Stealing your Guns

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions collective punishments are a war
crime. Article 33 states: "No protected person may be punished for an
offence he or she has not personally committed," and "collective
penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism
are prohibited."

"Individual rights are not subject to public vote; a majority has no
right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of
rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities
( and the smallest minority on earth is the individual )." - Ayn Rand

(The first act of any Tyrant is to disable the ability of "the ruled" to defend themselves)

Fact: at least 170 million human beings were killed by their governments during the 20th century....

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined...The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun". -Patrick Henry.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." -George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426.

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." -Tench Coxe, Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution, under the pseudonym "A Pennsylvanian" in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at col. 1.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5
million Armenians were exterminated.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953,
about 20 million dissidents were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938. and from 1939 to 1945 13
million Jews and others were exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935; from 1948 to 1952, 20 million
political dissidents were exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964, and from 1964 to 1981,
100,000 Mayan Indians were exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970 - from 1971 to 1979, 300,000
people were exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956, and from 1975 to 1977 one
million educated people were exterminated.

Ontario Premier, Attorney general and Mayor of Toronto support criminals with guns. Want peaceful private citizens disarmed so criminals and government can have their way with them.

Attorney General Chris Bentley, who will meet with the mayor next week to discuss gun violence, said "handguns are not necessary in 21st - century Ontario."

Echoing Mayor David Miller, the premier implored Prime Minister Stephen Harper to prohibit the private ownership of handguns.

Be advised gentlemen, you have NO LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY to ban the private ownership of handguns. NONE!

Apart from being against the SUPREME LAW that preserves FOREVER our property rights, AND effective means to lawful defence, it is totally incoherent for you to claim a right for the government, while denying the right of those who YOU WERE ELECTED TO SERVE. Give your head a shake!

The only guns you have any authority to ban (as Mayor and Chief of police) are those of the police. So get cracking, if you dare...

We don't blame the pencil the accountant uses to embezzle.
We don't blame the pen the identity thief uses to sign credit

Now you've been educated... If you see these people coming to your neighbourhood, you know they aren't coming to give you food or water or any other kind of aid.

People in Canada are not safe either, and in fact it is now possible for US military soldiers to come to your door. Click here to read details....

"Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is
unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is
unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by
the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,'
because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates
the right of an individual." --Thomas Jefferson to Isaac H. Tiffany, 1819.

In 1995, the so-called "Justice" Minister (Allan Rock) told the House of Commons that the firearms registry would only cost $85 million over five years. The total cost estimate for this confiscation list now exceeds two (2) Billion, and is growing.

The Liberal Party of Canada is even worse than that of the alleged "Conservatives".... These traitors actually came out and publicly admitted to trying to ban handguns for individuals never convicted of any crime..... This is a violation of our Great Charter and common law.

Meanwhile they helped allocate and spend over a billion dollars to give guns to border guards, who have hotlines to the police. Maybe they know something about the need for immediate protection that you don't? Why don't they want you to be able to lawfully defend yourself - ever wonder about that?

Liberals forcing legislation through....

Martin Cauchon, the Justice Minister, breaks procedure to force through gun registration in the House of Commons

(Roger) Gallaway

OTTAWA - Liberal MPs are protesting their own government's decision to shut down debate in an attempt to quietly pass new firearms legislation, with some MPs pledging to vote with the opposition.

This is the first time the Commons has voted on a matter dealing with the government's controversial firearms program since it denied a request for an additional $72-million last December. It would also be the 82nd time the Chrétien Liberals have limited debate since coming to power in 1992.

Some Liberals are siding with the Canadian Alliance in condemning the government for attempting to pass bill C-10A in one day.

MPs also fear a vote in favour of the bill will give a green light to Martin Cauchon, the Justice Minister, to make yet another request for money, even though he never satisfied numerous concerns about the programs' runaway costs, now well over one billion.

Roger Gallaway, MP for Sarnia, takes offence to the wording of the motion, which asks the House of Commons to ignore the fact that the Senate has violated its rights by splitting the bill and sending it back to the House.

"What is being proposed is scandalous,'' said Mr. Gallaway, the government is trying to maintain the firearms program through "back-door'' measures such as the bill from the Senate and is urging his colleagues to vote against the bill and the vote to limit debate.

"It's a Minister who has no principles now, because as the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, he's asking Members of Parliament to waive the law because he's got a problem,'' he said.

When the House passed Bill C-10, the bill originally contained aspects dealing with “cruelty to animals”. Some of the new firearms laws in the bill had to be passed by the Jan. 1, 2003 (registration deadline), so the Senate split off those sections into C-10A and sent it back to the House. However, because the House received the bill the same week that Sheila Frasier, the Auditor General, slammed the program for major cost overruns, Justice minister Cauchon chose to issue a one-year “amnesty” to gun owners affected by the new bill, rather than face the controversial debate that has now been put off to today.

(Did you notice how merely owning a gun suddenly became criminal? Well at least according to their thinking, which totally ignores the Law of Land, which expressly forbids the outlawing of citizens outside the common law, and a judgement of ones peers.)

It’s extremely rare for the Senate to split a bill and to do so, the Upper Chamber had to ask the House of Commons to "waive its rights and privileges in this case,'' in order to approve what it has done.

"I think Canadians should know that we've now sunk to the point where the Cabinet is asking the House of Commons to waive the law because they're in a tough spot,'' Mr. Gallaway said. "They think so little of us that their proposal is to waive the law to solve their problems.''

Today's motion to shut down debate and bring the bill to a final vote marks the 82nd time the current Liberal government has used closure or time allocation.

Brian Mulroney's Tory government shut down debate 72 times from 1984 to 1993.

The bill has been criticized for creating a position of Commissioner of Firearms to oversee the administration. Some Senators, said the Commissioner, lack independence because he or she will report to the Justice Minister, not Parliament.

Mr. Volpe, who said he may vote against the bill, warned MPs are starting to take issue with what some see as the government's excessive use of closure motions.

"These are important points and important precedents of Parliamentary procedure and if we want to just say, 'Forget it, we don't want to have anything to do with that any more,' well, we can abolish the House of Commons and let the executive rule by degree,'' he said.

______________________

The Liberals openly bragged about stealing our handguns if they are elected!

See Paul Martin and the "Liberal" Party of Canada's plan to steal your guns and infringe your rights.

______________________

Liberal fascists declare war on Gun Ownership; but still want to keep theirs.

http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/061129_resolutions_en.pdf
Be it resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the government of Canada to support legislation to eliminate the personal use of automatic and semiautomatic firearms.

Saskatchewan Federation of Police Officers wrote: "Saskatchewan Police Association representatives had polled their members on the six points of the Canadian Police Association resolution about the Gun Bill. The members responded overwhelmingly against the gun registry. The Saskatchewan Federation of Police Officers believes the money could more effectively be used in other areas of policing such as fighting organized crime, and human resources for all police services in the country." [full report]

by Teviah Moro. Orillia Packet & Times, Local News - Thursday, March 09, 2006

A 13-year-old kid could hack into the federal government's online gun registry and have access to millions of gun-owner addresses, says a former webmaster for the Canadian Firearms Centre.

But the real concern is what a criminal mind would do with a shopping list of guns in Canada, John Hicks, an information technology consultant in Orillia, told The Packet & Times yesterday.

"If this were Amazon, Visa, or EBay, they'd be bankrupt," Hicks said. "I have worked with 13-year-old kids who can break into this system."

He first notified managers at the Canadian Firearms Centre (CFC) about his concerns over the site's two-stage log-on process in March 2002.

Hicks said some security measures were improved, but the business site still has gaping security holes: "They run two websites; they only fixed one."

To log on for a firearms ownership transfer on the business page, users must provide the first eight digits of their gun licence numbers.

In a matter of minutes, Hicks who doesn't own a gun demonstrated how a hacker could tamper with the system, allowing for an unlimited number of log-on attempts.

"I can set a program up to make one request every five minutes," he said. "It's a process of elimination."

In his demonstration, Hicks, who stressed he's never broken into the system, managed to hit upon a legitimate licence number.

Once past that critical first step, hackers could get their hands on the addresses of gun owners, he noted.

The same flaw applies to passwords, Hicks said.

With access to gun-owner addresses, the potential for criminal activity snowballs, possibly leading to identity theft and fraud, he added.

Simcoe North MP Bruce Stanton said he's been in contact with Hicks and is looking into the issue: "Whatever gaps exist, they need to be rectified immediately."

But Stanton added gun owners shouldn't break into hysterics over Hicks's allegations.

"They should also be assured that steps are being taken to ensure that information is being kept confidential."

A spokesperson for CFC told The Packet no individual firearm information is accessible through the website.

"We actually exceed the government security standards," Maude Bourassa said. "We monitor any possible attempts of illegal entry into the system," and "no successful attempts to hack into the system have been detected to date."

But Hicks questioned the CFC's ability to monitor such attempts since the RCMP did not call him about yesterday's tinkering, which easily overcame the site's initial safeguard.

"It begs to ask the question: can you even prove that someone's broken in?" said Hicks.

Bourassa said repeated attempts to guess a password would be flagged by the website's monitoring system, blocking access from that location.

The security system has been tested by outside experts, including the RCMP, she added.

The Privacy Commissioner of Canada first reviewed the Canadian Firearms Program in 2001 and has since monitored developments, according to the office's last annual report to Parliament for 2004-05.

The Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness responded with steps to address concerns.

"However, given the passage of four years, the controversy surrounding the program, and the many ensuing changes, including recent amendments to the Firearms Act, it is time to refresh our knowledge of the program in order to plan a new audit," the report said.

A spokesperson for the privacy commissioner said the office is expecting a privacy-risk analysis from the CFC this summer.

Joey Stevens, a 17-year-old student at Twin Lakes Secondary School in Orillia, said an interest in computers and elementary school web design classes would equip kids with enough knowledge to bust the CFC's Internet security.

"If I had the right programs, it wouldn't be that difficult at all," Stevens said. "Even if you can't do it yourself, there are always people in chat rooms who can help you do anything."

Hicks's allegations have raised the ire of the Ontario Federation of Hunters and Anglers.

"In the wrong hands, the firearms registry could be the biggest shopping list for criminals out there," said spokesperson Robert Pye.

The federation has lobbied against the gun registry since its inception, deriding the former Liberal government for spending some $2 billion on a program its members say doesn't serve any purpose.

Though some improvements were made to the CFC website, Hicks said his attempts to bring attention to its flaws were "sloughed off" by management.

Frustrated that no action was being taken to address the problem, he made his concerns public in September 2003, before seeing his position eliminated and outsourced, Hicks said.

"I threatened to go public with this. My manager cut my job."

Lots of people seem bewildered as to the real purpose of this totally unlawful forced federal gun registry... It shouldn't really be a mystery at all. The registry has done nothing to reduce crime, as should have been obvious given the registry is not a requirement for criminals. No, this registry is to make it easier for the government to collect these guns in the coming UN inspired gun confiscation, which should be arriving within the next three to four years, if things go as scheduled. This at about the same time that a national ID will be made mandatory.

If you think mandatory ID is a stretch, you should know that the government has already been conditioning you for this, with their mandatory passport rhetoric that has now evolved to one of having special RFID "drivers licenses" or similar 'card style' ID. This will eventually be turned into a very convenient "biometric implant" which you will need in place of cash, and your mandatory ID. This is all just one or two more government sponsored terrorist attacks away.... and CSIS is already spreading the word about coming attacks.

You remember CSIS don't you? They're the guys that got 7.7 billion dollars even after failing to stop the Air India bombing; and who we now know had at least one mole in constant daily contact with the lead bomber; and who deleted hundreds of hours of key evidence connecting them to the bombers; and who are now holding up progress of a public inquiry, because they don't want you to get too close to the truth of who really blew up the Air India aircraft.

Is Bilderberg minion Stephen Harper backing out on his promise to get rid of the unlawful gun registry?

OTTAWA (CP) - It's not exactly a groundswell yet, but Conservative MPs are feeling the first ripples of discontent among farmers, hunters and target shooters impatient for action on a campaign promise to abolish the federal long-gun registry.

Backbenchers and cabinet members alike - mainly from Western Canada - say they're hearing from rifle and shotgun owners who can't understand why the law they thought was on the way out is still being enforced.

Justice Minister Vic Toews has acknowledged that some of his own constituents in rural Manitoba are among those "confused" by the current state of affairs.

The Tories have long opposed the registry established by Jean Chretien's Liberals in 1995. It was conceived as a crime-fighting measure, but critics say it's a nuisance to law-abiding gun owners.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper pledged to do away with it once in office. But until his government takes action the registry will continue to exist, and the bureaucrats at the Canadian Firearms Centre will continue to do their jobs.

"The law is still in place; we cannot tell people to ignore the law," Toews warned on the opening day of the current parliamentary session.

[Yes he can most definitely warn people to ignore the "law". Canada is not a prison, and unless government can show just cause under our Anglo-Saxon Common Law [a.k.a. THE LAW OF THE LAND] the government's authority to make such legislation is Ultra Vires, and the "law" is of no force or effect. It is frightening to think that there are MP's within our legislature that are totally unfamiliar with the law of Canada, and their DUTY to uphold it, and preserve our Liberties and Freedoms!! Perhaps even more frightening are those that don't even want to help groups like ours to fight for the future of Canada. No, they'd rather give their money to the local liquor store, and whine about where the country is headed.]

Bob Mills, an Alberta MP, has been telling the same thing to gun owners who complain to him - though he's not comfortable about it.

"You certainly can't advise them to break the law, but I can understand their concerns," says Mills.

[There is no "law" that can force a law abiding peaceful individual to register private property of thereafter become an "outlaw". The registry is not a law, its a statutory requirement that the MP's consented to hold THEMSELVES to. There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING criminal about owning private property for a lawful purpose. The only true Law that is being broken here, is by a so-called "New government of Canada" that shows contempt for the Constitution in making outlaws, in defiance to the eternal Law of the Land - which is Magna Carta. And the only arguable duty a gun owner has is to demonstrate competence in handling a firearm.]

"It's this limbo we're in right now that is the problem. I'd like to give them something more concrete."

Some of the complaints may seem trivial - for example, the continuing requirement to pay a $60 fee to renew firearms licences. But the fee is red flag for those who have always chafed at the law.

Ignoring the paperwork and fees can also lead to more serious trouble, including confiscation of firearms or even criminal charges.

"If you do not take action within 30 days from the date of this letter we will proceed to revoke your registration certificate without further notice, and we will advise your local police department for their follow-up," reads one letter from the Firearms Centre to an irate gun owner.

Many such missives have been passed to Garry Breitkreuz, the Saskatchewan MP who has led the campaign against the registry. He insists the government isn't wavering on its abolition pledge.

"I know Stephen Harper is going to keep his commitment," says Breitkreuz. "I've been assured of that."

The question is when. The answer is unclear, for a variety of administrative, legal and political reasons.

"This is a minority government," says David Tomlinson, head of the Edmonton-based National Firearms Association.

"They cannot change the firearms control laws unless they have a majority vote, and it's going to take time to assemble a majority vote . . . . I don't anticipate this is going to go down in a hell of a hurry."

Most anti-registry Tories are hoping the first step will be a report, due in mid-May, from Auditor General Sheila Fraser.

It's a follow-up to a 2002 study that predicted the cost of the registry - initially pegged at $2 million a year - would in fact add up to $1 billion over its first decade in operation.

Breitkreuz and other critics claim that was a lowball estimate and put the cost closer to $2 billion.

They're hoping Fraser will vindicate them with her second report - and persuade at least some Liberal, NDP and Bloc Quebecois MPs to join the abolition crusade.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, who is responsible for the registry, has predicted that once the numbers are out "people are going to be upset, and they're gong to have a right to be upset."

Wendy Cukier, a Ryerson University academic who heads the Coalition for Gun Control, isn't so sure.

Past cost overruns should be corrected in future, she says, but that isn't an argument for killing the registry.

"Why would you burn the house down because you spent too much money on the renovations?" asks Cukier.

"Fundamentally, the question is, what is it that our investment in gun control is giving us? I would argue we're getting benefits in terms of preventing injuries, deaths and crime."

There are other reasons the Tories can't move as quickly as they'd like - including the fact that the present registration system is so complex.

"It's like an enormous, balled-up fishnet," says Tomlinson. "You walk up to it and scratch your head and say, 'How do I sort this out?' "

The easiest move in the short run, he says, would be to issue cabinet orders granting temporary relief to gun owners on some pressing concerns.

That could include, for example, waiving licence renewal fees or offering amnesties to people facing loss of registration or seizure of weapons.

If such orders are issued this spring, it could put off a legislative showdown until the fall, when the government could bring in a bill to fully repeal the registry.

That bill may or may not pass, but some Tories already have a Plan B in case it fails - point the finger at the opposition.

"People will decide who to blame and I don't think it will be us," says Mills.

"They understand how the system works and they understand it's a minority government. But they obviously want us to try."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2006/04/16/1536778-cp.html

The gun registry was originally supposed to cost less than $2 million. In December 2002, Auditor General Sheila Fraser revealed that the program would run up bills of at least $1 billion by 2005.

But the calculations remained incomplete, so CBC News obtained documents through the Access to Information Act and crunched the numbers.

A large part of the $2 billion expense is a computer system that's supposed to track registered guns, according to one document. Officials [sic] initially estimated it would cost about $1 million.

Expenses now hover close to $750 million and the electronic system is still not fully operational.

Former Justice Minister Anne McLellan declined to talk to the CBC about the gun registry during the investigation. Bill Baker, the head of the Canadian Firearms Centre, also refused comment. [full report]

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria.

"No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- Thomas Jefferson

Restricting gun ownership does not reduce crime. If anything, it raises it substantially...

Graph shows major increase in violent crime in countries with harshest gun control laws. The US rate is lowest.

It is interesting to note that while the alleged federal government finds ever expanding reasons it claims to restrict law abiding citizens from their inherent right to bear arms, it finds just as trivial ideas to expand the use of firearms for police, and recently border guards.

Is it because border guards, who have bullet proof cubicles and a hotline to the police, are in so much greater peril than the public who walk the streets unarmed? Read the following letter from "Canada's new government" and form your own conclusion...

Check out your Great Charter - aka Magna Carta. Your commonwealth protection against government aggression and tyranny...

With all due respect to your editorial's statement that it is "dumb" for Canadians to

exercise their right to lawful self-defence, such a right is in fact the foundation of any

Our unalienable right of self defence is historically established in our common law

and predates our Magna Carta. Concomitant to the unalienable right to self-defence

Notwithstanding any statute to the contrary, the only argument a government could

hope to make in limiting our right to carry firearms for lawful defence would be to

require a level of competence in the operation of a dangerous tool. That duty was

Arguments based on emotionalism and fear-mongering don't cut it, particularly in

arguing for guns for oneself while taking the right from others, which seems to be

"Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set
lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
- Samuel Adams

Switzerland Strips Citizens of Gun Rights.

Despite the vehement protests from many of Switzerland’s cantons (states), the lower chamber of the nation’s Federal Assembly voted to strip its citizens of gun rights, not by registering or confiscating firearms, but by outlawing the storing of ammunition in the homes of the citizens.

According to The Liberty Zone, the move was led by Switzerland’s small but vocal–and powerful–Socialist minority. And apparently it was a leading women’s magazine who aided the Socialists in the cause.

The ban also applies to the male citizens who make up Switzerland’s time-honored citizens’ militia. Even they will be required to keep their ammo at approved government facilities.

The fact that a Leftist minority group was able to convince a majority of representatives in the Swiss Federal Assembly to approve the measure is considered a major victory for Socialism and the push to strip individual citizens of the right to keep and bear arms. [full report here]

Sources