Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Just in for the CSSA

February 1, 2011
For Immediate Release

CSSA/CILA endorses defending those who defend themselves

Firearms lawyer Ed Burlew says citizens allowed to protect themselves against violent attack

(Vaughan ON – February 1, 2011) The Canadian Shooting Sports Association / Canadian Institute for Legislative Action (CSSA/CILA) support the historic, fundamental right of an individual to defend themselves when under attack.

Ian Thomson of Welland was recently charged with numerous firearms offences when he defended himself again three masked men throwing Molotov cocktails at his home and dog house. While Mr. Thomson was not injured, one of his dogs suffered burns. Firearms lawyer Edward L. Burlew LL.B., is defending Thomson by demonstrating that Canadians must be allowed to protect their own safety and property without being forced to defend themselves against criminal charges. Thomson, who is a qualified firearms instructor, shot a firearm outside his home to dissuade the attackers.

"The courts have stated police do not have an official mandate to protect the safety of individual Canadians," explains CILA executive director Tony Bernardo. "Who among us would stand still if someone was trying to burn down our house with us inside? In the literal heat of the moment, it is surely instinctual to use reasonable force to end this kind of attack. If a qualified individual has a firearm in a home that is being fire-bombed, can anyone expect the endangered victim not to use it?"

Bernardo says he wishes Burlew well in what may develop into a landmark case.

"While we do not know the details of this case before the evidence is presented, the videos of people hurling gasoline bombs and death threats at people and pets is pretty compelling," adds Bernardo. "Our legal system appears to have evolved to a point where Canadians who try to defend themselves are somehow confused with criminals. Our forefathers would no doubt roll in their graves if they witnessed how the laws are being torqued to fit the mold of political correctness. We wish Mr. Burlew and Mr. Thomson well in trying to bring the legal community and police back in line by reminding them of the real difference between right and wrong."

Mr. Burlew has organized a peaceful day of protest on March 2nd at 9:00 a.m. to attract attention and support to the case. The rally will be held at the Welland Court House, 102 East Main Street, Welland, Ontario L3B 3W6 and all caring citizens are encouraged to participate.

The CSSA/CILA has contributed funding to Mr. Thomson's defence and hopes Canadians across the country will show their support by making a donation.

Contributions in the form of cheque, money order, VISA, MasterCard, AMEX, may be sent "IN TRUST" to:

Edward L. Burlew
16 John Street
Thornhill, Ontario L3T 1X8
Telephone: (905) 882-2422 FAX: (905) 882-2431

NOTE: You can call Mr. Burlew's office to contribute via credit card. Please call and request a form to be sent out to you.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

We are better than the Antis

We as firearm owners are better then the antis and Liberals. We have convictions, believe in self sufficiency, carry on tradition and believe in the responsibility of ones own actions. I hold myself accountable from everything in my life. I don't expect or want the government to take care of me or my family. I believe that when you reach adult hood and become a contributing member of society you should own a firearm.

Why is it that Liberals don't believe in these things. They want a government to nurture and care for them like a new born baby. They want to be told what they should do, what they shouldn't, and when they should do it. They don't want to be an individual for fear that they may fail. The don't believe another human being is capable of owning a firearm without using it to harm another. Maybe the antis and Liberals are the ones that aren't responsible or mentally stable enough to own a firearm, therefore they don't understand how another individual could be. Maybe to be a anti you have to be crazy?

What I don't understand is a individual such as Wendy Cukier can press her ideas on others in a society or country with protest and think that's OK. To believe that you know best for them and to look for government legislation driven by trajedy caused by crazy people to push your ideas upon them.

Gun owners don't do these things. We are not seeking legislation to make it mandatory to own a firearm, or to discharge in suburban areas. Every bit of the legislation we seek has to do with wanting to continue our own sport and traditions. It wants to take nothing from any individual. The Liberals seek to take away rights. We fight to save them.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

A change in Canadian law for firearms owners.

Taken from the Leader Post

"Refocusing our laws

By Russ Hillman, Leader-Post January 22, 2011 Gun control is one of the greatest failures of our time. The idea that a set of laws written against objects could prevent atrocities is childish. Any time a criminal can bypass the licensing, background check and registration portion of our laws by purchasing black market firearms, it nullifies the entire process.

The Mayerthorpe tragedy is a perfect example. Despite our many laws and bloated bureaucracy, Jim Rozcko got illegal firearms and killed four police officers. He had never had a licence or a background check; none of his firearms were registered. The system failed because the entire concept is a failure.

People with mental problems and prone to violence are too often undiagnosed or fail to take medications. No gun-control law or weapons prohibition can stop them from a murderous rampage or violent crimes.

We must stop the knee-jerk reactions of blaming objects and refocus on measures that are effective. Tougher sentencing of violent criminals and a reinvestment in our beleaguered mental-health system would be a good place to start



© Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post "

When something tragic happens are humanity searches for answers. Often our common sense is blocked by feelings of loss and surprise. That common sense takes a back seat to finding the whys and hows of that tragedy. Even when we can put a name and face to the terrible event that took place such as Alberta's

Mayerthrope shootings, the Arizona shootings and Fort Hood. A name and a face of a mentally deranged murder are not good enough and we start to attack the tools involved, and the law abiding citizens that use those tools.

I did feel a sense of guilt after hearing about the Arizona's shooting. I have owned and shot a Glock 17 pistol, almost identical to the Glock 19 used by Jared Loughner. My guilt quickly subsided when the initial shock of those events wore off and I began thinking about what happened January 8th. It was not my fault, and not the fault of any law abiding gun enthusiast. The guilt became anger after we saw the cries from the United States Democratic party for strict gun control laws and high capacity magazine regulations. The media and Democratic party were trying to blame me, and others like me. News papers throughout Canada were criticizing American gun control like it was the firearms enthusiasts of the state of Arizona's fault, or Sarah Palin and the icons she used. Similarly in Canada after the Mayerthrope shootings it was the hunters fault, and their "high powered rifles."

We have to remind ourselves. With all of these messages of guilt for being a firearms owner bombared on us by liberal media. It is not our fault.

Murder is illegal, yet it didn't stop any of these tragedys from happening. The only one at fault for these shootings are the killers themselves.

There is no way to legislate against crime, be it on any level. From petty theft to mass murders, no form of legislation will end these crimes. Accusing firearms and the people that use them for sport, hunting, and carrying on tradition lacks in reason, common sense and what is good.

A simple fact no Liberals want to hear, gun control is getting old. Maybe our liberal minority leaders should find something else to get their sheep voters worked up about. Its getting tiresome showing them the same facts with the same results and no change in their feelings towards gun ownership.

Fortunatley our current Conervative government does see this, and they are making moves to change it. It started with a push to scrap the long gun registry and now Harper plans on ammending the laws and making it easier to preform a citizens arrest. If only introducing a Canada version of Castle law was also on the horizon for the Conservative party.

Whether castle law happens in Canada or not, it is clear that most of us are starting to realize controlling firearms does nothing to fight the ones that don't obey the laws. How does giving law abiding citizens, especially women the ability to fight those criminals on a even playing field (or one actually in favor of the victim) cause our us to be more unsafe?