Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Gun Registry about to go bye bye!


Recommended Posts

Quite possibly. But would enough oppose it to make it an issue next election? Don't know about that.

It is why I believe that the whole thing needs to be looked at for effectiveness.

Although it might play well in a few constituencies, I don't believe it would be a net vote getter for the Tories. Far from it in fact.

An open minded, non partisan review of the complete firearms issue would be a refreshing change. Not likely however, regardless of who is in power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The Tories have said registration is ineffective. Period. Are you saying it is effective for handguns? How so if the argument is that police should not trust or rely in it?

Think my argument from the beginning has been that the Tories have argued that registration is ineffective. They certainly won't remove it from handguns with a minority. However, if the argument is t

Jdobbin why are you continuing with these semantics you know very well the long gun portion has been stressed over and over. There are also been other arguments that have been used against the long gu

I have shown that Harper doesn't think registration is effective.

One thing we do know is that Harper sometimes goes against his word. Income trusts and fixed election dates come to mind. However, you somehow now think that ending the registry entirely is impossible.

No you haven't you what you have is talk about the long gun registry.

You have nothing that proves what you insinuate about hand guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you haven't you what you have is talk about the long gun registry.

You have nothing that proves what you insinuate about hand guns.

You keep saying it is just long guns but the Tory argument has been about effectiveness of the registry. If it useless to the police on long guns, why is it useful on handguns?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although it might play well in a few constituencies, I don't believe it would be a net vote getter for the Tories. Far from it in fact.

It is why I don't see it happening except early on in a majority mandate.

An open minded, non partisan review of the complete firearms issue would be a refreshing change. Not likely however, regardless of who is in power.

Kind of silly not to since the evidence given could be compelling enough to change people's views one way or the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep saying it is just long guns but the Tory argument has been about effectiveness of the registry. If it useless to the police on long guns, why is it useful on handguns?

yes "the" registry impling the "long" gun registry. The long gun registry out here is refer to as "the" gun registry. How many times does it need to be repeated for you.

Edited by Alta4ever
Link to post
Share on other sites

yes "the" registry impling the "long" gun registry. The long gun registry out here is refer to as "the" gun registry. How many times does it need to be repeated for you.

I guess an actual Tory spokesman will have to tell me that they don't mean the handgun registry is ineffective. Forgive me not believing you as are anonymous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess an actual Tory spokesman will have to tell me that they don't mean the handgun registry is ineffective. Forgive me not believing you as are anonymous.

fine

Edited by Alta4ever
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is why I don't see it happening except early on in a majority mandate.

Ah, the hidden agenda again. Whatever.

Kind of silly not to since the evidence given could be compelling enough to change people's views one way or the other.

Agreed but the political game is more important so neither party is likely to see it that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, the hidden agenda again. Whatever.

As I said, I don't think it is hidden. Harper has said that there are things he can't do with a minority. Nothing to hide about that. He usually says he has no plans to do something rather than say he won't do it.

Agreed but the political game is more important so neither party is likely to see it that way.

Zero sum politics.

Kind of like how Harper shuts down the prison farms that pre-date the existence of Canada and there isn't even a debate about it.

Edited by jdobbin
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, I don't think it is hidden. Harper has said that there are things he can't do with a minority. Nothing to hide about that. He usually says he has no plans to do something rather than say he won't do it.

So stating the obvious about our system of government denotes some kind of plan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply cannot believe that what partisan politics is doing to our government and our nation. Surely it is clear to all of those representatives that the days of majority governments are all but over. From the day the BLOC was created with its taking such a high percentage of votes with it, the days were numbered.

What is needed is a multi-partisan approach, or coalition to get anything done. In the court of public opinion the jury is in. They want government to get off its collective ass and do their jobs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Legislatures and governments are two very different things. Canadian government (since before Confederation) has always been partisan. It's simply a part of our system. That said, this vote didn't occur along partisan lines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So stating the obvious about our system of government denotes some kind of plan.

The Tories favour going after the criminal element rather than controlling legal gunowners. The approach they took on the registries being ineffective in in keeping with that. It is why I believe that given a majority, the overall registry would fall in favour of criminal charges for illegal gun use. I don't believe that is out of line with how we have seen the Conservatives do things.

However, we have had this debate about what is possible and impossible before. I believe I stated back in 2006 that the Tories would not be hampered by fixed election dates. My recollection of things back then was that you didn't think it would happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think I have given a number of citations including those from Van Loan that he thinks the registry is ineffective.

Nice try. I asked for a quote showing an MP is lobbying against controls of handguns. Got one? No?

The argument they have made were about all guns, not just long guns.

They've clearly said handgun controls will remain in place.

I was referring to all party election events where Tory MPs state their position although as well as other events where Tory MPs have made remark on things like the effectiveness of the registry.

So I'm supposed to give you the benefit of the doubt that "MPs meetings" doesn't mean "MPs meetings," but at the same time, if the Torys say "registry" they are talking about handguns?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice try. I asked for a quote showing an MP is lobbying against controls of handguns. Got one? No?

Nice try to suggest that one had. I said that the Tories were against the registry and that it was argument they used for it in general and not specific to long guns.

They've clearly said handgun controls will remain in place.

They clearly said the registry was ineffective.

So I'm supposed to give you the benefit of the doubt that "MPs meetings" doesn't mean "MPs meetings," but at the same time, if the Torys say "registry" they are talking about handguns?

Think what you want. If the Tories say the registry is ineffective, they certainly haven't said they believe it is effective for hand guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tories favour going after the criminal element rather than controlling legal gunowners. The approach they took on the registries being ineffective in in keeping with that. It is why I believe that given a majority, the overall registry would fall in favour of criminal charges for illegal gun use. I don't believe that is out of line with how we have seen the Conservatives do things.

However, we have had this debate about what is possible and impossible before. I believe I stated back in 2006 that the Tories would not be hampered by fixed election dates. My recollection of things back then was that you didn't think it would happen.

On this, the Tories and I agree but I've never heard any one in government advocate abolishing handgun registry even though there might be the odd MP who would like to see it go. This is your own speculation largely rooted in partisanship. Having said that, it is not unheard of for governments to take a different position after being elected than during an election campaign. Chretien on the GST comes to mind and more recently, Gordon Campbell on the HST during the last BC election. Lying to get elected is not unknown, nor is it specific to any political party.

Regarding the Conservatives shutting down the prison farms without a debate. I don't agree with it. If they believe they provide unfair competition to private farms, food banks and other charities who would love to have that food. Aside from that, please don't try and maintain that Liberal governments presented every policy change (in the penal system or anywhere else) to Parliament for a full debate. No government does. You know very well that abolishing a gun registry requires changing the law which in turn requires an act of Parliament and will be debated fully. Regarding majorities. What makes a Conservative majority potentially more dangerous than a Liberal majority other than your own ideology? They both have the same powers.

I believe you recollect wrong, I have always thought a minority government committing itself to a fixed election date was a fools game because they have just given complete control of their government's future to the opposition. I do believe that particular election was politically motivated and did little to serve the country's interest. Nothing new there, that is our system. The timing of almost all of our elections is dictated by the interests of those with the power to force them, not in the interest of the public. Those committing the act will always maintain otherwise but their explanations are generally 90% BS. I am still very much in favour of a fixed date when there is a majority and would like to see it in the Constitution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is lobbying against control of handguns, it has never been an issue, this is just a straw man argument to deflect from the real problems with the long gun registry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice try to suggest that one had. I said that the Tories were against the registry and that it was argument they used for it in general and not specific to long guns.

Here's what you said:

There have been many in the Conservative party who have lobbied against controls on legal ownership including handguns.

Prove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what you said:

Prove it.

Think I have already with the registry links I have put up.

The Tories have said the registry is ineffective. They didn't say it was effective only for some weapons. They said it was ineffective as a whole.

Edited by jdobbin
Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is lobbying against control of handguns, it has never been an issue, this is just a straw man argument to deflect from the real problems with the long gun registry.

The Tories have said registration is ineffective. Period.

Are you saying it is effective for handguns? How so if the argument is that police should not trust or rely in it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On this, the Tories and I agree but I've never heard any one in government advocate abolishing handgun registry even though there might be the odd MP who would like to see it go. This is your own speculation largely rooted in partisanship. Having said that, it is not unheard of for governments to take a different position after being elected than during an election campaign. Chretien on the GST comes to mind and more recently, Gordon Campbell on the HST during the last BC election. Lying to get elected is not unknown, nor is it specific to any political party.

Think my argument from the beginning has been that the Tories have argued that registration is ineffective.

They certainly won't remove it from handguns with a minority. However, if the argument is that registration is useless, surely that has to apply to handguns as well. Right?

Regarding the Conservatives shutting down the prison farms without a debate. I don't agree with it. If they believe they provide unfair competition to private farms, food banks and other charities who would love to have that food.

I just find it odd and conservative writers are wondering aloud as well. The Neil Reynolds article in the Globe and Mail was particularly pointed saying the Tories wanted to move many prisoners frown low to high security to super regional prisons with the money saved from cutting elsewhere.

Aside from that, please don't try and maintain that Liberal governments presented every policy change (in the penal system or anywhere else) to Parliament for a full debate. No government does. You know very well that abolishing a gun registry requires changing the law which in turn requires an act of Parliament and will be debated fully. Regarding majorities. What makes a Conservative majority potentially more dangerous than a Liberal majority other than your own ideology? They both have the same powers.

Don't think I argued that. I was pointing to changes the Tories have made that didn't require any debate but probably should have.

I also didn't argue that a majority for the Tories is more dangerous than any other party's majority. I am saying that they would do things they presently wouldn't tackle just as the the Liberals did when they had a majority.

Some of those things from both sides, you probably wouldn't like.

I believe you recollect wrong, I have always thought a minority government committing itself to a fixed election date was a fools game because they have just given complete control of their government's future to the opposition. I do believe that particular election was politically motivated and did little to serve the country's interest. Nothing new there, that is our system. The timing of almost all of our elections is dictated by the interests of those with the power to force them, not in the interest of the public. Those committing the act will always maintain otherwise but their explanations are generally 90% BS. I am still very much in favour of a fixed date when there is a majority and would like to see it in the Constitution.

I could go back and look but I faced a barrage of attacks saying it would be impossible for Harper to call an election.

I don't believe the law would apply to a majority government either. In short, a government can make any excuse to call an election and not violate that law.

As for the Constitution.... as soon as it is opened, expect everything and a bag of chips tossed in. It will be hatd to control the process even for something small.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tories have said registration is ineffective. Period.

Are you saying it is effective for handguns? How so if the argument is that police should not trust or rely in it?

Jdobbin why are you continuing with these semantics you know very well the long gun portion has been stressed over and over. There are also been other arguments that have been used against the long gun registry. Right now this thread is being derailed by your partisan attacks instead we should be talking about the next steps of this process.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jdobbin why are you continuing with these semantics you know very well the long gun portion has been stressed over and over. There are also been other arguments that have been used against the long gun registry. Right now this thread is being derailed by your partisan attacks instead we should be talking about the next steps of this process.

One the main arguments against the registry has been that it is ineffective. It isn't semantics since a registry is what covers handguns as well. if one is ineffective, is the other one just as ineffective?

Is that the next step in the process?

I have said that I opposed the registry since I favoured a focus on licensing. However, I wanted to hear what police said about in detail before dropping it. However, if the registry is regarded as useless, why is it around for handguns? Surely the same arguments against it stand, don't they? And if they don't, why?

If you want to debate this, don't keep repeating that handguns will never be dropped if your argument is that the registry is useless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One the main arguments against the registry has been that it is ineffective. It isn't semantics since a registry is what covers handguns as well. if one is ineffective, is the other one just as ineffective?

Is that the next step in the process?

I have said that I opposed the registry since I favoured a focus on licensing. However, I wanted to hear what police said about in detail before dropping it. However, if the registry is regarded as useless, why is it around for handguns? Surely the same arguments against it stand, don't they? And if they don't, why?

If you want to debate this, don't keep repeating that handguns will never be dropped if your argument is that the registry is useless.

I'm not so sure if the Registry is useless but it is clear it needed to be revamped. I as well would like to see more study/discussion on this. I don't see how talking about handguns adds to the discussions. I guess anything is possible but we should focus on things that are on the radar. Instead we are talking about what the Tories would do if they win a Majority. Majority????? This country might not see one any time soon.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...