The Great Gun Control Debate

[Fishbone Jones]

A cache containing two assault weapons, drugs and $18,000 in reportedly stolen goods was uncovered by police in a shed during a routine investigation.

Nanaimo RCMP officers made the discovery in the 200-block of Pine Street earlier this week.

Two Soviet-era SKS Tula semi-automatic assault rifles, a scooter valued at $3,000, and an estimated $15,000 worth of bicycles were hidden in the shed, along with a quantity of heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana.

Police would not say what led to the find.

But the discovery of two Russian assault weapons is of particular concern, given the potential danger they pose to public safety.

The weapons are capable of rapidly firing up to 10 bullets without reloading.

"If they fall into the wrong hands, now they've got a semi-automatic weapon," said Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong of the Nanaimo RCMP.

"Or if some young child finds them and thinks they're a toy, and there's ammunition, look out."

Guns capable of firing one bullet after another are often used in mass shootings.

"Any time you have something capable of firing more than one bullet (in rapid succession), it's concerning," Armstrong said.

"You think about the massacres we've had with AK-47s. "If you can fire off (multiple) shots just like that, it has the capability of harming more individuals than a single shot."

Christopher Durkin, 43, appeared in provincial court Thursday facing weapons, property crime and drug charges.

His next court date is set for April 1.

 

[The_Falcon]

Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong of the Nanaimo RCMP gives us a great example of why it's not a good thing to talk  run your mouth outside of your 'lanes'.

http://www.nanaimodailynews.com/news/nanaimo-rcmp-discover-soviet-assault-weapons-1.900238#

This is an article about a bust with  $15'000 worth of bicycles, 2 semi-automatic rifles, some other stuff and an amount of heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana. You would think the drugs would be the center piece of this story right?

Apparently that honour goes to Soviet Assault weapons ($169 at Canadian tire with a non-restricted licence).  She goes on to talk about the the scary AK47 massacres we've had in Canada (which is zero).  Forget about the drugs, the assault weapons are a piticular concern. "They fire one bullet after another." 

My favorite. "If some young child finds them and thinks they're a toy, and there's ammunition, look out".  :

I read that, and reminded me of this.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Just sent them an e-mail comparing their article to something out of 1970 Pravada and implying they are the stooges of the RCMP PR unit.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I wonder if this isn't one of those cases when you really ought to "shoot the messenger." Accepting that Sgt Armstrong did say the words in quotes, my question is: what else did she say? What didn't the reporter include in his "gun" story? Maybe Sgt Armstrong really did get the focus all wrong, but it is equally possible, I think, that the reporter wrote the story he thought would sell the most soap.

 

[TCBF]

I generally stay out of this kind of thread - too many people on both sides of the "conversation" are fundamentalists / true believers......much like the political discussion threads on this site.

I concur with your assessment, including the fact that the name-calling is more than just a tad troubling.

Milpoints inbound

- The name-calling and general irateness was deliberately provoked by policy makers during the C-68 debates years ago. In order to get the public onside, they needed a bunch of people that could be used as a good example of what they considered 'neanderthal' thinkers. Once they got the recreational firearms community mad enough to parade in Ottawa, the mainstream media portrayed them in the worst light, and Canadians could now put a face to the opposition.

- I think if we want to hold at the defile, it's pointless to license firearms owners. Far cheaper to license criminals and other undesirables. They would be licensed to posses 'zero'.

- If we can have a sex offender registry, why not a firearms offender registry? After all, the rest of us don't need a 'Sex License", do we? We only register the offenders.

 

[Jarnhamar]

In response to calls for Darrell Bellaart to retract his fanciful factually wrong story about Soviet assault weapons he responds with poise and maturity.

"Whatchya gonna do if I don't, shoot me?"

Mark Macdonald, the managing editor for the Nanaimo Daily News can be reached here if you feel like sending an email.

mamacdonald@nanaimodailynews.com

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Further update on the seizures in Nanaimo.

Seized Soviet firearms can be legal in Canada

Robert Barron / Daily News
March 18, 2014 12:00 AM

The two Soviet-era SKS Tula semi-automatic assault rifles uncovered last week by the Nanaimo RCMP in a shed on Pine Street are legal in Canada, if they comply with federal regulations.

Steve Corscadden, from the Nanaimo and District Fish and Game Protective Association, said the weapons are considered non-restrictive weapons in this country and can be legally purchased by people who have successfully completed an accredited firearms course and acquire a possession and acquisition licence to buy guns and ammunition that can be checked by the authorities.

He said people who acquire a licence to have such weapons legally are also required to have a background check completed beforehand.

Corscadden said the Tula rifles are legal to have clips that can hold five bullets at a time, but no more.

The original design for the Russian-made rifle was for 10-bullet clips.

Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong of the Nanaimo RCMP said the rifles are currently being investigated by the RCMP and there has been no determination at this time as to whether they have been modified in any way. She said the RCMP should have more information on the rifles when the investigation is complete.

"These types of rifles are widely distributed in Canada and fairly inexpensive," Corscadden said.

"Most were made in the early 1950s and are considered very old technology among gun collectors. A lot of guys comb the world looking for them to put in their gun collections."

Members of the Nanaimo and District Fish and Game Protective Association, including firearms instructor Joe Michaels, were vocal in their opposition to the controversial federal long-gun registry that was scrapped by the Tory government in 2012.

The two rifles, a scooter valued at $3,000, and an estimated $15,000 worth of bicycles were found by the RCMP hidden in the shed in the 200-block of Pine Street, along with a quantity of heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana. Christopher Durkin, 43, appeared in provincial court last Thursday facing weapons, property crime and drug charges. His next court date is set for April 1.

RBarron@nanaimodailynews.com 250-729-4234

© Nanaimo Daily News

Article Link.

Still trying to wrap my head around the recovering of $15,000 in stolen bicycles.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

A decent higher end bike can be $1000 for a starting price.........wouldn't take many.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

A decent higher end bike can be $1000 for a starting price.........wouldn't take many.

And heaven knows there's enough people on that island that would live in a dirt hut and forage for berries to sustain themselves, so long as they could have the latest moisture wicking leotard and newest 87 speed, 1 pound bicycle.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

the editor of that paper has apologized and advised they will deal internally with the reporter. for the firearm's community, the words "never walk past a fault" applies to everything they read that is wrong, that's how you change the conversation.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Don't get it wrong,....you guys are still the scum of the earth, devil incarnate, et al.  I just want folks to know that drugs are even lower on my scale. ;D

 

[Loachman]

the editor of that paper has apologized

He did? Got a link? I couldn't find anything on the paper's website to that effect.

 

[The_Falcon]

From Colin's post, I believe it may have been via private email correscepondnce.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Directly to people from CGN who have been bombarding them with e-mails and letters, specifically about boycotting companies that advertize in the paper and encouraging their friend to as well.

 

[Loachman]

Excellent. Are you able to post it here?

I wrote to the paper, but have heard nothing back - not that I expected to.

 

[Loachman]

Just received from Mr Bellaart:

> Subject: Re: Response to "Nanaimo RCMP Discover Soviet Assault Weapons"
> To: "Loachman"
> Date: Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 3:41 PM

> Re: Response to "Nanaimo RCMP Discover Soviet
> Assault Weapons"

> Thanks for the following information. Very useful and informative.

My pleasure, sir. If you ever have any questions regarding firearms or the applicable legislation, I'd be happy to answer them.

> I especially appreciate the respectful tone. I’ve
> received a lot of email on this story — much of it
> highly inflammabory.

Too many people expect reporters to know everything about everything that they cover, and then blame them for any mistakes. That's neither realistic nor fair. You could only go by the "information" provided by Sgt Armstrong. It's not your fault that she's clueless/sensationalistic or whatever.

Every reporter with whom I've had working contact (and there have been plenty over many years) has genuinely had an interest in the topic at hand, and does their best to "get it right". I appreciate that, and I have enjoyed those dealings. Respect works both ways.

> My apologies for not getting back faster.

No problem whatsoever, and no apology required. As you said, you've received a lot of mail. I knew that you would. Given that, and knowing what the tone would be in a lot of the correspondence, I wasn't expecting to hear from you at all, but am glad that you did reply.

> All the best,

And to you,

 

[ballz]

I emailed the editor with a picture of the tweet attached...

Hi ________:
Thank you for sending your email, and the Nanaimo Daily News is sorry for any consternation the article has caused.
The mistake regarding the weapon has been taken out of the original story and we followed this with another story in yesterday's paper with a local gun expert talking about the weapon itself and its legality in Canada.
As for the Tweets, we in no way condone them and we are dealing with Mr. Bellaart internally.
Moreover, we welcome a guest editorial from anyone representing the collective views of the many legal firearms owners in Canada.
Mark MacDonald
Managing Editor
Nanaimo Daily News

 

[Jarnhamar]

I had a couple emails with Mr Macdonald and am really impressed with him and his response.  I get the feeling he received hundreds of emails about this story and Mr Bellaart's comment.

I was annoyed with Mr Bellaart for putting out the story but believe he was just writing what the befuddled RCMP officer had said. 

There's no excuse for his asinine twitter comment IMO.

 

[Loachman]

Reporters, especially those from smaller papers, skip from story to story, each one about something completely different, throughout their day. They do not have the time or the luxury to become experts on any of them. They usually do their best, but their understanding is limited and that is a simple fact of life rather than a personal failing on their part. They have to rely on witnesses and "knowledgeable people".

We want them to see things as we do, and report in our favour. We must also see things from their point of view. In this case, Mr Bellaart was matched with an RCMP sergeant. I doubt that Mr Bellaart has had any direct experience with firearms, or firearms owners like us. People tend to trust police. People also tend to think that police know something about firearms. Mr Bellaart would have had no idea that he was interviewing a complete idiot instead.

The fault is not his. It is Sgt Armstrong's, for yapping off about something way outside of her area of expertise (if she in fact has one), or for outright lying, or both.

Receiving profanity-laced e-mails from firearms owners, blaming and insulting him, only reinforces the pre-existing stereotype of the crazed and dangerous gun nut.

Patiently explaining, and respectfully educating, a reporter can turn him or her to our side. At least we can have one fewer attacking us in print.

Today, we have journalists like Matt Gurney, Brian Lilley, and Lorne Gunter regularly speaking out for us. Would that have happened if we'd blasted them for whatever they got wrong or did not understand in their first articles about firearms and owners?

This paper may only be a small one with limited readership, but we may now have a reporter on it who will have a little less of a tendency to believe everything that a police "firearms expert" says. He is probably somewhat upset that he was lied to, and made to look like a fool to the vast reaches of the interweb, and won't so easily let it happen again. If he's in doubt about something firearm-related in the future, he may just ask me, or anybody else who contacted him with a similar offer, before rushing an article to print. He may learn to ask the right questions, especially follow-up questions, during an interview or at a press conference. That may demonstrate to at least a few police that they are no longer free to spout nonsense unchallenged.

That is worth cultivating.

Treat reporters with respect and patience, and as human beings, and it can be surprisingly easy to get them on side. That is a good thing. Alienate them, and you have an enemy with the power to reach a large audience working against you. That is never a good thing.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The fault is not his. It is Sgt Armstrong's, for yapping off about something way outside of her area of expertise (if she in fact has one), or for outright lying, or both.

You have it with the second part. It is well known that the police sensationalize firearms seizures. One only has to look.

It does three things.

1) It misinforms and frightens the average Joe citizen who knows no better;

2) It demonizes owners and their firearms to create a social stigma around them; and,

3) It allows them to hold those seizures up as proof at budget time, that they require more money. Along side that, almost anytime they can, they will deploy their ERT, SWAT, or whatever they call their local men in black to show how many times they've responded. Again, for more money.

There is also some truth to your first part. Most police have no PAL, RPAL or personal firearms at home. They are no more cognizant of what an assault rifle is than a block of cheese. If it's got a box mag, or bayonet, collapsible stock, or forward grip it's an assault rifle.

It also doesn't stop there. Any scoped rifle, even your .22 Cooey, will be emphasized as a deadly sniper rifle capable of killing people miles away or taking out armoured vehicles.

The only way to combat this sort of thing is a factual, well worded response in the local Letter to the Editors. Enough of those and normal people reading those letters will come to realize the police spokespeople are a fraud.