From: owner-can-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca (Cdn-Firearms Digest) To: cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V10 #158 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 Thursday, January 11 2007 Volume 10 : Number 158 In this issue: re: Wendy's Funding re: Harmonics re: Club Membership for ATT re: Club Membership for ATT re: Wendy's Funding re: Club Membership for ATT Re: How to fight ATT crap? Re: How to fight ATT crap? Re: How to fight ATT crap? Re: How to fight ATT crap? Re: How to fight ATT crap? Re: How to fight ATT crap? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:01:51 -0800 From: "Todd Birch" Subject: re: Wendy's Funding When you check the list of Wendy's supporting organizations, you get a picture of how much public money is funded her way through various agencies and charitable groups on the public dole; i.e. your tax dollars. It is a safe assumption that not ALL members of these organizations agree with her position. She obviously had help from the government in getting these supporters on line and received her medal reward from Chretien for acting as poster girl for the movement. I once spoke to her on a CBC talk show line and asked why I couldn't join her organization when she was free to join any group I belonged to. She responded that if I belonged to any of her supporting organizations or agencies, I was in fact, one of her members. I was disgusted by this reality, but she is right. Her support is a mile wide, but 1" deep. TB ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:06:38 -0800 From: "Todd Birch" Subject: re: Harmonics I just 'pinged' the barrel of my Howa .308 with a tuning fork and it's seems to be in perfect tune.....hmmmmmmm..... Gotta be that 'sound box' of a laminate stock that needs the tune up, and that's in the works. I ain't gonna knock the idea. If you can abide it's looks, Browning's combo muzzlebreak/harmonics gizmo may be butt ugly, but apparently, it works. TB ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:17:16 -0800 From: "Todd Birch" Subject: re: Club Membership for ATT At one time in BC, you had to apply for an ATT through your club secretary, but that is no longer a requirement. It still applies if you want a "show permit" for public demonstration. These are applied for individually and issued for the duration of your PAL. It appears to be an area within the jurisdiction of the provincial firearms office and not a federal requirement. TB ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:12:15 -0800 From: "Todd Birch" Subject: re: Club Membership for ATT At one time in BC, you had to apply for an ATT through your club secretary, but that is no longer a requirement. It still applies if you want a "show permit" for public demonstration. These are applied for individually and issued for the duration of your PAL. It appears to be an area within the jurisdiction of the provincial firearms office and not a federal requirement. TB ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 15:38:16 -0500 (EST) From: Akimoya Subject: re: Wendy's Funding - --- Todd Birch wrote: > When you check the list of Wendy's supporting > organizations, you get a > picture of how much public money is funded her way > through various agencies > and charitable groups on the public dole; i.e. your > tax dollars. I don't know just how *much* support she actually receives from all of these groups. Most probably do nothing more than send her a letter saying that they are in favour of "more gun control" or somesuch. I highly doubt that many of them actually send her any money. As a corporation, I would think that her tax returns are a matter of public record, but to date I don't think anyone has bothered to request them to see exactly where her money comes from, and goes to... Yours in LIBERTY! Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 15:56:26 -0500 (EST) From: Akimoya Subject: re: Club Membership for ATT - --- Todd Birch wrote: > At one time in BC, you had to apply for an ATT > through your club secretary, > but that is no longer a requirement. It still > applies if you want a "show > permit" for public demonstration. These are applied > for individually and > issued for the duration of your PAL. > > It appears to be an area within the jurisdiction of > the provincial firearms > office and not a federal requirement. > > TB I must admit your descriptions above have me a little confused. What is a "show permit for public demonstration"? There are permits for taking guns to a gun show, under FA s. 19(1)(b)(iv): 19. (1) An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess restricted firearms may be authorized to transport a particular restricted firearm between two or more specified places for any good and sufficient reason, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, (a) for use in target practice, or a target shooting competition, under specified conditions or under the auspices of a shooting club or shooting range that is approved under section 29; or (b) if the individual (i) changes residence, (ii) wishes to transport the firearm to a peace officer, firearms officer or chief firearms officer for registration or disposal in accordance with this Act or Part III of the Criminal Code, (iii) wishes to transport the firearm for repair, storage, sale, exportation or appraisal, or (iv) wishes to transport the firearm to a gun show. but as far as I know, unless there is a gun show at a gun range, there are no "demonstrations" permitted. There *is* an SAP that one (used to) gets for taking non-12(6) prohibiteds to a range for "demonstration purposes" under the Firearms Act Special Authority to Possess Regulations. Further, your assertion that the issuance of ATTs is under the jurisdiction of the provice is partly correct, it is not completely so. It has long been shown that while a CFO has the authority to place a condition on any license or permit, they may only do so on a case-by-case basis, based only on the merits of the individual case in question. They may *not* apply one condition to ALL permits as a matter of "policy". This is outside their authority as "creatures of statute" as a "license issuing tribunal". This would trun them into lawmakers instead of the bureaucrats they actually are. IF they apply a condition on a license, then they must be able to justify reason for doing so, based solely on the merits of that indivudial application, nothing more. Yours in LIBERTY! Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:10:58 -0500 From: "Letsgosailing" Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? - ----- Original Message ----- From: "10x" <10x@telus.net> To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:31 AM Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? > At 07:23 PM 1/10/2007 -0800, you wrote: >> >>Hi guys, >> >>More and more provincial CFOs adapt Ontario way of >>handling ATTs.... For example Alberta now wants club >>membership as a requirement for ATT. New Brunswick >>wants clubs to do CFOs job in processing ATTs... (I >>think that clubs should charge CFO for such thing, >>e.g. $100 per ATT). >> >>What's your ideas? >> >>Thanks, >>Vladyslav > > Alberta wants proof of club membership. This is a whim of the C.F.O. as > being a "reasonable condition". > This condition does NOT have anything to do with the personal safety of > the > individual applying for the A.T.T. or the safety of the public. > The individual applying for the A.T.T. has already proven themselves safe > in order to get the Restricted Firearms Possession license. > Background checks have been done. > The requirement to provide proof of a gun club membership is just > harrassment. For our local club can take up to three months between the > time a member purchases their membership and they get their "official > card". Once they have filled out the application and the money is paid > they > are a member. > > BTW: Because of the information required by the federal government and the > privacy act in Alberta club executive can not divulge any information to > anyone - including the C.F.O.- about gun club members. Any club that > releases information about a member without the permission of that member > is breaking the law. > > BTW2: The C.F.O. will suggest that any expenses incurred by the clubs > regarding A.T.T.s be charged back to the applicant. > > BTW3: There is no provision in the Firearms act or regulations for an > individual to apply for an A.T.T. through a gun club. > > BTW4: Section 63 of the firearms act sets the geographic extent of > A.T.T.s > to be "valid throughout Canada". The C.F.O. has no power to place a > geographic limit like a provincial border on an A.T.T. The only > conditions > that can be set on an A.T.T. are based on the safety of the individual > obtaining the A.T.T. or public safety. > > The C.F.O.s are enforcing policy and it changes from jurisdiction to > Jurisdiction. This policy is used to harrass those who would attempt to > comply with the law. > It is a requirement for you to prove that you need the handgun for target practice only. You can not target practice except in an approved gun club. You can not discharge a handgun except in an approved club. Does that answer your question. This the purpose of an ATT. To transport the firearm to an approved club. In Ontario the club membership secretary or any person from the executive that deals with CFO applies for ATT. Personally have to go through the club for even for my instructors ATT. Like evry one else. That is the way it is now and I don't thing we will be able to change it. Ever. Unless there is a CCW permitted in Canada to the general public, That I doubt very much. Yanni Marinated S/V Princess Thalia Hamilton www.yannismarine.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:52:41 -0500 (EST) From: Akimoya Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? - --- Vladyslav Strashko wrote: > Hi guys, > > More and more provincial CFOs adapt Ontario way of > handling ATTs.... For example Alberta now wants club > membership as a requirement for ATT. New Brunswick > wants clubs to do CFOs job in processing ATTs... (I > think that clubs should charge CFO for such thing, > e.g. $100 per ATT). > > What's your ideas? > > Thanks, > Vladyslav I suppose it depends on how far you are willing to go. At the very least, I would go to your club executive and advise them of the points that 10x makes, especially that there are *no* requirements nor provisions under the law that allows them to do this. This is something that the CFOs of the Provinces have dreamt up to make their lives easier for them. I would also go to your provincial hunting/fishing/pro-gun org and tell them that no way in hell should they compromise themselves by acceeding to these illegal shenanigans. If they do cave in (no doubt as a result of pressure from the CFO or even outright coercion in the way of non-renewal of club licenses), then you can always try to go through the Privacy Act and/or Human Rights tribunal. I don't think there is any recourse available under the Firearms Act s 74 hearing, unless you submit an application independent of you club and it is refused. Access to Information Act requests on any documents concerning the implemenation of this program as part of a "policy" by the CFO would be useful to have. Yours in LIBERTY! Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:03:24 -0500 (EST) From: Akimoya Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? - --- 10x <10x@telus.net> wrote: > At 07:23 PM 1/10/2007 -0800, you wrote: > > > >Hi guys, > > > >More and more provincial CFOs adapt Ontario way of > >handling ATTs.... For example Alberta now wants > club > >membership as a requirement for ATT. New Brunswick > >wants clubs to do CFOs job in processing ATTs... (I > >think that clubs should charge CFO for such thing, > >e.g. $100 per ATT). > > > >What's your ideas? > > > >Thanks, > >Vladyslav > > Alberta wants proof of club membership. This is a > whim of the C.F.O. as > being a "reasonable condition". > This condition does NOT have anything to do with the > personal safety of the > individual applying for the A.T.T. or the safety of > the public. > The individual applying for the A.T.T. has already > proven themselves safe > in order to get the Restricted Firearms Possession > license. > Background checks have been done. > The requirement to provide proof of a gun club > membership is just > harrassment. For our local club can take up to > three months between the > time a member purchases their membership and they > get their "official > card". Once they have filled out the application and > the money is paid they > are a member. > > BTW: Because of the information required by the > federal government and the > privacy act in Alberta club executive can not > divulge any information to > anyone - including the C.F.O.- about gun club > members. Any club that > releases information about a member without the > permission of that member > is breaking the law. > > BTW2: The C.F.O. will suggest that any expenses > incurred by the clubs > regarding A.T.T.s be charged back to the applicant. > > BTW3: There is no provision in the Firearms act or > regulations for an > individual to apply for an A.T.T. through a gun > club. > > BTW4: Section 63 of the firearms act sets the > geographic extent of A.T.T.s > to be "valid throughout Canada". The C.F.O. has no > power to place a > geographic limit like a provincial border on an > A.T.T. The only conditions > that can be set on an A.T.T. are based on the safety > of the individual > obtaining the A.T.T. or public safety. > > The C.F.O.s are enforcing policy and it changes from > jurisdiction to > Jurisdiction. This policy is used to harrass those > who would attempt to > comply with the law. 10x makes some very good points regarding this situation. One more is, as I point out in another message, that there are no requirements under the law that you actually *belong* to a gun club in order to obtain and ATT - the law says "under the auspices" of a gun club, which might be as the guest of a member, or as the guest at an open invitation gun competition. Further, there are no requirements or even privsions for a gun club to undertake this task. I don't think that the CFO can delegate such authority to someone who isn't an FO. As 10x points out, this would also be a breach of any number of privacy laws. CFOs, when doing their job as assigned under the Firearms Act, are not acting as Police Officers - they are acting as functionaries and bureuacrats, and must abide by certain restrictions. As "creatures of statute", that is, a bureaucratic functionary created by a Statute of Parliament, they may *only* take such actions as are specified under that Statute. They do not have the authority to "make things up as they go along", which is what they are doing. They certainly may not make new law by establishing a blanket policy governing what "conditions" they can place on ALL permits they issue. I don't know what kinds of legal actions one can take against this kind of abuse of power. Yours in LIBERTY! Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:22:08 -0500 (EST) From: Akimoya Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? - --- Letsgosailing wrote: > It is a requirement for you to prove that you need > the handgun for target practice only. Partially correct, yes. You must be able to prove to the CFO that you have used your 12(6) prohibited firearms for one of their intended purposes under FA s 67 in order to get your 12(6) license renewed. One of the ways of doing that is to obtain gun club records. > You can not target practice except in an approved > gun club. Wrong. I know of no section of the Firearms Act that says this. While there are regulations that govern the creation and operation of shooting ranges, there is nothing that says you may ONLY target shoot at shooting ranges. > You can not discharge a handgun except in an > approved club. Wrong. This applies only to 12(6) prohibited handguns, about which the laws are stricter than restricted handguns, vis: 18. An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess prohibited firearms may be authorized to transport a particular prohibited firearm between two or more specified places (a) in the case of a handgun referred to in subsection 12(6) (pre-February 14, 1995 handguns), for use in target practice, or a target shooting competition, under specified conditions or under the auspices of a shooting club or shooting range that is approved under section 29; or (b) if the individual (i) changes residence, (ii) wishes to transport the firearm to a peace officer, firearms officer or chief firearms officer for registration or disposal in accordance with this Act or Part III of the Criminal Code, (iii) wishes to transport the firearm for repair, storage, sale, exportation or appraisal, or (iv) wishes to transport the firearm to a gun show. 19. (1) An individual who holds a licence authorizing the individual to possess restricted firearms may be authorized to transport a particular restricted firearm between *two or more specified places for any good and sufficient reason*, *including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing*, (a) for use in target practice, or a target shooting competition, under specified conditions or under the auspices of a shooting club or shooting range that is approved under section 29; or (b) if the individual (i) changes residence, (ii) wishes to transport the firearm to a peace officer, firearms officer or chief firearms officer for registration or disposal in accordance with this Act or Part III of the Criminal Code, (iii) wishes to transport the firearm for repair, storage, sale, exportation or appraisal, or (iv) wishes to transport the firearm to a gun show. FA s 18 does say that you may transport 12(6) prohibited handguns only between those specific places, for the purposes as listed; FA s 19 says that you may take restricted handguns just about anywhere, as long as the place and use is approved by the FO. The FO could write you an ATT for the moon if he wanted to. > In Ontario the club membership secretary or any > person from the executive > that deals with > CFO applies for ATT. Personally have to go through > the club for even for my > instructors ATT. > Like evry one else. That is the way it is now and I > don't thing we will be > able to change it. > Ever. This is simply bogus and at best extra-legal "policy" that the Ontario CFO forced down the throats of the gun clubs, most likely with the threat of non-renewal of their club licenses if they didn't comply. And the OFAH didn't want to opt-out because it was better to have a "devil we knew"...thanks for nothing, guys. If you don't know what the law says, you won't know when you're getting screwed over... Yours in LIBERTY! Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:29:48 -0600 From: 10x <10x@telus.net> Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? At 04:10 PM 1/11/2007 -0500, you wrote: > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "10x" <10x@telus.net> >To: >Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:31 AM >Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? > > >> At 07:23 PM 1/10/2007 -0800, you wrote: >>> >>>Hi guys, >>> >>>More and more provincial CFOs adapt Ontario way of >>>handling ATTs.... For example Alberta now wants club >>>membership as a requirement for ATT. New Brunswick >>>wants clubs to do CFOs job in processing ATTs... (I >>>think that clubs should charge CFO for such thing, >>>e.g. $100 per ATT). >>> >>>What's your ideas? >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Vladyslav >> >> Alberta wants proof of club membership. This is a whim of the C.F.O. as >> being a "reasonable condition". >> This condition does NOT have anything to do with the personal safety of >> the >> individual applying for the A.T.T. or the safety of the public. >> The individual applying for the A.T.T. has already proven themselves safe >> in order to get the Restricted Firearms Possession license. >> Background checks have been done. >> The requirement to provide proof of a gun club membership is just >> harrassment. For our local club can take up to three months between the >> time a member purchases their membership and they get their "official >> card". Once they have filled out the application and the money is paid >> they >> are a member. >> >> BTW: Because of the information required by the federal government and the >> privacy act in Alberta club executive can not divulge any information to >> anyone - including the C.F.O.- about gun club members. Any club that >> releases information about a member without the permission of that member >> is breaking the law. >> >> BTW2: The C.F.O. will suggest that any expenses incurred by the clubs >> regarding A.T.T.s be charged back to the applicant. >> >> BTW3: There is no provision in the Firearms act or regulations for an >> individual to apply for an A.T.T. through a gun club. >> >> BTW4: Section 63 of the firearms act sets the geographic extent of >> A.T.T.s >> to be "valid throughout Canada". The C.F.O. has no power to place a >> geographic limit like a provincial border on an A.T.T. The only >> conditions >> that can be set on an A.T.T. are based on the safety of the individual >> obtaining the A.T.T. or public safety. >> >> The C.F.O.s are enforcing policy and it changes from jurisdiction to >> Jurisdiction. This policy is used to harrass those who would attempt to >> comply with the law. >> > > > >It is a requirement for you to prove that you need the handgun for target >practice only. >You can not target practice except in an approved gun club. >You can not discharge a handgun except in an approved club. >Does that answer your question. Nope! And you can go to an approved club on a day pass or as a "guest" or after being invited to a competition. You don't need a membership. Wild West at WEM is an example of a shooting range offering day shooting to non members. >This the purpose of an ATT. >To transport the firearm to an approved club. >In Ontario the club membership secretary or any person from the executive >that deals with >CFO applies for ATT. Personally have to go through the club for even for my >instructors ATT. >Like evry one else. That is the way it is now and I don't thing we will be >able to change it. >Ever. Unless there is a CCW permitted in Canada to the general public, That >I doubt >very much. There is no means for the C.F.O. to not approve an A.T.T. that is applied for by an individual - even in Ontario. The law states the applicant applies to the C.F.O. for an A.T.T., not a gun club on behalf of the applicant. In Canada we go by the letter of the law, not what some bureaucrat believes is the "right way". ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:33:40 -0600 From: 10x <10x@telus.net> Subject: Re: How to fight ATT crap? At 05:03 PM 1/11/2007 -0500,Bruce wrote: > >10x makes some very good points regarding this >situation. One more is, as I point out in another >message, that there are no requirements under the law >that you actually *belong* to a gun club in order to >obtain and ATT - the law says "under the auspices" of >a gun club, which might be as the guest of a member, >or as the guest at an open invitation gun competition. > >Further, there are no requirements or even privsions >for a gun club to undertake this task. I don't think >that the CFO can delegate such authority to someone >who isn't an FO. As 10x points out, this would also >be a breach of any number of privacy laws. > >CFOs, when doing their job as assigned under the >Firearms Act, are not acting as Police Officers - they >are acting as functionaries and bureuacrats, and must >abide by certain restrictions. As "creatures of >statute", that is, a bureaucratic functionary created >by a Statute of Parliament, they may *only* take such >actions as are specified under that Statute. They do >not have the authority to "make things up as they go >along", which is what they are doing. They certainly >may not make new law by establishing a blanket policy >governing what "conditions" they can place on ALL >permits they issue. > >I don't know what kinds of legal actions one can take >against this kind of abuse of power. > >Yours in LIBERTY! >Bruce Thank you Bruce! There are very few protections for gun owners under the current firearms legislation. The courts routinely side with bureaucratic interpretations of the legislation and regulations if there is any doubt as to what the regulation means. The rules for issuing A.T.T.s and other permits to law abiding licensed gun owners are NOT STANDARD across Canada, nor do these rules seem to have any roots in either the firearms legislation or regulations. Bottom line, public servants use these rules to harrass and impede gun owners who are attempting to comply with the law. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V10 #158 *********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:akimoya@cogeco.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 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.