http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2011/10/25/pol-gun-registry...
This time they don't want simply abandonne the program but to destroy the database.
The effect is that nobody will be able to take over the gun registry.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
Some facts about the Gun Registry and its advocates:
*Coalition for Gun Control maven Wendy Cukier illegally received a $380,000 lobbyist grant from the Chretien government.
*Cukier's gun control group was also funded by the International Action Network on Small Arms--a London, England-based lobby group funded by billionaire U.S. benefactors, like the Ford and Rockefeller foundations.
*Cukier also made huge amounts off gun registry-related contracts, via her IT firm, Telecon Consulting.
*The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police accepted sponsorship from Gun Registry contractor (and Liberal donor) CGI, in exchange for lobbying to keep the registry.
*The CACP also opposed the introduction of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
http://www.ualberta.ca/~clement2/cacp.pdf
*The Gun Registry has neither prevented, nor solved a single crime (supporters cannot cite a single case).
*There has been massive non-compliance with the Gun Registry, with an estimated (according to Customs records) 50% of non-restricted firearms remaining unregistered.
*Registry data has been hacked by criminals, and used as a defacto shopping list for burglaries.
*The '11,000 hits per day' is a bogus statistic, resulting from software which automatically searches the Firearms Centre database for any police records search, including noise complaints and jaywalking incidents.
*In one year, the Canadian Firearms Centre spent $13.5M on 'travel expenses.'
*The Auditor General was never able to access all of the financial records for the Firearms Centre and Gun Registry.
*The $4.1M annual cost figure for the Registry cited by RCMP brass is laughably false, as it does not even cover the postal and staffing costs for the program.
*Despite claiming that the Registry would 'save lives, at any cost,' the Chretien government refused to arm border guards, axed the Ports Police (both important tools in the interdiction of arms smuggling), and attempted to close two RCMP crime labs--for 'cost reasons.'
*Along with firearms smuggled in from the U.S., prohibited weapons (short-barrelled handguns, full-auto firearms) are being smuggled into Canada from Asia and elsewhere (e.g., Norinco, Cosco).
*Unregistered, unlicensed, prohibited weapons are becoming increasingly common, in the arsenals of street-level gangs.
Let's quit pretending that the Gun Registry was ever anything more than a social engineering scheme, and a costly porkbarrel project. Good riddance.
I don't trust anything that the lying liars or their lapdog newz media say nowadays. Whatever it is they do broadcast for public consumption, imagine that the opposite is true, and it's good bet that you'll be right.
Whether you are "pro-registry" or "anti-registry," this sounds to me like it goes beyond scrapping C-68 (which was a bad idea from the get-go and should never have gone ahead) and actually dismantling some of the gun controls we have.
These are old line party issues and talking points. It's time we ignored hell out of them and started creating our own.
The long gun registry is created in order to find out if people suffering from mental desease got a weapon.
The Polytechnic drama would have been avoid if they were a gun registry at that time.
The long gun registry is created in order to find out if people suffering from mental desease got a weapon.
The Polytechnic drama would have been avoid if they were a gun registry at that time.
Kimveer Gill's semi-automatic rifle was listed in the gun registry in 2006.
Why was he able to shoot a Montreal student to death and wound 19 others?
The long gun registry is created in order to find out if people suffering from mental desease got a weapon.
The Polytechnic drama would have been avoid if they were a gun registry at that time.
Kimveer Gill's semi-automatic rifle was listed in the gun registry in 2006.
Why was he able to shoot a Montreal student to death and wound 19 others?
Even if it not perfect the registry is usefull. the problem is than he were not diagnose in time. Also the registry did prevent a lot of sucide by fire arm.
Whether you are "pro-registry" or "anti-registry," this sounds to me like it goes beyond scrapping C-68 (which was a bad idea from the get-go and should never have gone ahead) and actually dismantling some of the gun controls we have.
As a long time opponent of the LGR, mostly for its complete ineffectiveness, I think this is a very astute observation. What appears to be happening is that there is a bunch of gun control measures that are also being tossed out under the guise of scrapping C-68. That I don't support. It seems the Conservatives just can't resist playing politics with this issue. I expect what they are trying to do is get all NDP MPs to vote against their motion and then paint all the NDP members who have questioned the LGR as having lied to their constituents. They also know that in a lot of ridings where the NDP needs to make gains that they could use this as a hammer against their NDP opponents.
And of course the media will never truly report what is actually happening and report this as simply a keep or scrap the LGR issue. Doing anything else, such as actually examining issues, seems beyond the MSM national these days. So in the end the LGR will be scrapped, but so to will be a lot of good things we are doing around gun control, but proponents of the LGR will not focus on these things, just the LGR itself, and the Conservatives will still have their wedge issue.
Sigh.
http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674canada_tables_bill_to...
So will the NDP do a free vote (again) or a whipped vote?
What I don't like is the Harpers doing what they will with the registry. I don't like the registry being an owner of hunting rifles. But Canadian taxpayers paid for the damn thing, and now Steve and his 24 percent majority say they will scrap it? It's not their database - it belongs to Canadians, the police and so on. How about a referendum on the matter, Steve ya toadie?
From rabble's new Hill correspondent:
Emotion and rhetoric on long guns
Coté also referred to the 2005 murder of four RCMP officers in Mayerthorpe, Alberta. The long-gun registry, he said, was a key tool in apprehending and convicting the murderers in that case.
So much for the statement that the registry hasn't solved one crime. Also, within the RCMP annual report for one year (2009, I believe) there was a case cited where RCMP pulled over some guys in a truck who had long-guns. Using the registry, they were able to determine that those guns had been stolen from someone whose house had been broken into while they were away. Another case where the registry solved a crime, one of those mysterious "unreported" ones, too.
I notice that we're not hearing much from rural women.
Coté also referred to the 2005 murder of four RCMP officers in Mayerthorpe, Alberta. The long-gun registry, he said, was a key tool in apprehending and convicting the murderers in that case.
So much for the statement that the registry hasn't solved one crime. Also, within the RCMP annual report for one year (2009, I believe) there was a case cited where RCMP pulled over some guys in a truck who had long-guns. Using the registry, they were able to determine that those guns had been stolen from someone whose house had been broken into while they were away. Another case where the registry solved a crime, one of those mysterious "unreported" ones, too.
I notice that we're not hearing much from rural women.
I'll point out that in Mayerthorpe, the murderer killed himself on scene.
As for the stolen guns, it didn't prevent any crime. May have returned the guns to the owner... though it sounds as if they weren't properly locked up to begin with.
I'm quite sure Mr. Nerenberg was referring to the other two individuals charged with first-degree murder - Shawn Hennessey and Dennis Cheeseman - who ultimately plea-bargained down to manslaughter convictions. The Winchester.300 Magnum rifle found at the scene, which Hennessey had given to the actual killer (James Roszko), was registered to Hennessey's grandfather. That information was available to the RCMP only because the long-gun registry existed.
I suppose you could ask if that was the only piece of information that led to the apprehension of the other two involved. But it is nice to see that there is one whole example of the registry maybe doing some good, though of course not preventing crime, which it never could.
Unfortunately for the equal number of people who are stabbed to death and the even greater number of people who are assaulted with knives there is no registry available to maybe perhaps help solve one crime.
In related news, 2 killed in east-end Ottawa mall shooting tonight.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/killed+shooting+Gloucester+Centre/5612...
the only reason i tend to agree with the idea of the registry is that of all things that are registered in society, guns seem like one of the most important things to register since their sole purpose is killing. Sure, most criminals are smart enough to not use a registered firearm when comitting a crime, but by the examples above and others, plenty of people do!
I mean most criminals steal cars, but we still register those. so the whole "it criminalizes gunowners" things doesn't work for me any more than we're criminalizing car owners.
I guess the real question is should we be forced to register anything? or is it all a waste of our money because it may not really provide us with anything in terms of accountability for people's actions with things we consider dangerous?
@ milo204
The problem is not with the registration of firearms, which I support, but in parts of the firearms acquisition certificate which are both extremely intrusive, and unclear to the point that it does have the potential to criminalize gun owners.
Plus, the Liberals effectively poisoned this issue when they put a minister in charge who said he felt no one should have firearms except the military and police, and other members of cabinet who made similar allusions to remaking Canadian society.
THey did their best to rub people's noses in it, and I don't wonder that some reacted the way they did. I blame the Liberals for this outcome as much as I do Harper.
At this point I hope some of the municipal forces can follow Quebec's lead and hold onto registry records.
*The Gun Registry has neither prevented, nor solved a single crime (supporters cannot cite a single case).
Hunky_Monkey, I did provide an example of at least one crime that was solved by the use of the registry. As for crime being prevented, I wonder how one would know.
The crime rate is decreasing - as someone who supports the existence of the long-gun registry, I could try to present that as proof that the registry is working. It may well be the case. However, I do wish to be honest in my search for information and it seems that the USA is also experiencing lower crime rates than previous years. Is it not true, though, that their crime rate is way higher than ours?
And, as mentioned above, it also serves as a suicide prevention tool but how does one prove the event-that-could-have-happened-but-never-did-because-certain-steps-were-taken-that-intervened, aka prevention?
I think that, despite bscutter's assassination of Wendy Cukier's character above, there is a lot of valuable information and food for thought in the long-gun registry briefing notes for the Coalition for Gun Control.
In related news, 2 killed in east-end Ottawa mall shooting tonight.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/killed+shooting+Gloucester+Centre/5612...
Beacon Hill-Cyrville Councillor Tim Tierney was in the area at a few community meetings when he heard the news break Wednesday night, and decided to show up at the scene to wait for information.
Standing behind the police tape, Tierney called the double-shooting “heartbreaking” and uncharacteristic of the neighbourhood.
“It’s not every day you see this occurring in Ottawa.”
Very true. I lived in Ottawa for 10 years, and I don't remember anything like that happening in that shopping centre before.
Seems like it may have been caused by one of the guy's background in drugs, so hopefully it was just an incident between these two men and will remain an isolated occurrence.
Ending gun registry could fuel firearms trafficking: government briefing note
excerpt:
OTTAWA - Scrapping the requirement to register rifles and shotguns could fuel illegal firearms trafficking across the Canadian border, warns an internal federal memo.
It says the move would weaken import controls by eliminating a requirement for border officials to verify firearms coming into the country.
"Such a loophole could facilitate unregistered prohibited and restricted firearm trafficking into and through Canada," says the declassified memo, originally marked secret.
The memo was released under the Access to Information Act to the National Firearms Association and posted along with hundreds of other pages on the organization's website.
A gun can't kill me unless the criminal pulls the trigger. There are a tiny few who cause gun crime, and they have to be tracked down and taken out of the general population of society.
And the registry is one of the tools for doing so.
By our normal standards in Canada it would puzzle me why a 'law and order' government would want to end a long-gun registry. At one extreme, Texas has absolutely no gun registration whatsover, yet they delight in executing people, even when they are innocent. I suppose the case is that if you are going to allow people to possess deadly force, they have to be willing to pay the ultimate price if they use that force in a crime. Strict gun control = no death penalty. No gun control = death penalty. If you look at the various US states I think you would find a correlation there.
Whatever the position on gun control and the death penalty, the Conservatives have looked South and seen whole communities where the only employer is the prison system. These people will aways vote for a law & order agenda, as it is a question of their jobs. Create enough of a police-courts-lawyers-prisons-paramilitary infrastructure and you have enough votes to swing electoral districts. Tory strategists will also tell you that the politics of revenge works very well with the working classes and the poor, as they are victimized by criminals to the greatest degree. Ironically, it is being tough on law and order which makes the Tories the "working class party".
If you think that's puzzling, why would the people who are put in prison by those laws vote in overwhelming numbers for the Harperites?
Yet they do.
I call it mass-ochism. We always love the ones who hate us the most. In a lonely country, being abused for many is better than no contact at all. In the rural areas, there is huge self-loathing through poverty, alcohol and drug abuse, and other psychological issues based on nature and nurture. If someone comes in and says "I will straighten you out with harsh discipline" a lot of them think "It can't be any worse than now". Some will rebell, but they are building more prisons for them anyway.
That prisoners vote Conservative is a spurious contention, in my belief. To be aware of one's rights is an anti-Authoritarian impulse, and comes from the Left. In any system, people become critically aware of their rights. I think this would tend to make them vote on the left. For many, it is harsh experience with reality which changes political outlook. However it may on the other hand intensify the feelings in the first paragraph and push them into the arms of the Christian Identity and white racist people.
That prisoners vote Conservative is a spurious contention, in my belief.
Of course no one knows for sure where anyone marks that X, but I did not pull my observation out of thin air:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/harper-tories-most-popula...
In the actual data, prisoners are lumped together with soldiers and Canadians overseas, but there are indications there may be similar support in other countries as well.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100072955/most-prisoners-...
That prisoners vote Conservative is a spurious contention, in my belief.
Of course no one knows for sure where anyone marks that X, but I did not pull my observation out of thin air:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/harper-tories-most-popula...
In the actual data, prisoners are lumped together with soldiers and Canadians overseas, but there are indications there may be similar support in other countries as well.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100072955/most-prisoners-...
The Telegraph link does not work. I have heard the CBC incorrectly using the data to say that the people in jails vote Conservative. I don't believe it for a minute. In the last election there were less than 50,000 voters in this category. There is no breakdown between the military, the temporary out of towners and prisoners. I would suspect that citizens temporarily residing overseas would be by far the largest group of voters in this class
This highlights just how really pathetic the CBC has become.
Includes Canadian citizens temporarily residing outside Canada, members of the Canadian Forces (except members of the Canadian Forces who voted at the polling station established for the polling
division of their place of ordinary residence) and incarcerated electors.
Yes, NS. I think I raised those questions myself, so it's not exactly a gotcha.
The Telegraph piece isn't based on a study, but on an informed opinion. It also offers some idea of why prisoners who vote might tend to lean conservative.
And I didn't cite the CBC at all.
But I cited the stories in order to establish that I did not make it up. I wouldn't assume it is absolutely true, but the breakdown of that whole group is quite overwhelmingly conservative, so neither would I say it is wrong simply because I disbelieve it.
After all, there are plenty of other communities which vote solidly conservative even though it makes little logical sense.
...which was my whole point in the first place.
But I cited the stories in order to establish that I did not make it up. I wouldn't assume it is absolutely true, but the breakdown of that whole group is quite overwhelmingly conservative, so neither would I say it is wrong simply because I disbelieve it.
After all, there are plenty of other communities which vote solidly conservative even though it makes little logical sense.
...which was my whole point in the first place.
If you think that's puzzling, why would the people who are put in prison by those laws vote in overwhelming numbers for the Harperites?
Yet they do.
You were quite definitive in your presentation of this junk as science. Here is the result of a quick google search. Try to be more careful of the MSM garbage you present as fact.
Political Empowerment
Denying prisoners the right to vote can have a real impact on the politics of a nation. Most convicted offenders are poor or working class, and as noted, in many nations there is a disproportionate number of ethnic minorities represented within their ranks. These groups are likely to vote Liberal or Democratic rather than Con- servative or Republican. In the United States, Uggen and Manza (2002) estimate that since 1972, on average, 35% of disenfranchised felons would have voted in presidential elections and 24% would have voted in Senate elections. About seven of ten votes cast by convicted felons would have been for the Democratic party. Historically, therefore, seven senate elections may have been overturned in favor of the Democrats if felons were enfranchised. It has been estimated that the outcome of the 2000 U.S. Presidential election, where G. W. Bush won by 537 votes, may have been determined by the permanent ban on the voting rights of over 400,000 ex-felons in Florida (even after excluding the ban on felons). The impact of en- franchisement on local or district-level elections would be greater since there is a larger concentration of felons and ex-felons in urban areas.
A similar observation of the political impact of prisoner disenfranchisement has been made in the UK. The Prison Reform Trust (2001) has argued that in the 1997 General election, the ban on prisoners’ voting rights may have affected the results in eight marginal constituencies that accommodate a large number of prisoners.4 For instance, in Dorset South, which includes three prisons accom- modating nearly 1,500 prisoners, a Conservative candidate won by a majority of only 77 votes. Therefore, the enfranchisement of prisoners and ex-felons provides ample opportunities to think counterfactually about how politics might have been altered in democracies.
http://www.asap-spssi.org/pdf/0501dhami.pdf
Look, I think this tangent has gone far enough, but unlike the article I cited, there aren't any real numbers, and no actual voting prisoners in that piece at all.
There are numbers of ex-felons, sure, but as for how they might vote, there is only a guess based on the extrapolation of a claim that the whole community of "ethnic minorities" tend to vote Democrat. No numbers, unfortunately. And a bit odd, assuming that the values of the prison population can be equated to those of the entire non-white population, rich, poor, and in-between.
If we want to be careful and scientific and all...
Anyway, that's enough for me on this one.
(edit)
Hey, I did find this...
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060112/elxn_prison...
Hard to say if it was representative of the whole system, but it is real prisoners who really vote Liberal, a deviation from the general population that was also predicted by the Election Report.
In other news, Vic Toews has dismissed as inaccurate the memo which BoomBoom cited at #22.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/todays-paper/Toews+dismisses+secret+...
No news flash there.
Somebody better get their shit together on this issue...and quick.
Rafferty says...
“I was very encouraged by your support and believe that I have a clear mandate to vote to abolish the Long Gun Registry when I return to Ottawa.” (Nov. 11)
http://www.tbnewswatch.com/columns/columnentry.aspx?cid=173646&catid=133
Turmel says...
“All of us, we believe registration should be kept and I believe they do support that too,” she said of MPs John Rafferty and Bruce Hyer who voted to scrap the long-gun registry. (Nov. 16)
http://blogs.canada.com/2011/11/16/turmel-flouts-facts-vows-unity-on-gun-registry/
Two question for people here in the know...
1) Who is advising Turmel and briefing her on what her own MPs are saying publicly in the issue?
2) Do MPs, the Leadership, and their staff not talk about important issues or what?????
This is becoming very painful to watch unfold...
60789 if you don't want people to comment on your poorly researched comments then don't make them. Do an iota of checking first. You stated categorically that they did vote for Conservatives. Your words not mine and not the weasel words you are falling back on as you try to dismiss the fact that you stated a stupid right wing talking point as a fact.
Well to try again to steer this back on topic, I don't see it as stupid or right wing to make the general point that many Canadians voted for Harper despite the fact that his policies are completely against their interest.
And the gun control issue has been one of the most important issues to blame for that - particularly in rural Canada. I happened to stumble this morning on the site of a group opposing the registry. It featured a neat little animated gif of the Liberal logo (written as "LIE bral" which morphed into a hammer and sickle.
I think the Harper caucus might actually be regretting getting rid of the registry, since they have gotten so much mileage out of it. One wonders what they will use as their next great threat to freedom if they manage to get rid of it.
To use just one example, there are many supporters of the Wheat Board who claim they voted for Harper, but not for ending the single desk- many of them in ridings which used to go Liberal or NDP. It begs the question - what DID they vote for?
(edit)
I suspect the gun registry had more than a little to do with influencing that demographic. I don't think Harper would have ever gotten his majority had it not been for the registry, and I think it has always been more a political tool than a policy issue for him. After all, on every other aspect of justice he is all for more power and control, and more invasion of privacy.
Yet on this one flashpoint of an issue He is exactly the opposite. So of course they'll say they are going to destroy it. That's what this is all about.
But I'd be surprised if a carbon copy of the registry doesn't get handed over to someone at CSIS after it gets "destroyed". Why would he ever want to really get rid of that information?
Well to try again to steer this back on topic, I don't see it as stupid or right wing to make the general point that many Canadians voted for Harper despite the fact that his policies are completely against their interest.
I would have agreed with that point. That is akin to saying the sky is blue. WOW
PM'd you, Northern Shoveler.
At this point I hope some of the municipal forces can follow Quebec's lead and hold onto registry records.
The draft legislation would destroy all existing records, so that can't happen - unless Québec wins in court and others follow:
Quebec takes feds to court over guns
In the event Quebec wins its court battle and gets its hands on the gun records, Quebec would then adopt a bill to create its own arms registry.
Dutil noted that 2,561 weapons were ordered seized across the province during the past year out of concerns for the safety of the owner or another person.
Bill C-19 proposes that the arms registry be not only abolished but that all the records will be destroyed.
This is going to get so messy. Its almost as if Herr Harper and his little storm troppers have completely written off Quebec.
Too bad other provinces don't give a shit.
Coté also referred to the 2005 murder of four RCMP officers in Mayerthorpe, Alberta. The long-gun registry, he said, was a key tool in apprehending and convicting the murderers in that case.
So much for the statement that the registry hasn't solved one crime. Also, within the RCMP annual report for one year (2009, I believe) there was a case cited where RCMP pulled over some guys in a truck who had long-guns. Using the registry, they were able to determine that those guns had been stolen from someone whose house had been broken into while they were away. Another case where the registry solved a crime, one of those mysterious "unreported" ones, too.
I notice that we're not hearing much from rural women.
The "key tool" was a hunting rifle found at the scene (note that it was NOT the murder weapon) that was reported stolen by the uncle (?) of one of the accomplices. Even without the registry, that rifle still would have been reported stolen (as it is required by law), and the situation would not have changed in the slightest.
Well to try again to steer this back on topic, I don't see it as stupid or right wing to make the general point that many Canadians voted for Harper despite the fact that his policies are completely against their interest.
To say that the opposition was mediocre would be generous...
WHAT!?!?! Please please please tell me this is not so! Back in my home country, we know that guns kill - please tell me Canada is not making a big mistake! senior Harper is a capitalist pig! when the NDP get power, i hope they make him politcal prisoner number 1! I'm sorry canada!
Coté also referred to the 2005 murder of four RCMP officers in Mayerthorpe, Alberta. The long-gun registry, he said, was a key tool in apprehending and convicting the murderers in that case.
So much for the statement that the registry hasn't solved one crime. Also, within the RCMP annual report for one year (2009, I believe) there was a case cited where RCMP pulled over some guys in a truck who had long-guns. Using the registry, they were able to determine that those guns had been stolen from someone whose house had been broken into while they were away. Another case where the registry solved a crime, one of those mysterious "unreported" ones, too.
I notice that we're not hearing much from rural women.
Actually, Cote made several errors in his statement. There was only one Murderer, Roszko. He was found dead on the scene from a self inflicted gun shot wound. The case was pretty much closed right there.
Hennessey and Cheeseman were convicted of murder, but weren't on scene when it happened, and had no idea what Roszko was up to. The only reason they helped him was because he showed up to their house and threatened them with a gun, demanding a ride back to his farm. Their only crime was not being able to afford a lawyer who could argue the defense of necessity. Mark my words, those guys were wrongfully convicted.
The registry was used to track one of the several guns, back to one of the two individuals' uncles who reported it stolen years before. While the registry was able to do this, the Canadian Police Information Centre, which contains a record of all reported stolen property, also does this. To be fair the cons have never really claimed that gun registry isn't useful for solving crime, it just can't prevent it, as we've seen.
Its the same with your 2009 example, stolen property gets reported in CPIC. In fact, if you check the Ottawa Citizens website you can see what information is in the Registry. No where does it list the status of a gun, ie held by owner, loaned, or stolen. The system isn't set up for that.
WHAT!?!?! Please please please tell me this is not so! Back in my home country, we know that guns kill - please tell me Canada is not making a big mistake! senior Harper is a capitalist pig! when the NDP get power, i hope they make him politcal prisoner number 1! I'm sorry canada!
Welcome to Canada Emilio!
I would politely like to inform you that in Canada we don't throw capitalist pigs into prison, we elect them into office. We live in a democracy, governed by a rule of law, and believe in Individual rights. Like the right to life, liberty, and security of the person.
I would be very disappointed in the NDP if they chastized a former Prime Minister just because you said so...
And the registry is one of the tools for doing so.
How is it supposed to do that if their crime guns aren't registered?
Somebody better get their shit together on this issue...and quick.
Rafferty says...
“I was very encouraged by your support and believe that I have a clear mandate to vote to abolish the Long Gun Registry when I return to Ottawa.” (Nov. 11)
http://www.tbnewswatch.com/columns/columnentry.aspx?cid=173646&catid=133
Turmel says...
“All of us, we believe registration should be kept and I believe they do support that too,” she said of MPs John Rafferty and Bruce Hyer who voted to scrap the long-gun registry. (Nov. 16)
http://blogs.canada.com/2011/11/16/turmel-flouts-facts-vows-unity-on-gun-registry/
Two question for people here in the know...
1) Who is advising Turmel and briefing her on what her own MPs are saying publicly in the issue?
2) Do MPs, the Leadership, and their staff not talk about important issues or what?????
This is becoming very painful to watch unfold...
This happened during the C391 vote as well. Layton forced his MP's to tow the party line or risk penalty.... Then denied it in public. Pretty much guaranteed that the NDP won't see my vote.....
I find it absolutely disgusting that NDP'rs are suddenly overwhelmingly in favor of the gun registry,
When the Conservatives were in a minority government Jack Leighton himself told his MP's to "vote their conscience".... the bill to scrap was defeated by one measly vote.... Now, all of a sudden you garner heavy support in Quebec, the most feverishly anti gun province in Canada and your political platform changes?...
The registry is a ridiculous waste of money and does nothing to stop crime. The weapon used in the massacre at l'ecole polytechnique was registered... what good did that do? Criminals are going to have guns because they don't care about gun control laws or any other laws for that matter... that is what makes them criminals...
Jack would be ashamed of the party's current state cowtwiung and pandering in a desperate effort to keep a fading hold on newly acquired seats... Hell, just ask any of the 17 people that watch CSPAN and they will tell you that Bob Rae is the official opposition leader.... shame... Jack was a good guy...
I suppose everyone is entitled to an opinion.
Letting MPs vote their conscience was the only way to handle situation. Gun control/Crime control wasn't a big part of anyones campaign, asides from the Conservatives.
Why risk his MPs popularity in their own riding by trying to control a non confidence, non election issue? RCMP and SatsCan numbers show less than half of all long guns are even registered in the first place. I think getting rid of the Registry is probably more popular than than most people realize.
I think every party could probably think of better ways to spend the money, and the NDP have bigger fish to fry...Like trying to get Jack Harris not come off as completely hysterical every time he mentions the non restricted guns that he wants to ban.
Duplicate sorry. How do you delete?
2nd duplicate oops. I'm new.
The Liberal party lost a lot of seats in the last election thanks to their stand on the registry. Not just in the country either. Just ask Mark Holland how things went for him.
I don't trust anything that the lying liars or their lapdog newz media say nowadays. Whatever it is they do broadcast for public consumption, imagine that the opposite is true, and it's good bet that you'll be right.
You and I think the same. I always thought that way when the Lieberals were in power. But now I actually trust the Gov.
The Lieberals? That's so early 2000's, besides it's not the Liberals you need to worry about anymore, gonna be an ORANGE REVOLUTION in 2015.
Sewer's backing up again. Why is it so goddam hard to find a plumber just before Christmas?
How can you trust a guy that blurts out things like this:
It's obvious that Steve flunked elementary school math because more than 60 percent of Canadian voters voted against the Harper Gov't of Canada and in more than one election, too.
I can't trust someone who doesn't know basic ratio and proportions. If he doesn't know that, what else does he not understand? It's pretty scary if you ask me.
This is the political system we have. How come Liberals only bitch about it when they lose?
Just man up a bit and try again next election like we had to many times.
I can't trust someone who doesn't know basic ratio and proportions. If he doesn't know that, what else does he not understand? It's pretty scary if you ask me.
I knew there was something amiss behind those Alaskan Husky eyes, and from an economist no less.
Long-Gun Registry: RCMP Says Loss Will Make Criminal Probes More Difficult
ETA: oops - there's another thread on the same topic. Oh well.
The federal government has uncovered a conspiracy by provincial officials to not shred paper versions of the registry data - just in time.
Gun Owners' Saviour
But Toews is apparently not passionate enough about destroying gun data. Who knows - he may be a closet Liberal:
But forgive me if I keep an eye on Toews. After all, it seems clear to me he was only too happy to let the CFOs get away with their plan until it was uncovered.
Sources inside the government caucus also insist that Toews' original draft bill to eliminate the registry included a clause that would have kept the existing registry data. There was even a provision for transferring registry files to the provinces should they want to create their own registries, as Quebec does.
But Prime Minister Stephen Harper and much of the caucus are said to have gone ballistic and ordered Toews to reword the bill to include erasure of the database.
The minister's instincts were initially to keep the registry alive in all but name. So it is vital that he prove his commitment to stamping out all vestiges of registration by following through on his latest letter.
Amen!!!!!!
Toronto City Council demands Ontario registry data be preserved
Councillors voted 39-5 to urge the province to ask the federal government for the data in the registry before it is scrapped.
Councillors also reaffirmed their long-standing support for the gun registry and directed city lawyers to look for ways to intervene to stop the deletion of data on the nearly 290,000 non-restricted firearms which are registered in the Greater Toronto Area.
Mayor Rob Ford, Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday and Councillors Giorgio Mammoliti, Denzil Minnan-Wong and John Parker registered the five votes against the motion brought forward by Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam.
Doug Ford voted with the majority against Rob Ford. Luckily Council regulations bar handguns from meetings.