Perhaps nothing illustrates the differences in approach and motivation of the political parties better than the debate on the gun registry. Parliament now has before it Private Members' Bill C-391, which would do away with the long-gun registry but leave in place other parts of licensing requirements and safety regulations with respect to all guns.
...and yada yada yada. We've seen this kind of thing before , with C-301 for example, or the Tories wacky anti-abortion private member's bills. They never go anywhere. Except that this one is coming up for a vote in early November, and it just might. Our dear Brad Trost, Tory MP for Saskatoon-Humboldt, writes
...if most opposition MPs who have pledged to support the legislation keep their word, (and that’s a big if) then the House of Commons should vote to repeal the long-gun registry sometime around November.
The problem, to put it bluntly, lies with the NDP, who intend to let their backbench nobodies "vote their conscience" on the issue. MP Nathan Cullen thinks, given this fact, Bill C-391 will pass and go to committee. Of course, what comes out of committee cannot be known in advance, but it is nevertheless certain that the NDP is giving opponents their best chance in years to kill the registry.
Shame on them.
PS. This alert from the Coalition for Gun Control suggests there is a Liberal recidivist in the mix. I have been assuming that the Libs will whip this vote.
36 comments:
Your name says it all. Too many decisions have been based on people who live in big cities. Even Alan Rock who came up with the gun registry has never shot a gun. Just look at Britain and see where crimes with guns actually went up when a total ban was put in place. Punishing the rural people is no way to tackle gun crimes.
Sorry BCL.. but most thinking Canadians have long since had the veil removed from their sight which Alan Rock and his chronies put there when the gun registry was foisted on Canada.
It is the worst example of Liberal spending to no good purpose, and those who support the Liberals would be well advised to do a mea culpa, and just let it die.. as the saying goes, "Not with a bang, but with a whimper."
Roblaw,
Most of the over spending came during the setup, often caused by opponents (including a couple of Reform party MPS) throwing sand in the gears so they could point to cost overruns. But, kill it now, and that really would be money down the tubes.
Punishing the rural people is no way to tackle gun crimes.
How have rural people been punished by the gun registry?
"Even Alan Rock who came up with the gun registry has never shot a gun."
So, if I have never used cocaine, does that mean I can never advocate for its remaining a banned substance?
Robert is correct - registration is not punishment, unless you think all car owners are punished too.
I just don't see the connection between registering guns and people being safer.
If you wanted to outlaw handguns, I'd join up. I don't see the need or the utility of a handgun other than to shoot another human being.
But - even though I don't own a gun, and do not hunt, I don't really see the point of the registry. And there are four deceased RCMP officers in Mayorthorpe, Alberta, who, sadly, are proof of that.
And, my point anyway, is that the "fear" card regarding long-guns is no longer playing out anyway, and seeking to hold onto it is not going to prove helpful to Liberal polling numbers.
Long gun registry hasn't hurt anyone who is a real hunter in western Canada, where I live. Hunting still happens. I just returned from my son-in-law's where I was treated to a display of about ten long rifles, three of them being my old rifles. No hardship at all. I eat fresh deer, elk and moose every year. So what is the real problem?
BCL, you have outlined the real problem very well. The only problem is that some people refuse to listen and want to work wingnut frothings.
rgl. I'm a fairly reasonable person. While the gun registry doesn't hurt anyone (unless you are talking about wasted taxes), I still don't see the utility.
What exactly does the registry actually do "for" anyone? I'm open to understanding, but I'm not seeing the price beign worth the marginal, if any, benefit.
Long guns can also mean some of the long guns from the US.... not what farmers use, so it should be rural shotguns, not all long guns.
I am a dipper. I have lived on an acreage just north of Regina. I have had a rabid skunk trying to attack pets in the yard.
People who live in big city urban Canada, don't understand that there are parts of the country where you need to keep a 22 or a rifle in your home in other parts of Canada to deal with situations such as this.
I simply can't express to you how hated the long gun registry is in rural Saskatchewan. Out here, it is not just 'conservatives' who hate the registry, I know rural New Democrats AND Liberals who also resent the entire idea of having to register, pay high fees at the time of initial registration and fees annually thereafter.
Add to the red tape involved, everyone knows how much the bloody registry has cost.
No party will ever convince major parts of the nation that the registry is a good thing.
Leftdog, how does the registry prevent you from shooting your skunk?
You miss the point entirely. You miss the point that the federal government used the issue as a MONEY GRAB to perpetually tap me with a fee to keep the gun. Libs brought it in ... Libs pay the price out here for the cost, red tape and bother of the whole thing ... (and the Billion or so of our tax dollars it cost to implement).
And you wonder why the Liberals received LESS votes than the Green Party in the recent 2 provincial by-elections here.
Well, there you have it. The only people who count are rural Canadians...and only the ones is Saskalberta.
Frankly, we should think up more ways of tormenting them. Forced gay marriage, supplementary gala tax, bans on whirligigs and three-bean salads....
They're going to bitch and moan anyway, so why not give them some real reasons?
Ti-guy ... your Liberal arrogance is evident (and a big part of the reason your Party is in the dumper).
That aside, here is the Liberal 'red tape' that I and many other Candians have to deal with annually (not to even mention the $$$).
Gun Registry application stuff
TYPO CORRECTION:
"Canadians"
sorry LD
TG. The LPC numbers are your fault! Who knew?
Can anyone tell me the purpose of the motor v ehicle registry?
By the way, the gun registry was a key piece of evidence in the Mayerthorpe case.
Gayle
Is a vote on the gun registry really a confidence motion? If not then the NDP have no need support Harper's position and you're just trying to drum up anti-NDP rhetoric since your own party can't develop its own platform.
Really, why do so-called "progressives" stick with the sinking Liberal ship?
You miss the point that the federal government used the issue as a MONEY GRAB to perpetually tap me with a fee to keep the gun.
Holy fuck is that stupid. How can a program that's deep in red ink even remotely be considered a money grab.
Aside from that, why aren't any of you rural bumpkins perpetually outraged over the many other registration fees imposed upon you. Registering your motor vehicle every year sucks more money out of your pocket than registering your gun every five years.
Face reality, leftdog. Rural Canadians simply hate the gun registry for no rational reason.
WOW! I guess you sure told the 'rural bumpkins' didn'tcha????
Ti-guy ... your Liberal arrogance is evident (and a big part of the reason your Party is in the dumper).
I have more "rural" cred than you do. I just didn't grow thinking that it makes me better than everyone else.
The worst thing Saskalberta has done is export its dull and parochial urban vs. rural battle to the rest of Canada. It's also laughable, since the place doesn't even have any real cities.
Ti-guy ???? How can I have no real "rural cred" yet according to you, I live in a place that "doesn't even have any real cities." You can't have it both ways pal.
Really, why do so-called "progressives" stick with the sinking Liberal ship?
Because Dippers don't understand the first thing about market economics. Sure, they *say* they do, but secretly, they think everything would be better under public ownership. Also, they have no idea how to handle corporate abuse of power and would be torn to pieces by them in a matter of weeks if they ever formed the government.
Lastly, why should progressives Liberals support a party that so clearly despises them?
This has been the sum-total of the NDP's outreach to progressive Liberals "Vote NDP, you unprincipled fuckers!"
I love watching the libs and dippers write off everyone outside of four or five cities. And increasingly just the down town cores of those cities. Keep it up, Iggy will be proud, or are you now counting on that failed dipper Rae to save you?
This tells me all I need to know...
http://www.lowe.ca/Rick/FirearmsLegislation/AGangThatCouldn'tShootStraight.html
Another issue is the fact that inspite of the Liberals claiming a 98% compliance rate, the registry is woefully incomplete.
A study was done just before implimentation that showed the number of firearms in Candada to be somewhere between 14 and 19 million. Yet there are about 7 million in the system. What happened to the others?
The absolute worst aspect is the costs...hundreds of millions of dollars spent on software that still is not complete.
With only 7 million guns in the system, I would venture a guess that it could be looked after on a decent laptop with Excel.
How can I have no real "rural cred"
I didn't say you don't have any. Just less than I do.
It's not an authentic "rural experience" when people who live in rural areas don't engage in economic activities that can only be carried out in non-urban areas (farming, mining, forestry, fishing). Since very few people are engaged in agriculture (an activity that is itself, highly-mechanised and industrial), I don't really know what y'all do all day.
Anyway, apart from having to shoot critters now and again, it doesn't have the cachet it used to. Besides, we have 'possums in Tranna now. Ya cain't get any more rural then that!
Link got snipped, trying again.
http://www.lowe.ca/Rick/FirearmsLegislation/AGangThatCouldn'tShootStraight.html
Read it.
I love watching the libs and dippers write off everyone outside of four or five cities. And increasingly just the down town cores of those cities. Keep it up, Iggy will be proud, or are you now counting on that failed dipper Rae to save you?
I love it when Conservative assholes troll non-Conservative blogs. Oh well.
These are the extremes: The far right attracts jerks and assholes and the far left attracts social workers.
Hmmmm, add .html after the link to read it.
It is worth the read.
I can't help but feel every time little-guy writes something he just digs the hole a little deeper.
The registry or it's use to find and sieze guns dosen't seem to have helped with Toronto or Vancouver's drug related gang wars.
Homicide rates in the West remain the highest in Canada.
I'm finding it very amusing to watch the Dippers agreeing with the CONs about the gun registry here. You two make such a lovely couple :)
Registering my car every year and paying "high fees at the time of initial registration and fees annually thereafter" has not hurt my driving over the years. How exactly does the gun registry hurt your hunting or vermin control problems?
Gun ownership & usage in this country, like automobile ownership & usage, is a privilege and NOT a right. Just like for your car, you should have to pay for that privilege. Registry is all about public safety, for cars and guns. And this is why EVERY police agency in the country supports the gun registry ...hear that you Reformatory law & order types?
I don't oppose gun licensing and FAC's. That is the "control" on the purchase of handguns.
But - and here's the point that yet no one has responded to - because they can't. What is the benefit of registering a firearm?
Of course - we'll get the non-response typical of simple-minded gun registry proponents that, "registering" a handgun is the same as "registering" a car. Well, we put license plates on cars as well that match up with the registration, so that police can identify the user from a distance, and then we have laws that make the registered owner responsibile for accidents and for traffic offenses, regardless of whether the owner was driving.
So - then, when you start proposing that we put a 12" X 6" license plate on every gun, well, I guess the analogy wouldn't be quite so mis-stated. We also require autos be insured for damage they may cause before they are registered - so, I suppose we should also require registration to assure that all gun owners carry adequate third party liability insurance for any accidents occurring with those firearms. Finally, registration is a manner of "taxing" the use of our roadways - but, for the life of me, I can't recall what "use" a gun owner makes of the public purse (except for funding the registry system itself).
So - by making the "car registration" analogy, not only have you failed to make any cogent point at all, but you have betrayed your own inability to even understand why a vehicle is registered in the first place, and why, duh, a car is somewhat different than a gun.
Oh. By the way. I don't have to register a car to drive a car. I can rent. So - under the gun registry system, I'm assuming we can just rent guns, no? If not, well, why not, I mean.. they rent cars don't they?
Regarding the "use" of the gun registry system in the Mayorthorpe tragedy, it did absolutely nothing to save the lives of four RCMP officers and if anything, may have played a part in their death.
After checking the registry, the officers would have been told that no guns were held by Roszko.
Guess the registry mislead them.
I'm all for reasonable effort to make us safer, but I have a real problem with the bait-and-switch approach to gun safety created by the LPC.
It doesn't work.
It costs us something in the area of $64 million per year.
Tell me how it does protect, and I'm willing to keep an open mind. But - criminals don't register guns and millions of Canadians have guns and will not register them.
Just like old cars that aren't being driven around on a daily basis.
Mayorthorpe?
Do you even live in Alberta, Rob?
Let me help you Rob.
"What is the benefit of registering a firearm?"
Crime investigation, or did you miss it when I said this:
"By the way, the gun registry was a key piece of evidence in the Mayerthorpe case."
Or you could just ask the police what they do when they are about to go into an unknown house to execute a search warrant, arrest warrant etc. Something tells me that one of the things they do is check to see if there are any registered firearms in that location.
Kind of like that car registry thing you were nattering on about.
"Regarding the "use" of the gun registry system in the Mayorthorpe tragedy, it did absolutely nothing to save the lives of four RCMP officers and if anything, may have played a part in their death."
Aside from the fact the second part of your point is utter nonsense, it is still kind of like that car registry thing you were nattering on about. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't you more likely to die from a car accident than a gunshot wound? If so, can you tell me again why we register cars? Doesn't seem to prevent any car accidents. Why aren't you all "up in arms" about that?
Is this the best way to have spent $2 billion and for what purpose? Criminals don't register their guns! This is another example of 80-20. Punishing law abiding citizens (80%) to get at the criminals (20%). Take some of that money - go after the violent offenders - lock them up and DON'T let them out!
Post a Comment