will tell them they do not have my permission and I do not think they have reasonable cause to do so. If they insist on it anyway, I will hound them afterward with complaints to make sure both they and I get our money's worth. But I will not act like I am doing something wrong I should be ashamed I never said you should be ashamed and you can do what you like. In this province your firearm must be in a case at all times while being transported in a vehicle. Any time a vehicle is stopped and a firearm is visible , a policeman has all the grounds in the world to check you. Before I retired from the RCMP I was stopped one year at a checkpoint manned by RCMP and Provincial DNR. The guns were in the cases visible on the passenger side of the truck. Each one was checked and the truck was checked for any game even though I told them I had none. I was wearing my hunter orange cap and jacket. I was there for some time while all licences including driver's lic were checked. I did not bother to inform them that I was a member and none of them knew me. I was curious to see what they would do. I continued on my way a little later than I wanted to as I was tired and has some distance to go. The next time I went to the area my guns were in the compartment in the back of the truck and I had no sign of hunting gear showing. Another checkpoint and I breezed through after they looked at my inspection sticker on the window. The other vehicles pulled over and being checked were all obvious hunters. I am not ashamed of what I do either but I have better things to do with my time than spend it at a checkpoint jawing with some young smartass who believes Rock's statement that only he should be allowed firearms. The more you talk the more likely you are to be drawn into a conversation you may wish you had not. You do what you like , my post was never intended to suggest you had to do anything or feel anything. I do not attract attention when I am going or coming especially if I have been successful. My deer is in the back of the truck under a tarp. That prevents confrontation with the Disney types. Jim Hill ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 06:05:58 -0600 (CST) From: "Linda Toews" Subject: FW: A message to leftists A little late for Remembrance Day, but true words nevertheless: It is the soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 07:12:19 -0600 (CST) From: "dmwright" Subject: Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca GUN SHOW This Sunday Nov 17th, to be held at the "Jubilee Pavillion", south on Simcoe Street from HWY #401 to Lakeview Park Road, in Oshawa Ontario, watch for gun show signs. The show runs from 8 a.m. till 1 p.m. For more information please call 905-679-8812 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 08:39:48 -0600 (CST) From: "Richard A. Fritze" Subject: Hunters Beware [cont'd] The advice to travel as innocuously as possible [ie., no hunting gear, game, etc., visible], was aimed at the hunter who, for whatever reason, does not have a Liberal Firearms License. Otherwise, I agree that one should not slink around as if ashamed to be a hunter/shooter. As stated before, however, the powers of search and seizure under the Alberta Wildlife Act are broader than those under the CC. This is, I suppose, because the Alberta Wildlife Act is a true regulatory statute with no true criminal penalties [though jail is a possibility for some infractions]. I expect that the comparable provincial statutes in the rest of Canada are also regulatory. The argument goes that the stigma of a criminal conviction is not present for a conviction under the WA, unlike under the CC. One does not have to answer that he has a criminal charge/conviction to a USINS agent when crossing the border, though, as a conviction under the WA is not criminal. In conclusion, even if one has all necessary licenses [Provincial - Wildlife for hunting; Liberal - POL/PAL ], if you want to reduce the possibility of a hassle over firerarms, then take the steps to eliminate the grounds for inspection, search and seizure under both the Provincial and the Liberal gun laws. As well, there are all too many enforcement types who do not know the law and will seize your firearm if it is not cased or trigger-locked while in lawful transport. While there might be some satisfaction later in proving them wrong, in the meantime one is sans firearm and perhaps with a charge that will later be withdrawn. Richard A. Fritze ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:46:32 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Ackermann Subject: Re: Registration Generic registration forms are now available for download from the SMSA web site. Link to them from www.smsa.ca, or go directly to http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/mikeack/Reg_Frm_Frt.html Hope this helps, and don't forget those "Unknowns". - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, 4132 Sonora Rd. Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 My email: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca SMSA URL: www.smsa.ca "Hope for the best, but plan for the worst". ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:46:35 -0600 (CST) From: "Trigger Mortis" Subject: Re: Hunters Beware > > Place firearms out of sight in your vehicle either behind the seats and > > covered up with other items. Do not wear hunting orange or recognisable - ---- >Not me. >I'm not going to hide the fact that I'm a hunter or going to the range - >like >it's some dirty little secret to be ashamed of. >It is legal to carry your hunting firearms and non restricted firearms >uncased >in your vehicle in this province - and that's exactly how I will continue >to >transport them. If they want to see my license or whatever - I will have it >for >them to look at. >If they then decide to search my vehicle, I will tell them they do not have >my >permission and I do not think they have reasonable cause to do so. If they >insist on it anyway, I will hound them afterward with complaints to make >sure >both they and I get our money's worth. >But I will not act like I am doing something wrong I should be ashamed - ---- Right on, Rick. Screw that social engineering. Bye. Al. alan__harper@cogeco.ca SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM ************************* _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:47:08 -0600 (CST) From: "Trigger Mortis" Subject: Re: On the lighter side >OOPS! I BLEW THAT ONE! >A lawyer defending a man accused of burglary tried this creative defense: >"My client merely inserted his arm into the window and removed a few >trifling articles. His arm is not himself, and I fail to see how you can >punish the whole individual for an offense committed by his limb." >"Well put," the judge replied. "Using your logic, I sentence the >defendant's >arm to one year's imprisonment. He can accompany it or not, as he >chooses." >The defendant smiled. With his lawyer's assistance he detached his >artificial limb, laid it on the bench, and walked out. >From the column-writing team of Paul Rolly and Joann Jacobsen-Wells of the >Salt LakeTribune. =============== Then, the judge said, no, not that arm, the other one. Didn't I see this routine in an Abbot and Costello show? Bye. Al. alan__harper@cogeco.ca SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM ************************* _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:47:40 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Ackermann Subject: A-hunting we will go... I'll be off line till Sunday PM. Gonna blast Bambi and a few of his feathery friends! - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, 4132 Sonora Rd. Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 My email: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca SMSA URL: www.smsa.ca "Hope for the best, but plan for the worst". ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:47:40 -0600 (CST) From: Barry Glasgow Subject: Seizures, CSIS and Michael Moore Boy, things sure are picking up! I can't seem to get through a day without writing several letters. It's taking away from my productive time but it looks worth it since the anti-gunners are starting to take on more water than their urinary tracts can handle . Thanks to the RCMP officer on the left coast who gave such vivid proof of what's to come - some officers making up law as they go along and causing grief and misery for non-criminals. So much for reassurances from the Justice Department that police would enforce this thing reasonably. Caught the note from Garry/Dennis about the CSIS report and all the wonderful things they, the PWEU and NWEST are doing about illegal guns. Good point about them not mentioning guns stolen from police and from the military (you know, the only ones who should own guns eh, Mr. Rock). I got on their site and read a bit more of the report and guess what? Even those morons are using the "big" M1 Garand bust" to blow their own horns and give themselves a big slap on the back. I tried e-mailing them to point out that the guns were destined for WWII collectors - not criminals - and to ask if they had ever heard of any of these 9.5 lb., 43.6" smokepoles being used by bikers or Toronto gang bangers. Trouble is, the CSIS site doesn't have a "Contact Us" thingy. Finally, (and this is just too funny) I had sent an e-mail to Michael Moore - bugging him about his and Sarah Brady's miserable campaigning effort for the Democrats and to thank him for embarassing himself nationally by getting the CFC peeved at him for falsely depicting Canadian ammunition purchase procedures in his trash movie - only to find that his provider could not forward my e-mail because his inbox has overflowed. I don't think it's fan mail. On a side note, looks like any concerns I had about all the threats that Austin and company were making regarding not getting registration slips because of waiting till the last minute are unfounded. Justice Minister Cauchon's latest remarks that "his department believes it can handle the last-minute rush and process all forms that have been submitted by Jan. 1" pretty much covers anyone who applies before the deadline, wouldn't you think? Have a good weekend folks, things are looking up. Barry Glasgow Woodlawn, Ont. ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:48:11 -0600 (CST) From: "Richard A. Fritze" Subject: Prosecutions -- CFD v.5 #268 Lee Jasper wrote: "Let's be reminded that we have an RCMP officer, acting (I understand) under the direction of the provincial BC Attorney General who laid the charge, and it will be a provincial BC Crown Attorney (of a government that opted-out of the FA) who will prosecute. . . " In Alberta, if it is a CC offense, then the Provincial Crown prosecutes. If it is only a FA offense, then, in Alberta [an opt-out province], Premier Klein has stated that the Feds will have to prosecute those on their own. An exception to that is when a person is charged with a CC offense and a FA offense. Because the CC offense will be prosecuted by the Provincial Crown, they also prosecute the FA offense - one trial, one Crown - it's a cost-based decision. In Ewaschuk's, a leading reference on criminal law practice & procedure, under the topic The Trial Process (Prosecution to Sentencing), at 12:1040 - Federal and Provincial Attorneys General, the following is stated: The Attorney General of a province has official status to prosecute all crimes (not only Criminal Code violations) committed within his province although the Attorney General of Canada has paramount status to prosecute federal crimes, other than those contrary to the Criminal Code, commenced at the instance of the Government of Canada -- See Code, section 2 (varied 1985); Canada (Attorney General) v. Canadian National Transportation Limited; Canada (Attorney General) v. Canadian Pacific Transport Company Limited, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 206, 7 C.C.C. (3d) 449; R v. Wetmore and Ontario (Attorney General) [1983] 2 S.C.R. 284, 7 C.C.C. (3d) 507; R v. Hauser [1979], 1 S.C.R. 984, 46 C.C.C. (2d) 481. At topic 12:1050 - Provincial Attorney General, the Provincial Attorney General, it states: The Provincial Attorney General, by virtue of the definition of "Attorney General" in section 2 of the Criminal Code, may conduct prosecutions of all federal legislation, whether based on the criminal law power or not, except where information in respect of a non-Criminal Code offence is laid on behalf of the federal government and conducted by counsel for the Attorney General of Canada -- R v. Sacobie and Paul (1979), 51 C.C.C. (2d) 430, 28 N.B.R. (2d) 288 (CA), affd without reasons [1983] 1 S.C.R. 241, 1 C.C.C. (3d) 446n. Note: There are different rules for the Yukon and other Territories. Anyone wanting a more complete brief on this subject can email me at richard@fritze.com . Richard A. Fritze Barrister & Solicitor Tel. (780) 941 3809 www.fritze.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:49:15 -0600 (CST) From: Earth2Inc@aol.com Subject: Fwd: thank you Thanks to all of you who have replied with advice and suggestions. I am attaching my further and, hopefully, last set of concerns, worries and fears. Yours very sincerely, Nancy and Peter Wilson Nancy and Peter Wilson Subject: thank you To: akimoya@sprint.ca Dear Bruce, Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I really appreciate your sound advice about protecting my property. I definitely do not want the police storing my collection in their facility. By the time I got them back I would probably sit down and weep at their condition, ie. scratched, dented and rusting! Solution: Since my wife got her POL I'll let her register them. At least I'll have some measure of control over their care. Poblem 1: I will have to get my PAL to acquire my property back from my wife. This brings on the possibility that when I apply for my PAL, I will be put through the same idiocy of being refused again. Any suggestions? Problem 2: Since my wife has her POL and I do not, any firearms kept in our home, since we obviously live together, are in serious jeopardy of being seized. The only solution to that would be to have them stored in an area where the police would feel "safe?" that I could not get to them. Any ideas where they could be stored, and further, do we have to advise MTP when they arrive at the door of their whereabouts? Can we be forced to do so under C-68? Any further advice you might be able to provide would and is greatly appreciated. Thanks again, in advance. Yours sincerely, Peter and Nancy Wilson - - Dear Bruce, Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I really appreciate your sound advice about protecting my property. I definitely do not want the police storing my collection in their facility. By the time I got them back I would probably sit down and weep at their condition, ie. scratched, dented and rusting! Solution: Since my wife got her POL I'll let her register them. At least I'll have some measure of control over their care. Poblem 1: I will have to get my PAL to acquire my property back from my wife. This brings on the possibility that when I apply for my PAL, I will be put through the same idiocy of being refused again. Any suggestions? Problem 2: Since my wife has her POL and I do not, any firearms kept in our home, since we obviously live together, are in serious jeopardy of being seized. The only solution to that would be to have them stored in an area where the police would feel "safe?" that I could not get to them. Any ideas where they could be stored, and further, do we have to advise MTP when they arrive at the door of their whereabouts? Can we be forced to do so under C-68? Any further advice you might be able to provide would and is greatly appreciated. Thanks again, in advance. Yours sincerely, Peter and Nancy Wilson Moderator: a shining example of html ater much editing, and why I now just delete them immediately. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V5 #269 ********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:acardin33@shaw.ca 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/ CFDigest Archives: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/~ab133/ or put the next command in an e-mail message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca get cdn-firearms-digest v04.n192 end (192 is the digest issue number and 04 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., P.O. Box 1342, Saskatoon SK S7K 3N9 Phone: (306) 382-7070 Home page: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/ 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 in any way.