I have been pondering the recent policy reverals on the long-gun registry from LPoC leadership candidates Justin Trudeau and, now, Marc Garneau. I actually don't find Justin's response that hard to parse: if there was a registry left to defend, he would defend it, but now that its gone resurrecting the thing would come at too great a political cost. And I accept that walking away from the registry at this time may be an unfortunate political necessity.
But I also whole-heartedly agree with The Cowboy: in rural Canada, where opposition to the registry has been strongest (in fact I would say: the only part of Canada where opposition to it is particularly marked) a long gun is the murderer's weapon of choice. I would also point out that most violent per capita municipalities in Canada are out in Toryland, and suggest that at least some of the overblown reaction to the registry was the same kind of defensiveness you get from Scarberians when you mention gang violence.
So as policy the gun registry was clearly defensible, and given the way our healthcare system is structured, without it taxpayers in urban Canada will see a larger proportion of their hard-earned money funneled away to pay for the prosthetic feet of Alta. oil-rig workers who get drunk and try to kill one another with rifles but accidentally blow their own toes off instead. But I just don't see the registry as an achievable goal at the moment. So leave it be. Eventually demographics will solve the problem for us. The registry's most vocal critics are, demographically, angry old men who yell at passing clouds, and as time goes by there will be fewer and fewer of them. Then... a private member's bill late in the night and ....Ptonk! The West is civilized again.